babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » feminism   » Consensus-seeking, loyalty, and honesty

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Consensus-seeking, loyalty, and honesty
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 01 October 2002 06:36 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Do you pull your punches when you suddenly find that you're disagreeing with a friend or an ally?

I am of a whole bunch of different minds when I think about that question, and many things that happen on babble, on different parts of babble, make me think about it often.

For instance, on the Male-dominated? thread on this forum, and some months ago, Trespasser said at one point:

quote:
On a different note. I find women posters on Babble too consensus-seeking in some respects (if we sidestep a couple -- yes, there were no more than one or two -- trolls of female gender). At first I wondered why, but after disproportionately antagonizing people with clear disagreement three or four times (in all fairness, the interlocutors were both men and women, although more often men), I got the picture.

And yet not so far down on the same thread, after I'd made a post that was meant to mend a bridge or two between Tres and me (the friction had arisen suddenly and somewhere else), Tres thanked me for being sisterly, which made us both very happy and really did resolve the tension (eh, Tres?).

However, I still find Tres's first quote above troubling. I know she's right. I know there's pressure sometimes not to be too confrontational, on this forum and elsewhere on babble, and it drives me bats to think that strong and bright women are going to feel that chill -- the chill of propriety, a poor substitute for truth or courage -- where a lot of our male peers won't.

It especially drives me bats to think that strong and bright women might feel chilled on this forum, although I'm sure that's happened; I'm sure I've seen it.

I am no pussycat in some kinds of political debate; and yet I hate to fight; I really hate it. Furthermore, I know that personal loyalty does compel me to pull my punches, especially on this forum but elsewhere too.

Well, so, like: there's the mess. Thoughts? Anyone else part wimp and part fighter?


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 01 October 2002 10:04 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I do sometimes find myself pulling my punches, but then again I think any number of people here will tell you that they've been bruised by me at one time or another, because I tend to really get going when something tweaks me, and I gotta remember to hold on a half sec, relax, and see if I can't restate something.

So on balance I would say I sometimes do and sometimes don't.

(addendum: Oh, crud. I posted on feminism. That'll teach me to not look where I'm posting. Mea culpa.)

[ October 01, 2002: Message edited by: DrConway ]


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Wilander
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3150

posted 01 October 2002 11:21 PM      Profile for Wilander     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hi, there is a time to pull punches, and other times not to. You have to pick the hill you want to die on. You can't fight every little battle in life. Choose the issue that is most important to you, and don't compromise on that issue. That's my thought for the day. For example, I am a feminist, but I think that abortion hurts women. I think that men get off pretty easy when it's the woman who has to go through the trauma, while abortion conveniently frees the man from child support payments. Now this position isen't exactly poplular with most rabble-ites. So I can't get in a shouting match with everyone I meet about this.

Wilander


From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
disobedient
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2915

posted 02 October 2002 02:02 AM      Profile for disobedient     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I don't think I'm wimpy or feisty but I get the distinct impression that this place can be rather cliquish and that tends to make me not want to post.
From: Ontario | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
nonsuch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1402

posted 02 October 2002 03:03 AM      Profile for nonsuch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
If you don't pull punches at kin, friends and allies, you're going be alone in a world of enemies pretty soon. Want to survive? Let your brain choose the fights.

Okay, it's more complicated than that.
Within a family, one chooses fights very carefully, assessing probable damage against probable gain. You don't stage a grand stand against some trivial thing, knowing that half your relatives won't speak to you for a decade; you save it for something that really counts. Among friends, you do a similar assessment. Is the issue worth losing a friend over? Is it a matter of basic principle, wherein, if your friend is committed to the other side, you can't feel the same respect for hem, ever again?
It happens. Sometimes we lose friends. Other times, we compromise: we forgive, overlook, avoid, pretend the conversation never took place.

On a discussion board, you're dealing with virtual strangers. What have you got to lose?
If you can't be as honest and aggressive and bloody-minded as you want, what's the point of participating?

[ October 02, 2002: Message edited by: nonesuch ]


From: coming and going | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
oldgoat
Moderator
Babbler # 1130

posted 02 October 2002 09:52 PM      Profile for oldgoat     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
On a discussion board, you're dealing with virtual strangers. What have you got to lose? If you can't be as honest and aggressive and bloody-minded as you want, what's the point of participating?

Personally, I can't say as I see it that way. On this discussion board at least, I'm dealing with some virtual friends, and some real live friends. There are also all sorts of invisible types who I consider to be real people sitting in front of computer screens all over the the place.

Honesty is especially important in cyber relationships because we have no real way of determining if people are really as they try to present. But honesty doesnt have to mean bloody mindedness. And I believe in assertive rather than aggressive. So I think you should pick your spots, and be thoughtful where you're really going to let someone have it.

I think that debate at it's best guides itself toward consensus, and respects when people do not wish to be dissuaded from thier views.

So there


From: The 10th circle | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Catalyst
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 237

posted 02 October 2002 10:21 PM      Profile for Catalyst   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Do I ever pull my punches with friends here? You bet I do. But not out of being a wimp. If I find myself completely at odds with friends here, I state it politely on babble and if necessary straighten out conflicts in pm's or emails.

So why pull my punches at all? Let me give an example from work. While in the course of doing my job a design engineer stands between me and the car I am building. Not only is he (or she) endangering his (or her) safety, but he (or she) is potentially stopping me from completing my job before the next car gets to my station. In that case I usually utter something like, "Get the fuck outta my way." It is coarse, but it gets their attention and I have nothing to lose as I do not have to see him (or her) on a daily basis.

If it were my foreman, I would ask him (or her) to move more politely. And on the next break explain my vision is limitted and he (it IS a male in my case) is risking injury. I must deal with him on a daily basis and I value a good working relationship.

Here on babble, I argue with people who I think are not trolls (whom I ignore whenever I can) but civilly. If I feel like my arguments will be perceived as rude, I refrain. And if I feel a thread is about to be hijacked by a clash of personalities instead of iseas, I take it to email if I know them well or pm's if I don't.

I do not feel this is in the slightest "wimpy." Unless you folks think it is (kidding!)


From: gone | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
adlib
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2890

posted 03 October 2002 04:24 AM      Profile for adlib     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think in general women are taught to be more "consensus-seeking" if you will. I also think we're taught to invest a lot of energy thinking about how our actions affect others, which men are not taught. Since we are also taught that men's feelings are much more important than ours, or other women's, it leads to a particular dynamic on the boards.

I think it's just important to notice this dynamic in action. I think it's really funny that on boards where I haven't identified myself as a woman, people don't talk about my method of arguing. Whereas as soon as people know I'm a girl, they get all cranky that I'm not going out of my way to take care of their feelings, when I actually think that I am doing that already.


From: Turtle Island ;) | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca