Begging for a Coulter moratorium... June 24, 2006 7:32 AM   Subscribe

Please no more!
posted by anotherpanacea to Etiquette/Policy at 7:32 AM (73 comments total)

It's been said before. And I certainly don't defend the various transexual jokes. But can we please avoid linking to the Ann Coulter? Her work makes political disagreement into a kind of intolerance, and at base, metafilter is a place where we should be able to talk to each other because we want to rather than because we 'must.'

Some caveats: yes, I am advocating intolerance of intolerance. No, there is no contradiction here; antisemites and white supremacists are rarely the best of the web, and the same is true of antiliberals who take the same rhetoric and repackage it for partisan politics. And yes, I am well aware this will bring on a spate of FPPs regarding Coulter, as many mefites can't help but use the front page to snark. (I've done the same myself.) But in general, I'm begging you all, can we please ignore her?
posted by anotherpanacea at 7:33 AM on June 24, 2006


I'm with you here. Paying attention to the attention whore gives power to the attention whore. It's money-media kindergarten.

Problem is, stupid people like easy targets. Which dear Ann knows as she offers herself up, of course, but depressingly few Mefites seem to understand.

So it goes.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:48 AM on June 24, 2006


Intolerance of intolerance does not mean ignoring the intolerant. Not in my view, anyway. I prefer to shine a big fat light on the bastards. I also suspect I'm not in the minority on this.

When you start sniffily giving someone the Coventry treatment you actually give them a sort of diluted martydom, which they and their fans can exploit, or at least use to falsely justify their oh-so-challengingly- controversial views.

When faced with an enemy you should damned well get stuck in there. Otherwise they thrive.
posted by Decani at 7:50 AM on June 24, 2006


Also, she's comedy for the clued-in and grunt.hate-fodder for the dense, so, seriously, it's just getting sucked into the vortex of duh to think it's a discussion about tolerance and stuff, and to be avoided. Seriously. D00d.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:52 AM on June 24, 2006 [1 favorite]


Is someone forcing you to click those links? It's not like they were disguised, masquerading as being Coulter-free.

She's hideous, but telling people not to link to something you don't like isn't too pretty either.
posted by CunningLinguist at 7:54 AM on June 24, 2006


I'm big on intolerance of intolerance, sure, but I'm even more into censorship of censorship.

Or anything that remotely smacks of it.
posted by Ryvar at 8:12 AM on June 24, 2006


Ann Coulter is in my apartment, forcing me at gunpoint to read Internet posts about her.

This is really fucking up my Saturday.
posted by cortex at 8:13 AM on June 24, 2006


While we're on the topic, I've been meaning to bring this up for a while, so here goes: Could everyone please stop posting things I don't personally approve of?

These topics are always welcome:

1. Pirates
2. Monkeys
3. Strippers
4. Fire

I'll updte the list with more when I get a few free moments. In the meantime, just send me an email if you have something to post, but you're not sure what I'd think. Thanks.
posted by Gamblor at 8:15 AM on June 24, 2006 [1 favorite]


I was just on my way here to post this and found it to already be here.

No more Ann Coulter, please. There are reasons I don't watch the or read things that she appears in.
posted by 517 at 8:18 AM on June 24, 2006


Why does Ann Coulter exist?

Who created her?

When was the first time she got on TV, or radio, or wherever?

Why has her popularity grown since then?

Not due to any talent, or intelligence, or contribution to society. Not through nuanced political analysis, or having something interesting to say, or even through having a pretty face.

She only continues to exist for the same reason people slow down and take a look at fatal car accidents. You see the flashing lights and twisted metal and can't help your self.

And, like fatal car accidents, some sick fucks actually get off on it.

So drive safe, kids, and don't give her any more attention.
posted by Jimbob at 8:22 AM on June 24, 2006


Sorry if my previous comment caused any consternation. Limiting post topics to pirates/monkeys/strippers/fire was only intended for MeFi. You are still allowed to ask non-pirates/monkeys/strippers/fire-related questions to AskMe (but they won't be as awesome).
posted by Gamblor at 8:23 AM on June 24, 2006


Ah, Christ, now she's making me read this thread aloud. And I have to use a different voice for each of you or she complains.
posted by cortex at 8:24 AM on June 24, 2006


Ann Coulter is a media troll, we all know this. But a deadhead? That's a new fucking twist and an interesting interview with a psycho media troll.

Like I said in the thread, there is a difference between 200 posts about Ann Coulter saying "liberals are raping babies in order to eat them for the gay homosexual whale agenda" and one about her being a deadhead.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 8:29 AM on June 24, 2006


...there is a difference between 200 posts about Ann Coulter saying "liberals are raping babies in order to eat them for the gay homosexual whale agenda" and one about her being a deadhead.

Sure, there's a difference between the posts, but there ain't much difference between the resulting threads.
posted by cribcage at 8:40 AM on June 24, 2006


But in general, I'm begging you all, can we please ignore her?

No thanks. I like to know about what I may be critical of. I've found it is really very easy to not bother reading an FPP I'm not interested in, which is a lot of them.

If the post itself fails the guidelines, that's one thing. But a no-Coulter posts guideline doesn't currently exist. This one didn't strike me as "Ann says this on Fox."
posted by juiceCake at 9:12 AM on June 24, 2006


I demand more posts about strippers, monekys, pirates and fire.
posted by LarryC at 9:13 AM on June 24, 2006


Eh, there's precident for deleting threads about topics that have been 'played out' simply for being played out. I think coulter should be a part of this.

Evetually the schtick gets boring, and she is basically a troll. What's the best way to deal with trolls? Just ignore them.
posted by delmoi at 9:21 AM on June 24, 2006


Thanks for not staring at my adam’s apple.
posted by Pacheco at 9:25 AM on June 24, 2006


yes, delmoi, like I said twice now, coulter is played out, but coulter being a deadhead is news to me and the link that was posted was entirely different than the normal schtick that gets posted here about her.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:58 AM on June 24, 2006


I thought the Coulter Deadhead thread turned into a clone of all the other ones, too. A bunch of people arguing over if the post belongs on the blue or not and ignoring the actual link. If only there was something we could do about that.
posted by absalom at 10:00 AM on June 24, 2006


Incidentally it bugs me that women in politics and the media who are unpopular for their ideas and messages are torn down on the basis of their looks. People do it constantly, tending to overlook the fangs, hips, and jowls of all the dudes in the biz.

That's something that bugs me no matter who the subject is, but AC gets it pretty frequently, considering how much more superior and culturally enlightened than her we all clearly are.

I mean really, there's so much about her to hate, why take the cheap shot?
posted by hermitosis at 10:26 AM on June 24, 2006


The Grateful Dead link was fascinating, and still seems to be legit.
posted by bardic at 10:37 AM on June 24, 2006


I'm new, so still learning the 'protocol' here -- however, what I have observed is that one thing mefi does is reflect the 'pulse' of news/web/society (for better of worse). I personally hate seeing Coulter reified by the rabid right, and don't want to contribute to her notoriety. Still, ignoring the furor won't make it go away. I don't give Coulter attention, but the attention she is getting intrigues me. (... and seeing posts on mefi is one measure of that phenomena.)
posted by Surfurrus at 10:38 AM on June 24, 2006


I mean really, there's so much about her to hate, why take the cheap shot?

I'm afraid I just don't agree that it's a cheap shot. She sells her "sex appeal", as such, to her middle-aged, impotent, male right-wing audience, just as much as she sells a narrow-minded, violent worldview that appeals to them.

As far as I see it, if she is happy to make blood money from titillating her audience with sex and violence, then criticisms about her masculine, skeletal physical attributes are as much fair game as her warped political views.

I've seen this kind of argument before when closeted Republicans whine about being outed in the press, or when Republicans have family members outed. They have no problem making lives miserable for others, but when they are confronted with their own behavior, suddenly we are the ones at fault. I refuse to feel bad about it.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:42 AM on June 24, 2006


Ann Coulter appeals to the id in all of us. (Still on my Century of the Self kick!)
posted by Eideteker at 10:46 AM on June 24, 2006


A bunch of people arguing over if the post belongs on the blue or not and ignoring the actual link. If only there was something we could do about that.

I just went in and deleted every off-topic "this thread sucks, I'd do her, she's a man baby!" comment.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:48 AM on June 24, 2006


I think of Ann Coulter as the spawn of Satan, but I found this particular link quite different. It made her seem somehow human--and believe it or not, that's a good thing.

If the only things we read about her are her rabid pronouncements, it's easy to ignore the other side of her. (I found her admission of OCD particularly poignant.) Banning all things Coulter would be a big mistake. (I'm okay with banning all the Coulter/Hitler analogies, though. Yawn. Like that's news?)
posted by leftcoastbob at 10:49 AM on June 24, 2006


Ann Coulter appeals to the id in all of us.

She does not appeal to the id in me. These threads so often turn into LOL XTIANS types of threads [yes she's still weird, outrageously so] but they don't seem to get a ton of flags. I think it's because some people like them and the other folks already know enough to skip them.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:50 AM on June 24, 2006


These topics are always welcome:

1. Pirates
2. Monkeys
3. Strippers
4. Fire


Here ya be, matey.
posted by Astro Zombie at 10:55 AM on June 24, 2006


You rule, Astro.
posted by LarryC at 11:04 AM on June 24, 2006


If the link is interesting, surely a lame thread isn't worth killing it for? And while I'm sick to death of Ann Coulter Says Stupid Shit threads, this really wierded me out. Such a crazy mix of mythology in that interview. I thought it was fascinating and a great post. I mean come on:

My collection of Dead tapes, by the way, was the reason I heard one of the Linda Tripp tapes before Ken Starr did. Tripp's lawyer obviously needed to hear the tape before turning it over to the prosecutor, but he only had an old 1950's tape player and couldn't get it to work and Ken Starr wanted the tape the next morning. He was terrified he'd hit the wrong button and erase the evidence. In the wee hours of the morning, it occurred him, a Deadhead himself, that he knew one person in D.C. who definitely had a tape machine. So, at around 2 AM, he called me and asked to come over to use my tape deck.
posted by freebird at 11:09 AM on June 24, 2006


It strikes me that the deadhead interview was part of the book promotion tour. In the way that celebrities always point at themselves to sell their movies and novels and pepsi products, Coulter let us see the the human side for a second in hopes moving product. (This is my shot at an argument about breaking the guidelines. It's weak, I know.)

So, yeah. Maybe it's interesting, and therefore web's best. But Coulter has made it her life's work to create a nation we can't share. My own proclivities go far more towards the 'community' part than the 'weblog' part. I'm more than happy to miss out of the occasional "interesting" interview to preserve that community. This is more like a preference for the Good than for pirates and monkeys.
posted by anotherpanacea at 11:26 AM on June 24, 2006


there's precident for deleting threads

precedent.
posted by quonsar at 11:28 AM on June 24, 2006


Ann Coulter reminds me of Dr. Ruth; there is no far right political postion she won't give you permission to indulge yourself in, and in some way I do not understand, sex is at the bottom of the pile.
posted by jamjam at 11:29 AM on June 24, 2006


Sex is always best at the bottom of the pile.
posted by Astro Zombie at 11:36 AM on June 24, 2006


But isn't so great if you have piles in your bottom.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 11:38 AM on June 24, 2006


Touche, my friend.
posted by Astro Zombie at 11:40 AM on June 24, 2006


How about monkeys setting strippers and pirates on fire?
posted by blue_beetle at 12:12 PM on June 24, 2006 [1 favorite]


Or strippers and pirates monkeying around on Fire Island?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:22 PM on June 24, 2006


I find it easy enough myself to not read posts about Ilsa of the GOP... I'm not sure why it seems so difficult to others. A couple of posts with less than 10 comments would do more to avoid such posts in the future than complaining about it in MeTa IMHO.
posted by clevershark at 12:41 PM on June 24, 2006


There is a vast difference between the two articles that you linked to, anotherpanacea. The first one was uncreative, unfunny, and redundant - a perfect example of what you are sick of. The second one was interesting and insightful. After seeing so many posts about her objectionable political views, it was interesting to see one that showed a different side of her.

Let's face it, celebrities are celebrities, and people will talk and post about them. This is unavoidable. However, what is not cool is redundancy.
posted by Afroblanco at 12:41 PM on June 24, 2006


Gracias!
posted by Gamblor at 12:52 PM on June 24, 2006


I was intending to ignore this thread, but now I'm glad I didn't. It was an interesting post - much better than that lame ZOMG HITLER one.

Also, Astro Zombie just won the internet.

And cortex? Well, cortex is about to get wrecked at gunpoint, bottom of the pile or piles on the bottom or no, and I only wish I was there with a camera.
posted by loquacious at 1:03 PM on June 24, 2006


So let me get this straight: we shouldn't post about Bad People, because they're bad and we don't want to hear about them? Just fluffy bunnies and stuff? La la la la, I can't hear you, Ann Coulter!

The second link was fine. If the discussion turned out badly, that's the fault of the commenters.
posted by languagehat at 1:53 PM on June 24, 2006


What is this 'internet' I keep hearing so much about? It's really fucking with my Saturday.
posted by OmieWise at 2:05 PM on June 24, 2006


I wish we wouldn't give that rotten bitch any more attention than she already gets, but I saw her name and immediately skipped it, so there you go.
posted by puke & cry at 2:31 PM on June 24, 2006


I'd hit it.
posted by fixedgear at 4:36 PM on June 24, 2006


Ann Coulter appeals to the id in all of us.

If she appealed to my id, I would sign up for electroshock therapy.

posted by Kirth Gerson at 5:02 PM on June 24, 2006


When faced with an enemy you should damned well get stuck in there. Otherwise they thrive.

Actually, your outrage is what makes her thrive, but it feels so good to get indignant about her that you miss that.
posted by jonmc at 6:15 PM on June 24, 2006


I know fuck all about the Dead and try to know as litle as possible about Coulter and even I knew that she was a fan. Just sayin'.

I agree that she's as evil an influence on American society as they come, and when she dies in a car wreck I'll be dancing for joy, but this idea of "don't post about 'our' ideological enemies (they get too much attention as it is)" is just really fucked-up, comrades.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 7:28 PM on June 24, 2006


I just came to. Concussion. She yelled something about "donkey punching" and pistolwhipped me.
posted by cortex at 7:36 PM on June 24, 2006


...this idea of "don't post about 'our' ideological enemies (they get too much attention as it is)" is just really fucked-up, comrades.

That's exactly the point. This isn't about ideology at all; I'm a civic republican (which isn't a political party, but it's certainly not liberalism.) It's about things that are good for the community and bad for the community. In this case, metafilter mirrors the community at large, and she's just as bad for us as she is for it.

Pirates and Global Warming.
posted by anotherpanacea at 8:45 PM on June 24, 2006


please, gifs now
posted by Meatbomb at 9:26 PM on June 24, 2006


this idea of "don't post about 'our' ideological enemies (they get too much attention as it is)" is just really fucked-up, comrades.

It's not about whether we agree or disagree with what she says. And it's not about, We can't talk about Ann Coulter at all, ever. It's about, Enough already. Really. MetaFilter has already voiced its opinion on this topic — a lot. Move on.

What's more, the "discussions" have been and continue to be absolute shit. They bring out the worst of MetaFilter — and that's not a reflection on Ann Coulter, because I've had plenty of intelligent and civil conversations about Coulter's columns and rhetoric with Massachusetts Democrats who'd like to see her buried beneath a truck. It's MetaFilter: You put certain topics on the table and this place becomes a puddle of drool, quite incapable of intelligence or civility. Christianity is one of those topics. Ann Coulter is another.

It's not about censorship. It's about exercising some wisdom, maturity, and restraint. Saying, "Shut the fuck up about Ann Coulter already" is not equivalent to saying, "Thou shalt not discuss The Coulter."
posted by cribcage at 9:32 PM on June 24, 2006







posted by puke & cry at 9:35 PM on June 24, 2006





posted by puke & cry at 11:45 PM on June 24, 2006







posted by puke & cry at 11:50 PM on June 24, 2006


Simple solution -- Just skip the thread if you don't like the topic. Avert your eyes and that will solve the problem. No need to bring in a cannon to kill a mouse.

And I too am getting a little tired of hearing the derogatory comments about transsexuals. Now there's a problem worth addressing. If posters continually made derogatory comments about black folks, I doubt that it would be tolerated. If there were continual derogatory comments about gays folks, I doubt that would be tolerated for long either.

But it seems perfectly acceptable around here to make derogatory comments about transsexuals.

I hate Ann Coulter and her way-too-short skirts and her looney tunes political views too. And I see nothing wrong with some spirited bashing of A.C. on mefi.

But STFU about the transsexual thing. It's offensive -- especially coming from a predominantly liberal crowd.
posted by bim at 12:03 AM on June 25, 2006



I'm afraid I just don't agree that it's a cheap shot. She sells her "sex appeal", as such, to her middle-aged, impotent, male right-wing audience, just as much as she sells a narrow-minded, violent worldview that appeals to them.

As far as I see it, if she is happy to make blood money from titillating her audience with sex and violence, then criticisms about her masculine, skeletal physical attributes are as much fair game as her warped political views.

I've seen this kind of argument before when closeted Republicans whine about being outed in the press, or when Republicans have family members outed. They have no problem making lives miserable for others, but when they are confronted with their own behavior, suddenly we are the ones at fault. I refuse to feel bad about it.

Repeated for emphasis.
posted by puke & cry at 12:28 AM on June 25, 2006


That's not the point, Puke and Cry.

If someone criticizes the hypocrisy of a closted gay person promoting an anti-gay agenda, I doubt that anyone else would interpret that as a slur against gay people. I'm all for yanking the Ken Mehlman's and such out of the closet. I won't lose any sleep over it.

If, however, a woman's looks are constantly criticized because you don't feel that they are gender appropriate and/or are indicative of transsexuality, it seems to me that there is an awful lot of room for women and transsexuals to see that as a slur against them.

And given it's clear from some threads that mefi has transsexual forum members, it's a bit embarassing that people have to be subjected to crap like that. Ugh.

I don't expect mefi to be a tea party (hell no!), but I do think that a fairly progressive and intelligent bunch of mefites should be able to make their points without racist, sexist, homophobic and transphobic comments.

And in case your wondering, nope, I'm not a transsexual.
posted by bim at 3:03 AM on June 25, 2006


i used to be.
posted by StrasbourgSecaucus at 3:17 AM on June 25, 2006


Well said, bim.
posted by languagehat at 7:20 AM on June 25, 2006


I'd rather have Ann Coulter posts than the endless fucking stream of "Best of YouTube".
posted by mkultra at 7:48 AM on June 25, 2006


Please sir, I'd like some more...
posted by blue_beetle at 9:35 AM on June 25, 2006


If, however, a woman's looks are constantly criticized because you don't feel that they are gender appropriate and/or are indicative of transsexuality, it seems to me that there is an awful lot of room for women and transsexuals to see that as a slur against them.

Her looks are criticized because she's an evil, soulsucking monster who makes a living off selling her looks, among other things, to equally craven, soulless pigs. People's criticism has nothing to do with women or transsexuals.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:05 PM on June 25, 2006


Speaking as a woman, I just don't see it your way, Cock. I doubt that a lot of other women do either. But then again I not surprised that we disagree. You can't teach an old dog new tricks.
posted by bim at 1:56 PM on June 25, 2006


Self-identifying as queer, I doubt many transsexuals would agree with you, but perhaps many women do. We'll just have to agree to respectfully disagree.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:04 PM on June 25, 2006


Speaking as another person of the queer persuasion, yes, we'll just have to respectfully disagree.
posted by bim at 2:25 PM on June 25, 2006


As much as that gives us currency to speak for others.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:31 PM on June 25, 2006


there's precident for deleting threads

precedent.


No, I'm pretty sure that was supposed to be president.

Ann Coulter appeals to the id in all of us.

If she appealed to my id, I would sign up for electroshock therapy. -Kirth Gerson

Actually, your outrage is what makes her thrive, but it feels so good to get indignant about her that you miss that. -jonmc


jonmc gets it. The id is not just sexual, it's violent aggression. Love AND hate. One's not better than the other, which is why the less press she gets, the better.

Here you go, Meatbomb:

posted by Eideteker at 2:51 PM on June 25, 2006


I don't deny that it's wrong, but I despise Coulter with such bottomless intensity that anything that makes the hate cut even deeper appeals to me. The whole point of racial and sexual slurs and whatnot is that they cut more deeply. Sexist insults of Coulter are attractive because sexist insults are more hurtful. They also necessarily hurt innocents and that's one of the reasons they're wrong. But, again and frankly, there's no insult of Coulter that to my mind goes too far or is too hateful.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 3:59 PM on June 25, 2006


Anne who?
posted by Devils Slide at 7:19 PM on June 25, 2006


there's no insult of Coulter that to my mind goes too far or is too hateful.

I agree. But then I apply that principle to everything I hate. I'm very much into fairness and consistency, you see.
posted by Decani at 7:20 PM on June 28, 2006


« Older MeFi Messaging   |   Philly Meetup Followup Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments