Conservatives of Wrong Planet

Post Reply New Topic

A few months ago, I had a PM chat with a moderator concerning ongoing drama in PPR that was seeping out onto the site at large, and given some recent threads and posts I've seen allowed to stand, I think it's time the site had a larger conversation about this.

Right off the bat, I'm going to say that I'm not going to name any names or link any threads, I've reported many of them myself as I see them using the report button, and I don't see any point in stirring up drama or causing endless arguments by pointing fingers in public, I'm sure anyone who wants to can easily find examples of what I'm talking about in the News or PPR forums.

To get to the point, what I'm concerned about is what I'm going to call bashing, sweeping disparagement of large groups of people delineated by beliefs in this case, specifically those on the right, along with Christians of any stripe. I'm only tangentially affected, I hold beliefs that are not religious and do not conform to a left/right axis, but over the years I've found myself repeatedly speaking for our conservative, and to a lesser extent, Christian, members, out of a sense of dismay at the way they're constantly maligned by the majority group on the board that doesn't understand them and feels justified in condemning them in harsh terms.

I feel that this hostile climate prevents many of our members from participating in discussions or even identifying their beliefs out of a very justified fear of mockery and persecution, and that this would not be tolerated if aimed at other groups. Further, this makes things a lot more personal for many people, as it's incredibly difficult to be civil to someone who has repeatedly stated that people like you are stupid, bigoted, backwards, ignorant, etc, even if they haven't said those things about you specifically, which creates cycles of hostility that make the whole forum a less pleasant place for everyone.

There's an extra challenge as well, due to the cultural belief of many conservatives that they should handle their own business, and that relying on authority figures, in this case, moderators, to solve their problems, is weak and cowardly. This again leads to cycles of personal attacks and greater vitriol, and is compounded by a pervasive feeling among the site's conservative members that the moderators are unsympathetic to them. I think a big part of the reason for that belief is simply the site demographics, as conservatives are so outnumbered here that any misbehavior by them draws a lot of attention and is quickly reported, while their own reluctance to report, coupled with the reluctance of the more left wing majority to report each other for attacking conservatives, creates the impression that they're being unfairly targeted and that attacks on them are not punished. I don't think anyone on the mod team is consciously trying to do that, I just think it's an unfortunate consequence of the ideological makeup of the site. I will say that in the nearly 10 years that I've been here, we've never had a conservative moderator, and the only Christian one I can remember didn't last very long at all. Again, I don't think that's intentional, I think it has more to do with most of the mods being selected from the heaviest posters, who don't tend to come from PPR but rather from General or other more active forums on the board.

As to what I think should be done, I don't want anyone to be unable to say what they think, but I would like to see some of the more excessive bashing reigned in, things like the times I've scrolled through pages of two posters going back and forth about how horrible conservatives are, or the threads created with no other purpose than to mock Christians or "flyover country", the image macros with captions like 'but mah jawbs' or 'murica'. Those serve no purpose but mockery, and they piss people off for no real purpose, and pissed off people tend to want to hit back, especially pissed off people who don't feel they can go to a moderator with their issue. I don't want special protections for anyone, those kinds of posts are just as pointless when they mock other groups as well, I just feel that they're more common, and more tolerated, when they mock people on the right.

Anyway, with the recent events in Florida and the upcoming election, I expect this to get worse, so I wanted to get my two cents in before things really went crazy, and maybe start a conversation about what kind of site we want to have.

Dox47 asked me to look at this ....

This site is very hostile to religious people.

It shocked me.

I once called out past moderator "TallyMan (sp?)" for his statements. He was terribly anti-religious. He would make statements implying that religious people are dumb. I didn't take these statements personally. I was just shocked he was so insulting to other people.

I only participated in two religious threads: "Earth seeding" and "Earth Fine Tuning".

Both ended badly.

Renown physicist Stephen Hawking acknowledges both of these (origin of life might be earth seeding, and his multi-verse theory is based on his assumption of earth fine tuning).

However, on WP, they beat you over the head with "what evidence do you have?" , "you can't make claims unless you have substantial proof" .... "my science shows otherwise ...".

There is a refusal to admit that science does not know.

Out of all of the Belief-Systems that I have encountered... I find Materialism to be the Most-Stubborn. Although it is really more of a Dis-Belief System, I suppose, referred to as Pseudo-Skepticism by Para-Psychologists. I point to that clip of Sheldrake's talk so that you can see what I mean if you read all of the comments to see for yourself... this is also often referred to as Scientism by additional sources and the behaviours have been thoroughly studied... they are quite systematic with their behaviours and beliefs (like a literal system to the point where it becomes predictable exactly how a conversation will go since the other previous 30 materialists have said the exact same thing as-if though they think that you have never heard of those arguments before)...

Thank you for commenting, I didn't want to break the rule against cross posting, so I let a handful of atypical posters I know from PPR know that I was putting this up because I thought it would be helpful to hear from some of the people I was talking about.

Thank you, Mr. D., for bringing this topic out into the open. Honestly, as a Conservative at this point in time, I feel quite alone here. We used to have Raptor, but he is gone now and I know the views of Jacoby. I've been here about 2 yrs and I really am not aware if there are anymore Conservative members on this site. Sometimes I'll see a Conservative post here and there and don't even know the person posting it.  I'm wondering if some Conservatives here are afraid to post their views because they don't want any negative responses from other members. One minute I'll think a person is Conservative, but then some of their posts may be neutral because they may not want to stir anything up. I have to stand up for myself quite often by both non - conservative members and moderators and it infuriates me at times being called names and told I'm stupid for being a Trump supporter. Conservative Aspies can see what happens when I speak my mind and a lot of Aspies have problems with conflict and therefore, may be uncomfortable with voicing their own personal political views. And almost everytime I do report someone for saying something offensive, I get attacked by that person again - it happened tonight (which if that attack post is still there, I'm reporting him again!) I'll even get PMs after reporting someone. I just come out now and tell someone I'm reporting them because they always seem to know it's me anyway. How that is I have no idea. Normally, I would take care of the situation myself and tell the person off, but when I did that I got reported!

You want a decent website? Anyone who calls a member or a group of people an offensive name or says that they are stupid, dumb, ignorant - whatever, they should be sent a warning. And can moderators be reported?

People need to learn how to debate. That's the only way the political forum will run decently. If something (such as name-calling) wouldn't be accepted in a real debate, it shouldn't be allowed in the political forum. This is possible as we see the Haven is well controlled - I'm afraid to say "boo" in that forum.

The entire time I was at Aspies Central, I was never called an offensive name. AC's environment is totally different from WP's.

Some people cannot debate issues of politics without taking it personally and becoming overly emotional, the bickering in PPR has been a problem for a long time but recently people have become very very nasty to each other. I think there are people that bait and post offensive things in hopes of getting a reaction, people that have no interest besides proving their moral superiority are not good posters.

I think the moderating team probably cannot handle PPR as they cannot be counted on to be consistent or fair, there really should be someone specifically dedicated to keep these discussions friendly rather the usual spam clean up. We are all individuals with our potential for biases and so it concerning to think that the moderators are plotting against you. I think one form of posting that is really unhelpful is this "I'm not saying this about you but rather just people that are in the same demographic grouping and believe the same things as you" followed by some terrible insult, this is done both to the more conservative posters as well as the more religious ones. If you can't debate without insulting then don't do it, I don't know what joy you get out of doing it.

I think part of the problem is due to initially inadvertent offensiveness. I've noticed conservative members make statements that are incredibly offensive to a group of people but when others try to explain why those statements are offensive, the conservative members will just repeat their previous statements without stopping to try to understand things from the other point of view.

Specifically, I've witnessed a lot of offensive statements about transgender people. It's clear that the posters don't even realize how offensive they're being. So other members attack what those posters are saying.

It's ok to attack a belief. If someone believes gay people shouldn't get married, you can attack that belief. If your belief is due to your religion, then be prepared to have your religion attacked as well.

There are plenty of conservative posters who make well-reasoned logical arguments that are based on facts. But there are a larger number of people I've seen who just post arguments that are full of holes (and really aren't even valid arguments). Their citations (if they even post them) are usually from illegitimate or fake news sites that seem to exist solely to push a certain point of view.

Generally when liberals post faulty arguments that aren't based on facts, it's about gun control or something else that doesn't actually contain bigotry against another group of people. So they don't foment as much of a negative environment, even if what they're saying is wrong. There's a difference between attacking someone's beliefs (such as their religion or politics) and attacking a person for who they are (such as their sexual orientation or gender identity).

Alex,

Good explanation. I agree completely.

Most conservatives are not bigoted or racist or whatever ist. Most are great people who just see the world differently from me.

I think you expose your bias, I don't think there is any mystery where your views lie which is fine since we are all entitled to them but I don't see the truth in what you said. The transgender issue is something that is relevant and should be discussed but there seems to be people who think they can completely control other people's opinions on the matter and scream hate speech at anything they disagree, mind you that the people arguing in these threads aren't trans people but people that have taken up their mantle under the guise of social justice. There is a lot to debate about gender and transgenderism, it's not bigoted to have these discussions. I would like a specific example of what is unacceptable in this regards, where is that red line?

Most of the abuse that has happened lately have been the roving battles between people that support Donald Trump and those that don't(nobody actually supports Hillary), there are some specific posters(and we all could name names) that have made a real habit of trying to bait and provoke a response which is really where the mods should step in because it is really where these people want these threads to go. I always try to be civil but you can only do that so long in the face of nonstop insults and propaganda. It's an election and people have strong feelings, it should be expected, but I think it can be moderated or a maybe a better term mediated much much better than it is now. I think a dedicated moderator when it comes to PPR(and news which is basically an offshoot of PPR) would be most beneficial assuming that person isn't there to enforce their views of course as well as one dedicated to L&D. I know the mods here have to cover a lot of ground, most of their time seems to be spent fighting off spam attacks and then checking the reported posts. Posting on other forums it is normal to subcatogorize and give roles to the moderating staff.

Then stop calling me a bigot and a racist.

Jacoby,

You don't have to be trans to believe in trans rights. Not everyone is just trying to do this under a guise. A lot of people genuinely believe what they post.

And I think your bias is leaving you a little short sighted. The left gets bashed and ridiculed all the time as well. I see posts all the time claiming the left are just a bunch of violent lunatics. Usually by a very specific set of posters.

And Angela I've actually never called you those things, you just inferred it.

That's a bunch of BS. And just because I don't want to give up my rights to a "women's" restroom does NOT mean I'm racist or a bigot. I deserve to have the same rights that the transsexuals do, otherwise, I see that as being racist against women's rights.

As a straight white (I think) woman you have more rights than trans people. And again a trans women is a woman and deserves the same right to the woman's restroom as you do. No one is trying to tell you you can't use the bathroom you feel the most comfortable using but there are people telling that to trans people.

As far as I know, trans women have always been going in the women's bathroom. I just came concerned about the situation when I found out that heterosexual men could also go into the same bathroom that I do. That is NOT right - not unless I know about it before I make a decision to then enter that bathroom.

No it's not right. Letting trans people use the bathroom of their choice does not apply to cis-gendered people. If a cis man walks into a bathroom to perve, he should be arrested.

I actually think were agreeing on this. Trans women can use the women's bathroom, Cis man cannot. Is that what you're saying?

In Angela's defense, she gets attacked constantly here in the nastiest ways. I was given a board warning for calling somebody a dodo which is hilarious in retrospect considering the vulgarity I've seen since. I think she probably should be less reactive, it's two way street obviously.

Debating transgenderism and their rights should not be considered hate speech or off limits, it should be readily discussed. I posted in that bathroom thread, was what I posted hate speech? I don't believe it was and I don't think anybody trans would consider it, there is a real problem with the social justice warrior mindset of taking the mantle of these out-groups and deciding what is offensive and what isn't. I really would like more examples.

I think too many people these day have far too thin of skin, it's usually not the actual members of the out-group because they face real discrimination which the outside observer(the social justice warrior) cannot ever experience so they see discrimination thru the lens of their own self hatred of themselves and the environment they came from while clinging to these antiquated and quite racist ideals of noble savagery thus the need to constantly to constantly attack and belittle those as a means of elevating themselves as moral superiors. Tit for tat should be expected when dealing with two sides so unbridgable.