I just got into an argument over at sociological images, one the recently posted article “Lady Gaga’s Patriarchal Bargain, because I disagreed with the way the majority of the commentors were reacting to various posts. Specifically posts that did not have a feminist slant to them. They generally treated the posters like idiots, that they had no idea what they were talking about, basically treating them like children.
I stepped in and tried to talk with one of the posters. This poster had called one of the others a “poor uninformed misogynist” despite other posts showing that this is not necessarily true. I tried to explain that perhaps the poster would be better listened to if she had a better attitude, his opinion wasn’t wrong, I agreed with it partly. But she flat out denied any truth to it.
Does this seem like a good environment for a conversation? Perhaps to the majority of the commentors who didn’t seem to want a conversation, rather a validation of their views instead. I was under the impression that the blog in question was a teaching blog, there to inform readers about different sociological problems and inequalities. So I assumed the commentors would be willing to teach and discuss.
I’m venting a little bit here, I tired to stay reasonable over at the blog but at the end I got, as I was called, “passive aggressive.” I supposed you could say I was passive aggressive, but I still truly meant and felt everything I said.
If anyone who reads this cares to comment and perhaps explain where I went wrong in what I was trying to do, I was the poster Sarah over at Sociological Images.
[insert title here] 