“I’m a Man! I’m Brave! I Use an Alias!”

boy king

I believe the blogosphere is a microcosm of America. A microcosm, as a matter of fact, of the free world. Blogs are perhaps the major way we converse with each other, outside our own little pods of daily life. They are censored in un-free lands – when they are allowed at all. But in places where freedom rings, a healthy and unrestricted blogosphere has become a necessity.

What’s happening at Gay Patriot concerns me because, as I have said before, it is a small-arena version of what’s happening on the American Right. On any blog, Left, Right or Center, where a gang of thugs takes over and forces out dissent, freedom of speech is compromised. Freedom for only the group that shouts the loudest, has the most money or has the biggest guns is not freedom in any sense.

Everyone who dissents, at a blog where thugs are taking over, is labeled a troll. But it’s pretty easy to tell a troll. They generally don’t bother to read the posts, and they drop in flaming turds based only on the post’s headline. That happens fairly frequently at Gay Patriot, and such people are dispatched or discredited fairly easily. All that’s needed is a fire extinguisher and a poop-scoop.

But not everybody who dissents is a troll. Thoughtful people who come to Gay Patriot, for example, read and thoroughly digest the posts. Sometimes they agree with them and sometimes they don’t. Usually they agree with part of what’s being said in them, but not with all of it.

At Gay Patriot, you had just better agree with absolutely everything – or you are a “troll.” That is not the bloggers’ fault. They welcome disagreement, because that’s what makes a blog interesting. It’s the fault of the thugs, who want to turn it into an Amen Corner.

Those who’ve found this blog because I’ve commented on Gay Patriot are not trolls. Not a one of them. They’ve braved the thuggery there because, though they don’t agree with absolutely everything that’s posted there, they do agree with some of it. And they care about America. The objections they raise are worth considering, and even those with which people disagree are not – for Heaven’s sake – going to kill them.

The hysteria with which dissent is dealt, by the thugs, on Gay Patriot is truly over-the-top. You’d think ideas with which the thugs disagree carried some airborne contagion. That those who hear these ideas have been exposed to some dreaded disease.

It’s not interesting when a self-appointed guard dog stretches a thread to two hundred comments savaging somebody. Which is why, by the fiftieth comment or so, everybody else is gone. They may keep reading, but probably they do not. They know all too well what’s going to happen from then on.

What I find interesting is that absolutely none of the thugs use their own name. All of them hide behind aliases. And their strutting hyper-masculinity is truly funny. Men who act like that are, almost without exception, cowards. They’re the sort who rah-rah wars from the safety of their armchairs, and only fight them from behind their computer keyboards.

And only one person who disagrees with me, in this latest donnybrook, has had the gumption to come over here and engage me on my home turf. He is not a thug, and I wish he hadn’t gotten mixed up in this mess. The thugs, I have engaged repeatedly on their home turf – and even when they fight me, they make good and sure they do it from the friendly confines of the turf they control.

But the bloggers don’t realize it’s the thugs’ home turf. They’ve got this quirky notion that the blog belongs to them. I hope they take their turf back, and make it, once again, a place where ideas can be freely discussed without interference from quivering queens who are afraid somebody, somewhere, won’t know they’re men. They’re so unsure of their manhood that some of them even have to use aliases with the word “Man” in them.

Gosh darn it, there’s an irony in there somewhere…

About heine911

I'm an Episcopalian, Classical Liberal Ladies' Woman, helping to save Western civilization, searching for the perfect wife and enjoying every minute of it all.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to “I’m a Man! I’m Brave! I Use an Alias!”

  1. “I hope they take their turf back, and make it, once again, a place where ideas can be freely discussed.” I hope so. I can’t think of a precedent that suggests they will, though. Like a commenter already alluded to, someone like Seane-Anna, who sputters out nothing but nonsensical bile, gets a pass, because she tows the conservative line. While she may have gotten taken to task by others in the past, the only times I’ve witnessed someone do it (besides you or others whose beliefs run mostly opposed to hers) was when moderator Dan responded to her attacks directly after she singled him out.

    I’d like to see people use their real full names on GP and how that affects the debate. If they dont have the courage of their convictions, then what does that say about what they stand for? (Again, no one’s life would be threatened for what they said on GP, if they came out in the open; their reputation might be tarnished, though.) I don’t believe it should be mandatory, but if people are going to give themselves the license to be so disrespectful (beyond, really) while hiding behind a nom de plume, then maybe it should. That is, if GP wants to change their current trajectory of spiraling downwards. But, they appear to be pretty comfortable on their chaotic and absurd journey to the bottom.

    If GP is truly a “living room” where dissent is tolerated up until a certain point, and those guests who are more welcome can act any old way they seek fit, then maybe the moderators should privatize their blog once and for all; they can enjoy the true effects of their echo chamber to their heart’s content. Or, maybe that’s not the point. Perhaps, deep down, they crave the drama, because of whatever is occurring deep within themselves. They want people to know what is going on inside their minds, but they’re ashamed of the feelings the current state of the country and general attitude/beliefs of the populace brings out in them. They feel the U.S. is falling apart and they’re defenseless. They’re Howard Beale: “I’m as mad as Hell and I’m not going to take it anymore.” Except, they’re less public and direct. They latch onto this identity of “closet (sometimes gay) conservative.” Their coping mechanism won’t allow them to be totally constructive and level-headed. Why else be anonymous in this instance? So you can be petty and/or vile about what you believe? Where’s the glory in that? Where’s the benefit? I’m not a psychologist, so I can only ask all of these questions. Thank you for indulging me. I’ve always been fascinated by these “characters” at GP (which is what many of these real flesh and blood people have allowed themselves to turn into on Bruce and Dans’ blog).

    That being said, now that I am (voluntarily, good-naturedly) no longer commenting there, like some people, I’m learning to sit back and enjoy the (sh!t) show. The entertainment value is priceless. I didn’t appreciate the things Jman1961 was saying about you lately, Lori, but, when I disregarded the severity of his insinuations, there was an undeniable comical factor to just how he was conducting himself and the ridiculous things he was saying. I mean, who says that? Why? He’s like this mean-spirited cartoon character. Perhaps that is how he views himself. Too bad. But, maybe it works for him as a coping mechanism. I shouldn’t judge. That’s not my place.

  2. It’s been a week since this putrid rotten egg has broken open. NDT, and others, even after Dan writes a post titled “STOP THE PERSONAL ATTACKS!” in which the comment are full of a slurry of personal attacks, are still doing the same behaviors that led to that post in the first place.

    I still have no indication at all that NDT will show an ounce of integrity for falsely accusing me of calling Dan an extremist, a racist, and of wanting Dan to kill himself.

    I’ll not wait up at night with any concern about it.

    Though NDT has, temporarily at least, dialed back his attacks a bit (which will revert back to usual form in a few weeks or less), I’m afraid Dan and Bruce have made the choice to let it continue.

    I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t see any evidence that any action has been taken. Too bad. GP used to be a nice blog to be a part of, even when we had our differences.

    Oh well. If their choice is to have GP be the home of the insane rabid Conservative crowd instead of the intellectual Gay Conservative, and I can’t persuade them otherwise (which God knows I’ve tried to advocate for), ultimately, it is their choice. it’s a bad choice, but they’ve seemed to have made it.

    Again. I hope I’m wrong. But all indicators are that I’m not.

  3. Lori Heine says:

    A few of the more egregious comments have been removed from the mega-thread that got so crazy. I do appreciate that. It may send a message, if those meant to receive it are capable to learning anything from it. But I agree that it will not solve the problem.

    I know gay conservatives who are not total whackos. But if GP’s intent is to show that gay conservatism is a reasonable position, you’d think they’d want to highlight the commenters who are not whackos, and regularly remind the ones who go nuts that they’re making their position look bad.

    If all people ever see of gay conservatives are people like NDT or J “Man,” they’re not going to get a very positive picture of gay conservatives. I’m really not a conservative because I can’t get with social conservatism — and conservatives have made quite clear they intend to remain shackled to it. If libertarians are to be treated as something separate, then that’s what we must be — something separate.

    I don’t even think libertarians are welcome, by the conservative commenters, at GP. The bloggers certainly want us there, and they are very good about welcoming us. But they can only do so much.

    I don’t agree, with ILC, that banning people is like dropping a nuclear bomb on them. I do believe it should only be used as a last resort. But your blog is like your house, or your place of business. People have the right to say anything they like — but you have the right to determine whether they can say it on your property. It does not curtail their freedom of speech if they’re still perfectly free to go speak somewhere else.

    Claiming someone has told one of the bloggers to go kill himself is very serious. It’s only a step shy of calling someone a murderer. I agree that an apology is called for. When someone accuses another person of such a thing, then won’t apologize for it, it makes it look as if the blog that permits such behavior is a nest of lunatics.

    There are many serious and thoughtful commenters on GP. I include there people I NEVER agree with. They deserve better than that.

  4. “There are many serious and thoughtful commenters on GP.”

    There aren’t that many anymore. Five years ago there was a much wider variety of comment. But a good number of them stopped coming back…. Wonder why?

  5. “””A few of the more egregious comments have been removed from the mega-thread that got so crazy. “”””

    Well, that’s a week too late.

  6. Pat says:

    It’s good that some of the more egregious posts have been deleted, but I see the post that started it all, where NDT accused some of us of wanting Dan to kill himself, among other things, is still up. I don’t think simply deleting posts will send a message. And simply having a general call for stopping personal attacks hasn’t helped either. The only thing that might work is having the blogmasters calling out specific offender(s), and warning them that continued violations will result in being banned. And then follow through if continued violations occur. Dan came close to specifically identifying NDT once (he talked about a conservative blogger violating the rules in a thread, and NDT was clearly the only conservative blogger that violated the rules in that thread.) I recall NDT reacting with an infantile tirade, but at least he got the message that Dan was talking about him. I just don’t think it was direct enough.

    • Lori Heine says:

      To take the behavioral scientist approach, behavior that is rewarded is behavior that gets repeated. People don’t learn that differently from monkeys. Remember those experiments with monkeys getting Cheerios out of a gumball machine?

      The monkeys at GP always get their Cheerios. NDT knows good and well that after he goes into time-out for a little while, he can come back out and return to the same behavior as before.

      I don’t advocate banning him, because (A) he’s good friends with Dan and Bruce and (B) all it would do would be to make a martyr out of him. It might make the behavior of his little friends — who’d be angry because he was banned — that much worse.

      He is capable of being a very decent person, even a gentleman. I’ve met him, and I think he’s genuinely a nice guy. But his online behavior is atrocious. I don’t know why that happens, and I’m not sure an alias totally explains it.

  7. Pat says:

    Lori, I only favor banning as a last resort. I don’t think the blogmasters have used all the tools they could to stop NDT’s behavior. In fact, it appears that his behavior has been rewarded as you suggest. But suppose that shortly after that email on of the blogmasters comments on the thread and stated specifically that NDT violated the policy by posting multiple personal attacks against several posters (without saying that some of the other points in the post is valid). Goes to the original post, deletes it completely, except to leave a parenthetical comment “post deleted due to violation of GP policy,” and then send him an email with a stern warning. If after two or three more times, the behavior somehow still persists, then I believe the point of last resort has been reached.

    I just don’t see how Dan and Bruce could consider NDT to be a friend if he continues to try to undermine them. And if his posse gets upset, then it seems to me that GP would not be the blog for them. I guess it comes down to, do Dan and Bruce really want their site to be welcoming to all with civil discussion of opposing views, or if that is really a crock.

    I have heard others say that NDT is a nice guy in person. And I don’t doubt your assessment of when you met him. First of all, except for the most vicious animals, anyone is capable of presenting himself as a gentleman, and behaving in a decent manner. There is a saying that one’s true character is determined by how the person behaves when know one is looking. Well, posting on a blog is perhaps half-way between being in person, or being in a position where no one is looking. And we see what kind of individual NDT is under these circumstances.

    • Pat says:

      I fouled up the fourth sentence of the first paragraph above.

      But suppose shortly after NDT’s post in question, it was, as soon as possible, followed up by a comment by one of the blogmasters that stated specifically that NDT…

  8. “””But suppose that shortly after that email on of the blogmasters comments on the thread and stated specifically that NDT violated the policy by posting multiple personal attacks against several posters (without saying that some of the other points in the post is valid). Goes to the original post, deletes it completely, except to leave a parenthetical comment “post deleted due to violation of GP policy,” and then send him an email with a stern warning. If after two or three more times, the behavior somehow still persists, then I believe the point of last resort has been reached. “””

    Pat, I’ve been in email communication with Dan over the past year at least on this very topic. He indicated that I’m not the only one who has complained. He is very well aware of at least some of the past blatant transgressions, as he himself admits. The point of last resort presented itself many complaints ago. It would be one thing if they were not aware of what’s going on, but that is clearly not the case.

    I do have some sympathy here. NDT is indeed a friend of Dan and Bruce. If they did indeed pull the trigger and he did get banned, GP would lose several other commenters who are allies with NDT and would have no problem with NDT’s outrageous slanders and behavior.

    At this point, it certainly appears they have chosen the path of least resistance and chose to let a repeat offender of their own rule slide. Which makes me wonder, exactly which conservative “principle” are they upholding here? Because NDT has clearly broken, on hundreds of occasions, their one rule concerning Gay Patriot civility.

    “All animals are equal, but some are more than others”.

  9. Pat says:

    Mike, I have never seen Dan or Bruce specifically cite NDT for a violation, only general calls for civility when he violates the rule. I recall seeing Bruce posting after other posters violate the policy giving a warning specifically addressed to them. With NDT, the warning always comes after other poster(s) try to defend themselves, and multiple posters are warned. With my approach above, Bruce and Dan give NDT, and only NDT, a public warning. I think there is a chance of his behavior improving. I’ve gone stretches where I did not visit GP, so maybe I missed such direct warnings. Or because Dan and Bruce are friends with NDT (some friend), perhaps they are not willing to take even this pre-banning step.

    I’m not sure how much they would lose if NDT’s allies left. Most of them don’t seem open to civil discussion themselves.

    I do have sympathy for Dan and Bruce. But it’s NDT that has put them on the spot. If NDT needs to act out in such a manner, I’m sure there are other venues where he can do so. That’s one of the reasons that, even though NDT appears to be nice in person, is really not, by sticking it to two of his friends in the manner he has.

  10. ” If NDT needs to act out in such a manner, I’m sure there are other venues where he can do so.”

    He has his own blog…. In fact, that is where I first came across him, at about the same time I found GP 8 years ago. He seem OK then. Problem is, GP gets links to other blogs. NDT’s blog is staler than mine. He would lose a built-it national audience.

  11. Pat says:

    Actually, I used to post regularly on his blog. He had somewhat of a following. But when he started getting foul, I stopped. And I saw soon after that a lot of people left, and then he practically abandoned it himself.

    I have to amend one thing I wrote. I saw that Dan did, sort of, deal with NDT directly when he deleted a post by NDT personally attacking a Facebook friend of Dan’s. But Dan didn’t follow it up by saying that personal attacks against fellow posters would no longer be tolerated. So, the message that NDT received is that he won’t personally attack Dan’s Facebook friends, and that it is still okay to personally attack posters.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s