I follow a blog called Feminist Critics and sometimes post on there.
Its one of the most unusual on the web, both in the way it is moderated and for the types of discussions one can have on it.
Despite it's title, the blog is not run by people who consider themselves anti-feminists or MRA's, though many of the long-time commenters lean that way. One of the bloggers , ballgame, even identifies as feminist and they've had other self-identified feminist bloggers before. They also have a whole post called "What Feminism Got Right" which they urge any newly participating feminist or anti or skeptical person to read prior to posting. Basically, the blog exists to try to bring to light problematical and unexamined areas of feminist discourse and philosophy as well as to examine "gender roles" dispassionately in terms of how they impact both men and women.
In order to do that, and to avoid many of the problems that are often encountered on other blogs where flamewars are rampant or censorship rules the day, they have employed a rather unusual system of light moderation. They wish to welcome feminist commenters even those who may initially be hostile. They do by means of a few rules and an interesting type of thread division. Threads are divided into NH and RP. NH is "no hostility" and is more tightly moderated as well as containing rules such as "no piling on". RP are "regular parallel" where less strict rules apply and of course the newly arrived feminist commentator may choose to participate in one or both of the threads. The rules are here:
Now, the interesting thing about this, is , I'm afraid all too common. That is, that despite all the rules and special privileges afforded feminists there are still relatively few who comment and even fewer who either stick around or make repeated visits. This is not to grate on feminism: this seems common with just about every ideology I've ever run into. That is, no matter how easy you make it for people to come to your place to share their views and have those views challenged, few people seem up to it.
This is partly why blogging is often futile. Vox Day only gets the occasional atheist at his site, Roissy only gets the occasional anti-game person, and ..well I could go on and on. People just always seem to want to keep their opinions dry and unchallenged - its probably easier emotionally that way. Socrates really was an unusual man after all!
The Uninhabitable Earth.
1 week ago