Can we drop the simplistic moralizing in AskMe? June 22, 2005 4:10 PM Subscribe
Can we drop the simplistic moralizing in AskMe? The responses in darkness' recent thread are disgusting.
I'll stick my separate complaint about that thread in this one. It should have been posted as anonymous, given that darkness's full name and identity is available through his blog. I just looked at pictures of darkness and his wife on their summer vacation, and I'm realizing that he really violated his wife's privacy in a big bad way.
If there's any way to change it to anonymous, Matt, I think the thread would give me less of the jeebies.
posted by Saucy Intruder at 4:13 PM on June 22, 2005
If there's any way to change it to anonymous, Matt, I think the thread would give me less of the jeebies.
posted by Saucy Intruder at 4:13 PM on June 22, 2005
Um. Yeah. That too. In that case, Matt, deleting the thread might be a good idea.
posted by nixerman at 4:17 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by nixerman at 4:17 PM on June 22, 2005
Wasn't it his choice to post with his name? Who are we to say he shouldn't have? (Unless he did it by mistake, well, then...)
posted by tristeza at 4:19 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by tristeza at 4:19 PM on June 22, 2005
tristeza, his wife is a separate person. She might not appreciate that he is using the Internet to get advice on divorcing her.
posted by Saucy Intruder at 4:23 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by Saucy Intruder at 4:23 PM on June 22, 2005
Not sure who exactly you're addressing by I avoided empty insults and eventually gave him what I thought was advice on what he should do. Yes, I did comment that he'd screwed up big time, but I think that realizing that is part of his solution. He's a guy who needs to leave his wife both his own good and hers, and he's caught in the trap of "oh but without me she'll be screwed." I said nuts to that. Hard to hear? Perhaps. Actionable for him? Damn right.
posted by scarabic at 4:24 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by scarabic at 4:24 PM on June 22, 2005
I would also like peeps to drop the smug and superfluous "get a therapist" party line which pops up in every thread about relationships. If you can't help the person, don't bother answering.
posted by dydecker at 4:28 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by dydecker at 4:28 PM on June 22, 2005
After trashing other people's attempts at giving some advice, ODiV's utterly hollow thoughts on what to do next hang incredibly limp on the page. Talk to her. That's great.
posted by scarabic at 4:28 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by scarabic at 4:28 PM on June 22, 2005
It's pretty clear that [the poster]'s proposed solutions are fucked up. If someone had posted an AskMe with the question "should I shoot this dog or instead should I strangle it?" I'm reasonably sure most of the the comments would be along the lines of "neither."
posted by Optimus Chyme at 4:29 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by Optimus Chyme at 4:29 PM on June 22, 2005
Saucy Intruder - yeah, thanks, I got that part, but it was HIS post, do we get to edit like that when we deem it appropriate? Should that not be left to the poster? Just seems to me like it's not for us to decide for someone else (even tho you may counter and say that darkness certainly decided for someone else, I think that actually makes my point - it was inappropriate for him to do, and it's inappropriate for us to do as well).
posted by tristeza at 4:31 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by tristeza at 4:31 PM on June 22, 2005
Scarabic: Your advice was that he should feel like a worthless sack of shit. That's real fuckin' helpful, genius.
All this proves is that the internet is not the place to get relationship advice. All of the things that make for spicy fights (anonymity, snark) make for horrible and judgemental screeds when dealing with real people.
posted by klangklangston at 4:32 PM on June 22, 2005
All this proves is that the internet is not the place to get relationship advice. All of the things that make for spicy fights (anonymity, snark) make for horrible and judgemental screeds when dealing with real people.
posted by klangklangston at 4:32 PM on June 22, 2005
I would also like peeps to drop the smug and superfluous "get a therapist" party line which pops up in every thread about relationships.
That's right. Because getting professional help is NEVER an acceptable answer. Let's also drop the smug "get a doctor/dentist/vet/lawyer" party line in questions about medicine, animals, and legalities as well, while we're at it! Down with the acknowledgment of complex issues that may take more assistance than a few dashed-off paragraphs from strangers!
posted by scody at 4:33 PM on June 22, 2005
That's right. Because getting professional help is NEVER an acceptable answer. Let's also drop the smug "get a doctor/dentist/vet/lawyer" party line in questions about medicine, animals, and legalities as well, while we're at it! Down with the acknowledgment of complex issues that may take more assistance than a few dashed-off paragraphs from strangers!
posted by scody at 4:33 PM on June 22, 2005
Saucy Intruder, the odds his wife or anyone who knows her at all would stumble across his post is nearly impossible. There is not enough data in his post to pinpoint where he is at and tell his wife. Either the post is A: A drama post with no real situation going on or B: Someone showing the world they are not as intelligent as they once seemed.
posted by Dean Keaton at 4:33 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by Dean Keaton at 4:33 PM on June 22, 2005
I don't see moralizing and I don't think it's disgusting. Also, the person posted it under their name and they haven't requested I remove it or anonymize it, so I won't. They're an adult.
The person asking the question comes off as very selfish, and the answers are a reaction to that attitude.
Like I said, I see nothing wrong with that thread.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 4:34 PM on June 22, 2005
The person asking the question comes off as very selfish, and the answers are a reaction to that attitude.
Like I said, I see nothing wrong with that thread.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 4:34 PM on June 22, 2005
I would also like peeps to drop the smug and superfluous "get a therapist" party line which pops up in every thread about relationships. If you can't help the person, don't bother answering.
Just so you know, one of the people posting a (well thought out) "go to therapy" answer is himself a therapist.
posted by mlis at 4:34 PM on June 22, 2005
Just so you know, one of the people posting a (well thought out) "go to therapy" answer is himself a therapist.
posted by mlis at 4:34 PM on June 22, 2005
I'm with Optimus. If you ask for feedback, that's what you get.
posted by alms at 4:35 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by alms at 4:35 PM on June 22, 2005
scarabic, you called the guy a 'shitbag'. While you get points for creativity, (not sure I've heard that one before), don't you think your "advice" could be posed in a less judgemental manner? I won't even go into the stupidity behind such snap judgement, this is just about tone. If you were at all interested in actually helping the guy out you might've rephrased your advice the way you stated it in this thread.
Optimus Chyme, if darkness' question was in any way analagous to your hypothetical question you might have a point. His situation and the resulting question are just a bit more complex than somebody deciding how to murder a dog.
I don't even mind the rampant bad advice in the thread. It's the tone of the thread that's really upsetting. Let's keep the invective and condemnations in the gray, please.
posted by nixerman at 4:41 PM on June 22, 2005
Optimus Chyme, if darkness' question was in any way analagous to your hypothetical question you might have a point. His situation and the resulting question are just a bit more complex than somebody deciding how to murder a dog.
I don't even mind the rampant bad advice in the thread. It's the tone of the thread that's really upsetting. Let's keep the invective and condemnations in the gray, please.
posted by nixerman at 4:41 PM on June 22, 2005
He could have cut out all the middle stuff and left the question as:
My wife wants, more than anything, to have a baby. I want, more than anything, not to. What should I do?
I don't have any good reason not to have a kid. We both have stable upper-middle class jobs, our insurance is excellent, there is room in the house and her parents would love to become grandparents and are willing to help out.
Perhaps some fathers had a similar experience and could tell it's all OK and my feelings will change?
But he didn't. He shared all kinds of things that didn't even related to the question I think he was trying to ask. He told us that he would consider deceiving/leaving his wife over this and then asked if it was ok to feel that way. He asked. People answered. That's the way the site works.
posted by wallaby at 4:42 PM on June 22, 2005
My wife wants, more than anything, to have a baby. I want, more than anything, not to. What should I do?
I don't have any good reason not to have a kid. We both have stable upper-middle class jobs, our insurance is excellent, there is room in the house and her parents would love to become grandparents and are willing to help out.
Perhaps some fathers had a similar experience and could tell it's all OK and my feelings will change?
But he didn't. He shared all kinds of things that didn't even related to the question I think he was trying to ask. He told us that he would consider deceiving/leaving his wife over this and then asked if it was ok to feel that way. He asked. People answered. That's the way the site works.
posted by wallaby at 4:42 PM on June 22, 2005
It's one of the better AskMe moments. High drama and the great human trainwreck all right there.
posted by xmutex at 4:43 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by xmutex at 4:43 PM on June 22, 2005
i think it's really hard for me to emphasize with darkness and his attitude towards his problem ... and i think that if someone's going to post something like he did, he's going to have to accept that people may not reply in an emphatic way
i can't really be bothered with giving him any advice ... except that maybe he ought to look at what people are saying about him in that thread and question himself as to why they would feel that way
posted by pyramid termite at 4:44 PM on June 22, 2005
i can't really be bothered with giving him any advice ... except that maybe he ought to look at what people are saying about him in that thread and question himself as to why they would feel that way
posted by pyramid termite at 4:44 PM on June 22, 2005
FWIW, I agree with nixerman, in that the thread was way harsh.
Not that it should get deleted, or made anonymous though.
posted by Count Ziggurat at 4:46 PM on June 22, 2005
Not that it should get deleted, or made anonymous though.
posted by Count Ziggurat at 4:46 PM on June 22, 2005
Dean Keaton, do you really think the odds are that long? Metafilter is a popular place and there's an awful lot of personal information in his website, including the name "darkness." Significant others who are experiencing difficulties in a relationship can be very motivated to go online and find hints on what might be troubling their SO. Egad.
posted by Morrigan at 4:47 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by Morrigan at 4:47 PM on June 22, 2005
This reminds me of something from Dan Savage, actually. A guy writes up and says "I'm interested in ___ kind of sex and my woman is not. What should I do?" Dan rambles a bit, saying: "Well, most columnists would tell you that you should be ashamed of yourself, that no one should be pressured into doing anything they don't want to do. However, most therapists are also women, and so heavily into PC-BS-speak that you'll never get an opinion about what's right for you, except that you're lucky to have this woman at all. My answer is: leave her or cheat on her. Your impulses won't change no matter how much you want them to. You're only being unfair to both of you right now."
Now you may not agree with Dan on that one, but his answer did two things:
i) it was upfront with the question asker -- it didn't tell him a bunch of happy half-truths that wouldn't apply to the real world -- and Dan is pretty quick to confront people on their true motivations if they seem to be pussy-footing around, because that's helping them, too;
ii) he didn't ignore the person's needs, as the one seeking advice.
If we add a iii) reminder of obligations when someone other than the advice seeker may be harmed, then I think we have a nice little set of guidelines:
You can be upfront and confront the advice seeker,
You shouldn't ignore what this person wants/needs,
You can and should confront the person when their actions may harm someone else.
If this woman was also 26, I think we'd have mostly had a different reaction. But stringing along a 35 year-old woman with regard to children is "harm" to me. The same as if he'd confessed he'd contracted an STD and didn't want to tell her, or if she had come on asking about deceiving him regarding using birth control.
posted by dreamsign at 4:49 PM on June 22, 2005 [1 favorite]
Now you may not agree with Dan on that one, but his answer did two things:
i) it was upfront with the question asker -- it didn't tell him a bunch of happy half-truths that wouldn't apply to the real world -- and Dan is pretty quick to confront people on their true motivations if they seem to be pussy-footing around, because that's helping them, too;
ii) he didn't ignore the person's needs, as the one seeking advice.
If we add a iii) reminder of obligations when someone other than the advice seeker may be harmed, then I think we have a nice little set of guidelines:
You can be upfront and confront the advice seeker,
You shouldn't ignore what this person wants/needs,
You can and should confront the person when their actions may harm someone else.
If this woman was also 26, I think we'd have mostly had a different reaction. But stringing along a 35 year-old woman with regard to children is "harm" to me. The same as if he'd confessed he'd contracted an STD and didn't want to tell her, or if she had come on asking about deceiving him regarding using birth control.
posted by dreamsign at 4:49 PM on June 22, 2005 [1 favorite]
"Go to therapy" would indeed be a sad sort of knee-jerk response to any post based on any personal problem. But this isn't just any sort of personal problem.
At the best, this guy posted his very most selfish and callous thoughts. He has lied to his wife as a basic condition of them getting married, and he's considering getting a vasectomy and lying to her about it just to avoid (he says) hurting her. He's willing to deceive her massively to keep her in a relationship that he doesn't seem to care about because he thinks she can't handle him leaving.
Everything about his post screams that's he has behaved, and is continuing to behave, in an extremely selfish way -- almost sociopathic. At the very least, he's in a bad relationship.
Again, if "get therapy" or "get a divorce" or "you've fucked up" were automatic responses on AskMe, then we'd have a problem. But darkness really should get therapy, he almost certainly should get a divorce, and he surely has fucked up. So what, exactly, are we supposed to say in response to him?
posted by argybarg at 4:49 PM on June 22, 2005
At the best, this guy posted his very most selfish and callous thoughts. He has lied to his wife as a basic condition of them getting married, and he's considering getting a vasectomy and lying to her about it just to avoid (he says) hurting her. He's willing to deceive her massively to keep her in a relationship that he doesn't seem to care about because he thinks she can't handle him leaving.
Everything about his post screams that's he has behaved, and is continuing to behave, in an extremely selfish way -- almost sociopathic. At the very least, he's in a bad relationship.
Again, if "get therapy" or "get a divorce" or "you've fucked up" were automatic responses on AskMe, then we'd have a problem. But darkness really should get therapy, he almost certainly should get a divorce, and he surely has fucked up. So what, exactly, are we supposed to say in response to him?
posted by argybarg at 4:49 PM on June 22, 2005
Well, his username is darkness.
He's probably crazy!
posted by _sirmissalot_ at 4:54 PM on June 22, 2005
He's probably crazy!
posted by _sirmissalot_ at 4:54 PM on June 22, 2005
This is far from being a moral condemnation---because jesus knows my morals are not exemplary---but the first thing I thought when I read his post was, "Hey, whoa there douchebag." Yuck. Poor wife.
And I don't think that "seek therapy" is an obvious or condescending comment. I mean, the guy came to metafilter for advice before going to a therapist. That's sad.
Sorry if this offends, but man... come on...
posted by aGreatNotion at 4:54 PM on June 22, 2005
And I don't think that "seek therapy" is an obvious or condescending comment. I mean, the guy came to metafilter for advice before going to a therapist. That's sad.
Sorry if this offends, but man... come on...
posted by aGreatNotion at 4:54 PM on June 22, 2005
Significant others who are experiencing difficulties in a relationship can be very motivated to go online and find hints on what might be troubling their SO.
All of which kind of goes to darkness's thoughtfulness/consideration (or [continuing] lack thereof) towards his wife, doesn't it?
On preview: But stringing along a 35 year-old woman with regard to children is "harm" to me.
Dreamsign nails it.
But darkness really should get therapy, he almost certainly should get a divorce, and he surely has fucked up. So what, exactly, are we supposed to say in response to him?
Apparently we're supposed to tell him to hang out with some kids and see how he feels in a few years -- or possibly to just go ahead and have kids, and hope that he winds up being a good dad. Anything else is just harsh, unfeeling moralizing, I gather.
posted by scody at 4:55 PM on June 22, 2005
All of which kind of goes to darkness's thoughtfulness/consideration (or [continuing] lack thereof) towards his wife, doesn't it?
On preview: But stringing along a 35 year-old woman with regard to children is "harm" to me.
Dreamsign nails it.
But darkness really should get therapy, he almost certainly should get a divorce, and he surely has fucked up. So what, exactly, are we supposed to say in response to him?
Apparently we're supposed to tell him to hang out with some kids and see how he feels in a few years -- or possibly to just go ahead and have kids, and hope that he winds up being a good dad. Anything else is just harsh, unfeeling moralizing, I gather.
posted by scody at 4:55 PM on June 22, 2005
nixerman and klangklangston - I take your point but you've missed mine. I didn't call him a shitbag. I told him to begin thinking of himself as one. There was a valuable point to that: that he should stop thinking of himself as having the power to make everything all right. That he should stop thinking of himself as his wife's only hope for fulfillment. That he should get out of the picture and leave her be, put distance between them. I think that's good advice. He wants permission to leave. I gave it to him.
don't you think your "advice" could be posed in a less judgemental manner?
Well, perhaps, but by the same token: what do you care?
posted by scarabic at 4:57 PM on June 22, 2005
don't you think your "advice" could be posed in a less judgemental manner?
Well, perhaps, but by the same token: what do you care?
posted by scarabic at 4:57 PM on June 22, 2005
I actually found it a very reassuring thread about the general state of people's morals on Metafilter.
posted by dness2 at 4:59 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by dness2 at 4:59 PM on June 22, 2005
dydecker : "I would also like peeps to drop the smug and superfluous 'get a therapist' party line which pops up in every thread about relationships. If you can't help the person, don't bother answering."
I dunno that it's smug (depends on the person).
I dunno that it's superfluous (if, after all, it were the best answer, it couldn't really be superfluous, could it?)
Generally (though not always), in AskMe, the most common answer is the correct answer, so the phrase "party line" doesn't really mean much.
And if a person asks for advice, and your advice is to see a therapist, isn't that helping the person?
(Note: none of the above arguments is contingent on therapists being a good idea. You could replace the word "therapist" with "witch doctor" or "washing machine", and it would still stand. I'm just saying that your arguments about why advice to "ask a therapist" should stop aren't really strong arguments)
scarabic : "I didn't call him a shitbag. I told him to begin thinking of himself as one."
It didn't come across that way (that's not accusative, it just really didn't come across that way to me).
On preview: You're welcome (and it isn't so much your tone, as the fact that what you were trying to communicate didn't really communicate. That tone is fine, as long as communication isn't your goal, but I suspect it is, so you should be honest with yourself and determine your real goals : )
posted by Bugbread at 5:10 PM on June 22, 2005
I dunno that it's smug (depends on the person).
I dunno that it's superfluous (if, after all, it were the best answer, it couldn't really be superfluous, could it?)
Generally (though not always), in AskMe, the most common answer is the correct answer, so the phrase "party line" doesn't really mean much.
And if a person asks for advice, and your advice is to see a therapist, isn't that helping the person?
(Note: none of the above arguments is contingent on therapists being a good idea. You could replace the word "therapist" with "witch doctor" or "washing machine", and it would still stand. I'm just saying that your arguments about why advice to "ask a therapist" should stop aren't really strong arguments)
scarabic : "I didn't call him a shitbag. I told him to begin thinking of himself as one."
It didn't come across that way (that's not accusative, it just really didn't come across that way to me).
On preview: You're welcome (and it isn't so much your tone, as the fact that what you were trying to communicate didn't really communicate. That tone is fine, as long as communication isn't your goal, but I suspect it is, so you should be honest with yourself and determine your real goals : )
posted by Bugbread at 5:10 PM on June 22, 2005
"Perhaps some fathers had a similar experience and could tell [me?] it's all OK"
How could that AskMe be answered without some bit of moralizing?
posted by mischief at 5:12 PM on June 22, 2005
How could that AskMe be answered without some bit of moralizing?
posted by mischief at 5:12 PM on June 22, 2005
His question was based on a background of lies and an inhumane assessment of his relationship with his wife, and rationalized by his own cowardice. The fact that he acknowledges the cruelty of some of his options can hardly be called mitigating. That his options did not include compromise of any sort makes the tone all the more chilling. I would (and have) cease all contact with such a person, and it's not surprising to me that people acted with repulsion.
posted by boo_radley at 5:15 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by boo_radley at 5:15 PM on June 22, 2005
so does this mean I shouldn't ask about whether I should shoot that dog or just strangle it?
posted by shmegegge at 5:18 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by shmegegge at 5:18 PM on June 22, 2005
So, somebody asks us for permission to treat another human being (one that he has sworn to love and honour for life) like a piece of dirt and receives as response moral outrage. You are surprised by this? As mischief says, how could this not be answered without moralising? It is, at heart, someone asking which despicable and morally bankrupt way to behave is best.
posted by dg at 5:27 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by dg at 5:27 PM on June 22, 2005
so does this mean I shouldn't ask about whether I should shoot that dog or just strangle it?
Silly rabbit, pellet guns are for kids.
posted by dreamsign at 5:31 PM on June 22, 2005
Silly rabbit, pellet guns are for kids.
posted by dreamsign at 5:31 PM on June 22, 2005
Perhaps we can add a disclaimer to the green's post box advising against moral condemnations of the poster?
So, if someone asks for advice on how to make a pipe bomb or cook meth, we'll all just have to hold our tongue? This is not NerfWorld, nixerman, get a helmet.
posted by jonmc at 5:31 PM on June 22, 2005
So, if someone asks for advice on how to make a pipe bomb or cook meth, we'll all just have to hold our tongue? This is not NerfWorld, nixerman, get a helmet.
posted by jonmc at 5:31 PM on June 22, 2005
Can we drop the pathetic whining in MetaTalk? The FPP re darkness's recent thread is making me barf thick, bitter, blood-streaked bile through my nostrils. I think there may be some pieces of brain in there too.
How could that AskMe be answered without some bit of moralizing?
Pre-fucking-cisely. There was NO WAY a post like that one wasn't going to generate harsh words and strong opinions. And my God, I'd take any number of forceful, moralising, opinionated, lively, sparky, human responses to a tough question than THIS sort of tired, mithering, spunkless, whingeing MetaTalk thread.
Again: why don't you just let other folk respond how they see fit and stay the hell away if you don't like it? Or flame them there and then like a decent human being with a working spine would, or flag them if you can't summon the cojones to voice your distress at source instead of asking Matt to do it for you, or running off to the grey and "calling out" and pissing and moaning like a whiny little bitch?
Look. When someone posts something provocative - and that question most certainly was provocative - you will get provocative replies. No, really, you will. I'm not kidding. It will happen. And it will still happen whether you complain about it or not. That is as sure and certain as the fact that a bunch of tiresome whiners will never, ever, stop bitching and complaining about other people's behaviour on MetaTalk. Oh look. I'm doing it too. QED. Thank you very much.
posted by Decani at 5:33 PM on June 22, 2005
How could that AskMe be answered without some bit of moralizing?
Pre-fucking-cisely. There was NO WAY a post like that one wasn't going to generate harsh words and strong opinions. And my God, I'd take any number of forceful, moralising, opinionated, lively, sparky, human responses to a tough question than THIS sort of tired, mithering, spunkless, whingeing MetaTalk thread.
Again: why don't you just let other folk respond how they see fit and stay the hell away if you don't like it? Or flame them there and then like a decent human being with a working spine would, or flag them if you can't summon the cojones to voice your distress at source instead of asking Matt to do it for you, or running off to the grey and "calling out" and pissing and moaning like a whiny little bitch?
Look. When someone posts something provocative - and that question most certainly was provocative - you will get provocative replies. No, really, you will. I'm not kidding. It will happen. And it will still happen whether you complain about it or not. That is as sure and certain as the fact that a bunch of tiresome whiners will never, ever, stop bitching and complaining about other people's behaviour on MetaTalk. Oh look. I'm doing it too. QED. Thank you very much.
posted by Decani at 5:33 PM on June 22, 2005
"After trashing other people's attempts at giving some advice, ODiV's utterly hollow thoughts on what to do next hang incredibly limp on the page. Talk to her. That's great."
I think talking to her would be more productive than talking to us based on our responses. Yeah, I spent more of my time talking about the people in the thread than responding to the question and that was probably stupid. I do want him to know that it is okay for him to feel these things and talk about these things though. There's no wrong way to feel.
posted by ODiV at 5:33 PM on June 22, 2005
I think talking to her would be more productive than talking to us based on our responses. Yeah, I spent more of my time talking about the people in the thread than responding to the question and that was probably stupid. I do want him to know that it is okay for him to feel these things and talk about these things though. There's no wrong way to feel.
posted by ODiV at 5:33 PM on June 22, 2005
And if a person asks for advice, and your advice is to see a therapist, isn't that helping the person?
Not especially. You're just passing the job of dispensing advice to another person. Not that I think therapy is never warranted for serious problems (as was stated upthread) but simply intoning "you need therapy" to answer to many (and even somewhat minor) relationship problems posed on Ask Metafilter is baffling.
I am amazed that anyone would suggest darkness is "sociopathic" and "would benefit from counselling". He has made a mistake which seems to me to be very human and he was looking for advice. No need to reprogram the poor guy.
Disclaimer: I am not American and I have never met anyone who has been in or considered therapy for relationship issues, so perhaps this a cultural thing.
posted by dydecker at 5:34 PM on June 22, 2005
Not especially. You're just passing the job of dispensing advice to another person. Not that I think therapy is never warranted for serious problems (as was stated upthread) but simply intoning "you need therapy" to answer to many (and even somewhat minor) relationship problems posed on Ask Metafilter is baffling.
I am amazed that anyone would suggest darkness is "sociopathic" and "would benefit from counselling". He has made a mistake which seems to me to be very human and he was looking for advice. No need to reprogram the poor guy.
Disclaimer: I am not American and I have never met anyone who has been in or considered therapy for relationship issues, so perhaps this a cultural thing.
posted by dydecker at 5:34 PM on June 22, 2005
Did you all miss this line in darkness's post:-
There is one last option. She has mentioned that if I wanted to leave once she had the kid, it would be ok. I *really* don't want to do this, as I myself was raised by a single mother and it isn't something I'd like to do to someone else.
It sounds like she wants the child more than the marriage - not a good basis for a child to be brought into this world. How often do we criticise men for "doing the deed" without taking responsibility for it, and yet here is one guy who is willing to question his situation before it's too late. Let's face it - if we take her words at face value (that she wants a child more than the marriage), then what's to stop her meeting anothersperm donor guy?
posted by FieldingGoodney at 5:35 PM on June 22, 2005
There is one last option. She has mentioned that if I wanted to leave once she had the kid, it would be ok. I *really* don't want to do this, as I myself was raised by a single mother and it isn't something I'd like to do to someone else.
It sounds like she wants the child more than the marriage - not a good basis for a child to be brought into this world. How often do we criticise men for "doing the deed" without taking responsibility for it, and yet here is one guy who is willing to question his situation before it's too late. Let's face it - if we take her words at face value (that she wants a child more than the marriage), then what's to stop her meeting another
posted by FieldingGoodney at 5:35 PM on June 22, 2005
Did I say FPP? I didn't mean FPP. I must have been thinking of *FAP*.
posted by Decani at 5:35 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by Decani at 5:35 PM on June 22, 2005
dydecker : "I would also like peeps to drop the smug and superfluous 'get a therapist' party line which pops up in every thread about relationships. If you can't help the person, don't bother answering."
I was one of the first people to advise that darkness see a therapist, and I stand by that. I felt neither smug nor thought I was being superfluous, as he had not made any mention of having tried therapy, or even that he had considered it.
I haven't advised therapy for folks who ask how to get over a bad breakup, or dealing with weight gain, etc. But this man and his wife need help in communicating, and help with their repective issues, and I truly believe that only a therapist can make this marriage work.
posted by Specklet at 5:36 PM on June 22, 2005
I was one of the first people to advise that darkness see a therapist, and I stand by that. I felt neither smug nor thought I was being superfluous, as he had not made any mention of having tried therapy, or even that he had considered it.
I haven't advised therapy for folks who ask how to get over a bad breakup, or dealing with weight gain, etc. But this man and his wife need help in communicating, and help with their repective issues, and I truly believe that only a therapist can make this marriage work.
posted by Specklet at 5:36 PM on June 22, 2005
shmegegge, I think you're free to shoot, as long as you wait until morning before seeking assistance should the dog become immobile. Assuming recently established rabbit protocols apply to dogs.
As for darkness, I honestly assumed the question was a troll and ignored it, though I was tempted to join in the slagging. Poor Mrs. darkness.
posted by jack_mo at 5:37 PM on June 22, 2005
As for darkness, I honestly assumed the question was a troll and ignored it, though I was tempted to join in the slagging. Poor Mrs. darkness.
posted by jack_mo at 5:37 PM on June 22, 2005
I would posit that few of the people posting in that thread have a fucking clue what they're talking about. Some clearly do, and that's great.
Part of the problem is with the question: relationship questions can't be answered with fact or technical expertise, and everybody thinks they're a goddamn professional advice columnist because they had a girlfriend once or got divorced.
Hey, life's tough, folks. People fuck up sometimes, and ask others for advice about it. You can be honest without being a total prick, and you can also keep your fucking mouth shut when you don't have anything productive to add, but that would require some self-examination.
posted by rocketman at 5:39 PM on June 22, 2005
Part of the problem is with the question: relationship questions can't be answered with fact or technical expertise, and everybody thinks they're a goddamn professional advice columnist because they had a girlfriend once or got divorced.
Hey, life's tough, folks. People fuck up sometimes, and ask others for advice about it. You can be honest without being a total prick, and you can also keep your fucking mouth shut when you don't have anything productive to add, but that would require some self-examination.
posted by rocketman at 5:39 PM on June 22, 2005
Yikes... After reading your advice scarabic, I'm sorry I wasted time trying to justify myself to you.
posted by ODiV at 5:40 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by ODiV at 5:40 PM on June 22, 2005
So, if someone asks for advice on how to make a pipe bomb or cook meth, we'll all just have to hold our tongue? This is not NerfWorld, nixerman, get a helmet.
Seconded.
flame them there and then like a decent human being with a working spine would
Two considerations:
-- verbally whacking someone upside the head is usually conducive only to them blowing you off. if you actually care enough to voice an opinion, one would think you care enough to phrase it in a receptive, if tough, way. Dr. Laura may be entertaining, but she sure isn't helping many people.
-- I would think that we have some duty to the advice seeker, just as someone who asks "how do I get a white wine stain out of my shirt" isn't served by people telling them to "use red" (a la Fark). Check my history. I hate MetaWinging as much as anyone. I recently compared MetaTalk to excretion of a good meal. But as long as we're talking about it, it couldn't hurt to agree to be ethical about our treatment of people here -- as I think I outlined in a previous post, above.
On preview:
You're just passing the job of dispensing advice to another person.
Sometimes that is the most qualified person. It takes wisdom to realize when you're in over your head (just as when a psychologist suspects an organic problem and should refer to a psychiatrist or other specialist MD).
but simply intoning "you need therapy" to answer to many (and even somewhat minor) relationship problems posed on Ask Metafilter is baffling.
Agreed, and it does come off as flip, smug, and full of condemnation, most of the time.
I am amazed that anyone would suggest darkness is "sociopathic"
I certainly didn't say it in the AskMe thread, nor did I suggest it here as anything other than a "sounds like" tendency, but yes, I've worked in various psych venues, and this did start to sound that way to me (prior to darkness' next post).
posted by dreamsign at 5:45 PM on June 22, 2005
Seconded.
flame them there and then like a decent human being with a working spine would
Two considerations:
-- verbally whacking someone upside the head is usually conducive only to them blowing you off. if you actually care enough to voice an opinion, one would think you care enough to phrase it in a receptive, if tough, way. Dr. Laura may be entertaining, but she sure isn't helping many people.
-- I would think that we have some duty to the advice seeker, just as someone who asks "how do I get a white wine stain out of my shirt" isn't served by people telling them to "use red" (a la Fark). Check my history. I hate MetaWinging as much as anyone. I recently compared MetaTalk to excretion of a good meal. But as long as we're talking about it, it couldn't hurt to agree to be ethical about our treatment of people here -- as I think I outlined in a previous post, above.
On preview:
You're just passing the job of dispensing advice to another person.
Sometimes that is the most qualified person. It takes wisdom to realize when you're in over your head (just as when a psychologist suspects an organic problem and should refer to a psychiatrist or other specialist MD).
but simply intoning "you need therapy" to answer to many (and even somewhat minor) relationship problems posed on Ask Metafilter is baffling.
Agreed, and it does come off as flip, smug, and full of condemnation, most of the time.
I am amazed that anyone would suggest darkness is "sociopathic"
I certainly didn't say it in the AskMe thread, nor did I suggest it here as anything other than a "sounds like" tendency, but yes, I've worked in various psych venues, and this did start to sound that way to me (prior to darkness' next post).
posted by dreamsign at 5:45 PM on June 22, 2005
I was going to say this thread was a worthless waste of MeTa space, but Decani's comment redeemed it. Thanks, guy.
But, nixerman? Next time you find yourself thinking "I'll probably regret posting this..." you might want to listen to that small still voice. You're probably about to make a dumb post.
posted by languagehat at 5:45 PM on June 22, 2005
But, nixerman? Next time you find yourself thinking "I'll probably regret posting this..." you might want to listen to that small still voice. You're probably about to make a dumb post.
posted by languagehat at 5:45 PM on June 22, 2005
The person asking the question comes off as very selfish, and the answers are a reaction to that attitude.
Like I said, I see nothing wrong with that thread.
posted by mathowie at 4:34 PM PST on June 22 [!]
Sometimes, Haughey has a 'Dutch' attitude that is admirable.
I wish more people were able to let people just be.
posted by The Jesse Helms at 5:47 PM on June 22, 2005
Like I said, I see nothing wrong with that thread.
posted by mathowie at 4:34 PM PST on June 22 [!]
Sometimes, Haughey has a 'Dutch' attitude that is admirable.
I wish more people were able to let people just be.
posted by The Jesse Helms at 5:47 PM on June 22, 2005
There was NO WAY a post like that one wasn't going to generate harsh words and strong opinions.
amen, brother, amen.
I like you guys -- well, some of you at least -- but there's no amount of money large enough that would convince me to discuss my personal life issues with you. this is not a support group, thankfully, has never been, is not meant to be one, and hopefully never will.
there are zillions of topics where MetaFilter's help is very often priceless. "should i have a kid with my wife even if I don't give a sweet fuck about her and about the baby?" is not the kind of topic I'd care to discuss here. most of the advice wouldn't simply be helpful, and the torrent of abuse would be quite ugly.
I'm on the record here as wondering on a MeTa thread if the love/relationship advice available on AskMeFi was really quality advice. I remain terribly skeptical. we don't do that well, mostly. not that I care, if I wanted to read that kind of stuff that I'd buy self-help books or Tony Robbins cd's and the advice there would probably be vastly superior to AskMeFi's, no offense intended.
so, darkness has the right to be an asshole, if indeed he is one, as many users seem to think. tough shit. it was a bad question and it got a lot of bad answers, like the "I shot a bunny wabbit 3 times and it's dying should I finish it off or not?" thread of a few days ago.
your iBook's screen has been doing this this strange flickering thing? Ask MeFi and the problem will go away.
you need to build an FM radio at home and all you have is a fountain pen, a half-dead battery, and an old bread toaster? AskMeFi and you'll be able to build it.
you don't care about kids and you want to get a vasectomy unbeknowst to your older wife? Ask MeFi at your own risk. that's all
posted by matteo at 5:52 PM on June 22, 2005
amen, brother, amen.
I like you guys -- well, some of you at least -- but there's no amount of money large enough that would convince me to discuss my personal life issues with you. this is not a support group, thankfully, has never been, is not meant to be one, and hopefully never will.
there are zillions of topics where MetaFilter's help is very often priceless. "should i have a kid with my wife even if I don't give a sweet fuck about her and about the baby?" is not the kind of topic I'd care to discuss here. most of the advice wouldn't simply be helpful, and the torrent of abuse would be quite ugly.
I'm on the record here as wondering on a MeTa thread if the love/relationship advice available on AskMeFi was really quality advice. I remain terribly skeptical. we don't do that well, mostly. not that I care, if I wanted to read that kind of stuff that I'd buy self-help books or Tony Robbins cd's and the advice there would probably be vastly superior to AskMeFi's, no offense intended.
so, darkness has the right to be an asshole, if indeed he is one, as many users seem to think. tough shit. it was a bad question and it got a lot of bad answers, like the "I shot a bunny wabbit 3 times and it's dying should I finish it off or not?" thread of a few days ago.
your iBook's screen has been doing this this strange flickering thing? Ask MeFi and the problem will go away.
you need to build an FM radio at home and all you have is a fountain pen, a half-dead battery, and an old bread toaster? AskMeFi and you'll be able to build it.
you don't care about kids and you want to get a vasectomy unbeknowst to your older wife? Ask MeFi at your own risk. that's all
posted by matteo at 5:52 PM on June 22, 2005
The problem here isn't that darkness shouldn't be given moral advice for the moral dilema he's gotten himself into, through morally questionable actions. The problem is that most people have trouble confronting immoral behavior without getting personal with its perpetrator... also known as hating the sin, loving the sinner.
People screw up. Sometimes they do immoral things because they think it will help them get something they want they can avoid or work around the consequences later. Story of the human condition.
Give moral advice. But learn to do it such a way that you're not simply consigning people to worthless screw-up-hood for the rest of their lives.
posted by weston at 6:00 PM on June 22, 2005
People screw up. Sometimes they do immoral things because they think it will help them get something they want they can avoid or work around the consequences later. Story of the human condition.
Give moral advice. But learn to do it such a way that you're not simply consigning people to worthless screw-up-hood for the rest of their lives.
posted by weston at 6:00 PM on June 22, 2005
languagehat, I'm actually pretty glad I posted this. It exposes many people for the blowhards they are and others for the great persons they are. And if AskMe does devolve into a place where "advice" comes in the form of insults and abusive language, well, I suppose, nobody will be very surprised. mathowie's indicated that such behavior is A-OK.
Anyways, here's to darkness and rocketman. Good luck to both of you.
posted by nixerman at 6:01 PM on June 22, 2005
Anyways, here's to darkness and rocketman. Good luck to both of you.
posted by nixerman at 6:01 PM on June 22, 2005
Can I also say that some of the responses are actually very good?
WCityMike covered the ground very well.
posted by weston at 6:03 PM on June 22, 2005
WCityMike covered the ground very well.
posted by weston at 6:03 PM on June 22, 2005
Decani : "Or flame them there and then like a decent human being with a working spine would, or flag them if you can't summon the cojones to voice your distress at source instead of asking Matt to do it for you, or running off to the grey and 'calling out' and pissing and moaning like a whiny little bitch?"
What, "decent people" ignore the rules of the sites they're on?? Flaming belongs in the grey, not the green or the blue. Running off to the grey and "calling out and pissing and moaning like a whiny little bitch" can be incredibly accurately rephrased as "flaming them in the correct place, like a decent human being with a working spine".
dydecker : "You're just passing the job of dispensing advice to another person. Not that I think therapy is never warranted for serious problems...but simply intoning 'you need therapy' to answer to many (and even somewhat minor) relationship problems posed on Ask Metafilter is baffling."
Well, if (in your opinion) the person seeking advice is asking in the wrong place, pointing them to the right place isn't "passing the job", it's "helping them out". If somebody posts a question about how to fix their computer on the blue, and I say "That belongs in the green", I'm not "passing the job instead of answering the question", I'm directing them to a more helpful resource than what they're using. And while I agree that "ask a therapist" seems to get popped out way more than necessary, I'd say this is one of the cases where it seems very appropriate.
posted by Bugbread at 6:30 PM on June 22, 2005
What, "decent people" ignore the rules of the sites they're on?? Flaming belongs in the grey, not the green or the blue. Running off to the grey and "calling out and pissing and moaning like a whiny little bitch" can be incredibly accurately rephrased as "flaming them in the correct place, like a decent human being with a working spine".
dydecker : "You're just passing the job of dispensing advice to another person. Not that I think therapy is never warranted for serious problems...but simply intoning 'you need therapy' to answer to many (and even somewhat minor) relationship problems posed on Ask Metafilter is baffling."
Well, if (in your opinion) the person seeking advice is asking in the wrong place, pointing them to the right place isn't "passing the job", it's "helping them out". If somebody posts a question about how to fix their computer on the blue, and I say "That belongs in the green", I'm not "passing the job instead of answering the question", I'm directing them to a more helpful resource than what they're using. And while I agree that "ask a therapist" seems to get popped out way more than necessary, I'd say this is one of the cases where it seems very appropriate.
posted by Bugbread at 6:30 PM on June 22, 2005
So, if someone asks for advice on how to make a pipe bomb or cook meth, we'll all just have to hold our tongue?
Yes. Absolutely hold your tongue if you don't have a helpful answer to offer. What's hard to understand about that, jonmc and dreamsign?
AskMe is about information, including information about, say, growing pot, to cite one example that's been discussed here before. If you don't want to offer an answer to a question like, simply ignore the question and don't post. The alternative is allowing everyone's definition of what constitutes a morally objectionable topic to determine which questions get answered efficiently.
And that's utter horseshit.
(Please note I'm referring specifically to the two questions jonmc posed above, which, unlike darkness' dumbly phrased dump, can indeed be posed without immediate harm to others.)
posted by mediareport at 6:48 PM on June 22, 2005
Yes. Absolutely hold your tongue if you don't have a helpful answer to offer. What's hard to understand about that, jonmc and dreamsign?
AskMe is about information, including information about, say, growing pot, to cite one example that's been discussed here before. If you don't want to offer an answer to a question like, simply ignore the question and don't post. The alternative is allowing everyone's definition of what constitutes a morally objectionable topic to determine which questions get answered efficiently.
And that's utter horseshit.
(Please note I'm referring specifically to the two questions jonmc posed above, which, unlike darkness' dumbly phrased dump, can indeed be posed without immediate harm to others.)
posted by mediareport at 6:48 PM on June 22, 2005
This:
If you don't want to offer an answer to a question like, simply ignore the question and don't post.
should be:
If you don't want to offer an answer to a question like "What's the best way to get large buds from pot plants," simply ignore the question and don't post.
posted by mediareport at 6:50 PM on June 22, 2005
If you don't want to offer an answer to a question like, simply ignore the question and don't post.
should be:
If you don't want to offer an answer to a question like "What's the best way to get large buds from pot plants," simply ignore the question and don't post.
posted by mediareport at 6:50 PM on June 22, 2005
Yes. Absolutely hold your tongue if you don't have a helpful answer to offer. What's hard to understand about that, jonmc and dreamsign?
And what if the task that the user wants to complete is something utterly repulsive and dangerous? How far you want to stretch that? Should we give abduction advice? info on how to commit arson? There is such a thing as moral imperatives, mediareport.
posted by jonmc at 6:57 PM on June 22, 2005
And what if the task that the user wants to complete is something utterly repulsive and dangerous? How far you want to stretch that? Should we give abduction advice? info on how to commit arson? There is such a thing as moral imperatives, mediareport.
posted by jonmc at 6:57 PM on June 22, 2005
AskMe is about information, including information about, say, growing pot, to cite one example
I was generalizing along the lines of what jonmc (directly above) is suggesting: things that are likely to do harm, particularly to other people. Not ambiguous topics where I feel compelled to insert my own morals on drug use (note that I chastised one person for doing this with their own perspective on whether one "should" have children).
I'd readily separate cooking crystal meth from making a pipe bomb. One is likely to only do harm to the questioner (and I'd feel free to note any objective data to that end), the other stands a very good chance of harming someone else. You want to ask about growing pot, harvesting psilocybin, seeking an abortion, experimenting with a same-sex partner, etc, etc, etc, I'm not going to insert my own ideas of wrong and right. You want to know about making a pipe bomb, drugging a date unconscious, planning the perfect murder (unless for a book -- if I believe you), etc, etc, etc, then forget it. There's a difference between respecting the fact that another's sense of ethics is different than your own, and assisting another person to do harm to others. What's so hard to understand about that?
posted by dreamsign at 7:13 PM on June 22, 2005
I was generalizing along the lines of what jonmc (directly above) is suggesting: things that are likely to do harm, particularly to other people. Not ambiguous topics where I feel compelled to insert my own morals on drug use (note that I chastised one person for doing this with their own perspective on whether one "should" have children).
I'd readily separate cooking crystal meth from making a pipe bomb. One is likely to only do harm to the questioner (and I'd feel free to note any objective data to that end), the other stands a very good chance of harming someone else. You want to ask about growing pot, harvesting psilocybin, seeking an abortion, experimenting with a same-sex partner, etc, etc, etc, I'm not going to insert my own ideas of wrong and right. You want to know about making a pipe bomb, drugging a date unconscious, planning the perfect murder (unless for a book -- if I believe you), etc, etc, etc, then forget it. There's a difference between respecting the fact that another's sense of ethics is different than your own, and assisting another person to do harm to others. What's so hard to understand about that?
posted by dreamsign at 7:13 PM on June 22, 2005
The thread really overwhelmed me over the moment I first read it. I had to respond, really honestly. Something told me that Darkness wanted a certain amount of 'tough love' (even from people who don't know, let alone love, him).
But then, as soon as my first response was posted, I felt overwhelmed again. I felt sick and sad and embarrassed for even responding. I though I was being too harsh and that it was none of my business and too sordid a situation for me to get into. I almost asked Mathowie to delete my response.
Then I read WCityMike's response, and it made me feel a lot better. I think (hope) that good things are coming out of this thread, and even the harsh comments provide insight.
posted by lalalana at 7:19 PM on June 22, 2005
But then, as soon as my first response was posted, I felt overwhelmed again. I felt sick and sad and embarrassed for even responding. I though I was being too harsh and that it was none of my business and too sordid a situation for me to get into. I almost asked Mathowie to delete my response.
Then I read WCityMike's response, and it made me feel a lot better. I think (hope) that good things are coming out of this thread, and even the harsh comments provide insight.
posted by lalalana at 7:19 PM on June 22, 2005
Significant others who are experiencing difficulties in a relationship can be very motivated to go online and find hints on what might be troubling their SO.
maybe that's the plan.
posted by quonsar at 7:23 PM on June 22, 2005
maybe that's the plan.
posted by quonsar at 7:23 PM on June 22, 2005
whether I should shoot that dog or just strangle it?
there are other options.
posted by quonsar at 7:26 PM on June 22, 2005
there are other options.
posted by quonsar at 7:26 PM on June 22, 2005
Jesus H. Christ, quonsar. I kept looking and hoping for some small indication that you made that page yourself, like the "anusfilter" or the "yooha" pages, but I didn't find any.
Yeeeee-eeeeesh. That kid's a great argument for allowing 54th-trimester abortions.
Oh, and I think the best advice on how to make a pipe bomb or cook meth is to not do them at the same time.
posted by yhbc at 7:48 PM on June 22, 2005
Yeeeee-eeeeesh. That kid's a great argument for allowing 54th-trimester abortions.
Oh, and I think the best advice on how to make a pipe bomb or cook meth is to not do them at the same time.
posted by yhbc at 7:48 PM on June 22, 2005
Hello darkness, my old friend, I've come to talk with you again,
Because a vision softly creeping, Left its seeds while I was sleeping,
And the vision that was planted in my brain,
Still remains, within the sound of silence.
And in the naked light I saw, Ten thousand people, maybe more.
People talking without speaking, People hearing without listening...
posted by dreamsign at 7:50 PM on June 22, 2005
Because a vision softly creeping, Left its seeds while I was sleeping,
And the vision that was planted in my brain,
Still remains, within the sound of silence.
And in the naked light I saw, Ten thousand people, maybe more.
People talking without speaking, People hearing without listening...
posted by dreamsign at 7:50 PM on June 22, 2005
I've got to go with dreamsign: if you find something morally repugnant because you think it's just wrong and bad, shut your mouth. If you think somethings morally repugnant because it involves harming others, feel free to open your mouth again. Yeah, there's grey areas (harming someone emotionally? doing something that isn't necessarily harmful, but very well might be? harming your "soul"? Sure, grey areas), but at least it clears up the usual suspects that get brought out in these discussions (pot, shaving your pubes, and killing people).
posted by Bugbread at 8:08 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by Bugbread at 8:08 PM on June 22, 2005
I don't see anything wrong with that thread. If people were simply saying things like, "You're a fucking asshole," that would be a problem. But they aren't. They may tell the guy off, but they are also providing concrete advice about what he should actually do and what they feel his responsibilities are.
Darkness's question specifically solicits help in finding a moral answer to his dilemma. Any answer must address that.
And to be honest, the posters in the thread are actually much less harsh than I would have been.
posted by orange swan at 8:09 PM on June 22, 2005
Darkness's question specifically solicits help in finding a moral answer to his dilemma. Any answer must address that.
And to be honest, the posters in the thread are actually much less harsh than I would have been.
posted by orange swan at 8:09 PM on June 22, 2005
Something told me that Darkness wanted a certain amount of 'tough love' (even from people who don't know, let alone love, him).
Between this one and the bunny thread I'd wondered briefly if some of the AskMe posters were sociologists gathering data for a thesis.
posted by Tuwa at 8:36 PM on June 22, 2005
Between this one and the bunny thread I'd wondered briefly if some of the AskMe posters were sociologists gathering data for a thesis.
posted by Tuwa at 8:36 PM on June 22, 2005
Should we give abduction advice? info on how to commit arson? There is such a thing as moral imperatives, mediareport.
Yeah, thanks for the alert, dude. You can't ignore the fact that, despite your and dreamsign's objections, Matt didn't think this one qualified as noxious. Oops. Guess you judged wrong.
And it's worth noting that the thread in question isn't the first to spark absurdly moralistic and unhelpful noise (xmutex, whose answer above is telling, being a consistent source, most recently offering a charmingly helpful "Wow is he dumb" in response to this question). It's a problem, jonmc, and folks who've been here a while should get that by now.
There's a difference between respecting the fact that another's sense of ethics is different than your own, and assisting another person to do harm to others. What's so hard to understand about that?
Nothing. That's what we have flags and two moderators with delete power for, dreamsign. Are you really unable to see the danger to AskMe's usefulness in allowing everyone to decide for themselves which threads deserve to be harshly judged and which don't? The point is very simple: AskMe answers should be focused and relevant, without judgment. If you and jonmc see a thread that you think is dangerous to the community, flag it and move on. But the old guideline about imagining what MeFi would be like if lots of folks do what you do applies perfectly here; the awful example set by user moralizing in AskMe threads is far worse than any potentially serious harm posed by a question that violates basic social norms before Matt or Jessamyn gets to it.
Quit judging the poster in AskMe threads. Either supply a helpful answer, correct misinformation or shut up. What's hard about that again?
posted by mediareport at 8:39 PM on June 22, 2005
Yeah, thanks for the alert, dude. You can't ignore the fact that, despite your and dreamsign's objections, Matt didn't think this one qualified as noxious. Oops. Guess you judged wrong.
And it's worth noting that the thread in question isn't the first to spark absurdly moralistic and unhelpful noise (xmutex, whose answer above is telling, being a consistent source, most recently offering a charmingly helpful "Wow is he dumb" in response to this question). It's a problem, jonmc, and folks who've been here a while should get that by now.
There's a difference between respecting the fact that another's sense of ethics is different than your own, and assisting another person to do harm to others. What's so hard to understand about that?
Nothing. That's what we have flags and two moderators with delete power for, dreamsign. Are you really unable to see the danger to AskMe's usefulness in allowing everyone to decide for themselves which threads deserve to be harshly judged and which don't? The point is very simple: AskMe answers should be focused and relevant, without judgment. If you and jonmc see a thread that you think is dangerous to the community, flag it and move on. But the old guideline about imagining what MeFi would be like if lots of folks do what you do applies perfectly here; the awful example set by user moralizing in AskMe threads is far worse than any potentially serious harm posed by a question that violates basic social norms before Matt or Jessamyn gets to it.
Quit judging the poster in AskMe threads. Either supply a helpful answer, correct misinformation or shut up. What's hard about that again?
posted by mediareport at 8:39 PM on June 22, 2005
"supply a helpful answer"
I would say that the vast bulk of the responses in the subject AskMe did just that.
posted by mischief at 8:43 PM on June 22, 2005
I would say that the vast bulk of the responses in the subject AskMe did just that.
posted by mischief at 8:43 PM on June 22, 2005
My biggest problem is the double standard. Someone asks "how do I defraud my company" and gets told "you're a shitbag" and the second person gets dumped on and told AskMefi isn't a place for moralizing. Someone asks "how do I get out of this situation with my wife" and gets told "you're a shitbag" and it's all okay.
There should be a single standard.
posted by Justinian at 8:44 PM on June 22, 2005
There should be a single standard.
posted by Justinian at 8:44 PM on June 22, 2005
Depends what you consider helpful. In the case of someone who's behaving badly, it may in fact be helpful to be told you're behaving badly and doing another person harm. Fucking STOP IT.
posted by scody at 8:51 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by scody at 8:51 PM on June 22, 2005
that was aimed at mediareport, incidentally, even though it seems to be in response to Justinian.
posted by scody at 8:53 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by scody at 8:53 PM on June 22, 2005
I would say that the vast bulk of the responses in the subject AskMe did just that.
I would agree, mischief, and even think scody's posts in the thread were fine. jasper411 also did a particularly good job of offering moral advice without ridiculously harsh judgments. Two posts down, however, we get callmejay's delightful "What are you, nuts?" and "You guys both sound generally fucked up," adding a judgmental insult to the wife as well. That shit's way over the line, and should have been deleted as noise. At least delfuego had the decency to later admit that "Jesus, that's fucked up" was "a little harsh."
What bothered me in *this* thread was the general support I saw for aggressive judgmentalism in AskMe answers, and that's what I'm calling out now.
posted by mediareport at 9:00 PM on June 22, 2005
I would agree, mischief, and even think scody's posts in the thread were fine. jasper411 also did a particularly good job of offering moral advice without ridiculously harsh judgments. Two posts down, however, we get callmejay's delightful "What are you, nuts?" and "You guys both sound generally fucked up," adding a judgmental insult to the wife as well. That shit's way over the line, and should have been deleted as noise. At least delfuego had the decency to later admit that "Jesus, that's fucked up" was "a little harsh."
What bothered me in *this* thread was the general support I saw for aggressive judgmentalism in AskMe answers, and that's what I'm calling out now.
posted by mediareport at 9:00 PM on June 22, 2005
I am amazed that anyone would suggest darkness is "sociopathic" and "would benefit from counselling". He has made a mistake which seems to me to be very human and he was looking for advice. No need to reprogram the poor guy.
Thank god, there's someone sensible in this trainwreck after all. This is a normal human fucked-up situation. It probably occurs many times daily to otherwise lovely people. Let's look at what darkness wrote:
I knew that she wanted to have a kid when we got married, but it seemed like some far off bridge that could be crossed long in the future.
Naïve? Yes. Flat-out stupid? Certainly. But cruel? How do you know? It seems much more likely that, at the time, he convinced himself that he really did want to have kids, eventually, that he would grow to like the idea, etc. I doubt he was intentionally lying to his wife so much as he was lying to himself; the human capacity for self-delusion when in love is an amazing thing.
The point of AskMe is to answer questions. I was impressed, recently, when someone wanted visa advice for her "friend" in her teens who wanted to go to the US to be with a boy, that (mostly) none of the usual holier-than-thou MeFi cabal tried to tell her that this was a bad idea, though I'm sure many who read the question thought so. I would like to see the same practice applied elsewhere. Unless Matt is willing to set precise moral guidelines which dictate which questions are acceptable (and I think he's got more sense than that), someone is always going to be able to find something offensive in nearly any question, and other people are going to find even the most non-conventional questions completely acceptable.
posted by IshmaelGraves at 9:02 PM on June 22, 2005
Thank god, there's someone sensible in this trainwreck after all. This is a normal human fucked-up situation. It probably occurs many times daily to otherwise lovely people. Let's look at what darkness wrote:
I knew that she wanted to have a kid when we got married, but it seemed like some far off bridge that could be crossed long in the future.
Naïve? Yes. Flat-out stupid? Certainly. But cruel? How do you know? It seems much more likely that, at the time, he convinced himself that he really did want to have kids, eventually, that he would grow to like the idea, etc. I doubt he was intentionally lying to his wife so much as he was lying to himself; the human capacity for self-delusion when in love is an amazing thing.
The point of AskMe is to answer questions. I was impressed, recently, when someone wanted visa advice for her "friend" in her teens who wanted to go to the US to be with a boy, that (mostly) none of the usual holier-than-thou MeFi cabal tried to tell her that this was a bad idea, though I'm sure many who read the question thought so. I would like to see the same practice applied elsewhere. Unless Matt is willing to set precise moral guidelines which dictate which questions are acceptable (and I think he's got more sense than that), someone is always going to be able to find something offensive in nearly any question, and other people are going to find even the most non-conventional questions completely acceptable.
posted by IshmaelGraves at 9:02 PM on June 22, 2005
could someone point me in the direction of that askme thread about growing pot?
posted by puke & cry at 9:02 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by puke & cry at 9:02 PM on June 22, 2005
"There should be a single standard."
Welcome to the fucking world. Here's your cheese danish and be sure to fill out all the paperwork.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 9:19 PM on June 22, 2005
Welcome to the fucking world. Here's your cheese danish and be sure to fill out all the paperwork.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 9:19 PM on June 22, 2005
The point is very simple: AskMe answers should be focused and relevant, without judgment.
mediareport hits the nail on the head right there.
posted by y2karl at 9:42 PM on June 22, 2005
mediareport hits the nail on the head right there.
posted by y2karl at 9:42 PM on June 22, 2005
I'd readily separate cooking crystal meth from making a pipe bomb. One is likely to only do harm to the questioner (and I'd feel free to note any objective data to that end), the other stands a very good chance of harming someone else.
Just an FYI, cooking up meth turns white trash neighborhoods into Superfund sites. It really pollutes the surrounding areas, so as far as the harm done, I'd say your comparison is a poor one. /pedantfilter
posted by Rothko at 10:26 PM on June 22, 2005
Just an FYI, cooking up meth turns white trash neighborhoods into Superfund sites. It really pollutes the surrounding areas, so as far as the harm done, I'd say your comparison is a poor one. /pedantfilter
posted by Rothko at 10:26 PM on June 22, 2005
Metatalk: This is not NerfWorld, get a helmet, a cheese danish and be sure to fill out all the paperwork
posted by Rothko at 10:27 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by Rothko at 10:27 PM on June 22, 2005
I doubt he was intentionally lying to his wife so much as he was lying to himself; the human capacity for self-delusion when in love is an amazing thing.
Amen bro. Been there, done that, have the T-shirt and the video.
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 10:31 PM on June 22, 2005
Amen bro. Been there, done that, have the T-shirt and the video.
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 10:31 PM on June 22, 2005
[removed post at the request of the question asker]
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:44 PM on June 22, 2005
posted by mathowie (staff) at 10:44 PM on June 22, 2005
He made scody talk dirty; "Oh for fuck's sake,"
yeah, I noticed that, too -- isn't it hot?
posted by matteo at 12:53 AM on June 23, 2005
yeah, I noticed that, too -- isn't it hot?
posted by matteo at 12:53 AM on June 23, 2005
jonmc: And what if the task that the user wants to complete is something utterly repulsive and dangerous?
Repulsive to you? I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be suggesting that. Repulsive to all of us? Well you know we're never all going to agree on that.
The fact is that you can fulfil your moral imperatives by not offering any help and not answering the question. If we all feel that the question is outside the boundaries of 'decency' then the questioner will receive no advice. It's likely we already have working models for this. To give one example, I'm sure there are members who disapprove of pre-marital sex but they don't jump in with moral condemnation every time someone asks a question about their unmarried sexlife.
Is the real problem that you want everyone to know about your moral imperatives? Go on, try condemning them with your silence.
posted by biffa at 3:01 AM on June 23, 2005
Repulsive to you? I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be suggesting that. Repulsive to all of us? Well you know we're never all going to agree on that.
The fact is that you can fulfil your moral imperatives by not offering any help and not answering the question. If we all feel that the question is outside the boundaries of 'decency' then the questioner will receive no advice. It's likely we already have working models for this. To give one example, I'm sure there are members who disapprove of pre-marital sex but they don't jump in with moral condemnation every time someone asks a question about their unmarried sexlife.
Is the real problem that you want everyone to know about your moral imperatives? Go on, try condemning them with your silence.
posted by biffa at 3:01 AM on June 23, 2005
[removed post at the request of the question asker]
For fuck's sake. I hope he had a damn good reason.
posted by Kwantsar at 5:18 AM on June 23, 2005
For fuck's sake. I hope he had a damn good reason.
posted by Kwantsar at 5:18 AM on June 23, 2005
despite your and dreamsign's objections, Matt didn't think this one qualified as noxious. Oops. Guess you judged wrong.
I don't know where to begin with what's wrong with that statement.
I'm sure there are members who disapprove of pre-marital sex
Jesus on a trampoline! What several MeFites here are offering are near-end points on a continuum. Someone wants advice on growing pot or having pre-marital sex, we'll focus on the question. Someone wants advice on murdering their SO for insurance money, we'll focus on the asshole. The grey area in between is what we should be talking about, and no, we shouldn't have a "single standard" for pot smoking and murder.
mediareport: I agree with the examples you gave of unhelpfulness/rudeness, and as I said before, some of the comments, while possibly helpful, were tossed out more as insults (you need therapy, dude!).
I don't, however, agree with your "flag, move on" philosophy. There's a difference between forcing your moral perspective down someone else's throat and standing up and saying something when it seems like someone is going to get hurt. I certainly hope you don't apply that philosophy to the street. (hmm... that girl looks like she needs help... Oh well, none of my business. Ok, maybe I'll call the cops and just move on) If I ask an AskMe question tomorrow on how get away with murder, I fully expect you to do the humane thing and not the polite thing.
And as someone pointed out above, the question frames the answer. You ask a question partly about "what is the right thing to do" and that's the kind of answer you're going to get. But even if your question is purely factual (how do I poison a water supply?), expect that you may not get the answer you're looking for.
posted by dreamsign at 5:37 AM on June 23, 2005
I don't know where to begin with what's wrong with that statement.
I'm sure there are members who disapprove of pre-marital sex
Jesus on a trampoline! What several MeFites here are offering are near-end points on a continuum. Someone wants advice on growing pot or having pre-marital sex, we'll focus on the question. Someone wants advice on murdering their SO for insurance money, we'll focus on the asshole. The grey area in between is what we should be talking about, and no, we shouldn't have a "single standard" for pot smoking and murder.
mediareport: I agree with the examples you gave of unhelpfulness/rudeness, and as I said before, some of the comments, while possibly helpful, were tossed out more as insults (you need therapy, dude!).
I don't, however, agree with your "flag, move on" philosophy. There's a difference between forcing your moral perspective down someone else's throat and standing up and saying something when it seems like someone is going to get hurt. I certainly hope you don't apply that philosophy to the street. (hmm... that girl looks like she needs help... Oh well, none of my business. Ok, maybe I'll call the cops and just move on) If I ask an AskMe question tomorrow on how get away with murder, I fully expect you to do the humane thing and not the polite thing.
And as someone pointed out above, the question frames the answer. You ask a question partly about "what is the right thing to do" and that's the kind of answer you're going to get. But even if your question is purely factual (how do I poison a water supply?), expect that you may not get the answer you're looking for.
posted by dreamsign at 5:37 AM on June 23, 2005
You're still failing to address, dreamsign, the issue of differing standards of "harm to others" among folks answering questions in AskMe, and what that says about your general rule, "Let answerers decide for themselves when to be harshly judgmental in AskMe." Rothko's point about the harm done by home meth labs punctures your own example, so it might be good to start there.
The simpler and more respectful solution - again - is to AVOID HARSH JUDGMENTS AIMED AT THE PEOPLE ASKING QUESTIONS IN ASKME. This solution 1) avoids the unnecessary hurt inflicted by folks who can't resist insulting someone whose moral standards they disagree with, while 2) keeping a perfectly good mechanism in place for deleting atrociously inhumane and immoral questions.
Where the heck's the problem with that solution, dreamsign? It covers both of our major complaints perfectly well, while your solution only covers yours, and denies mine is an issue at all.
If I ask an AskMe question tomorrow on how get away with murder, I fully expect you to do the humane thing and not the polite thing.
Well, we've already had one about the best way to dispose of a body. Fascinating stuff, really.
posted by mediareport at 6:33 AM on June 23, 2005
The simpler and more respectful solution - again - is to AVOID HARSH JUDGMENTS AIMED AT THE PEOPLE ASKING QUESTIONS IN ASKME. This solution 1) avoids the unnecessary hurt inflicted by folks who can't resist insulting someone whose moral standards they disagree with, while 2) keeping a perfectly good mechanism in place for deleting atrociously inhumane and immoral questions.
Where the heck's the problem with that solution, dreamsign? It covers both of our major complaints perfectly well, while your solution only covers yours, and denies mine is an issue at all.
If I ask an AskMe question tomorrow on how get away with murder, I fully expect you to do the humane thing and not the polite thing.
Well, we've already had one about the best way to dispose of a body. Fascinating stuff, really.
posted by mediareport at 6:33 AM on June 23, 2005
[removed post at the request of the question asker]
Now that surprises me. I thought darkness was dealing with the responses in a mature way and seemed to be getting something out of the thread. Maybe he decided the wife might see it after all. Anyway, good luck to him.
posted by languagehat at 6:41 AM on June 23, 2005
Now that surprises me. I thought darkness was dealing with the responses in a mature way and seemed to be getting something out of the thread. Maybe he decided the wife might see it after all. Anyway, good luck to him.
posted by languagehat at 6:41 AM on June 23, 2005
I certainly hope you don't apply that philosophy to the street.
Oh, yes, my stars, do certainly hope that.
(Yeesh, how desperate can someone get in an argument?
posted by mediareport at 6:42 AM on June 23, 2005
Oh, yes, my stars, do certainly hope that.
(Yeesh, how desperate can someone get in an argument?
posted by mediareport at 6:42 AM on June 23, 2005
The problem, mediareport, comes when the best and most useful answer also involves making a potentially harsh judgement.
Let me give you an unlikely example: "My daughter won't clean her room, so I'm thinking of withholding food from her until she gets the lesson. Should I give her some kind of drink to keep some of her nutrition up, or is a total fast okay for a few days?"
Well, the only sane answer to this question is: If you are even thinking of starving your daughter as punishment, you need some very serious counseling, as your values sound dangerously messed up. Sorry if you wanted daughter-starving advice, but this is what you need to hear.
Or do I hand out daughter-starving advice? Because I can't face the idea of being (gosh) "judgemental?"
darkness, especially in his first post, came off as saying "I've deceived my wife about having kids pretty well so far but now I can't get the bitch off my back. What do you think about these ideas?"
The best answer is not -- hey! become a Big Brother! Or volunteer at a day care! But: It sounds like the problems in this situation run very deep, especially in you. You need counseling to straighten out those serious problems.
I'm not going to shrink away from saying that because it's (sniff sniff) "judgemental." That strikes me as just ridiculous.
posted by argybarg at 7:19 AM on June 23, 2005
Let me give you an unlikely example: "My daughter won't clean her room, so I'm thinking of withholding food from her until she gets the lesson. Should I give her some kind of drink to keep some of her nutrition up, or is a total fast okay for a few days?"
Well, the only sane answer to this question is: If you are even thinking of starving your daughter as punishment, you need some very serious counseling, as your values sound dangerously messed up. Sorry if you wanted daughter-starving advice, but this is what you need to hear.
Or do I hand out daughter-starving advice? Because I can't face the idea of being (gosh) "judgemental?"
darkness, especially in his first post, came off as saying "I've deceived my wife about having kids pretty well so far but now I can't get the bitch off my back. What do you think about these ideas?"
The best answer is not -- hey! become a Big Brother! Or volunteer at a day care! But: It sounds like the problems in this situation run very deep, especially in you. You need counseling to straighten out those serious problems.
I'm not going to shrink away from saying that because it's (sniff sniff) "judgemental." That strikes me as just ridiculous.
posted by argybarg at 7:19 AM on June 23, 2005
Just an FYI, cooking up meth turns white trash neighborhoods into Superfund sites. It really pollutes the surrounding areas, so as far as the harm done, I'd say your comparison is a poor one. /pedantfilter
From the link provided:
Such items included a pond which has a yellow tint but no discernable odor, two bulging polyethylene drums, some white pellets in an unmarked container spilled on the ground, and unidentified white powder found on the table and on the floor in the “cooking” area of the laboratory. A number of carbon dioxide canisters (similar to ones used in the restaurant industry) and LPG cylinders were found scattered over the property. Other materials which seem unrelated to the operations were also noticed: many cans of WD-40, paint material, degreaser, chemical indicator (phenolphtaleine), Fehlings reagent (sugar test) and sodium silicate.
Not to minimize the pollution thereof but that makes it as much a Superfund site as an abandoned gas station. As far as hazardous materials, the shelves in garden section of your local Home Depot has any meth lab lapped a couple of dozen times. As a consequence, so do many of your neighbor's garages. I've gone to garage sales and seen a big bottles of Orthene--!--and various other insecticides and fungicides dating back to the 70s on the shelves of said garages. Now, that's scary. When any Joe or Josephine in the country can buy Round Up over the counter by the gallon, scenes of guys running around meth lab busts in haz mat suits seems a bit silly. The stuff people buy and put on their lawns and gardens without a thought is far nastier than the contents of that list quoted. One probably walks by front lawns as toxic as that meth lab every day.
posted by y2karl at 7:32 AM on June 23, 2005
From the link provided:
Such items included a pond which has a yellow tint but no discernable odor, two bulging polyethylene drums, some white pellets in an unmarked container spilled on the ground, and unidentified white powder found on the table and on the floor in the “cooking” area of the laboratory. A number of carbon dioxide canisters (similar to ones used in the restaurant industry) and LPG cylinders were found scattered over the property. Other materials which seem unrelated to the operations were also noticed: many cans of WD-40, paint material, degreaser, chemical indicator (phenolphtaleine), Fehlings reagent (sugar test) and sodium silicate.
Not to minimize the pollution thereof but that makes it as much a Superfund site as an abandoned gas station. As far as hazardous materials, the shelves in garden section of your local Home Depot has any meth lab lapped a couple of dozen times. As a consequence, so do many of your neighbor's garages. I've gone to garage sales and seen a big bottles of Orthene--!--and various other insecticides and fungicides dating back to the 70s on the shelves of said garages. Now, that's scary. When any Joe or Josephine in the country can buy Round Up over the counter by the gallon, scenes of guys running around meth lab busts in haz mat suits seems a bit silly. The stuff people buy and put on their lawns and gardens without a thought is far nastier than the contents of that list quoted. One probably walks by front lawns as toxic as that meth lab every day.
posted by y2karl at 7:32 AM on June 23, 2005
I'm not going to shrink away from saying that because it's (sniff sniff) "judgemental." That strikes me as just ridiculous.
Try reading closely, argybarg. I've never said you should shrink away from saying things like "you need counseling." In fact, I've noted very clearly that most of the responses in the thread in question were fine, including those that offered moral advice. What's your point here?
Mine is discouraging the "simplistic moralizing" this MeTa thread initially called out, and attacking aggressive judgmentalism aimed at the poster, particularly when it comes in the form of direct insults. Those things are a blight on AskMe whenever they appear, and folks should be careful to not encourage them. How? By offering moral advice in a way that focuses on the behavior, not the person, for one example (which many folks in darkness' thread did, as I noted). By sitting on your hands when all you have to offer is "You guys both sound generally fucked up," for another. By recognizing that the freedom to ask difficult questions is important, and that the openness of AskMe is worth preserving, even if it means we all occassionally see a question we think is a little disgusting.
This is not hard.
posted by mediareport at 7:43 AM on June 23, 2005
Try reading closely, argybarg. I've never said you should shrink away from saying things like "you need counseling." In fact, I've noted very clearly that most of the responses in the thread in question were fine, including those that offered moral advice. What's your point here?
Mine is discouraging the "simplistic moralizing" this MeTa thread initially called out, and attacking aggressive judgmentalism aimed at the poster, particularly when it comes in the form of direct insults. Those things are a blight on AskMe whenever they appear, and folks should be careful to not encourage them. How? By offering moral advice in a way that focuses on the behavior, not the person, for one example (which many folks in darkness' thread did, as I noted). By sitting on your hands when all you have to offer is "You guys both sound generally fucked up," for another. By recognizing that the freedom to ask difficult questions is important, and that the openness of AskMe is worth preserving, even if it means we all occassionally see a question we think is a little disgusting.
This is not hard.
posted by mediareport at 7:43 AM on June 23, 2005
argybarg, darkness came off like that to you. You later admitted that you, along with several others, completely misjudged him and failed to see a scared guy that needed help. Stop being an arrogant fuck and learn a lesson from this affair. The next time somebody comes off as an unrepetent jerk to you--and let's face it, that's what this is about, you guys wanted darkness to come to you for weak, and needing forgiveness because, like most Christians, you're more interested in forgiving than actually helping--consider giving them the benefit of the doubt and putting your best foot forward. Hint: that's what being a moral person is really about, not viciously insulting those who've "sinned" in your eyes. And you can drop the bullshit "tough love" excuse. Calling somebody a "shitbag" isn't going to do anything for somebody except make them blow you off, at best.
Anyways, I'm sure things won't get better. The next time somebody posts a question like darkness' the same blowhards will show up to get their licks in. I'm just really glad there are people like rocketman and KevinSkomsvold around.
posted by nixerman at 8:10 AM on June 23, 2005
Anyways, I'm sure things won't get better. The next time somebody posts a question like darkness' the same blowhards will show up to get their licks in. I'm just really glad there are people like rocketman and KevinSkomsvold around.
posted by nixerman at 8:10 AM on June 23, 2005
All this blowhard's moralizing about blowhards moralizing is making me dizzy.
posted by mischief at 8:48 AM on June 23, 2005
posted by mischief at 8:48 AM on June 23, 2005
I certainly hope you don't apply that philosophy to the street.
Oh, yes, my stars, do certainly hope that.
(Yeesh, how desperate can someone get in an argument?
Mediareport, if you don't think that some misguided souls (who, after all, went on the internet looking for personal advice) won't act on people's suggestions -- and in so doing has as much potential for harm as standing by while someone does something harmful in person -- then you are sadly mistaken about the human potential for misguidedness.
Yeesh, my arguments are so weak, I think I'll begin with the ad hominem attacks.
Mine is discouraging the "simplistic moralizing"
SO IT'S SETTLED! Complex moralizing for everyone!
This is not hard.
It appears to be damn near impossible for some people.
posted by dreamsign at 9:46 AM on June 23, 2005
Oh, yes, my stars, do certainly hope that.
(Yeesh, how desperate can someone get in an argument?
Mediareport, if you don't think that some misguided souls (who, after all, went on the internet looking for personal advice) won't act on people's suggestions -- and in so doing has as much potential for harm as standing by while someone does something harmful in person -- then you are sadly mistaken about the human potential for misguidedness.
Yeesh, my arguments are so weak, I think I'll begin with the ad hominem attacks.
Mine is discouraging the "simplistic moralizing"
SO IT'S SETTLED! Complex moralizing for everyone!
This is not hard.
It appears to be damn near impossible for some people.
posted by dreamsign at 9:46 AM on June 23, 2005
JerryFilter
or
MetaSpringer
/not sure who the moralising freak show host is but Springer will do due to his fame
posted by asok at 10:08 AM on June 23, 2005
or
MetaSpringer
/not sure who the moralising freak show host is but Springer will do due to his fame
posted by asok at 10:08 AM on June 23, 2005
I missed a bunch of the thread before it was deleted; out of curiosity, did darkness ever respond or clarify his question/stance?
posted by Specklet at 10:22 AM on June 23, 2005
posted by Specklet at 10:22 AM on June 23, 2005
darkness responded. Clarified some issues, made others more murky. The usual AskMe soap opera.
posted by mischief at 10:31 AM on June 23, 2005
posted by mischief at 10:31 AM on June 23, 2005
As I recall, darkness said that he and his wife had already discussed the issue (before he posted the AskMe?) and that some of his more outrageous options were actually recommendations from friends. I don't remember much else.
One of these days, someone is going to capture a thread like that and respost it in MeTalk in its entirety.
posted by mischief at 11:02 AM on June 23, 2005
One of these days, someone is going to capture a thread like that and respost it in MeTalk in its entirety.
posted by mischief at 11:02 AM on June 23, 2005
You later admitted that you, along with several others, completely misjudged him and failed to see a scared guy that needed help.
Bullshit. What he posted the first time was very clear and very appaling. I have no qualms about having responded the way I did, given the information he presented. This is a guy who said he'd lied to his wife in order to steal her from another man, and now, when his lies are piling up, is considering lying again to dodge the pain. Given that scenario, my advice is always liable to be: "Stop lying and change your way of dealing with things."
The fact that he came back with a different set of angles later is, I suppose, heartening. But it doesn't mean I exercised poor judgement the first time.
Whether you, some internet guy who knows me not at all, deem me an "arrogant fuck" has no effect on my life, although the hypocrisy in this context is amusing. But calling me a Christian ... them's fightin words.
posted by argybarg at 11:27 AM on June 23, 2005
Bullshit. What he posted the first time was very clear and very appaling. I have no qualms about having responded the way I did, given the information he presented. This is a guy who said he'd lied to his wife in order to steal her from another man, and now, when his lies are piling up, is considering lying again to dodge the pain. Given that scenario, my advice is always liable to be: "Stop lying and change your way of dealing with things."
The fact that he came back with a different set of angles later is, I suppose, heartening. But it doesn't mean I exercised poor judgement the first time.
Whether you, some internet guy who knows me not at all, deem me an "arrogant fuck" has no effect on my life, although the hypocrisy in this context is amusing. But calling me a Christian ... them's fightin words.
posted by argybarg at 11:27 AM on June 23, 2005
This is a guy who said he'd lied to his wife in order to steal her from another man,
Stop being an arrogant fuck and learn a lesson from this affair.
May I ask again, what was the askme question?, to the answers provided.
posted by thomcatspike at 12:14 PM on June 23, 2005
What he posted the first time was very clear and very appaling.
And I thought it was written in a way that indicated he was clearly feeling terrible about himself, feeling helpless and worthless and trapped. He was desperate for a new answer because he realized all the existing answers were shitty.
I guess we all read into vagueness differently.
posted by Gucky at 1:11 PM on June 23, 2005
And I thought it was written in a way that indicated he was clearly feeling terrible about himself, feeling helpless and worthless and trapped. He was desperate for a new answer because he realized all the existing answers were shitty.
I guess we all read into vagueness differently.
posted by Gucky at 1:11 PM on June 23, 2005
thomcatspike: the original AskMe post was a long rambling affair, including some questionable options, regarding not wanting a child while the wife does. As I recall, it didn't really contain an actual question.
posted by mischief at 2:22 PM on June 23, 2005
posted by mischief at 2:22 PM on June 23, 2005
One of these days, someone is going to capture a thread like that and respost it in MeTalk in its entirety.
I've been diligently waiting for a meepzorp mirror of the thread in question.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:28 PM on June 23, 2005
I've been diligently waiting for a meepzorp mirror of the thread in question.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 4:28 PM on June 23, 2005
Yeesh, my arguments are so weak, I think I'll begin with the ad hominem attacks.
That's a hoot coming from someone who just completely ignored the argument in the post above the one you cited. Here it is again:
You're still failing to address, dreamsign, the issue of differing standards of "harm to others" among folks answering questions in AskMe, and what that says about your general rule, "Let answerers decide for themselves when to be harshly judgmental in AskMe." Rothko's point about the harm done by home meth labs punctures your own example, so it might be good to start there.
The simpler and more respectful solution - again - is to AVOID HARSH JUDGMENTS AIMED AT THE PEOPLE ASKING QUESTIONS IN ASKME. This solution 1) avoids the unnecessary hurt inflicted by folks who can't resist insulting someone whose moral standards they disagree with, while 2) keeping a perfectly good mechanism in place for deleting atrociously inhumane and immoral questions.
Where the heck's the problem with that solution, dreamsign? It covers both of our major complaints perfectly well, while your solution only covers yours, and denies mine is an issue at all.
Well, dreamsign? If my argument above is so weak, surely you'll be able to counter it. I'm all eyes.
posted by mediareport at 6:48 PM on June 23, 2005
That's a hoot coming from someone who just completely ignored the argument in the post above the one you cited. Here it is again:
You're still failing to address, dreamsign, the issue of differing standards of "harm to others" among folks answering questions in AskMe, and what that says about your general rule, "Let answerers decide for themselves when to be harshly judgmental in AskMe." Rothko's point about the harm done by home meth labs punctures your own example, so it might be good to start there.
The simpler and more respectful solution - again - is to AVOID HARSH JUDGMENTS AIMED AT THE PEOPLE ASKING QUESTIONS IN ASKME. This solution 1) avoids the unnecessary hurt inflicted by folks who can't resist insulting someone whose moral standards they disagree with, while 2) keeping a perfectly good mechanism in place for deleting atrociously inhumane and immoral questions.
Where the heck's the problem with that solution, dreamsign? It covers both of our major complaints perfectly well, while your solution only covers yours, and denies mine is an issue at all.
Well, dreamsign? If my argument above is so weak, surely you'll be able to counter it. I'm all eyes.
posted by mediareport at 6:48 PM on June 23, 2005
May I ask again, what was the askme question?
"My wife wants, more than anything, to have a baby. I want, more than anything, not to. What should I do?
I don't have any good reason not to have a kid. We both have stable upper-middle class jobs, our insurance is excellent, there is room in the house and her parents would love to become grandparents and are willing to help out.
She is in good health, but is 35 years old, so if she is ever going to have a kid, now would be the time. It's also important to note that she is chinese, which places some cultural importance on having a child. I am [in my mid-20's] I probably have plenty of productive years left in me, but should probably at least quit smoking before having a kid.
My options, as I see them, are thus:
1) Stop to "taking part." It is unlikely that this would be sucessful as it's hard for a 26 year old male to refuse sex.
2) Underhanded secret sterilization. Perhaps getting a vasectomy without telling her (yeah honey, I've always had that scar), or just take really long hot showers, wear tight underwear and ride my bike as much as possible.
3) Divorce. The ultimate trump card. I really don't want to do this, but could. This would absolutely devastate her and would be a really awful thing to do.
4) Force the issue and let her decide on one of the above options. Basically, tell her that I won't have a kid. period. And let her decide where to go from there.
I knew that she wanted to have a kid when we got married, but it seemed like some far off bridge that could be crossed long in the future. She also agreed to leave her then current husband for me partially based on my acceptance of having a child. If I did leave her, it would probably be the worst thing anyone could ever do to her. She would be unlikely to find another suitable father before her chances of sucessfully having a child were pretty slim.
There is one last option. She has mentioned that if I wanted to leave once she had the kid, it would be ok. I *really* don't want to do this, as I myself was raised by a single mother and it isn't something I'd like to do to someone else.
Why don't I wan't to have a kid? Well, I like my freedom right now, and whenever it comes up I get scared shitless of loosing it. I like being able to decide on friday at 5:30pm that we should go to [US vacation spot] for the weekend. I've never been to [European city] and would like to spend some time there [deleted information about European city]. As I previously said, I have no good reason to not have a kid other than my own fear, uncertainty and doubt.
Perhaps some fathers had a similar experience and could tell it's all OK and my feelings will change?"
posted by mlis at 7:08 PM on June 23, 2005
"My wife wants, more than anything, to have a baby. I want, more than anything, not to. What should I do?
I don't have any good reason not to have a kid. We both have stable upper-middle class jobs, our insurance is excellent, there is room in the house and her parents would love to become grandparents and are willing to help out.
She is in good health, but is 35 years old, so if she is ever going to have a kid, now would be the time. It's also important to note that she is chinese, which places some cultural importance on having a child. I am [in my mid-20's] I probably have plenty of productive years left in me, but should probably at least quit smoking before having a kid.
My options, as I see them, are thus:
1) Stop to "taking part." It is unlikely that this would be sucessful as it's hard for a 26 year old male to refuse sex.
2) Underhanded secret sterilization. Perhaps getting a vasectomy without telling her (yeah honey, I've always had that scar), or just take really long hot showers, wear tight underwear and ride my bike as much as possible.
3) Divorce. The ultimate trump card. I really don't want to do this, but could. This would absolutely devastate her and would be a really awful thing to do.
4) Force the issue and let her decide on one of the above options. Basically, tell her that I won't have a kid. period. And let her decide where to go from there.
I knew that she wanted to have a kid when we got married, but it seemed like some far off bridge that could be crossed long in the future. She also agreed to leave her then current husband for me partially based on my acceptance of having a child. If I did leave her, it would probably be the worst thing anyone could ever do to her. She would be unlikely to find another suitable father before her chances of sucessfully having a child were pretty slim.
There is one last option. She has mentioned that if I wanted to leave once she had the kid, it would be ok. I *really* don't want to do this, as I myself was raised by a single mother and it isn't something I'd like to do to someone else.
Why don't I wan't to have a kid? Well, I like my freedom right now, and whenever it comes up I get scared shitless of loosing it. I like being able to decide on friday at 5:30pm that we should go to [US vacation spot] for the weekend. I've never been to [European city] and would like to spend some time there [deleted information about European city]. As I previously said, I have no good reason to not have a kid other than my own fear, uncertainty and doubt.
Perhaps some fathers had a similar experience and could tell it's all OK and my feelings will change?"
posted by mlis at 7:08 PM on June 23, 2005
argybarg : "What he posted the first time was very clear and very appaling."
Not so clear to me.
posted by Bugbread at 8:52 PM on June 23, 2005
Not so clear to me.
posted by Bugbread at 8:52 PM on June 23, 2005
Damn you, bugbread, and your complex moralizing!
posted by mediareport at 9:33 PM on June 23, 2005
posted by mediareport at 9:33 PM on June 23, 2005
the issue of differing standards of "harm to others"
Honestly, mediareport, didn't see this one. No lie.
But given how consistently you've failed to answer my criticisms, you must be smokin those hoots. Your solution is to ignore potential trouble because it's "none of our business". Well, someone just walked in and made it our business by posting here. The only one doing any "simple moralizing" here is YOU. (come on kids, you know the drill: just say no!)
posted by dreamsign at 10:16 PM on June 23, 2005
Honestly, mediareport, didn't see this one. No lie.
But given how consistently you've failed to answer my criticisms, you must be smokin those hoots. Your solution is to ignore potential trouble because it's "none of our business". Well, someone just walked in and made it our business by posting here. The only one doing any "simple moralizing" here is YOU. (come on kids, you know the drill: just say no!)
posted by dreamsign at 10:16 PM on June 23, 2005
didn't see this one. No lie.
Well, that sure doesn't speak well of your ability to read closely, does it? Perhaps you also missed the post where I said that offering moral advice in AskMe is fine, and cited specific examples where I feel it was done without simplistic judgmental bullshit. Look for it; it's up there.
You also still haven't addressed the argument, dreamsign. Come on. You don't like my solution, ok. What's your solution to the issue of differing standards of "harm to others"? Here it is a third time:
The simpler and more respectful solution - again - is to AVOID HARSH JUDGMENTS AIMED AT THE PEOPLE ASKING QUESTIONS IN ASKME. This solution 1) avoids the unnecessary hurt inflicted by folks who can't resist insulting someone whose moral standards they disagree with, while 2) keeping a perfectly good mechanism in place for deleting atrociously inhumane and immoral questions.
Where the heck's the problem with that solution, dreamsign? It covers both of our major complaints perfectly well, while your solution only covers yours, and denies mine is an issue at all.
I'm still waiting...
posted by mediareport at 11:34 PM on June 23, 2005
Well, that sure doesn't speak well of your ability to read closely, does it? Perhaps you also missed the post where I said that offering moral advice in AskMe is fine, and cited specific examples where I feel it was done without simplistic judgmental bullshit. Look for it; it's up there.
You also still haven't addressed the argument, dreamsign. Come on. You don't like my solution, ok. What's your solution to the issue of differing standards of "harm to others"? Here it is a third time:
The simpler and more respectful solution - again - is to AVOID HARSH JUDGMENTS AIMED AT THE PEOPLE ASKING QUESTIONS IN ASKME. This solution 1) avoids the unnecessary hurt inflicted by folks who can't resist insulting someone whose moral standards they disagree with, while 2) keeping a perfectly good mechanism in place for deleting atrociously inhumane and immoral questions.
Where the heck's the problem with that solution, dreamsign? It covers both of our major complaints perfectly well, while your solution only covers yours, and denies mine is an issue at all.
I'm still waiting...
posted by mediareport at 11:34 PM on June 23, 2005
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by nixerman at 4:13 PM on June 22, 2005