"Honor killings" and Metafilter

July 15, 2010 5:14 AM

MeFi's own TheLastPsychiatrist talks about the alleged honor killings and Metafilter gets mentioned in the process (down at the end of the post).
posted by falameufilho to MetaFilter-Related at 5:14 AM (217 comments total)

Way to diss a deletion, dude.
posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 5:30 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Quoting the bit down at the end of the post:

You might think that the American internet is the obvious place to do this, but it's not.

Sorry, the *what* internet?!??

Consider Metafilter, the online forum where no topic is too controversial for an opinion grounded in either reason or expletives. What did the community that fears neither God nor the NSA have to say about this case?

As an atheistic Buddhist, so have no reason to fear 'god', and have no idea who or what the NSA is. It's fair enough to assume, however, that they are irrelevant & have no jurisdiction here.

This post was deleted for the following reason: This is awful, but we've had posts discussing honor killings in general and specific incidents before and I'm not sure what good is going to come from this one.-- [moderator]

Yeah, it was single-link outragefilter, and the thread was already as pointless & ugly as a beard on a babushka.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:33 AM on July 15, 2010

This post was deleted for the following reason:
[...]

That's why it's going to happen again.

Only MetaFilter can stop honour killings!!!
posted by EndsOfInvention at 5:34 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

so = I
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:35 AM on July 15, 2010

I am often frustrated by all the pre-emptive deletions when nothing bad has happened in a thread yet. On the flipside, any site that has been going at a fair pace for eleven years probably knows where the line is with its members.

Sucks to be me, who would like to comment in some of the deleted threads. Would probably suck worse if I inadvertantly ran headlong into an ongoing bitterfest.

I've also been curious as to what 'try again in a few days' means in a deletion reason, especially when it isn't a topic in an open thread.
posted by shinybaum at 5:40 AM on July 15, 2010

Sys Rq nailed it.
posted by gman at 5:41 AM on July 15, 2010

Only MetaFilter can stop honour honor killings!!!

American Internetified that for you.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:41 AM on July 15, 2010 [12 favorites]

You might think that the American internet is the obvious place to do this, but it's not.

Sorry, the *what* internet?!??

"American internet" !=> "the internet, which is American"
"American internet" => "that subset of the internet which is American"
posted by DU at 5:44 AM on July 15, 2010 [3 favorites]

Doesn't he mean "USian" internet? Or are we all Americans? (Again.)
posted by rtha at 5:46 AM on July 15, 2010

Also, I look forward to the...what's the website-loyal version of "nationalistic"?...fervor and frenzy about the ensue defending against the menace of *gasp* an opinion from the (horrors!) outside!
posted by DU at 5:46 AM on July 15, 2010

American Internetified that for you.

Wait, this is the American internet? Shit, must've taken the wrong tube this morning. I wondered why everyone was talking funny.
posted by EndsOfInvention at 5:46 AM on July 15, 2010

So a member wrote a post on his blog about something he read on Metafilter. I assume this happens somewhat regularly. Why is this important?
posted by Houstonian at 5:46 AM on July 15, 2010 [2 favorites]

You might think that the American internet is the obvious place to do this, but it's not

Well, that's OK then, as I'm on the English internet - a place where words are spelt right, data travels down cables on the left hand side and all comments are accompanied by tea (or real ale).

I've also been curious as to what 'try again in a few days' means in a deletion reason, especially when it isn't a topic in an open thread.

I think it means "the user has posted the FPP in a haze of outrage and GRAR and 'I must post this NOW' and would benefit from stepping away from the keyboard for a bit. Once they have calmed down then they can write a more considered and better researched FPP."
posted by Electric Dragon at 5:47 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

It's also extremely disingenuous for a member - of all people - to assert that a moderator's deletion reason reflects the opinion of the entire community, especially when there was a MetaTalk thread raised, which debated the merits of the deletion.
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:53 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

One day a dude's famous for eating a really big donut and the next he's gone and signed the death warrants of thousands of innocent Muslim women around the globe.
posted by The Straightener at 5:55 AM on July 15, 2010 [18 favorites]

This is not a good post for MetaTalk.
posted by chinston at 5:55 AM on July 15, 2010

I think TLP is a pretty cool guy. Eh pays attention to comparative effectiveness studies and doesn't afraid of anything.

But seriously? Only Metafilter can stop the conveniently-biased media narratives?
posted by anotherpanacea at 5:56 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

I didn't think he was blaming metafilter so much as saying if nobody on a mostly openminded US based site is willing to talk about it then that's what the problem in general is.

I thought it was a bad post because it had no context and because honour killing stories are like Daily Mail headlines, so I disagree with him on that. Also the best people to discuss genuine honour killings are probably people in that community.

I think it means "the user has posted the FPP in a haze of outrage and GRAR and 'I must post this NOW' and would benefit from stepping away from the keyboard for a bit. Once they have calmed down then they can write a more considered and better researched FPP."

Oh! I get it, thanks.
posted by shinybaum at 6:02 AM on July 15, 2010

...but on the bright side, at least nobody here made the comment that TLP's first reader made...
posted by UbuRoivas at 6:03 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

I'd have liked the original FPP more if I'd known that it could provoke such an interesting argument. I think TheLastPsychiatrist's conclusion ("we must laugh at the dark lord and say he is weak and impotent!") isn't likely to be effective, but his analysis of the killing certainly seems plausible.
posted by Joe in Australia at 6:03 AM on July 15, 2010

Well, that's OK then, as I'm on the English internet - a place where words are spelt right, data travels down cables on the left hand side and all comments are accompanied by tea (or real ale).

I'm on the Scottish internet - a lot like the English internet, but with more Irn Bru. I'm not sure how this is affecting my Metafilter experience. Are there things that only people on the American internet can see on the site?
posted by Coobeastie at 6:04 AM on July 15, 2010

I'm just not sure what the ideal discussion those in favor of the post have in mind. I mean, we're all against honor killings, aren't we? I'm not sure what good my white, middle-class, atheist American outrage can do here.
posted by JoanArkham at 6:07 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Sys Rq nailed it.

I disagree. This site has buried its head in the sand about the recent spate of hose killings.
posted by yerfatma at 6:07 AM on July 15, 2010 [3 favorites]

So the next time there's an honor killing, it's our fault? He spends a good bit of that article talking about the disingenuousness of the original Marie Claire article, then finishes off with that? Dude.
posted by Devils Rancher at 6:09 AM on July 15, 2010 [2 favorites]

Are there things that only people on the American internet can see on the site?

It's the other way around. The Americans don't get ball-by-ball live cricket updates in the sidebar. Just refresh your browser every hour or two for the latest action results!
posted by UbuRoivas at 6:10 AM on July 15, 2010

Technically a large collection of hose killings is not called a spate, but rather a run.
posted by Lemurrhea at 6:11 AM on July 15, 2010 [3 favorites]

Are there things that only people on the American internet can see on the site?

On the American internet, MeFi has an embedded .wav of The Star Spangled Banner. On the plus side, everyone else gets freeporn.metafilter.com which is blocked for the American internet.
posted by EndsOfInvention at 6:11 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

On the plus side, everyone else gets freeporn.metafilter.com which is blocked for the American internet.
posted by EndsOfInvention at 9:11 AM on July 15 [+] [!]

You must be on the Utah Internet.
posted by Salvor Hardin at 6:18 AM on July 15, 2010

Colour!
posted by chunking express at 6:24 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

One of mefi's own made a post on their own blog? Am I understanding this correctly?
posted by pwally at 6:34 AM on July 15, 2010 [12 favorites]

I didn't know I was on the American internet...
posted by keijo at 6:38 AM on July 15, 2010

Maybe TLP could, in addition to making a post on HOFB, make a better (than the one that was deleted) post for the blue. Or is he not serious about bringing more attention to honor killings? hamburger for breakfast
posted by rtha at 6:39 AM on July 15, 2010

Wording aside, I do understand his point. I think he just means that the story will be mainly ignored because people's reaction is, "Yeah, this is horrible, but this kind of thing happens a lot, so what's the point in talking about it?"
posted by Jaltcoh at 6:40 AM on July 15, 2010 [2 favorites]

What did the community that fears neither God nor the NSA have to say about this case?

We said it needed to be discussed in MetaTalk, which it is. I don't really like this trend of multiple MeTa threads about single deleted MeFi posts. If TheLastPsychiatrist doesn't know about MeTa will someone tell them about it?
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:41 AM on July 15, 2010 [2 favorites]

You know, a lot of white non-muslims kill family members, too, for similar reasons, but hose killings are just called "murder."
posted by Sys Rq at 8:40 PM on July 12 [21 favorites +] [!]

I feel like thats a cop-out. People get into fights all the time, but that doesn't preclude spousal abuse from being a real issue. Lots of communities have different issues, different problems, different outlooks. Anyone who says that honor killings = muslimsareevil!! is an idiot, but I think pretending there isn't a trend of women being brutalized within these communities is just as ignorant.
posted by rosswald at 6:46 AM on July 15, 2010 [2 favorites]

From TLP's article:

In other words, it's a domestic abuse story that they package as a honor killing story.

This is pretty much it in a nutshell.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 6:47 AM on July 15, 2010 [6 favorites]

I am on this USain internet now. Working pretty well, but not getting all innuendo here.
posted by JohnnyGunn at 6:56 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Consider Metafilter, the online forum where no topic is too controversial for an opinion grounded in either reason or expletives. What did the community that fears neither God nor the NSA have to say about this case?

Oh snap.
posted by anniecat at 7:05 AM on July 15, 2010 [3 favorites]

"They're all Muslim, dummy." Oh, the religion takes precedence over everything. So that's why Iraq and Iran get along so well. ...

I am aware of the obvious links between honor killings and Islam and I am aware of the various arguments concerning the extent to which this is cultural, tribal, religious or educational. I don't care. Practically, when you link honor killings with Islam, you make it impossible to stop them because either a) people are thrilled at the chance to attack Islam, which allows the rebuttal, "oh, you just hate Islam!" or b) people are too nervous to attack Islam, so it goes unchecked.


Bold is mine. There is a blatant admission that avoiding religion in the discussion leads to honor killings going unchecked. But the gist of the article is the more shy method of blaming it on the person by comparing it to every other kind of jealous murder.

Rather than debate the quality of the article, I would would rather encourage everyone to try harder to support those who leave any religion, because the basis for any freedom is being able to change your mind and survive the choice. Far too many free people take their hard won intellectual freedom for granted. Far too many people think that religion is some sacred cow they must defer to out of some sheltered notion of tolerance, as though it was ever a pure ideal apart from cultural and tribal nuances.
posted by Brian B. at 7:06 AM on July 15, 2010

If TheLastPsychiatrist doesn't know about MeTa will someone tell them about it?

People aren't allowed to talk about MeFi outside of MeFi? If anyone needs to be talked to about multiple MeTa's on the same deleted post, it should be falameufilho, not the outside blogger.
posted by DU at 7:06 AM on July 15, 2010

"American internet" => "that subset of the internet which is American"
posted by DU at 8:44 AM on July 15

Repeated for emphasis. The American internet is the part of the internet where the culture, opinions, and norms expressed are American. It's the part of the internet where no one defends Chinese internet censorship, or defends passionately the tradition of stoning rape victims to death. I assure you there are mainstream sites on the internet --in other languages-- where those are the dominant opinions expressed, and simply reflect the culture of the people who post there.

Is it really so hard for people to understand that the internet spans the whole world in much the same way the real world does, and like the real world there are portions of it with their own norms, mores, behaviors, cultures, biases etc? The part of the internet that you spend 100% of your time in is not at all the same internet that frequented by someone in Iraq. Is there an Iraqi site like metafilter out there? If so, it is just as easy for you to read it as it is for your to read this one. But you don't read that one, and furthermore you don't know if it exists. It doesn't matter if you are reading metafilter from Japan or Chile or if you are Japanese or Chilean. It's a matter of culture.

The internet can connect you with every kind of person in the world. But nearly everyone uses it to connect only with people who are just like them, not physically or ethnically, but culturally, politically, and behaviorally.

I liked the article, and thought it made a very good point. If we are going to apply the term "honor killing" fairly, then 19th and early 20th century Southerners committed more honor killings than Muslims in American ever will.
posted by Pastabagel at 7:07 AM on July 15, 2010 [8 favorites]

Yeah, this could and should have gone in the open MeTa thread.


Also:

Doesn't he mean "USian" internet? Or are we all Americans? (Again.)

I can't tell if rtha is being ironic or not.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 7:21 AM on July 15, 2010

People aren't allowed to talk about MeFi outside of MeFi?

People are obviously allowed to talk about the site elsewhere. But when the person doing the talking is a long-time member of the site, and their talking-about-it involves taking a dismissive swipe at the site while ignoring (whether as a matter of ignorance or convenience, not clear which at the moment) the substantive discussion on that site of the thing they're taking a potshot at, it comes off as pretty weird and suddenly makes what could have been a normal discussion-by-members-of-the-site-on-metatalk into a weird mefi-vs-blog dynamic that is not basically ever very useful.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:22 AM on July 15, 2010 [2 favorites]

Is it really so hard for people to understand that the internet spans the whole world in much the same way the real world does, and like the real world there are portions of it with their own norms, mores, behaviors, cultures, biases etc?

For what it's worth, my read on the spit-take at "the American internet" is not that people find odd the idea that regional customs and conventions and biases exist in clusters online much as they do in the real world. It's at the oddness of declaring that Metafilter (a) is explicitly American rather than just demographically skewed in that direction or, maybe weirder, (b) is a without-further-comment stand-in for all things American and internet.

It's an oddly pat reference, which is part of why I think as a coda to a blog from someone who has been on the site for a while and didn't bother to mention that in the process either is kind of an annoying kissoff move.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:26 AM on July 15, 2010 [2 favorites]

Personally, I am afraid of NASA.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 7:34 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Cortex, that's running up against the Get Your Own Blog push from the moderators and the push to, you know, not have a MetaTalk post over every single deleted thread. It's not useful to MetaFilter, but it doesn't have to be useful to MetaFilter, and I don't think the post was intended as "This is a message to MetaFilter."

In context, it's pretty clear to me that the author thinks:

1) Honor killings are a problem and
2) we (Americans) ought to be able to discuss this as a way to create pushback,
3) but we cannot seem to do so, and as a case in point
4) even MetaFilter, a place where just about any subject is up for grabs and rather fearlessly
5) won't discuss it, therefore no pushback
6) and if even they won't do it, nobody else will
7) so no pushback, and the killings will continue

Now, I don't think that, you know, some idle chit-chat on the Intarwebs is the key to solving honor killings, so I disagree with that part of his blog entry, but I do not read it as a shaming post or a "I am going to take a swipe" post at all. It's just not about MetaFilter. The site is just a handy example of a case known to the author where discussion on that topic was closed down. The wording is clunky because he's pissed off about the whole thing (and the post shows that, in a rambling way where he's plonking together sections of "goddamn this pisses me off" with as much trembling restraint as he can muster), but that last bit doesn't come off to me as a deliberate parting shot.
posted by adipocere at 7:38 AM on July 15, 2010 [8 favorites]

I offer a tip of the hat to the moderators for their restrained reaction. It is good that they are them and I am not, because seeing such a horrible and unfair cheap shot at a deletion decision would have gotten me extremely angry and likely to fire back with some improper vitriol.
posted by norm at 7:41 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

The "Freedom of Speech" given to you guys, have made you all senseless, arrogant, mindless pricks.

Au contraire, mon ami; I've been a prick since before I could sound out whole words.
posted by Inspector.Gadget at 7:44 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Honor killings are a problem . . .

Wait, wasn't the point that there really isn't any such thing as an Honor Killing epidemic, and the only reason we are interested in it is because of the family's heritage?
posted by Think_Long at 7:46 AM on July 15, 2010 [5 favorites]

We had honor killing discussions before and it didn't magically solve the problem, I guess we could try again. Everyone remember to clap when you read the thread so the honor killings stop.
posted by furiousxgeorge at 7:51 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Cortex, that's running up against the Get Your Own Blog push from the moderators and the push to, you know, not have a MetaTalk post over every single deleted thread.

Again, it's fine for TLP to talk about whatever they want to talk about on their own blog. That includes Metafilter, and fundamentally I'm not saying they've done something wrong per se so much as expressing my frustration and distaste for the specific way they've done it in this case. That's about as far as it goes, really.

And part of the point of this is that there very much was a Metatalk post about it already; you're quite right that we don't want a Metatalk post for every single deleted post, but if there's already a Metatalk thread about a given deleted post and someone who is a member of the site has something to say about that post or the deletion, that would be the logical place to do it.

3) but we cannot seem to do so, and as a case in point
4) even MetaFilter, a place where just about any subject is up for grabs and rather fearlessly
5) won't discuss it, therefore no pushback

I get the point, I just think it's a crappily-made point given that (4) completely fails to account for the fact that we have, in fact, had a bunch of discussions on the site about honor killings. It's either ignorant or disingenuous, and as a bit of driveby framing in a blog post from someone who didn't bother to actually say as much over here where it'd make sense to have that discussion it chafes.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:53 AM on July 15, 2010

The site is just a handy example of a case known to the author where discussion on that topic was closed down.

Yeah that was my read too. This is a large problem. MeFi's action here was indicative of how people react to the problem in a way that is not solving the problem. I get why TLP didn't start explaining the larger issue of MeTa and community policing and all of that. I just do get a little defensive when people make [what I consider to be] lazy swipes in that "That's why it's going to happen again." collocation with the MeFi mention and the wrap up of the post.

I know this wasn't strictly what was meant, and I know this topic is really frustrating to people because they feel that other people's inactions [or actions in this case] are part of the problem, but I felt that the rest of the post was stronger and that sort of felt like a "fuck you MeFi" ending. That said, this is exactly what GYOBing is for.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:54 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

ANSWER FOR YOUR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY CORTEX!!!!1
posted by The Straightener at 7:54 AM on July 15, 2010 [2 favorites]

Rather than debate the quality of the article, I would would rather encourage everyone to try harder to support those who leave any religion, because the basis for any freedom is being able to change your mind and survive the choice.

GO TO CHURCH AND PRAY OR I'LL PUT A CAP IN YOUR ASS, MY SON.

At the risk of stating the obvious, people all over the planet leave or switch their religions all the time and aren't killed over it. But hey, good for you for giving in to ridiculous hyperbole and equating crazy fundamentalists with the rest of us.
posted by zarq at 7:55 AM on July 15, 2010

Bold is mine. There is a blatant admission that avoiding religion in the discussion leads to honor killings going unchecked. But the gist of the article is the more shy method of blaming it on the person by comparing it to every other kind of jealous murder.

Isn't that blaming it on the person who is jealous, not the victim?
posted by furiousxgeorge at 7:55 AM on July 15, 2010

seeing such a horrible and unfair cheap shot at a deletion decision would have gotten me extremely angry and likely to fire back with some improper vitriol.

Seriously? Get a grip. It's just some random blogger no one would have heard of without this MeTa.
I have never understood why every time some blogger or newspaper hack types the word "metafilter" - in praise or no - we have to get in a tizzy about it.

That said, I, for one, most definitely fear the NSA.
posted by CunningLinguist at 7:56 AM on July 15, 2010

Has MeFi truly never had a good FPP about honor killings and a good discussion following?

I find that hard to believe, and figure TLP must be wrong.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:56 AM on July 15, 2010

because seeing such a horrible and unfair cheap shot at a deletion decision would have gotten me extremely angry and likely to fire back with some improper vitriol.

On some forums, this would be just cause for the banhammer. We have it so good here!

There is an interesting discussion to be had about the intersection between the US's (unjustified) fear of fatwas, and the fact that Muslims are a religious and cultural minority here (and treated as such). A hasty post about an "honor killing" does not seem like the place to have that discussion.
posted by muddgirl at 7:58 AM on July 15, 2010

Should have said "perhaps unjustified". I was trying to make a hypothesis, not a conclusion.
posted by muddgirl at 7:58 AM on July 15, 2010

On some forums, this would be just cause for the banhammer. We have it so good here!

If we did not, I'd guess most of us wouldn't be here in the first place.
posted by Mooski at 8:00 AM on July 15, 2010

It's just some random blogger no one would have heard of without this MeTa.

Hell, it's a MeFite I would have never heard of without this MeTa.

Has MeFi truly never had a good FPP about honor killings and a good discussion following?

Previously, on MetaFilter Honor Killings: FPP.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 8:04 AM on July 15, 2010

"...and have no idea who or what the NSA is. It's fair enough to assume, however, that they are irrelevant & have no jurisdiction here."

NSA.

It's a comforting thought to believe they lack jurisdiction any place.

And my take on the blog post:

1. It's weird to directly quote [moderator] but not give actual attribution.
2. The OP was exactly a GYOB post, so for once someone did this. Good on him!
3. I really want to see this subject on metafilter, but think at this point it'll have to wait a month or two before it'll fly.

posted by cjorgensen at 8:06 AM on July 15, 2010 [2 favorites]

Previously, on MetaFilter Honor Killings: FPP.

Beat me to it. :)

Those posts were less thin, at least.
posted by zarq at 8:09 AM on July 15, 2010

There was also this one.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 8:12 AM on July 15, 2010

I suspect right-wing bias with this MeTa.
posted by Burhanistan at 8:14 AM on July 15, 2010

I suspect right-wing bias with this MeTa.

In what sense?
posted by zarq at 8:17 AM on July 15, 2010

MeTality has a well known conservative bias.
posted by Think_Long at 8:23 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

collocation is a new word to me, and a good one. Will have to remember it.

I found the linked article to contain some decent points, but it truthfully shot itself in the face with the last paragraph.
posted by edgeways at 8:23 AM on July 15, 2010

Happy birthday, Metafilter!
posted by cjorgensen at 8:26 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

I thought that "American internet" was an acknowledgment that the internet was invented in America, and that if we hadn't invented it, all you whiners [whingers?] would still be using Minitel or some other brain-damaged European thing.
posted by Crabby Appleton at 8:28 AM on July 15, 2010

I think cortex just wishes people wouldn't criticize his decisions in a forum where he can't delete any comment he doesn't like.
posted by Crabby Appleton at 8:31 AM on July 15, 2010

Yep that's probably exactly it you nailed it again CA
posted by Think_Long at 8:34 AM on July 15, 2010

I think cortex just wishes people wouldn't criticize his decisions in a forum where he can't delete any comment he doesn't like.

I think you are another perfect candidate for GYOB if that's actually how you think things work around here.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:39 AM on July 15, 2010 [3 favorites]

I think the point of the parting shot is not that Mefi = bad for not discussing honor killings but it's an example of a smart, opinionated, media-savvy community that is still (somewhat) trapped/tricked into calling them "honor killings" in the first place; when they are really "ego killings".
posted by r_nebblesworthII at 8:40 AM on July 15, 2010 [4 favorites]

Oh, don't be silly and starting with that nonsense, Crabby. In fact, in this particular situation I disagreed with the deletion over here and cortex gave a polite response, and was classy enough not to say 'Hey jack-off, if you haven't even RTFA to begin with, maybe you should keep your opinions on deletion in the holster.'
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 8:41 AM on July 15, 2010

I think you are another perfect candidate for GYOB if that's actually how you think things work around here.

It's difficult to really know, since deleted comments leave no evidence.

Also, I don't see what being a "candidate for GYOB" has to do with what one thinks about how things work here.
posted by Crabby Appleton at 8:43 AM on July 15, 2010

That was a great article and then it took a nosedive at the end and was all like "MAH WEBZONE IS TEH BEST AND YALL SUCK"
posted by fuq at 8:45 AM on July 15, 2010

You know, if I were in cortex's position, I would probably wish the same thing. And there's no denying the fact that the mods' being, on the whole, pleasant, patient, and polite makes the experience of their decisions to delete content easier to tolerate. I sometimes wonder if that's really a good thing.
posted by Crabby Appleton at 8:50 AM on July 15, 2010

The fact that most deleted content is pretty crap helps to make its absence tolerable, too.

AHHH BUT HOW DO I KNOW THAT IT'S CRAP IF IT'S BEEN DELETED?, you ask. Well, my opinion is based upon comments of mine which have been deleted - most if not all have been snide and shitty, and the times when some indignant sap makes a big stink when some snide and shitty comment of theirs has been deleted.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 8:57 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Hoo hoo hoo yes, I could make a whole blog dedicated to criticizing the mods!

I have no criticisms of the mods. BUT I AM WATCHING OH YES
posted by everichon at 8:58 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

If cortex deletes every comment he does like I have to point out that he has shitty tastes and I have a whole list of things he's missed! Many of the comments are mine.
posted by cjorgensen at 8:58 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

I think cortex just wishes people wouldn't criticize his decisions in a forum where he can't delete any comment he doesn't like.

This from the guy who was taking a "I will not take this to metatalk" crap in a thread on the blue the other day after having two different mods tell him to cut it out. If you want to pretend you're aggrieved by unhinged moderation rather than your own refusal to use the site in the way in which it actually works—by taking moderation and policy issues to the part of the site specifically dedicated to discussing that stuff—you can do that, but man does it get tiring dancing with that kind of bullshit.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:03 AM on July 15, 2010 [4 favorites]

I think cortex just wishes people wouldn't criticize his decisions in a forum where he can't delete any comment he doesn't like.

cortex honor-killed your comments, eh?
posted by Greg Nog at 9:04 AM on July 15, 2010

If cortex deletes every comment he does like...

cortex: "I love this precious little comment so much I cannot share it with anyone! It must be deleted before the masses soil it with their dirty eyeballs!"
posted by anotherpanacea at 9:07 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

CA It's not really a public space though, so content can/is be removed dependent on any whim whatsoever. Cortex is in the position he is in because he has the trust of the owner (and the overwhelming majority of users) and in fact content is not removed for capricious reasons. I can only think of one deletion of mine that was unwarranted, and that was due to a misunderstanding, and I even got an apology and permission to re-post it.

If you are unhappy, there are less restrictive places to post the noise to signal ration is much more out of whack though imo, the internet is filled to the brim with the ongoing push and pull of freedom vs quality.
posted by edgeways at 9:07 AM on July 15, 2010

I didn't say that cortex deletes every comment he doesn't like. I said that he can delete any comment that he doesn't like.
posted by Crabby Appleton at 9:07 AM on July 15, 2010

cortex honor-killed your comments, eh?

Yeah, but it wasn't because of his religion; it's just that he's a narcissist.
posted by Crabby Appleton at 9:08 AM on July 15, 2010

And there's no denying the fact that the mods' being, on the whole, pleasant, patient, and polite makes the experience of their decisions to delete content easier to tolerate. I sometimes wonder if that's really a good thing.
posted by Crabby Appleton

So you're saying that you think it would be better if they were... crabbier? Perhaps as crabby as a crab apple?

Very clever, Mr. Appleton. Very clever indeed. But now your stealth takeover of the site will have to wait for another day...
posted by scody at 9:09 AM on July 15, 2010

> I said that he can delete any comment that he doesn't like.

He has the technical ability to do so. Do you think that there wouldn't be some massive pushback and revolt if mods were just in the habit of deleting comments they disagreed with or didn't like? Or are you just looking for attention?
posted by Burhanistan at 9:09 AM on July 15, 2010

I'd feel the "that's why it's going to happen again" was quip perfectly justified. The author nails how & why people are refusing to discuss honor killings. It's absolutely clear the author is criticizing aggregate behavior, not just metafilter, but his criticism applies perfectly well to metafilter, and metafilter provides a convenient & simple example.

I'm personally kinda suspicious that police simply aren't throwing enough investigative resources into suspected honor killings. We're not talking about disassociated professional killers here, but family members who'll leave some physical evidence behind.
posted by jeffburdges at 9:10 AM on July 15, 2010

> it's just that he's a narcissist.

Well isn't that the pig's ass calling the bull smelly?
posted by Burhanistan at 9:10 AM on July 15, 2010 [5 favorites]

And there's no denying the fact that the mods' being, on the whole, pleasant, patient, and polite makes the experience of their decisions to delete content easier to tolerate. I sometimes wonder if that's really a good thing.

If you like, and should the mods grant me the power, I would gladly delete most of your comments here with condescension, arrogance and no small amount of satisfaction.
posted by Shepherd at 9:11 AM on July 15, 2010 [2 favorites]

I said that he can delete any comment that he doesn't like

So you object to the role of a moderator? Moderated discussion is one of the core reasons why I say my bullshit here instead of elsewhere. Spambots and trolls are deleted, and my dumb ass is tolerated.
posted by Think_Long at 9:12 AM on July 15, 2010

Apparently Crabby came for the cheerleading for [certain] views, but stayed for the innocuous chit-chat.
posted by yhbc at 9:12 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Yeah, but it wasn't because of his religion; it's just that he's a narcissist.

I do dislike the way that popcorn sticks in my teeth. Any ideas for other good snack food while watching a jerk flame out?
posted by norm at 9:17 AM on July 15, 2010

Christ, Crabby. I honestly thought you turned a corner and were sincerely interested in the reasoned discourse you mention in your profile, but you indisputably are the intellectually dishonest actor here. And you're sort of a creep, too.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:18 AM on July 15, 2010

I'd assume the citation was [moderator] specifically because he just wanted an example that criticized the behavior of whole online communities, especially users who don't even read stories about honor killings, not just one moderator. You'll not the deletion cited says basically we'd say nothing constructive, emphasizing this begins with user behavior.
posted by jeffburdges at 9:18 AM on July 15, 2010

And there's no denying the fact that the mods' being, on the whole, pleasant, patient, and polite makes the experience of their decisions to delete content easier to tolerate. I sometimes wonder if that's really a good thing.

This doesn't even make any sense. Are you suggesting that because they're generally so nice, their deletions get a pass, and this is somehow ... bad? So what are our options then: no deletions whatsoever, or the mods become powerhungry tyrants who drop lulzy wordfilters without warning and ban people because they got a call from a telemarketer on the way to the Mod Board?

I don't know why you hang out here. Honestly, tell me. Because all I ever see you do is gripe and bitch and moan about how terrible things are here.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 9:18 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

I'm personally kinda suspicious that police simply aren't throwing enough investigative resources into suspected honor killings.

but, how do you know that?
And how do you separate out "honor killings" from homicide that just so happens to take place within the family?

his criticism applies perfectly well to metafilter, and metafilter provides a convenient & simple example.

It's a lazy example tacked onto a decent article, as pointed out in the other MeTa thread in a number of places, this is hardly the first discussion of "honor killings" on metafilter and I absolutely fail to see how a piss poor Marie Claire article does anything to further understanding of the rare instances of honor killing in the US. Indeed it seemed the whole point of TLP's blog post was it was in reality not an honor killing after all, so I am a little baffled what his parting shot was all about.
posted by edgeways at 9:20 AM on July 15, 2010

It's not honor killing when WE do it.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 9:22 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Or are you just looking for attention?

Don't tell anyone, but I'm just trying to get scody to like me. (That "crabby" joke just never gets old to you, does it scody?) Actually, I'd rather not get any attention from the MeFi Majority, but they seem fascinated with me, and so...

Oh, by the way, cortex, I'm afraid that as MetaFilter's profile continues to rise, there will be more and more comments about it on other sites, many of which may not seem entirely fair to you. I think it would be in your best interests to find some way to not be traumatized by each one.

Well isn't that the pig's ass calling the bull smelly?

I know, Burhanistan. Crabby Appleton is not allowed to joke on MetaFilter. (Or did you not RTFA?)

On preview, yeah, I know, love it or leave it. I've heard that one before, too.
posted by Crabby Appleton at 9:25 AM on July 15, 2010

Any ideas for other good snack food while watching a jerk flame out?

Crabby's not going to flame out. He adores the attention he gets. It's funny that he should call cortex narcissistic - projection much?
posted by rtha at 9:27 AM on July 15, 2010

On preview, yeah, I know, love it or leave it. I've heard that one before, too.

Do you hear me saying that? Plenty of people register complaints. That's fine. Your entire schtick is all about bitching about what a crap place this is. If someone had showed me your little profile message out of context, I would never guess that this is a person still posting here. That's why I can't help but wondering why you're here. No one's telling you to leave. You just give no indication that you enjoy it here, at all.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 9:28 AM on July 15, 2010

This almost feels like some kind of creepy Cultural Revolution thing. What are we doing, summoning the Bourgeois Revisionist here so he can confess his disloyal criticism of Metafilter to the comrades and be suitably shamed?
posted by TheophileEscargot at 9:29 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Actually, I'd rather not get any attention from the MeFi Majority, but they seem fascinated with me, and so...

MeFi Majority is fascinated by space marines and Roger Ebert, not you.
posted by Think_Long at 9:31 AM on July 15, 2010 [3 favorites]

I said that he can delete any comment that he doesn't like

So you object to the role of a moderator?

So you want to nuke New York?
So you want to make cat declawing mandatory?
So you want to ban cilantro?

Really, where do these nonsequiturs some from?

On preview: Crabby is just an attention whore. Check.
posted by Crabby Appleton at 9:31 AM on July 15, 2010

Looking at the comments over on TLP's site, they've made it clear they weren't aware of Metatalk in the first place, which gels with a lack of any activity on this part of the site. Hopefully they'll take a look going forward, but that's at least helpful in showing it's more lack of familiarity than anything at work with some of the failure to represent substantially what actually went down.

Oh, by the way, cortex, I'm afraid that as MetaFilter's profile continues to rise, there will be more and more comments about it on other sites, many of which may not seem entirely fair to you. I think it would be in your best interests to find some way to not be traumatized by each one.

Annoyed and frustrated != traumatized. I'm more than accustomed to seeing varyingly well-footed criticism of metafilter on other sites. I don't generally bother saying anything about in public if someone doesn't specifically bring it up in the first place.

On preview, yeah, I know, love it or leave it.

The full refrain is more like "love it, leave it, or I guess hang around mostly for the apparent pleasure of being vocally unhappy with how the place works and fishing for dislike as long as it gets people to respond to you, if that's really how you want to spend your time, but it sucks and makes you seem like a jerk".
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:33 AM on July 15, 2010 [11 favorites]

On preview: Crabby is just an attention whore. Check.

I think we can all agree on this.
posted by nestor_makhno at 9:35 AM on July 15, 2010 [9 favorites]

Sorry, Think_Long, I'm using "honor killing" as a shorthand way of saying "offing of women for various bullshit 'control' purposes, fronted by someone, somewhere, as some traditional deal, that mostly makes me want to unproductively hit someone responsible really hard* whenever I hear about it," rather than "a reputation-fronted phenomenon of female slayings which is culturally or religiously based." I don't know if I should use scare quotes around the phrase or something else. Maybe we need a new punctuation that says, "Yeah, that's the way you refer to it, and I'm quoting you, but I think the entire framing is wildly wrong."

* because, well, I will admit to having the human impulse of wanting to see Faleh Almalek in a big, padded suit trapped on a Six Flags bumper car rink being repeatedly slammed about by highly recognizable porn stars, porn stars, and feminist porn stars driving said bumper cars, then buried in the most embarrassing fashion possible, and while it isn't a very nice thing to think I wonder if it isn't in some small way a bit of Dantean justice. This also goes, in slightly different manners, for FGM, acid attacks, extra boys getting dumped in Utah, the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, MK Ultra, and, well, a lot of other stuff, making me not a very nice person when you sum up all of these into one big integral of rage.
posted by adipocere at 9:38 AM on July 15, 2010

This almost feels like some kind of creepy Cultural Revolution thing. What are we doing, summoning the Bourgeois Revisionist here so he can confess his disloyal criticism of Metafilter to the comrades and be suitably shamed?

Actually, Metatalk has always been the place to talk about outside mentions of the site. What I didn't like-- and a lot of the other commenters too-- is that the callout is really unfair. The site has discussed* 'Honor Killings' before, as noted, and it's entirely appropriate to delete a post that seems more designed to collect outrage than to be a well sourced contribution to the site.

Moreover, the blog posting itself is a good and important one, which makes the callout at the end even more jarring.

*Metafilter is a community weblog. That great threads and discussions happen here is essentially secondary.
posted by norm at 9:39 AM on July 15, 2010

(That "crabby" joke just never gets old to you, does it scody?)

Change your tune and I'll happily join you on harmony, dollface.
posted by scody at 9:47 AM on July 15, 2010

What are we doing, summoning the Bourgeois Revisionist here so he can confess his disloyal criticism of Metafilter to the comrades and be suitably shamed?

I think it's t'other way 'round, TheophileEscargot. Crabby Appleton has a pattern of behavior wherein he goads or mocks the mods for their perceived egotripping and unprofessionalism and the community in general for their tolerance of such and perpetuating a cult of personality around the mods. He wasn't summoned here, and the more angry responses to him are motivated by people thinking that he's being unfair, not engaging in good faith, or being an insulting jerk. He has been invited several times to expand upon his drive-by insults, and either slinks off, claims no one would give him a chance to, or says he's too busy with whatever Crabby Appleton's do when they aren't being Crabby Appletons which further solidifies his reputation as being an intellectually dishonest weasel. I'm not happy with the phenomenon of pile-ons, but in his case he seems to invite it, possibly because it reinforces his shallow criticisms or because daddy didn't give him enough hugs. Regardless, people are presumably gutsick of his antics to the point that they frankly no longer care to find out what his glitch is, since he has been given ample opportunity to deal honestly and each and every time has chosen to take the low road.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:47 AM on July 15, 2010 [3 favorites]

>> The site is just a handy example of a case known to the author where discussion on that topic was closed down.

> Yeah that was my read too. This is a large problem. MeFi's action here was indicative of how people react to the problem in a way that is not solving the problem. I get why TLP didn't start explaining the larger issue of MeTa and community policing and all of that. I just do get a little defensive when people make [what I consider to be] lazy swipes in that "That's why it's going to happen again." collocation with the MeFi mention and the wrap up of the post.

I hadn't known about the FPP deletion or related MeTa discussion. Coming from that perspective, mod quote at the end of the article just seemed to be an ordinary rhetorical flourish that, if anything, lifted MeFi as an example of ideal uncensored Internet conversation. To me it said, "if not here, where?" and had little to do with MeFi specifically (and this view was reinforced by the redacted mod name). However, with more context (this thread) I can see how it could also be badgering.
posted by zennie at 9:48 AM on July 15, 2010

Crabby Appleton is so davy.
posted by Burhanistan at 9:49 AM on July 15, 2010 [2 favorites]

I feel like thats a cop-out. People get into fights all the time, but that doesn't preclude spousal abuse from being a real issue.

Didn't read the whole thread, so this may have already been raised, but I believe SysReq's excellent point is that calling it an "honor killing" removes a bit of semantic heft. It should be called what it is -- murder, which should be treated as murder. There's nothing inherently special about a culture that makes murder any more or less understandable. Murder, murder, murder.

Reminds me of George Carlin on language.

"'Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.' I bet you, if we'd still been calling it 'shell shock,' some of those Vietnam veterans might have gotten the attention they needed at the time. I bet you that. But it didn't happen. And one of the reasons is because we were using that soft language, that language that takes out the life out of life."
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 9:52 AM on July 15, 2010

I think we're being trolled.
posted by Kattullus at 10:02 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Haters gonna hate.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 10:03 AM on July 15, 2010

Actually, I'd rather not get any attention from the MeFi Majority, but they seem fascinated with me, and so...

THERE IS NO CAB... Oh, Majority? Is there one of those? When did we vote for that? Was I asleep?
posted by grapefruitmoon at 10:04 AM on July 15, 2010

Ooh, is this when Crabby Appleton finally posts his List of Grievances / Proposals for Improving the Site?
NAH, PROBABLY NOT
posted by jtron at 10:04 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Ooh, is this when Crabby Appleton finally posts his List of Grievances

I think we have to wait for Festivus. Of course, there could always be a Festivus in July miracle, but I kind of doubt it.
posted by grapefruitmoon at 10:05 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

I think we're being trolled.
posted by Kattullus at 12:02 PM on July 15 [+] [!]

An odd trait of Metafilter moderation is the seeming reluctance to boot trolls. It seems counterintuitive to me, but it seems to work, so.
posted by jtron at 10:05 AM on July 15, 2010

People, please. Let the experts handle this.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 10:06 AM on July 15, 2010 [2 favorites]

I believe SysReq's excellent point is that calling it an "honor killing" removes a bit of semantic heft. It should be called what it is -- murder, which should be treated as murder. There's nothing inherently special about a culture that makes murder any more or less understandable.

I'm having trouble grokking that. I don't see how saying that Aqsa Parvez was the victim of an honor killing diminishes the heinousness of the act anymore than saying George Tiller was assassinated rather than murdered. It simply provides a certain amount of context for the murders - it is absolutely important that the designations and their implications be used carefully, but again, I just don't get how they depreciate anything.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:10 AM on July 15, 2010

People, please. Let the experts handle this.

Excuse me, I speak jive.
posted by norm at 10:14 AM on July 15, 2010 [2 favorites]

> it's just that he's a narcissist.

Sounds like someone has a liiiiiiiittle tiny donut.
posted by heyho at 10:16 AM on July 15, 2010 [2 favorites]

Haters gonna hate.

And debate.
posted by new brand day at 10:35 AM on July 15, 2010

Sys Rq nailed it.

Hosed it, more like. (Can't a guy get a typo fixed?)
posted by Sys Rq at 10:39 AM on July 15, 2010

What are we doing, summoning the Bourgeois Revisionist here so he can confess his disloyal criticism of Metafilter to the comrades and be suitably shamed?

Theophile Escargot, were you referring to me here, or to The Last Psychiatrist (as I read it)?
posted by Crabby Appleton at 10:39 AM on July 15, 2010

(Can't a guy get a typo fixed?)

Should have used your 30 second edit windo.
posted by cjorgensen at 10:43 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

I think that's still a windon't.
posted by heyho at 10:46 AM on July 15, 2010

That's weird. The edit button works fine for me.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 10:49 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

I don't see how saying that Aqsa Parvez was the victim of an honor killing diminishes the heinousness of the act

Saying that it's a "honor killing" tags it as something specific within a culture, which infers (to me, at least, but I'm sure for others, too) that society's response should be attendant to that culture.

This leads to "don't raise the bridge, lower the river" thinking. This leads to code words and political dog whistles.

If a Mormon man shoots his Mormon wife to collect insurance money, you don't say it's "Mormon killing" or a "greed killing," because those adjectives are irrelevant and only serve to muddy the picture. It's just murder. Bad people doing bad things.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 10:51 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Theophile Escargot, were you referring to me here, or to The Last Psychiatrist (as I read it)?

Ah, I read it as being about you, CA, but being about TLP does make a lot more sense. Sorry about muddying the water there.

*Makes addition to my extensive list of Things I Fail To Grok*
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:51 AM on July 15, 2010

(as I read it)

That's how I read it also.

(Can't a guy get a typo fixed?)

From three days ago? You might need to email us an explain what needs to be done. And now with the lulz and all... maybe not.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:52 AM on July 15, 2010

I don't think saying 'financially-motivated murder' obscures anything (Sure, 'Mormon killing' would, as would 'Muslim killing'), but I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:55 AM on July 15, 2010

I balk at calling it a "killing" at all. Killing, to me, implies that there's some justification to it. "Honor-motivated murder" seems less distasteful to me.
posted by muddgirl at 11:02 AM on July 15, 2010

Well, Alvy, look at this way ... saying it's a "honor killing" infers that someone thought honor must be preserved. But, a-ha, in an irony double back-flip, we know that loss of honor should not justify killing. The irony of the term infers a built-in excuse -- he himself is a victim, a victim of his culture. We've now taken one step toward understanding his mindset. Maybe we can plead down from first degree murder to, you know, a murder of passion, or perhaps even manslaughter? And if we could only change the culture ...

Wait, wait, no. No. Fuck the culture. And it's murder in the first, chump.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 11:04 AM on July 15, 2010

> I felt that the rest of the post was stronger and that sort of felt like a "fuck you MeFi" ending.

Yeah, exactly. It was a shitty way to end it, and if "MeFi's own" TLP has any guts they'll show up here to apologize/explain. (Of course, if CA had any sense he wouldn't still be here.)
posted by languagehat at 11:08 AM on July 15, 2010

can we let that "infer" go without an honor killing?
posted by found missing at 11:11 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

I meant The Last Psychiatrist.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 11:12 AM on July 15, 2010

It's clear enough from context so it's not really anything but a usage gripe, but, yeah, CPB, the standard usage there has "imply" for your every use of "infer"; they're two sides of the implication/inference coin, not synonyms.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:18 AM on July 15, 2010

S'OK, AA, target fixation is a hell of a drug.
posted by Crabby Appleton at 11:21 AM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

If a Mormon man shoots his Mormon wife to collect insurance money, you don't say it's "Mormon killing" or a "greed killing," because those adjectives are irrelevant and only serve to muddy the picture.

With respect, this is not a great metaphor. This is because the "honor" in "honor killing" is descriptive of the level of ownership of males over females in some patriarchal cultures, while "murder", by itself, doesn't describe the motivation for or circumstances around the crime. It's just another crime.

While we don't call murdering Mormons for cash "Mormon killing" or "greed killing", we would use a descriptive term like "premeditated killing" because some people, irrespective of religion, have decided and will decide to plan and carry out the murder of another human being for some reason.

IMO, using a descriptor like this is not irrelevant, does not serve to muddy the picture, and in most cases, in fact, clarifies the nature of the crime and the character of the perpetrator.

Not all murders are the same, and in relation to the subject of patriarchs who take it upon themselves to deal with offenses to the family (such as the daughter not going forward with an arranged marriage) by committing murder, the term "honor killing" does go a long way to describing the motivation and cultural issues.

Much as "premeditated" serves to describe the act of killing someone for an insurance check, "honor" legitimately adds clarity.

A more valid concern is whether the "honor" descriptor glorifies the crime or validates its perpetrator's motivations. For me, it doesn't, but I could see how this would be an issue for others who take a more literal reading of the word.

If there's a better descriptor, I think it should be used, but "murder" by itself actually loses clarity about circumstances, motives, cultural baggage -- all the things that are important about this particular issue.

Above all else, the use of "honor" reminds the reader that the victim is invariably a woman who is treated like chattel by her father or family patriarch. Whatever term is used, I think some kind of descriptor is important to reinforce this fact.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:23 AM on July 15, 2010 [4 favorites]

If a Mormon man shoots his Mormon wife to collect insurance money, you don't say it's "Mormon killing" or a "greed killing," because those adjectives are irrelevant and only serve to muddy the picture. It's just murder. Bad people doing bad things.

I don't know. Surely you would agree that describing the murder of a high-ranking political figure as an "assassination" is accurate, wouldn't you? What Cain did to Abel, "fratricide"? These are just different flavours of murder, I would think. And that's just the word itself. If you were writing a news article about the insurance fraud murder in your example, you'd include the insurance fraud in your writing, wouldn't you? It seems eminently relevant.

For what it's worth, in Dutch media these incidents are generally referred to as eerwraak, "honour" + "revenge", perhaps more accurately "honour avengement". I've seen similar usage in British media as well.

I do not approve of needless labels and agree that they muddy the picture and are often a sign of tendentious reporting. However, in this case it seems clear that these incidents are rooted in a value system particular to a certain culture. In my country at least it is a common enough occurrence that it seems fair to use a unique label for it. Eskimos and snow, and all that.

If it seems that the label portrays an entire demographic cohort in a negative light, that's deplorable. And I don't really see a solution for it, to be completely honest. But how else would we talk about it? How would we signify that this is a discrete societal problem separate from other murders, which it, you know, is?

In the Netherlands it is, again and sadly, common enough to have become an issue of its own in political and societal discourse. How would you prefer we refer to it? "Murders rooted in honour culture"? Something even more unwieldy?

Labels are broad brushes but they are sometimes necessary. To insist upon their not being used is tantamount to censhorship.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 11:38 AM on July 15, 2010 [2 favorites]

Yeah, exactly. It was a shitty way to end it, and if "MeFi's own" TLP has any guts they'll show up here to apologize/explain. (Of course, if CA had any sense he wouldn't still be here.)
posted by languagehat at 2:08 PM on July 15

This seems rather out of character for you. TLP could just as easily be reading this thread and thinking, "If they had any guts, they'd show here [to his blog] to explain." And what the hell does that even mean, "guts." What's he supposed to be afraid of, ironic quips and snarky asides?

As Metafiler becomes more popular and more relevant, this kind of thing is going to happen more often, reasons for deletion are going to get more public scrutiny, Meta threads are going to be used to judge the site as a whole, etc. People here slam boingboing, digg, reddit, and 4chan every day, but no one suggests that the people making those comments here should have the "guts" to take them up at 4chan.

The fact that people on popular blogs are name-checking metafilter is a good thing, remember that.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go tell the /b/tards on 4chan to stop being a bunch of hentai-obsessed pedophiles. Oh, but first I have to pop over to Boing Boing to let Cory and Xeni know that I can see right through their hipster pose.
posted by Pastabagel at 11:41 AM on July 15, 2010 [6 favorites]

Mmmm Xeni's see-through hipster hose...
posted by Mister_A at 12:04 PM on July 15, 2010

Or are you just looking for attention?

Yep ... he is.
posted by ericb at 12:10 PM on July 15, 2010

I'd rather not get any attention from the MeFi Majority, but they seem fascinated with me, and so...

Don't flatter yourself with your delusions of grandeur.
posted by ericb at 12:13 PM on July 15, 2010

Labels are broad brushes but they are sometimes necessary. To insist upon their not being used is tantamount to censhorship.

I find this a sort of weird argument. I get what you and BP are saying, but there are times when the label itself, and who is using it and why, are important parts of the message, but not necessarily informative in the way people might consdier accurate. And of course accuracy is something people debate a lot. I think of "date rape" and "spousal rape" which, while descriptive, also can have [depending on who is using them] a somewhat belittling tone as in "oh it's not REAL rape"

In the library world we debate the label idea a lot, saying that while purely descriptive labels are okay ["this is a western" "this is a graphic novel"] ratings and ranking labels are not okay. This is debated, of course, because we're so attentuated to MPAA ratings, for example, or EXPLICIT LYRICS sorts of things that we don't think why they might not be necessary, or what they are becoming shorthand for [MPAA ratings for example are very touchy about sex but not at all touchy about violence, so when you think it's just "what's okay for kids" you might want to think again].

So that's just my framing and where I'm coming from, but I often find labels to be a censor's tool, so it's worth understanding the multiple contexts that you can come to this from. As far as honor killings specifically, I feel like it adds context without obscuring the severity of the crime but others might feel differently.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 12:17 PM on July 15, 2010

I think of "date rape" and "spousal rape" which, while descriptive, also can have [depending on who is using them] a somewhat belittling tone as in "oh it's not REAL rape"

I agree with this point, even if I'm not sure about "honor killing" doing the same thing. Maybe there's a better label that communicates the same underlying ideas in as efficient a way.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:25 PM on July 15, 2010

And what the hell does that even mean, "guts."

BE A MAN DAMMIT AND FIGHT ON THE TERMS I'VE DICTATED.
posted by new brand day at 12:38 PM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

I would like to see this term, "honor killing," turned on its head á la the attempted suicide bomber ---> homicide bomber thing (which was awful). I don't want the term "honor" anywhere within a thousand feet of the animals who do things like this—the suggestion is that the murderer is protecting or restoring honor, a notion I can do without, and a notion that is not universally accepted by followers of Islam. So, how about "disgrace murder." Or just murder. Yeah, murder's probably the best. "Honor" mitigates the horror of the act and positions it as the "right" thing to do in a certain worldview. Let's reject that worldview and not acknowledge any preservation or restoration of honor, only the furtherance of horror, injustice, and disgrace. These are murders committed by murderers.
posted by Mister_A at 12:53 PM on July 15, 2010 [2 favorites]

Yeah I think I can see where you're coming from, jess. Although I must add I can't think of any situation where I personally have noticed say "spousal rape" being used in a sense that minimized the rape aspect. I guess this is partly cultural/linguistic, and maybe observer bias (you catch 100% of all burglars you catch). Anyway, I think I understand how it could be used that way.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 12:53 PM on July 15, 2010

I'm on the Finnish Internet Experience (tm) also known as the FIE (rhymes with PIE), a human right as handed down by the powers that be.

and I just don't get the point of all this grar grar

I'm confused. Its all your fault.
posted by infini at 1:09 PM on July 15, 2010

> This seems rather out of character for you.

Eh, probably. It's hot and I'm juggling two editing jobs and occasionally wrangling grandsons and not getting enough sleep. Now get off my lawn.
posted by languagehat at 1:33 PM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Oops, didn't mean to say that last part out loud.
posted by languagehat at 1:33 PM on July 15, 2010

I agree with what Blazecock wrote above - I can't pretend to the slightest expertise on the subject, but I first became aware of the term honour killing through the work of minority women's advocacy groups in the UK, and they certainly made a strong case for specificities in the murderous behaviour described by the phrase.
posted by Abiezer at 1:59 PM on July 15, 2010

I LOVE YOU CRABBY APPLETON
posted by infinitywaltz at 2:31 PM on July 15, 2010

hug it out, kids.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 2:38 PM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Any of you fucking pricks grar, and I'll hug every motherhugging last one of ya!
posted by Skot at 2:56 PM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Will you still love me...tomorrow?
posted by Crabby Appleton at 3:03 PM on July 15, 2010

Only if it's one of those bro hugs. One arm, chest bump, firm pat on the back.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 3:07 PM on July 15, 2010

Drugs, not hugs.
posted by new brand day at 3:09 PM on July 15, 2010

False dichotomy.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 3:10 PM on July 15, 2010 [6 favorites]

Everyone needs a side hug.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 3:18 PM on July 15, 2010

Will you still love me...tomorrow?

PROBABLY
posted by infinitywaltz at 3:19 PM on July 15, 2010

Feels better, more feeling.
posted by new brand day at 3:19 PM on July 15, 2010

More filling!
posted by new brand day at 3:20 PM on July 15, 2010

Will you still love me...tomorrow?

Exactly as much as I do today!
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 3:25 PM on July 15, 2010

See, haters! Jessamyn loves me! Uh, wait a minute...
posted by Crabby Appleton at 3:35 PM on July 15, 2010

There's always Meatbomb.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 3:36 PM on July 15, 2010

Meatbomb, not hugs.
posted by new brand day at 3:38 PM on July 15, 2010

Man, I love it when Crabby gets enraged and then there's a rage at Crabby stage and then everybody does the sidearm hug.

It's like my family fights, plus sidearm hugging.
posted by angrycat at 3:39 PM on July 15, 2010

Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow
by Carole King

Tonight you're mine completely,
You give your love so sweetly,
Tonight the light of love is in your eyes,
But will you love me tomorrow?

Is this a lasting treasure,
Or just a moment's pleasure,
Can I believe the magic of your sighs,
Will you still love me tomorrow?

Etc.
posted by Crabby Appleton at 3:40 PM on July 15, 2010

What's a Meatbomb?
posted by Crabby Appleton at 3:45 PM on July 15, 2010

One of Tom Jones' greatest hits IIRC.
posted by Abiezer at 3:48 PM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

Man, I love it when Crabby gets enraged [...]

Enraged? Really? Annoyed and frustrated != enraged.

Seriously, I just went back and re-read all my comments in this thread, and I didn't see rage in any of them. Am I really that poor a judge of tone in writing?
posted by Crabby Appleton at 3:55 PM on July 15, 2010

It's clearly in service of a rhyme, Crabby.
posted by muddgirl at 3:59 PM on July 15, 2010

What's a Meatbomb?
$20, same as in town.

Sorry
posted by nestor_makhno at 4:03 PM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

tried to rhyme and then got to side-armed hug and then the rhyme scheme fell apart
posted by angrycat at 4:20 PM on July 15, 2010

Sorry, I completely missed that.
posted by Crabby Appleton at 4:31 PM on July 15, 2010

I'm just pleased and surprised to learn there's only one more psychiatrist left. Dude must be making money hand over fist.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:55 PM on July 15, 2010

what's going on? how are you people? why am I here? Who has my pants?
posted by The Whelk at 5:57 PM on July 15, 2010

TheophileEscargot: "confess"

I agree. The thread got derailed successfully rather quickly by Crabby, but the fact is that this is a thread calling someone out for posting on their own damn blog.
posted by SecretAgentSockpuppet at 7:49 PM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

TheophileEscargot: "This almost feels like some kind of creepy Cultural Revolution thing. What are we doing, summoning the Bourgeois Revisionist here so he can confess his disloyal criticism of Metafilter to the comrades and be suitably shamed"

Sorry, the quote above is the quote I meant to include. I wasn't paying attention to the fact that the "quote" link only grabbed the word I'd used as a search parameter to find the quote. My bad.
posted by SecretAgentSockpuppet at 7:51 PM on July 15, 2010

In the library world we debate the label idea a lot, saying that while purely descriptive labels are okay ["this is a western" "this is a graphic novel"]

At the library I frequent, they have comics on the first floor. Okay, fine, Then they have more comics on the fifth non-fiction floor, filled under 741 (Drawings & Drawing). And then they have biography comics on the second floor, in biography, and not even in a special biography comic section, just mixed in with the regular books, and then I have to hunt through the whole damn section looking for the green GRAPHIC NOVEL sticker slapped on the spine! You guys make a special area for the large printers, but I have to make, like, three stops for comics! WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:13 PM on July 15, 2010 [1 favorite]

People wanted comics being treated just like literature and now that it's happened people want it to be easy to find like in the old days.
posted by Kattullus at 10:52 PM on July 15, 2010

I don't know if there are foreigners on the American internet. Frankly, I don't want to know.

A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Commie works.
posted by krinklyfig at 2:05 AM on July 16, 2010

So comrades, come rally,
And the last fight let us face.
The Internetionale,
Unites the human race.
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:33 AM on July 16, 2010

Did you guys know there's a 5:30 in the morning now?
posted by The Whelk at 2:37 AM on July 16, 2010

There won't be as soon as we standardise into one timezone. Adjust your watches, comrades! It's 7:30, Friday evening.
posted by UbuRoivas at 2:43 AM on July 16, 2010

it's just a jump to the left.
posted by The Whelk at 2:47 AM on July 16, 2010 [1 favorite]

Are you tired of catching up with the world rather then the world catching up with you? Why not upgrade to Metafilter Standard Time? MST allows for faster interwebs co-ordination and memespread, reverse and acceleration effects, and a built in entropy dampener to make sure you are always the best you all the time.

MeTime: Don't You Deserve Some?
posted by The Whelk at 2:51 AM on July 16, 2010 [1 favorite]

This thread is sorta weird. Am I supposed to be angry some dude was critical of MetaFilter on his own website?
posted by cj_ at 3:36 AM on July 16, 2010

What's weirder is how Crabby obsessively responded to everything aimed at him *except* the part where cortex mentions the "taking a 'I will not take this to metatalk' crap in a thread on the blue the other day." Pretty revealing, that.

But apparently we've moved on to hugs.
posted by mediareport at 5:41 AM on July 16, 2010

I wrote the post on The Last Psychiatrist.

My intention wasn't to slander Metafilter, I was using it as an example. But note that many of the comments here were about my statement "the American internet," as if to say, "look at this dummy, he just doesn't understand that the whole world uses the internet, too?" Of course I understand that, but do you think that it's some sort of central gathering for people from American and Mongolia alike? That they all stop by the Huffington Post because they're interested in climate change? The point I was making was that if "Americans" (read: western values) on the sites they go to are either too biased ("Muslims suck!") or too nervous "(Gee, I don't know, not all Muslims drive Jeeps, maybe we shouldn't mention Muslims or Jeeps, just in case someone thinks it's a codeword") to even discuss this issue, why would you expect other people to do so?

In true meta fashion, you've avoided discussing honor killings by discussing the discussions about honor killings. That's a typical American media maneuver, it's why we never seem to get any common ground and we seem to know very little about what's going on. Newsweek changed their format from "news" to enhanced commentary, ok, they did it to make money, but if everyone does that, where are you going to learn what happened? Seriously? "Joe Klein's an idiot as per what I saw on Glen Beck!" Oh. So I should buy a house now, or not?

If you follow my logic on the prevalence of news commentary and it's purposeful avoidance of difficult issues, then sites like Metafilter become a little more important because even though it's still opinion and commentary, it can be disputed immediately. "Hey, at least we're more open than Newsweek." (/joke) Additionally, they seem to be favored by younger people (I think) which makes them more important to changing the culture, relevant as per below.

As t the honor killings: I've tried to offer a psychological understanding of honor killings that both understands and explains the regularity of Islam/tribalism while showing that the reasons for the murder are more selfish, totally unrelated to morality or traditions, based entirely on self-preservation. If you follow that logic, and the logic that people rarely change even terrible coping styles that make them miserable simply because they work, then changing the people around these future murderers is how you stop them from murdering. You make honor killings more shameful than "my daughter is an slut!" You don't make them illegal or immoral because the narcissist slips out of that ("they don't understand [islam/family/insert excuse here]"). You have to make it more shameful, that's the only thing they respond to. Alternatively, you could make it so they understand that the murder won't wash away the previous shame ("you're a limp-dicked murdering loser, and you're wife is still a slut!") Or something.

No, of course honor killings aren't Metafilter's fault, sigh. But there is no way to expect Newsweek to give you the real story with a nuanced understanding of the role of religion, psychology, etc, if "western values" places like Metafilter can't. "No, we'll pass, we'd rather let Marie Claire handle this one, based on how they handled the white-after-Labor Day controversy."
posted by TheLastPsychiatrist at 6:38 AM on July 16, 2010 [5 favorites]

No, of course honor killings aren't Metafilter's fault, sigh. But there is no way to expect Newsweek to give you the real story with a nuanced understanding of the role of religion, psychology, etc, if "western values" places like Metafilter can't.

Just speaking for myself, here, but I think your big mistake is simply thinking of Metafilter as an institution with responsibilities. It's not: it's a website where people who belong to other institutions (many of them with the kind of responsibilities you mention) gather to discuss things of interest.

It's akin to the mistake of thinking that a university bar has its own obligations to contribute to the research programs of the scholars who drink there. Sure, the inhabitants have work to do, and they may sometimes discuss that work at the bar. But the bar doesn't have any work to do.
posted by anotherpanacea at 6:55 AM on July 16, 2010 [1 favorite]

Just speaking for myself, here, but I think your big mistake is simply thinking of Metafilter as an institution with responsibilities. It's not: it's a website where people who belong to other institutions (many of them with the kind of responsibilities you mention) gather to discuss things of interest.

This is more or less my objection as well, yes. It is neither Metafilter's mission nor its duty to be an outlet for discussion of bad news; this is not a news outlet or a political discussion forum or a human rights advocacy platform, and what news and politics and rights stuff does occur here is just a part of the overall mix of the content of the site, not the raison d'être.

So it's fine to want to see this discussed on Metafilter—and, again, it has been in the past and there is no reason it can't be again in the future, something you failed to acknowledge in the least in your post, which was part of my frustration with the mention—but it's a mistake to draw a conclusion from the failure of a specific post on the subject to fly for general-mefi-guidelines rather than topic-specific reason that this is a No Go topic. The quality of the post in terms of what works on mefi is first and foremost what matters here, not whether or not the subject of the post is difficult or important.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:04 AM on July 16, 2010 [2 favorites]

If you follow that logic, and the logic that people rarely change even terrible coping styles that make them miserable simply because they work, then changing the people around these future murderers is how you stop them from murdering. You make honor killings more shameful than "my daughter is an slut!" You don't make them illegal or immoral because the narcissist slips out of that ("they don't understand [islam/family/insert excuse here]"). You have to make it more shameful, that's the only thing they respond to.

These aren't different. Putting the onus on Islamic authority and making it illegal and more immoral is making it more shameful. Targeting the social milieu by popular commentary outside their culture is, arguably, what created the murderous estrangement in the first place. It is nice to assume that we can tame the religiously barbaric with our Western shaming in order to "change the people around them" but there is still no reason to ignore the religious sources the murderers look up to, and who actually take credit for preserving or dictating their misogynist tendencies.
posted by Brian B. at 7:18 AM on July 16, 2010

But apparently we've moved on to hugs.

At last...
posted by hugbucket at 7:21 AM on July 16, 2010

My intention wasn't to slander Metafilter, I was using it as an example.

It was an erroneous or disingenuous example. We've had a lot of discussion on honor killings and other difficulty subjects here.

But note that many of the comments here were about my statement "the American internet," as if to say, "look at this dummy, he just doesn't understand that the whole world uses the internet, too?" Of course I understand that, but do you think that it's some sort of central gathering for people from American and Mongolia alike? That they all stop by the Huffington Post because they're interested in climate change?

Your point is utterly lost when you use "American" to mean "competent English speakers with access to the internet."

But there is no way to expect Newsweek to give you the real story with a nuanced understanding of the role of religion, psychology, etc, if "western values" places like Metafilter can't. "No, we'll pass, we'd rather let Marie Claire handle this one, based on how they handled the white-after-Labor Day controversy."

I don't even understand what you're implying. Do you think that Newsweek was ever some sort of really serious hard news source with deep commentary? It's a magazine. And really, there's no need to sniff at Marie Claire in comparison to Newsweek. Both are at about the same level of waiting-room reading material.

Comparing either to Metafilter is bizarre.
posted by desuetude at 7:45 AM on July 16, 2010 [1 favorite]

*Takes a massive dump in hugbucket*
posted by Schmoopy at 7:46 AM on July 16, 2010

cortex: "
This is more or less my objection as well, yes. It is neither Metafilter's mission nor its duty to be an outlet for discussion of bad news; this is not a news outlet or a political discussion forum or a human rights advocacy platform, and what news and politics and rights stuff does occur here is just a part of the overall mix of the content of the site, not the raison d'être."


Yeah, again; he's not the one that posted the mefi thread that was deleted, he wasn't commenting *about* the deletion, so much as it was a reference to a leftish website AS AN EXAMPLE...but the most important thing here: IT WAS HIS OWN DAMN BLOG.

If you have an issue with something someone says about metafilter on their blog, then talk about it on their blog, but it is absolutely uncalled for, imho, for a member to be called out in meta for something they write on their own blog. It's too much like a loyalty test, that members are expected to never mention mefi, or to always be in agreement with whatever the prevailing opinion is, or they can expect that someone will find the post and there'll be a pileon in meta.

It's rude, especially when the person was following both rules and custom by GYODB.

I think this whole thread should be deleted.
posted by SecretAgentSockpuppet at 7:52 AM on July 16, 2010 [3 favorites]

Meta threads don't generally get deleted, do they? They moderators can certainly close it, though.

I also didn't see this thread as a callout (although "this member posted on his blog about MetaFilter" seems just as inappropriate). Apparently, TheLastPsychiatrist didn't know that MetaTalk existed. Now he knows. Yay!
posted by muddgirl at 7:57 AM on July 16, 2010

It's too much like a loyalty test, that members are expected to never mention mefi, or to always be in agreement with whatever the prevailing opinion is, or they can expect that someone will find the post and there'll be a pileon in meta.

I do think it has potential to be troublesome. That said, I don't see a big shaming/shunning going on. Plus, this is the internet: sites are connected by hyperlinks and trackbacks. It's a two-way street.

Disagreement is an opportunity: if a knowledgeable person disagrees with me, I wonder if maybe they know something I don't know. As I'm generally a fan of TLP, I'm guessing he's quite capable of sticking up for himself, and in any case he seems to be committed to the spirit of reason-giving and reason-responsiveness.

If TLP thinks that Metafilter is analogous to a journalists' outlet with obligations to correct media bias... well, I find I disagree, but I'd like to hear his reasons. Maybe he's right... how will we know until we hear him out?
posted by anotherpanacea at 8:06 AM on July 16, 2010 [1 favorite]

saysthis, what the hell was that for?
posted by Burhanistan at 8:34 AM on July 16, 2010

If you have an issue with something someone says about metafilter on their blog, then talk about it on their blog, but it is absolutely uncalled for, imho, for a member to be called out in meta for something they write on their own blog.

This metatalk post read much more to me as "hey, here's someone talking about metafilter", not "how dare this person besmirch the site". There's been pushback in here against the way TLP went about it, but I think I've been fair and civil in stating my own frustrations with how that mention of the site was handled, and I haven't seen other people really going over the top in here about it either.

I specifically refrained from taking up the issue over on TLP's blog because the mefi angle was clearly a tertiary thing, little more than an aside in an article that was substantially not about mefi, and so storming in there to make a fuss seemed like it would be the more obnoxious thing to do. In general I think we would have been fine without this thread in the first place, but insofar as this is a place where mefites talk about mefi-related stuff and the writeup in question was by a mefite and specifically referenced metafilter, it's hardly out of line.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:40 AM on July 16, 2010

And Schmoopy, what's your problem?
posted by infini at 8:54 AM on July 16, 2010

If you have an issue with something someone says about metafilter on their blog, then talk about it on their blog, but it is absolutely uncalled for, imho, for a member to be called out in meta for something they write on their own blog. It's too much like a loyalty test, that members are expected to never mention mefi, or to always be in agreement with whatever the prevailing opinion is, or they can expect that someone will find the post and there'll be a pileon in meta.

If the moderators had called him out, then sure, that'd be terribly inappropriate. This post wasn't framed as a callout. It was framed neutrally, actually. And it was posted by another MeFite.

What, when Metafilter is mentioned in a positive way it shouldn't be mentioned in MeTa either, lest we pile on with self-congratulations and recipes?

TheLastPsychiatrist probably not a nice uptick in pageviews thanks to this MeTa, too. See, everyone wins!
posted by desuetude at 9:16 AM on July 16, 2010

(got, not not)
posted by desuetude at 9:20 AM on July 16, 2010

I just ate an ant.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane at 9:23 AM on July 16, 2010

If you have an issue with something someone says about metafilter on their blog, then talk about it on their blog, but it is absolutely uncalled for, imho, for a member to be called out in meta for something they write on their own blog.

I feel like this type of scenario [i.e. "take it to your own blog"] is useful when something has already spun off of MetaTalk [like the sidebar that happened on bingo's blog after the Russian girls thing] but usually when people see people mentioning MeFi other places they say something here. And that's okay.

And I guess I don't see this as a callout, but as more like a mention. I'm aware that for some people, having people scrutinizing your words and/or possibly talking about you in absentia can seem weird and creepy, but we try pretty hard to reign in shitty behavior if we see it and otherwise, this is the sort of thing that happens in MeTa. People are, some of them, disagreeing with TLP and yeah having a meta-conversation about the topic which is itself a point of disagreement, but to my read it's not problematic and nowhere near "we need to close this" levels.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:36 AM on July 16, 2010

Your point is utterly lost when you use "American" to mean "competent English speakers with access to the internet."

Thank you.

As far as I'm concerned, the New Zealand internet has been overrun by Americans. If you throw a rock and it doesn't hit an American, it's probably some bloody foreigner who only pretends to speak English. If it weren't for our Australian brethren and sistren, the place would be intolerable.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 1:50 AM on July 17, 2010

i_am_joe's_spleen, don't you mean Brethren and Cistern?
posted by Devils Rancher at 4:43 AM on July 17, 2010

*splurts out coffee*
posted by infini at 5:03 AM on July 17, 2010

I just ate an ant.

As long as it wasn't with cilantro.
posted by mediareport at 5:06 AM on July 17, 2010 [1 favorite]

i_am_joe's_spleen, don't you mean Brethren and Cistern?

That's great! USA! US.... oh, wait.
posted by norm at 6:40 AM on July 17, 2010