Warren Farrell’s notorious comments on date rape: Not any more defensible in context than out of it
Warren Farrell, possibly pondering the mysteries of consent.
NOTE: This is the second installment of The Myth of Warren Farrell, a continuing series examining Farrell’s The Myth of Male Power, the most influential book in the Men’s Rights canon. You can see the first post here.
Men’s Rights elder Warren Farrell has been accused of being a “rape apologist,” largely because of one now-notorious sentence he wrote in The Myth of Male Power:
We have forgotten that before we began calling this date rape and date fraud, we called it exciting.
This sentence is at least as puzzling as it is disturbing. Calling date rape “exciting” is pretty foul. But what on earth is “date fraud?”
To find out, let’s do what Farrell’s supporters insist we always do with his more troubling remarks: look at it in context to see if it is somehow more defensible – or, at the very least, to see if we can discern what exactly is is he even meant.
Looking at the sentence in context in The Myth of Male Power, we find that it appears in the midst of a long discussion not only of date rape but also of a number of other dating-related behaviors that Farrell claims traumatize men in the same way date rape traumatizes women. So let’s back up a bit to let him spell out his basic premises — and define what “date fraud” is in the first place:
While the label “date rape” has helped women articulate the most dramatic aspect of dating from women’s perspective, men have no labels to help them articulate the most traumatic aspects of dating from their perspective. Now, of course, the most traumatic aspect is the possibility of being accused of date rape by a woman to whom he thought he was making love. If men did label the worst aspects of the traditional male role, though, they might label them “date robbery,” “date rejection,” “date responsibility,” “date fraud,” and “date lying.” (p.313, The Myth of Male Power, 1993 hardcover edition)
He proceeds from here to some Men’s Rights subreddit-style man-whinging:
The worst aspect of dating from the perspective of many men is how dating can feel to a man like robbery by social custom – the social custom of him taking money out of his pocket, giving it to her, and calling it a date. To a young man, the worst dates feel like being robbed and rejected. Boys risk death to avoid rejection (e.g., by joining the Army).(p. 314)
I think Farrell is confusing “the Army” with “the French Foreign Legion” and real life with Laurel and Hardy movies.
Evenings of paying to be rejected can feel like a male version of date rape. (p. 314)
Yep. Paying for a woman’s dinner and having a pleasant conversation with her, only to have her refuse to have sex with you, is in Farrell’s mind just like being raped.
Having dealt with date robbery and rejection, Farrell moves on to date fraud and lying:
If a man ignoring a woman’s verbal “no” is committing date rape, then a woman who says “no” with her verbal language but “yes” with her body language is committing date fraud. And a woman who continues to be sexual even after she says “no” is committing date lying.
Do women still do this? Two feminists found the answer is yes. Nearly 40 percent of college women acknowledged they had said “no” to sex even “when they meant yes.” In my own work with over 150,000 men and women – about half of whom are single – the answer is also yes. Almost all single women acknowledge they have agreed to go back to a guy’s place “just to talk” but were nevertheless responsive to his first kiss. Almost all acknowledge they’ve recently said something like “That’s far enough for now,” even as her lips are still kissing and her tongue is still touching his. (P 314)
Uh, Dr. Farrell, I’m pretty sure that women are still allowed to say no to sex even if they are kissing a man. Either partner, of whatever gender, is allowed to stop sexual activity at whatever point they want to, for whatever reason they want to. That how consent works.
And now we come to Farrell’s famous quote:
We have forgotten that before we began calling this date rape and date fraud, we called it exciting. (pp. 314-315)
It still doesn’t make sense to me, but that combination of “date rape” and “exciting” makes me queasy.
Perhaps the rest of Farrell’s paragraph will help to elucidate what he means:
Somehow, women’s romance novels are not titled He Stopped When I Said “No”. They are, though, titled Sweet Savage Love, in which the woman rejects the hand of her gentler lover who saves her from the rapist and marries the man who repeatedly and savagely rapes her. It is this “marry the rapist” theme that not only turned Sweet Savage Love into a best-seller but also into one of women’s most enduring romance novels. (p. 315)
Oh, so because some women enjoy fictionalized rape fantasies, real non-fictional date rape is therefore “exciting?”
Farrell follows this up, confusingly, with two sentences that utterly contradict one another:
It is important that a woman’s “noes” be respected and her “yeses” be respected. And it is also important when her nonverbal “yeses” (tongues still touching) conflict with those verbal “noes” that the man not be put in jail for choosing the “yes” over the “no.” He might just be trying to become her fantasy. (p. 315)
Three things. First: If the “conflict” is as Farrell sketched it out above — a woman saying “that’s far enough for now,” while kissing with “tongues still touching” — there is no conflict. Kissing, with tongues or without, does not give a man permission to put his penis in a woman. Reciprocal kissing gives you permission for … reciprocal kissing.
Second: when the alleged nonverbal “yeses” and the verbal “noes” conflict – or you think they do – here’s an idea: RESPECT THE VERBAL NOES. Err on the side of NOT-RAPE. If she says no, assume she means no, until she uses ACTUAL WORDS to say yes. Strange but true: woman can actually USE HUMAN LANGUAGE to express what they want. If a guy doesn’t respect a woman’s verbal “noes” because he thinks — or pretends to himself — that she’s saying “yes” with her body, how exactly can the law distinguish this from rape?
“Your honor, it’s true she told me no, but her elbows were saying “yes.””
Also: if your gal and you want to play out “nonconsensual” fantasies, that’s fine; lots of people do that — consensually. You just need to work out the basic rules and safewords in advance. There are entire subcultures of people devoted to this who will be happy to fill you in on the details. Really. They are very chatty.
Third: Do you all find it as creepy as I do that Farrell tends to sketch out these various rapey scenarios in the steamy prose of a second-rate romance novelist?
If you’re an MRA convinced I’m somehow misquoting Farrell here, here’s a screencap of most of the passages I just quoted which someone on the Men’s Rights subreddit helpfully posted some time ago. Or you could get hold of Farrell’s book and check for yourself.
Oh, but I’m not done yet. I’ve got even more context to provide.
Farrell tries his best to draw some sort of distinction between date rape and stranger-with-a-knife-rape:
We often hear, “Rape is rape, right?” No. A stranger forcing himself on a woman at knife point is different from a man and woman having sex while drunk and having regrets the morning. What is different? When a woman agrees to a date, she does not make a choice to be sexual, but she does make a choice to explore sexual possibilities. The woman makes no such choice with a stranger or an acquaintance. (p. 315)
So going on a date with someone and ostensibly making a “choice to explore sexual possibilities” means that it’s ok for people to force sex on you against your will later in the evening? Uh, Dr. Farrell, how exactly is this not rape? How does the fact that two people went to a movie beforehand turn coerced sex into not-real-rape?
You’ll have to ask Dr. Farrell that question, as his explanation makes no sense whatsoever to me.
A few pages down the road, Farrell warns about the dangers of “date rape” legislation in hyperbolic terms, arguing, bizarrely, that it will lead to more rape.
If the law tries to legislate our “yeses” and “noes” it will produce “the straitjacket generation” – a generation afraid to flirt, fearful of finding its love notes in a court suit. Date rape legislation will force suitors and courting to give way to courts and suing.
The empowerment of women lies not in the protection of females from date rape, but in resocializing both sexes to share date initiative taking and date paying so that both date rape and date fraud are minimized. We cannot end date rape by calling men “wimps” when they don’t initiate quickly enough, “rapists” when they do it too quickly, and “jerks” when they do it badly. If we increase the performance pressure only for men, we will reinforce men’s need to objectify women – which will lead to more rape. Men will be our rapists as long as men are our initiators.…
Laws on date rape create a climate of date hate. (p.340)
I don’t even know where to start with all that. That is just one giant steaming heap of nonsense. To put it as politely as I can.
Oh, in case you’re wondering, Farrell also thinks that a lot of what’s called spousal rape is really “mercy sex,” because people who are married to one another often have sex when they don’t want to — and that’s the way it should be, since “all good relationships require ‘giving in,’ especially when our partner feels strongly.” Sex you don’t want is just part of what makes a happy marriage happy!
The Ms. survey can call it a rape; a relationship counselor will call it a relationship.
Spousal rape legislation is blackmail waiting to happen. (p. 338)
So, does putting Farrell’s “we called it exciting” quote in context transform it into something innocent and understandable and not-rapey?
I think it’s pretty clear that the answer is no.
But not everyone agrees with me on that. When someone on the Man’s Rights subreddit recently provided some of the context for Farrell’s quote, the assembled Men’s Righsters mostly thought what he was saying sounded fine to them, arguing that he brings up some very legitimate points, attacking feminists for quote mining, suggesting that “feminists don’t reality” and that the Feminist machine slanders anyone who gets in their way. Heck, one fellow even suggested that he had gotten the distinct impression that Feminists want to create more instances of “rape-by-misunderstanding” in order to punish men. Oh, and then one of them attacked my previous post on Farrell’s disturbing views on incest.
Posted on May 3, 2013, in antifeminism, consent is hard, imaginary oppression, mansplaining, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, MRA, nice guys, oppressed men, playing the victim, rape, rape culture, reddit, the myth of warren farrell, warren farrell and tagged men's rights, MRA, rape, reddit, warren farrell. Bookmark the permalink. 1,058 Comments.
Guess that life lesson didn’t really stick, then.
Cassandra – yes. Out of all the shitty laws one might want to repeal, they want to get rid of the laws around the bodily integrity of women. Hooray for human rights.
If your child takes another child’s toy without asking, and you tell him not to do that, you’re committing child abuse. It’ll just make him seethe in rage that he’s not allowed to steal stuff, he’ll become obsessed with stealing, and when he grows up he’ll become a bank robber.
It’s also child abuse to make your child eat her vegetables. She’ll grow up hating vegetables and will eventually burn down a broccoli farm in revenge.
Don’t get me started on bath time.
Brz is typing while looking in the mirror again.
Thanks so much for the welcome package, kitteh (and, by proxy, cloudiah). :)
I had no idea hard chairs were misandry. It explains so much about why I can’t seem to sit still in women’s studies classes.
Actually it does sound like you were committing a crime.
Assault is a crime. Battery is a crime.
Slapping someone is a crime.
You are an asshole and an admitted violent offender. So yeah. I think you should go now.
“When I was a kid, I used to make unprovoked attacks on kids, and it never did me any harm. I’m a fine citizen now. Just look at me, I’m calling complete strangers ‘assholes’ on the internet because they’re telling me consent is required for sex.”
“I had no idea hard chairs were misandry. It explains so much about why I can’t seem to sit still in women’s studies classes.”
You’ve realised the terrible truth, Bob! :D
Who do you think the most disingenuous troll is, everyone?
I’m starting to think it’s Brz, but correct me if I’m wrong.
There’s quite some competition for that title, isn’t there? Lensman’s totally disingenuous with his flip from poor-me to standard MRA garbage. Brz we know to be a lying liar, ditto Abnoy, AntZ, all the regulars. I’m not sure Owly or Meller count, because they were so far off in their own bizarro worlds and seemed to believe their own fantasies.
Wait, I didn’t need to ask. I’m quite sure it’s TS. Even though I haven’t seen him in ages.
TS, is that ToySoldier? Yes, he’s a little piece of shit, that one. Did he get banned? I don’t think he’s commented here in the time I’ve been reading.
Yep, that’s him. He’s been banned according to David. I haven’t seen him here at all, actually, but he wins by default just because I’ve seen him on other feminist websites and on his own blog being the disingenuous dipshit he is. Recently, I saw him accuse Thomas Millar from Yes Means Yes of not talking about female-on-male rape victims “anywhere,” even though Millar briefly mentioned such victims in the article TS was commenting on. His dishonesty is off the charts.
Yeah, he’s all “I’m the victim always and forever!” and then talks shit about other victims, or anyone else at all, from what I’ve seen of his older stuff here (when I’m reading old threads). Mostly his walls of text make my eyes glaze over, but the responses are telling.
I really like Thomas Millar’s posts on Yes Means Yes, the few of ‘em I’ve read.
Here’s the link to the mini-thread in question. Prepare to cringe.
“When I was a child I was a bully who hit other kids for no reason and my parents did nothing, and then I grew up to be the troll I am today! Do you want your kids to turn out like me?”
This has been an ad from the Parents for Discipline Association of Everywhere.
Fuck you. Seriously, fuck you. I’m not a rapey asshole, or a violent offender and you people have no fucking right on lecturing people on morality. When you accuse other people to do not “treat women as humans” you try to hide your compulsory need to treat certain groups of humanity like shit. When you accuse someone of being “victim-blaming” you try to hide that it’s you who’re always trying to find new victims to bully. When you accuse men of being abuse enablers or apologists you try to hide that it’s you who act as sectarians who manipulate young women by offering them support and compassion and menace of rejecting them of the group if they do not follow strictly the orthodox ideological lines (the people here can talk about that if they want, the people who find normal to say to a member of their own e-community that they’re drunk-posting and that they should go to bed when the person in question manifest inappropriate compassion for a guy whose only crime has been to try to pick up awkwardly women in the streets. Their way to punish dissent, the relations of powers between the den mothers and the candid ones, the way the seconds always try to have the approval of the firsts and how these one use this as a control tool, is one of the sickest thing I’ve seen on the Internet). It’s you who’re the assholes. You’ve created a moral system whose only purpose is to legitimate by advance all the sick manipulative, abusive shit you do. Tartuffes, that’s what you are, ill-intentioned hypocritical morals-lecturers who only use morals as a stick to hurt other people.
You can’t say whatever you want, that it’s OK to accuse a 4-years-old boy of being a rapist, that it’s OK to public-shame people in order to make a point because the patriarchy is so big and so powerful that you’re allowed to use shitty methods to pursue noble goals, when we make the sum of what you say, of what you do, someone with a functioning moral compass is able to see that there’s nothing behind your aggressive and abusive behavior, behind the shit you do while keeping using the inverse accusation all the time to dismiss any responsibility for the shit you do, there’s no goal at all, only a pretext, only a disguised aggressiveness.
Own your fucking shit and as you love to say, I wish you to step onto a lego.
And that, “I stopped when a beautiful girl told me she didn’t like it. ” So he solves moral quandaries with his dick instead of his conscience. Actually, that could be the mrm mission statement.
I think I did read that thread, it looks familiar. Was that CDC study the same one Tamen (who I see turns up there as well) blathering about here the other day?
The only thing I’ll give TS is that he doesn’t (iirc) do the same as most MRAs, which is to alternate “but what about women raping men? It happens all the time, it’s just as prevalent, ignoring it is misandry!” with “he was lucky to be chosen by a hot babe, I’d totally tap that, the ones who were really traumatised were the boys she didn’t choose” when a female teacher rapes male students.
Shorter Brz: women have this idea they can ignore me and don’t have to have sex with me! Waaaahhhh! Misandry!
Did you hear what I said, Brz? Fuck off. And take your disingenuous bullshit with you.
Instead I shall step into a lego.
(Or I would, if it was closer to me.)
For some reason I can just see the Doctor falling in love with that lego house!
(I know there are lego TARDISes. Lego is like Rule 34.)
Brz, so, shut up about rape because it makes rapists victims? Erm… no.
You’ve seen the Lego porn, right?
Brzzzzz — Wall. Of. Text. With damned near perfect English grammar despite being fumingly angry.
At being called a bully, which you were. Going around slapping people on the playground is bullying, plain and simple.
And no one said the little boy was a rapist, just that he needed, and apparently understood, a lesson in personal boundaries. Teaching 4 year olds about boundaries is completely normal…and really, most get a cursory level of personal boundary lessons much younger, in the form of “no one gets to touch your private parts without your permission”. Kissing is also sexual and you don’t do that to people without permission, and people can’t do that to you without permission? Normal parenting!
I really don’t want to imagine a world in which everyone can go arround randomly kissing whomever they like. What’s your fucking issue here? That he’s 4? That he’s a boy being told that he needs a girl’s permission? The mere existance of the word rape? That you can’t get a GOTCHA moment since, in reality, no one here thinks that he raped her? What the fuck man, you want people to be able to just touch anyone however they want?!
TL;DR — kids need to be taught about boundaries so they can acknodge and protect their own.
Cassandra – I hadn’t, and now I may never be able to unsee it! :D
Brz, you’re doing it wrong. This is not how you neg women.
Lego porn?
The world is a strange, mysterious place.
You know, I don’t like how MRAs have ruined the word ‘egalitarian’, which is (in my opinion, I know others here may disagree) a perfectly respectable word. I thought it meant ‘equality is a good thing, and trying to equalise society as much as possible is therefore a good thing’, but according to MRAs (reddit in particular, it seems) it means ‘I guess people can have equality of opportunity, but I mean it’s obvious men are superior, right, and gender roles should be enforced as much as possible.’ Disappointing.
CassandraSays, I enjoyed that lego porn.
Bob Goblin…goblin eh? Fitting!
^a less failed attempt at begging and I’ve never even done it before!
Welcome btw, hope my joke doesn’t upset you (lol, I’m an erfworld fan, capital city Gobwin knob, so yeah, I actually like goblins :) )
Begging, because auto correct says that negging isn’t a word.
But really, this time it’s right, they’re begging, in a way.
This one is a present for Brz.
Begging for attention, or failed negging for attention, that’s our trolls all over.
I read “Bob Goblin” and think “Hobgoblin’s brother?” in a Pratchettish sort of way. :)
OMG love that Pervert video!
Brz, did you dummy spit like that when they pulled you up in front of the school principal for hitting all those kids?
Argenti, that was a good first attempt. Bravo! Next time, try to be slightly more mysterious-insulting. Something like, “Goblin means mangina in Esperanto.”
It’ll make my defenses go haywire, and I’ll be yours in seconds flat. It’s like doing math.
That he’s 4.
And Come one, you know perfectly that “rape”, “sexual assault” aren’t only used to describe the act of crossing sexual “boundaries”, you keep using these terms all the time with a sense which goes far beyond the notion of crossing “boundaries” of other people. Rape is a tool by which all men keep all women in a status of inferiority, isn’t it?
I’ve never said that we shouldn’t teach kids to respect boundaries of other people, there’s simply more at stake here, there’s an ideological thing and a strong symbolical violence and that’s just sick. That is sick and that is perverse.
But you can say that I have a problem with the “mere existence of the word rape”, that a boy need a girl’s permission to kiss her or that I want “people to be able to just touch anyone however they want”.
Seriously, at this point, I don’t even want to make a point anymore.
You’re not a bad person Argenti Aertheri but I think I’ve just reached the point where my disgust for the general atmosphere here has became stronger than my curiosity for these people who speak in a language to which I’m not used.
Oh yeah, that’s so fucking horrible. Teaching a child to respect another child’s agency! Abuse, surely.
You don’t give a flying fuck about teaching people boundaries if you think that gaining consent from people isn’t important. Sorry.
Then fuck off, Brz. You won’t be missed.
Something tells me this is how Brz thinks we should be socializing young men.
Oh good, we’ve disgusted him away. Au revoir, Brz!
Now that he’s gone, anyone got any good studying music recommendations for me?
Hobgoblin’s brother? Ha ha, nah, it was just my first D&D character, a bard with a mutant unicorn steed named Worthless.
Oh, awesome, you’re finally leaving? Bye!
A mutant unicorn called Worthless? Cool!
I wonder if he’s distantly related to the cows in Cold Comfort Farm – Graceless, Aimless, Feckless and Pointless.
Kittehserf, when you were vacuuming, did five cent pieces go up the tube with that “chinkachinkachink” sound? I love that.
No, but some of Maddie’s nibbies went up with a clackety-clack noise! (Upright vac, no tube.) :D
Forgot to ask, how did your picnic go?
Yes, cat biscuits are great for that. Also stuff like spilt uncooked rice – “swissssh”. Picinic was great. Glorious at the lake – mild afternoon, trees all clothed in autumn finery, sunlight dappling on the lake. The kids even had a paddle. Watched them while I sat catting with a good friend. Perfect.
“Picinic” – I sound like Yogi Bear!
Sounds like a perfect day!
“Watched them while I sat catting with a good friend. Perfect.”
Furrdian slip? ;)
Why yes, catting at the lake. Have you never tried it? You must
*embarrassed*
Hmmm … does this sort of thing count?
There’s a creek near my place that the older of the two Quacks Family kitties used to like swimming in occasionally. Go catting there and you might catch something!
@Brz
You heard it here first! Blogs making fun of misogynists are definitely an awful combination of those weirdo Christian cults that pop up and Soviet Russia under Stalin. So, should we go with Commissar David or Father David?
And you don’t actually have to read here very long to see that there is actually a fair amount of disagreement amongst posters here. We had a schism a while back in which we lost quite a few well-loved posters over disagreements about the site, actually.
P.S. You’re not a member of “[our] own e-community” any more than a barnacle is a member of a sailing crew.
Brz — dude, why are you putting boundaries in scare quotes? I’m really not sure how to word this if you don’t even believe that personal boundaries are a thing, but I’ll repeat part of my last comment all the same. When children are taught that people aren’t allowed to touch their private parts, they’re taught that people have to respect their boundaries. The same applies to sexual acts, which kissing is (come on man, you’re an adult, I don’t have to tell you this!)
That he’s 4 makes it a matter of time outs and lectures, not a legal matter, yes, but a lecture on not doing things to people that they don’t want (respecting others boundaries) is still in order. I mean fuck, this is what parents (are supposed to) do — prepare their kids for life in the wider world as adults. And yep, if he did that in 10 years it’d totally be sexual assault.
As for your accusations of wtf rape means, either you missed English nuance or are being willfully obtuse. The closest anyone’s come to saying “[r]ape is a tool by which all men keep all women in a status of inferiority” was Dworkin, in a novel. Note that “rape is about power” is not the same as “men keep all women in a status of inferiority” — when adults abuse kids it’s about power, ditto teachers abusing students, or when someone incapable of consent is raped (eg mentally handicapped). So “all men”? No, plenty see rape as a horrible violation that no one should suffer. Now, rapists use rape to assert their superiority. But note the simple fact that not all men are rapists.
Also, I can’t make heads or tails of your argument that this is some sort of ideological issue of symbolic violence. The kid got told not to do it again, he said he wouldn’t, someone wrote up a piece using his feelings of pride that his son gets it to explain why consent should be taught young. I’m not seeing your issue here. That the father found it easier to say rape than sexual assault? I mean, that’s kind of his problem? Idk about him, but I’m pretty sure I’d not want the inevitable “what’s sexual mean?” question. Rape is divorced enough from the sex part to allow a lesson in “this is wrong” without having to explain to a small child what sex is. But I’m guessing, I don’t have kids, and am certainly not this boy’s father (do have plenty of experience with kids though, and oh boy is 4 the stage of awkward questions!)
——
My cousin’s oldest daughter just turned 13…those explanations about sex are about to become important (and she’s had a crush for years!) Can’t wait to see my cousin flip out about this!
Goddamnit when’d it become 5 am!!
Brz go to bed, it’s dawn. And on that note, you’re in Boston, go practice your English on store clerks. Or visit your damned museum, that place left me barely able to walk because of course we had to do it in one day! (Also, the aquarium, because cuttlefish)
…MoMA will be worse huh?
I’d go for Commisar David. He might get to wear a cool uniform that way.
How is Lavender doing, lowquacks? Ignore me if you don’t want to talk about him.
Oh and Brz? Yeah, you’re full of it about that “seconds” and “firsts” shit. You must’ve missed the days of having an actual set of “elite” members. These days those of us who’ve been here awhile try to be actively welcoming of newcomers. Until they prove that to be a wasted effort that is. Compare lensman with Bob Goblin, or any of the other recent delurkers.
To anyone lurking, delurk! We have hard chairs and SCENTED MOTHERFUCKING CANDLES, and a welcome package that explains it all! (Also, cupcakes. And fish if you mention it and remind me :) )
“(come on man, you’re an adult, I don’t have to tell you this!)”
assumes facts not in evidence ;)
“Brz go to bed, it’s dawn. And on that note, you’re in Boston, go practice your English on store clerks.”
Jeez, what did they do to deserve that? No store clerk gets paid enough to have to put up with the fauxFrench jerkwad.
Surprisingly well! We had another vet look at him – didn’t want to do a biopsy, still, so we don’t know much about the lumps, which could possibly be benign – and he’s on antiinflammatory drugs which he’s been very good about taking, which should help him stay happy and healthy for longer and have had the lovely side effect of bringing his appetite back and then some. He’s happy, seems to realise that big adventures aren’t a great idea any more, and as far as anyone can tell he’s not in pain, and we’ve bought him a little bed that sits in Mum’s room for if he wants to be away from people.
“We had a schism a while back in which we lost quite a few well-loved posters over disagreements about the site, actually.”
Yeah I missed that (well, directly, I’ve heard enough to be glad I missed it). Brz clearly missed it. Sort version Brz? About half the aforementioned “elite” posters left, after a “lovely” confrontation with the other half.
And by all the gods I hope I didn’t just fan that fire.
Brz seems to think “saying things with regard to the space you’re in” or just “not being an arsehole” is the same as humbly seeking the approval of some mysterious elite.
@Argenti
So welcoming, in fact, that we tried in vain to work with/sympathise with the “converted” Mr Al despite his year or so of general unpleasantess towards us and mild stalking of active commentors.
If we really crushed dissent, you’d not see any – David lets almost everyone through moderation, and is an unbelievably light banhammer user. The fact that you can shit all over the comments like this is evidence that we’re not some evil echo chamber as you’re alleging – even if we were, what’s wrong with a moderated community? Not everywhere is for everyone.
That’s good to hear, lowquacks! Has he regained any weight with his improved appetite?
Did you see the conversation a while back where Hrovitnir mentioned puppy food for picky older dogs, and said that the same thing can apply for older cats/kitten food?
@Argenti
I don’t know a lot about what went down, but was semi-active at the time and glad to have missed the most of it because seeing a lot of people I like get upset with each other would’ve been pretty draining.
I think the posters who you could’ve upset have mostly stopped reading/participating in this blog, or the comments at least, by now.
“what’s wrong with a moderated community? Not everywhere is for everyone.”
Oh, but that interferes with Brz’s inalienable right to force himself on unwilling people, whatever the form – verbally, in writing or physically. He said long since he likes the sort of society where he has untrammelled privilege to bully those around him. Freedom, man!
(Freedom from harassment by men like Brz doesn’t count.)
lowquacks — my Swiss cheese memory forgot about your I’ll cat, glad to hear he’s doing well!
Kitteh — they work retail, trust me here, anyone truly trying to make use of their second language will not be the worst they see. (My favorite was the doctor who blamed me for not having Acrobat when he needed it, he had surgery in 45 min…and you waited until now because?)
As long as he actually sticks to asking where the bananas are and whatnot, he’ll remain tolerable. Of course, that is a huge assumption right there.
I still think he should go to the aquarium, because cuttlefish! I had one following the iPad/camera around, I was stalked by a cuttlefish! ‘Twas adorable! And the way they change colors is amazing.
…why yes, I was just as excited as the children!
He certainly feels heftier and not as bony, but part of that’s his winter coat coming in, probably.
He gets hungry enough for it not to matter too much, but one trick we do use is to heat up food a bit – his sense of smell’s not as great in his old age and heat can bring out some of the kitty-appetising odours in things.
lowquacks, from what I’ve heard, most of that went down in the Secret Room in the forum, and I don’t think any of the people involved have posted here since.
I’d never heard of heating food like that (though we used to warm Hadji’s meat for him, ‘cos he was picky about eating cold food). I’ll keep that in mind if Fribs loses her appetite.
lowquacks — to avoid risking re-igniting it, I’ll just say that I witnessed a lot of what built up to it and I haz feels. So maybe it’s totally safe now, but my feels are still feels and moot now, so yeah, I’m dropping it.
But yep, our crushing of dissent is totally why anyone not proven to be an asshole is given a chance to explain stupid comments. Fuck, Ruby was given so many chances it’s a joke (tell me you saw “prisoners deserve to be raped” Ruby in action)