Consistency October 28, 2013 4:43 PM   Subscribe

there's so much not-answering-the-question in this askme it makes my head spin.

this isn't an issue of answering the question he's really trying to answer. let me quote from the OP

I'm not asking for advice on how to find a partner - that's a separate question. What I'm asking here is this: given that (a) my past is out of my control, and (b) there's at least a possibility that the future will look the same, what do I do with the pain that these thoughts cause me to feel?

i recently had two comments deleted from a post because the OP explicitly said she didn't want "tough love." if you were to be consistent, it seems you should be deleting many of the comments in the askme i linked to because they also disregard the OP and give input he explicitly doesn't want.

if consistency isn't considered to be something desirable ... i'd be interested to hear people's opinions about why.
posted by cupcake1337 to Feature Requests at 4:43 PM (194 comments total) 2 users marked this as a favorite

Comparing your deleted answers with an entirely different question is a short path to pain and misunderstanding. Do yourself a favor and let it go.

Flag the answers you think are flaggable, and move on.
posted by carsonb at 4:58 PM on October 28, 2013 [13 favorites]


"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines."

ralph waldo emerson
posted by pyramid termite at 4:58 PM on October 28, 2013 [14 favorites]


I see almost all of them suggesting therapy, which is answering the OP's question. I also see some of them suggesting that he reevaluate the premise of his question, the background information, because it may not be - for lack of a better word - valid. showbiz_liz says it best in her answer
The entire premise of your question is based on a faulty assumption: that you can never get better
I guess I'm reading the majority of the answers differently than you. I don't see the bulk of them failing to answer the question at all.

Either way though:

if you were to be consistent

the mods have said on repeated occasions that things are addressed mostly on a case-by-case basis. Trying to compare your previous experience to this one isn't the best way to address the issue you see.

Flag it and move on.
posted by ish__ at 5:00 PM on October 28, 2013 [4 favorites]


I felt bad for the asker of that question. I totally understood where the tough love answers were coming from, but he didn't seem to get what he wanted out of the question. Also, you know, you can do everything right and still not meet a compatible life partner and spend a long time, perhaps your entire life, alone. It's fair to want to know how to cope with that without getting a ton of WELL HERE'S WHAT YOU SHOULD CHANGE. Even if you're open enough to admit some difficult things about which women you feel attracted to.
posted by prefpara at 5:02 PM on October 28, 2013 [11 favorites]


i recently had two comments deleted from a post because the OP explicitly said she didn't want "tough love." if you were to be consistent, it seems you should be deleting many of the comments in the askme i linked to because they also disregard the OP and give input he explicitly doesn't want.

You seem confused. There is a different between tough love answers and answers that gently challenge some of the assumptions of the asker. If, as per usual, you have questions about your own deleted comments, I will be happy to reproduce them here and explain exactly what was wrong with them. We did actually delete a few tough love answers from that thread but the ones that are left seemed okay to the read of the mods who were working before me and to me.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 5:07 PM on October 28, 2013 [9 favorites]


it seems you should be deleting many of the comments in the askme i linked to because they also disregard the OP and give input he explicitly doesn't want.

Like what for instance?
posted by John Cohen at 5:13 PM on October 28, 2013


MeTa had this same conversation with cupcake1337 just in July, including cupcake saying "rules inconsistently enforced" is her/his "main gripe," along with his/her now-standard accusation that "mods make very hypocritical decisions, then call it nuance." As she has again here, Jessamyn offered to reproduce the specific content of cupcake's deleted AskMe comments and discuss those directly, instead of in this kind of roundabout way. As I recall, cupcake didn't respond to that offer, leaving the mods to describe them rather than quote them:

Your comment was a months-old reply to a thread that basically stated the OP was the problem in the situation she had asked a question about. It was not only not answering the question it was insulting and jerkish.

cupcake1337, would you mind if the mods quoted that comment here for us to see for ourselves if you have a decent case that you've been treated unfairly? Would you mind if the mods reproduced all of your deleted AskMe comments for the same reason?

Anything else would at this point be mere distraction. You've been flogging this horse for months and months now. Let's see the comments you've had deleted from AskMe. All we need is for you to say, "Sure, mods, go ahead and post them."
posted by mediareport at 5:36 PM on October 28, 2013 [23 favorites]


Did you flag the answers you found objectionable?
posted by palomar at 5:36 PM on October 28, 2013 [2 favorites]


if consistency isn't considered to be something desirable ... i'd be interested to hear people's opinions about why.

Because "consistency" would make this a place with rules instead of a place with moderators. Rules are good for baseball. Moderators are good for communities.
posted by escabeche at 5:40 PM on October 28, 2013 [14 favorites]


cupcake1337, I read a lot of your answers in askme, including many before they get deleted, and here's a little "tough love" you could consider taking on board:

Your answers are often mean. They are frequently brusque, accusatory, and disparaging towards the person asking the question. They usually adhere to a weird kind of social-darwinism, favour confrontational and all-or-nothing approaches, and seem to disregard either the tone of the question, or empathy towards the asker.

If you are concerned that your answers are being deleted, I suggest wording them more gently, delivering them with less authority as the absolute solution, and being more cognisant that the people asking questions, especially human relationship questions, are often feeling judged, sad, just generally tender emotionally speaking, and alter your tone accordingly.

That's my take.
posted by smoke at 5:43 PM on October 28, 2013 [69 favorites]


I should modify the above - I think you can and do give helpful answers, cupcake1337, frequently. However, I have personally noted the tendency described above, particularly in human relationship questions - and if I, a disinterested observer, can see it, I guarantee you the feeling would be tenfold in whoever has asked the question.
posted by smoke at 5:51 PM on October 28, 2013 [3 favorites]


First, they came for cupcake1335 and I said nothing....
posted by y2karl at 6:00 PM on October 28, 2013 [4 favorites]


I swear, If someone ever works out a way to turn passive aggression into useable power, Metafilter could drive the world into the next millennium. Or perhaps I just "seem confused".
posted by Decani at 6:07 PM on October 28, 2013 [4 favorites]




the mod's are free to put up any comment of mine they deleted, after all, i already put it on the internet once. though, i would appreciate it if they were going to do that, that they reproduce the comment in whole.
posted by cupcake1337 at 6:12 PM on October 28, 2013 [1 favorite]


the mod's are free to put up any comment of mine they deleted, after all, i already put it on the internet once. though, i would appreciate it if they were going to do that, that they reproduce the comment in whole.

This is an odd phrasing. Jessamyn responded to you directly, to say that they could post your deleted comments and walk through the problem, if you wanted to. You're referring to "the mod's [sic]" and "they" as if one wasn't already making the offer directly to you, and rather than answer that question you're speaking in generalities. Why not just say "Jessamyn, I would appreciate it if you did repost my deleted comments for discussion" or something similar? Why the roundabout method?
posted by davejay at 6:21 PM on October 28, 2013 [9 favorites]


Or perhaps I just "seem confused".

Have you considered therapy?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:23 PM on October 28, 2013 [5 favorites]


if consistency isn't considered to be something desirable ... i'd be interested to hear people's opinions about why.

Stuff is different all around!
posted by Greg Nog at 6:25 PM on October 28, 2013 [1 favorite]


I swear, If someone ever works out a way to turn passive aggression into useable power, Metafilter could drive the world into the next millennium. Or perhaps I just "seem confused".

You're just going to softball it in like that?
posted by griphus at 6:28 PM on October 28, 2013 [19 favorites]


This is obviously a mismatch of wits here, and not really a good thing to keep open. cupcake1337, I hope you can eventually grok that it's ok if the moderation is not consistent. It's a big messy world, and absolute rigor on a website is cold comfort anyway.
posted by planetesimal at 6:29 PM on October 28, 2013 [3 favorites]


Fine. Here are the two comments we've deleted from you this week. From the same thread. You later made a comment we didn't delete.
___
regarding staying friends: keep in mind that the regular "friend" relationship you've been having with him is actually a a relationship where he courts you and you don't have to do anything extra. i'd bet this is a "boyfriend without benefits" situation. i think continuing to be "friends" is selfish because, in this context, being "friends" is most likely not the kind of relationship two friends usually have.

i think you should tell him discretely that you're not interested, and that you won't be seeing him or his SO for at least a year. continuing to be friends is like having sex with someone even though they are blackout drunk: they hypothetically should be able to judge for themselves, but because of the mental state they are in the responsibility is on you to not hurt them.

[link]
___

This is not just "no tough love" this is saying what the OP is doing is as bad as raping someone. Not okay. You then made this comment later. You basically outlined the OPs course of action, without specifically pointing out that this is what they did, and called them selfish.
___

Is it stubborn, selfish, or disrespectful to their relationship if I want to remain friends with them?

it's not selfish to want that, but it would be selfish if you went along and pretended nothing happened, yet still try to be "friends" with him, because he wasn't treating you like a friend, he was treating you like someone he wanted to sleep with.

[link]
___

First comment was absolutely inappropriate which is what we told you when you emailed us asking about it. Second comment still seemed like a callout of the OP, was flagged, was removed.

We removed a few comments from the thread today, as I said. You went on a flagging tear in that thread which I emailed you about and asked you to stop right before you opened this MeTa thread. As we've said in MeTa many times, flagging over a dozen comments in a single thread does not help us do our job. Feel free to flag a few, email us about it or open a MeTa thread about it if you have concerns that are not being addressed.

As I said upthread, you've been here for a decent amount of time and yet there are some basic aspects to how the site works that you don't seem to understand. Which is fine, but you have to sort of work with us on them not just make up your own model of how the site should work. We've explained over email and here why your comments were deleted. If you'd like feedback from the community about that, you are welcome to get it here.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:29 PM on October 28, 2013 [16 favorites]


[the links just go to location in the thread, in case that helps, I know they don't go anywhere]
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:34 PM on October 28, 2013


what is the difference between the italicized and not italicized part in the reposted comments? Was that another comment that was also deleted?
posted by sweetkid at 6:35 PM on October 28, 2013


I am comfortable with the site moderators drawing a fuzzy judgement-call line that has "you know, you may change and get better" on one side and "being friends without putting out is like rape" on the other side of that line.
posted by rmd1023 at 6:37 PM on October 28, 2013 [18 favorites]


consistency isn't considered to be something desirable ... i'd be interested to hear people's opinions about why

Perfect consistency of the kind that's rhetorically called for sometimes when someone's comment has just recently been deleted is (a) impossible, (b) unlikely to improve the quality of discussion that goes on here and (c) likely to involve truly draconian moderation requiring ten times the number of mods than actually exist.
posted by Ipsifendus at 6:38 PM on October 28, 2013


cupcake1337, you seem to recognize that it can be valuable to give answers to human relations questions that might be technically slightly outside of what the OP asked for.

Here, you said: "to not answer your question: i suggest you ask him on a date." You went on to answer the question. But you saw the point of answering something a bit different from what the OP asked, since this could still help the OP with her situation.

Here, the OP said "I have no intention of leaving her," and you said: "then you've already [pre]-disqualified a lot of good advice." That was a strong hint that you'd recommend breaking up, though the OP had ruled this out. You hinted at this again by saying: "at the end of the day, she's ok with the status quo and you're not getting your needs met."

Those are just a couple examples that jumped out at me from skimming the last few of your 500+ AskMe answers.

My point isn't to say whether any of those comments were wrong or right. I'm just saying, you've answered a bunch of human relations questions, and you seem to have noticed that it's not always as simple as: the OP asked a question, so every comment either is or isn't an answer, and the comments that aren't a direct answer should be deleted. So do we really need this series of call-outs of AskMe threads where some of the comments might not be direct answers in the strictest sense? Flag the comments you think are derails; they might or might not get deleted; and if some comments stay up that aren't within the precise boundaries the OP attempted to set up in posting a complex humans relations question, well ... that's just what complex human relations questions are like.
posted by John Cohen at 6:40 PM on October 28, 2013 [8 favorites]


I mean if we're doing an Open Forum sort of thing on those deleted comments, cupcake1337 can I just hear the logic behind that first deleted comment? I mean you are, on the regular, questioning why certain people answered a question in a certain manner which you feel is both discourteous to the asker and not answering the question. Can you explain how that deleted comment is not both of these things?
posted by griphus at 6:41 PM on October 28, 2013 [1 favorite]


what is the difference between the italicized and not italicized part in the reposted comments?

Ugh, just an error on my part. Now fixed.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:42 PM on October 28, 2013



what is the difference between the italicized and not italicized part in the reposted comments?

Ugh, just an error on my part. Now fixed.

Oh makes sense. So it's just one terribly unhelpful comment.
posted by sweetkid at 6:53 PM on October 28, 2013 [5 favorites]


in that askme, the OP asked

Is it stubborn, selfish, or disrespectful to their relationship if I want to remain friends with them?

so, i was answering that question. as for discourteous, that's more a matter of opinion, but if you read my comment carefully, i don't judge her as a person, i judge actions she may or may not take.
posted by cupcake1337 at 6:58 PM on October 28, 2013


You also equated her remaining friends with this couple to raping someone who's blackout drunk. Are you seriously calling that "discourteous"?
posted by palomar at 7:01 PM on October 28, 2013 [29 favorites]


my exact words were that it "is like" raping someone who's balckout drunk. "is like" is not exactly the same in every way as "exactly the same in every way."

so, i wouldn't say i equated it, i'd say i said "they are similar in at least one important way" and that important way is that in both situations a person's ability to give consent (have sex/just be friends) is impaired in such a way that they can't credibly give consent.
posted by cupcake1337 at 7:09 PM on October 28, 2013


ick. no they are not the same in any way. A person can certainly have consent in being friends or not. The two people in that question both had agency - the one revealing the feelings and the one deciding to still be friends or not post-reveal of feelings.
posted by sweetkid at 7:12 PM on October 28, 2013 [3 favorites]


It's about as appropriate to say that this potential discourtesy "is like" raping somebody as it is to say that deleting some of your comments "is like" rounding people up and killing them (and I hope y2karl was trying to mock you there, and not seriously comparing comment deletion to Nazi policy). Simile and metaphor require a sense of proportion.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 7:14 PM on October 28, 2013 [11 favorites]


I remember now why I stopped engaging with cupcake1337 whenever I see him crapping all over a thread: specious and disingenuous arguments, application of standards of behavior that apply to everyone but him, and a level of tone-deafness that would be astounding if I didn't believe it's actually some form of performance art.
posted by palomar at 7:15 PM on October 28, 2013 [24 favorites]


ick. my argument was that his long held, secret infatuation made him (at least temporarily) not able to judge things correctly. aren't we always faulting the Nice Guys(TM) who remain friends with women when they really have some romantic intentions? i'm saying he's likely (and temporarily) like that.
posted by cupcake1337 at 7:15 PM on October 28, 2013


Also this part:

keep in mind that the regular "friend" relationship you've been having with him is actually a a relationship where he courts you and you don't have to do anything extra. i'd bet this is a "boyfriend without benefits" situation. i think continuing to be "friends" is selfish because, in this context, being "friends" is most likely not the kind of relationship two friends usually have.

makes it seem like you didn't even read the question -- she said nothing had happened between them and he's married.
posted by sweetkid at 7:16 PM on October 28, 2013 [8 favorites]


> my argument was that his long held, secret infatuation made him (at least temporarily) not able to judge things correctly. aren't we always faulting the Nice Guys(TM) who remain friends with women when they really have some romantic intentions? i'm saying he's likely (and temporarily) like that.

But that's all your own projection and baggage, and it needn't be put forth in a forum where people are looking for help.
posted by planetesimal at 7:21 PM on October 28, 2013 [19 favorites]


In this case, too, it seemed like the guy just told the OP to get it off his chest. He doesn't want to leave his wife or date this other woman or anything. It's not a Nice Guy thing to do, it's actually kind of selfish on his part.
posted by sweetkid at 7:25 PM on October 28, 2013 [1 favorite]


my exact words were that it "is like" raping someone who's balckout drunk. "is like" is not exactly the same in every way as "exactly the same in every way."

my god, bill clinton's posting to metafilter
posted by pyramid termite at 7:28 PM on October 28, 2013 [32 favorites]


(and I hope y2karl was trying to mock you there, and not seriously comparing comment deletion to Nazi policy)

Should have stuck with I have a pea under my deleted heartbreaking comment of staggering genius mattress.
posted by y2karl at 7:34 PM on October 28, 2013 [9 favorites]


Q: I have social anxiety and body image issues and I may possibly never be in love, I don't want advice on getting a partner but how do I deal with this?
A: Maybe your issues are connected to your current feelings, maybe work on them and also there's still time to meet someone.

Vs.
Q: How do I handle this, no tough love.
A: It's like you're raping him and also being selfish.

Can you see how they're not really examples of the same thing?
posted by billiebee at 7:40 PM on October 28, 2013 [11 favorites]


This thread is like a big beautiful chocolate cake right out of the oven.

I mean, in that both are nouns.
posted by escabeche at 7:47 PM on October 28, 2013 [40 favorites]


Until I scrolled down I thought you were going to say A CAKE FULL OF WASPS.
posted by elizardbits at 7:50 PM on October 28, 2013 [20 favorites]


hey

I, at least, descend from good Irish Catholics
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 7:52 PM on October 28, 2013 [2 favorites]


Yes, but how do you pronounce "pho"?
posted by planetesimal at 7:55 PM on October 28, 2013 [1 favorite]


cholmondeley-featherstonehaugh
posted by elizardbits at 7:59 PM on October 28, 2013 [16 favorites]


Why would a cake full of wasps be scary? They'd probably just hang out in there moaning about the mileage on their Bentley and wait for the butler to let them out.
posted by Ghostride The Whip at 8:33 PM on October 28, 2013 [19 favorites]


as long as they're nice and drunk they're not scary
posted by sweetkid at 8:35 PM on October 28, 2013 [3 favorites]


All my wasps are committed elsewhere, but I can bake you a cake full of termites.
posted by Pudhoho at 8:47 PM on October 28, 2013


cupcake1337: ""is like" is not exactly the same in every way as "exactly the same in every way.""

And different threads are not "exactly the same in every way" so the mods take things on a case by case basis.
posted by notsnot at 8:53 PM on October 28, 2013 [2 favorites]


Or cake by cake basis as is appropriate
posted by sweetkid at 9:11 PM on October 28, 2013 [6 favorites]


This is not just not tough love, this is like the opposite of tough love. Trying to lend hope to the hopeless is practically the definition of mercy. If someone writes a comment about cooking food cheaply and says to assume they can't find any more money in their budget for food but the stuff they say indicates that they haven't realized they're eligible for food assistance, then it's downright cruel not to mention it. Is it really that hard to see the difference between a comment that basically tells someone that they are selfish and they should feel bad, and a comment that tells someone they are a worthwhile human being and deserving of love and that there are still ways they may yet find it?
posted by Sequence at 9:15 PM on October 28, 2013 [13 favorites]


"Is it really that hard to see the difference between a comment that basically tells someone that they are selfish and they should feel bad, and a comment that tells someone they are a worthwhile human being and deserving of love and that there are still ways they may yet find it?"

There is a difference, certainly. But it's not necessarily kind and helpful.

It's definitely true that many, many things aren't as bad as they seem to someone in the middle of them and it's helpful to (gently) lead that person to the awareness of this. But it's also the case that sometimes things really are that bad; and anyone who has been in such a situation knows that it is infuriating and deeply unhelpful when people tell you that it's not that bad and give you a pep talk when what you really need is a) for them to listen to you and take what you say seriously, and b) offer advice that is helpful for that actual situation.

At the very least, at an absolute minimum, really listen to what people say and validate their concerns before you attempt to explain to them that they're confused. And don't tell them they're confused, suggest the possibility while conceding that they know their lives and selves better than you do.
posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 9:26 PM on October 28, 2013 [13 favorites]


cupcake1337, I actually think you're right that the replies offering anonymous hope that he may find someone and have a great relationship are not answering the question, and are basically giving OP exactly what he's said he doesn't want. And since I hate that phenomenon in general, I wouldn't mourn if every one of those answers were deleted.

But I don't think that's your real concern. Your real concern is that you think you're being ill-treated: that these poster's are getting better treatment than you. Their non-answers stand, and your non-answers are deleted, and you want to know why.

I think I know the answer to that, too. These non-answers to anonymous are meant kindly, and given in an attempt to offer hope and comfort. Maybe they even will. So the mods aren't going to rush to delete answers that are well-intended and may offer comfort and hope. But that doesn't describe your own deleted answers. While I'll presume that yours are also meant kindly, and well-intended, they're harsh. We're looking at the difference between an off-topic reply that might make someone at least feel better, vs an off-topic reply that outright scolds OP, and may make her feel worse. I'm not surprised that the one is pruned and the other -- even though it may be useless and frustrating -- is allowed to stand.

I think I even agree with it, because to me it boils down as follows: Your comments clearly have to go, and the others maybe ought to go. But, to me, a "maybe" means it ought to be left alone.
posted by tyllwin at 9:47 PM on October 28, 2013 [27 favorites]


Metafilter commandment #7: Thou shalt not call-out a thread in MetaTalk to complain about your treatment in an entirely different thread.
posted by empath at 10:51 PM on October 28, 2013 [10 favorites]


"my exact words were that it "is like" raping someone who's balckout drunk. "is like" is not exactly the same in every way as "exactly the same in every way.""

yer SATs musta been a hoot
posted by klangklangston at 12:45 AM on October 29, 2013 [21 favorites]


my exact words were that it "is like" raping someone who's balckout drunk. "is like" is not exactly the same in every way as "exactly the same in every way."

so, i wouldn't say i equated it, i'd say i said "they are similar in at least one important way" and that important way is that in both situations a person's ability to give consent (have sex/just be friends) is impaired in such a way that they can't credibly give consent.


Your "blackout rape" reference is an unhelpful comparison because it is distractingly and needlessly melodramatic. It's likely to create a huge derail about sexual assault which will not help the OP get the answers they need.

You can discuss consent in that thread without saying deceit "is like" rape.
posted by zarq at 3:54 AM on October 29, 2013 [3 favorites]


I'm frequently alarmed at how often "therapy" is the recommended solution. A tiny percentage of people can afford to talk to a therapist at the rates therapists are forced to charge and an even smaller percentage can afford any medication that might be prescribed. It's axiomatic. Insurance agencies are in the business of insuring healthy people.

Therapy is only available if you are healthy, wealthy and curently employed. i.e less likely to be in need of therapy. There is a reason that insurance agencies migrated coverage to employers. People that work full time are by definition less likely to be in need of coverage.

"Are you in therapy?" is a fucking joke. The question betrays your arrogance your position and your ingnorance. Please fucking stop it.
posted by vapidave at 4:05 AM on October 29, 2013 [3 favorites]


"Are you in therapy?" is a fucking joke.

No, it's an option. One that might not be available to everyone, much like lots of the suggestions offered in many AskMes. That doesn't mean it's not valid to offer it. I don't know about the US, but there are some free counselling options available in other places. Personally I have paid for therapy, accessed it free through a short-term government-funded service, and via a charity on a donation basis. We have no way of knowing the possibility of individuals accessing therapy (and the debate about healthcare/insurance etc is a separate one) so I don't see why we shouldn't be allowed to suggest something that might be helpful, and let the asker filter out what best suits their own circumstances as necessary.
posted by billiebee at 4:35 AM on October 29, 2013 [14 favorites]


vapidave: The question betrays your arrogance your position and your ingnorance.

Something similar could be said about those who think that all people using AskMe are from a country where therapy isn't covered or heavily subsidized by their respective government. While I haven't read this entire AskMe thread in detail, I didn't see any location listed in the initial question.
posted by gman at 4:36 AM on October 29, 2013 [11 favorites]


Therapy is only available if you are healthy, wealthy and curently employed. i.e less likely to be in need of therapy.

I was in therapy for a couple months of my unemployment. Because I know of the existance of a therapist who would work on a sliding-scale until I got employed again.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:37 AM on October 29, 2013 [2 favorites]


I'm frequently alarmed at how often "therapy" is the recommended solution.

To be honest, 'get therapy' is often a 'nice' way of saying that the OP is the cause of their own problems, or even "I don't even know where to start with all the things wrong with your question."
posted by empath at 4:43 AM on October 29, 2013 [27 favorites]


I'm not reading this, but I have something to say.

In that pay cut question I said that I don't need to hear about finding a new job or talking to a real lawyer since I'm already looking for a new job (any leads?) and that I wanted to see if I was definitely wrong before talking to a real lawyer.

Answers that just told me to talk to a real lawyer or to get a new job were deleted.
posted by theichibun at 5:01 AM on October 29, 2013 [2 favorites]


Therapy is only available if you are healthy, wealthy and curently employed. i.e less likely to be in need of therapy.

Ignorant and dangerous nonsense. Therapy is, firstly, not psychiatry (so no prescriptions involved at all) and generally more affordable and much more likely to be available at clinics or practices with a sliding scale.

Lawyers are expensive too. Doesn't make them any less valid of an answer than therapists if they are the professional whose intervention the OP would most beneft from.
posted by griphus at 5:04 AM on October 29, 2013 [17 favorites]


Wow that was some amazing timing.
posted by griphus at 5:04 AM on October 29, 2013 [1 favorite]


I stand by my position. Therapy is too expensive and least affordable and insurance companies actively avoid providing therapy [and all health care] to those who are most in need. This is not news.

"No, it's an option. ...I don't know about the US" I was adressing the availability in the US where it is largely not an option. Insurance here is mostly provided via employer. This means, by definition, that you are able to work a forty hour week and likely don't suffer from a physcal or mental disability. If you don't have a job, you are unlikely to qualify insurance except at usurios rates. I'm happy to know it is an option where you are. It should be that way.
posted by vapidave at 5:08 AM on October 29, 2013


"...and generally more affordable and much more likely to be available at clinics or practices with a sliding scale."

You understand that there is a large segment of our population that can barely afford food right? Therapy, on a sliding scale or not, is not an expense that they can entertain.
posted by vapidave at 5:17 AM on October 29, 2013 [1 favorite]


Sure, but the overlap of people who have access to an regular internet connection and a MeFi account means the people accessing AskMe for help are more likely to have an income that can support a sliding-scale therapy appointment, even if it takes some financial re-arrangement. From what I remember from the last time a userbase survey was done, MeFites are not, on average, struggling to put food in their mouths. There are people on this website in seriously dire straits; many do not hesitate to tell us, and that is a very good thing because responses can be tailored to that. But it's a hell of a disservice to assume everyone who needs help is inherently unable to afford the kind of help they need unless they explicitly say "I can afford therapy but need to be talked into it."

Many people who can afford it have no idea they can afford it because someone in their life told them it's way, way too expensive for the average person and then there's all the medication they have to get and all sorts of other ignorant junk that scares them away from it. And that's bad for everyone: them, their friends and relatives, and anyone who they go on to parrot that nonsense to.

And, finally, many people below the poverty line (for a time, myself included) can get access to therapy by way of Medicaid. Not everyone has access to that, no, or the ability to go and even get access to it, but the opportunity should be seized if it does present itself. Again, an option -- like food stamps, unemployment benefits and many other things the government provides to the poor but are looked down upon in our culture-- that many people on this website have, time and time again, proved they have no idea they can receive.
posted by griphus at 5:30 AM on October 29, 2013 [29 favorites]


This means, by definition, that you are able to work a forty hour week and likely don't suffer from a physcal or mental disability.

There are plenty of people (including me!) who suffer from mental disabilities and are able to work forty hours a week, although it might be difficult. Implying that you can't work if you are disabled perpetuates the idea that if someone appears functional they must be faking it and this is really not true.
posted by Mrs. Pterodactyl at 5:30 AM on October 29, 2013 [39 favorites]


comparing something that is not-rape to something that is rape is pretty beyond the pale.
posted by angrycat at 5:31 AM on October 29, 2013 [28 favorites]


There is only one thing like rape, and that's rape.
posted by Too-Ticky at 5:39 AM on October 29, 2013 [22 favorites]


"MeFites are not, on average, struggling to put food in their mouths."

The majority of people who view AskMe are not Mefites.

"There are plenty of people (including me!) who suffer from mental disabilities and are able to work forty hours a week, although it might be difficult. Implying that you can't work if you are disabled perpetuates the idea that if someone appears functional they must be faking it and this is really not true."

Me three. My comment was directed at how the insurance industry culls in order to profit. It was not intended to indicate that people with disabilities can't be productive employees.
posted by vapidave at 5:40 AM on October 29, 2013


The majority of people who view AskMe are not Mefites.

Either we were talking about the appropriateness of replies of "try to get therapy" to specific questions asked by MeFites and you're moving the goalposts, or I have no idea what your argument against suggesting people try to get therapy is.
posted by griphus at 5:42 AM on October 29, 2013 [1 favorite]


Frankly, it just seems like you want to complain and knock people for suggesting therapy.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:47 AM on October 29, 2013 [9 favorites]


My argument is that "pay for therapy" is a remedy that is unavailable to most people.
posted by vapidave at 5:48 AM on October 29, 2013


I think support groups are more nearly available.
posted by vapidave at 5:49 AM on October 29, 2013


And that is a bullshit argument, because in the US therapy is available to most people.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:50 AM on October 29, 2013 [3 favorites]


My argument is that "pay for therapy" is a remedy that is unavailable to most people.

Yes. Do you want to argue how AskMe users should respond to questions in light of your first argument's conclusion?
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 5:50 AM on October 29, 2013


One of my best friends was so broke, that he was living in his car and eating ramen noodles made with tap water from public bathrooms and he managed to both get therapy and get prescribed medication.
posted by empath at 5:50 AM on October 29, 2013 [7 favorites]


My argument is that "pay for therapy" is a remedy that is unavailable to most people. I think support groups are more nearly available.

I believe most people reading AskMe are intelligent enough to mentally swap out "therapy" for "support groups" on their own initiative if their economic situation warrants it.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 5:59 AM on October 29, 2013 [5 favorites]


There is a reason that insurance agencies migrated coverage to employers.

Federal wage controls during World War II?
posted by zamboni at 6:04 AM on October 29, 2013 [3 favorites]


Many places (states, counties, cities) offer free or very, very low-cost mental and behavioral health services, particularly for low-income people. As a person with (sometimes disabling) depression, these services, which include therapy, quite literally have saved my life.

Therapy is NOT out of reach for most people. Perpetuating the myth that only people who are well-off can access therapy is harmful.

Google and/or 311 can be very helpful for turning up mental health crisis services in a person's area, many of which include therapy.
posted by SugarAndSass at 6:05 AM on October 29, 2013 [19 favorites]


There's also the There Is Help page on the MeFi Wiki.
posted by Catseye at 6:10 AM on October 29, 2013 [7 favorites]


This conversation about the realities of low-income people pursuing mental health services is far more worthwhile than the other one.
posted by box at 6:15 AM on October 29, 2013 [8 favorites]


Most advice given in response to an AskMe question will not be useful to at least some readers. People live in different places, have different abilities, and have different financial and cultural resources. Given that reality, should we limit all advice to only those suggestions which can be acted upon by every reader?
posted by Area Man at 6:16 AM on October 29, 2013 [3 favorites]


We should take people seriously when they ask people to be kind when answering human relationship questions. If someone specifically asks for that then I think it should be seriously considered before laying harsh judgements all over them. I'm happy that the mods err on the side of that.
posted by h00py at 6:22 AM on October 29, 2013 [16 favorites]


You made an insensitive tone-deaf comment and it was deleted.
What's inconsistent about that? Insensitive tone-deaf comments are probably deleted every day if not every hour on this website.

What makes you so special, eh?
posted by oceanjesse at 6:37 AM on October 29, 2013 [1 favorite]


Therapy is, as far as I'm concerned, lovely. It's not always easy to get, but even if you can't get it, there are sometimes things you can do to kind of--replicate at least part of the experience for yourself? I have a stack of resources like this that's getting big enough that I've started considering whether a Deezil-esque mental health self-care profile might be of some use... Public mental health care services are often available but the waiting lists can be insane. Look, I find my puns amusing, shut up. But there's "you need care in crisis" and then there's "you need some help tweaking your brain and your life"; the former is not very doable with self-help, the latter is more so than I originally thought.

I try to remember to couch it in terms of "if you can, and if you can't right now, do it when you can", though. I firmly believe that, to borrow a phrase, there are few sorrows, however poignant, in which a good therapist is of no avail, but I do think sometimes people neglect the fact that not all resources are equally available.

I didn't mean that the softer side of things is never problematic, but it is always better to err on the side of kindness is a good way of putting it.
posted by Sequence at 6:53 AM on October 29, 2013 [6 favorites]


My current therapist worked with me on a price while I was self- and/or un-employed that was well under 50% of his stated rate, with the understanding that the rate would go up when I started making money again. I had no money coming in and was concerned about the expense, but in retrospect it was some of the best money I've spent.

The Asker can always follow-up, either in-thread (I think?) or in another MeTa, to ask about getting therapy or finding a support group on the cheap.

As far as off-topic answers, I'm one of the folks suggested therapy in the original thread, and I'd like to share my reasoning a little bit for why I did so:

The Asker presented what I took to be a classic XY question, such that, in my judgment, it was appropriate to step back a little bit and talk about the X and not the Y as such. Human relations questions are of course a bit more tricky than "What kind of ham should I serve when my kosher-keeping Jewish friends come over for dinner?" but in at least some cases the Asker is kind of avoiding, whether intentionally or unconsciously, an obvious and direct solution and it is worth pointing it out.

But it's not just as simple as addressing the X rather than the Y, because in this specific case, the Asker has acknowledged -- right there in the part that you quoted, cupcake1337 -- that he needs help a) letting the past be past without feeling pain/regret about it, and b) dealing with the pain of a potential future that hasn't happened. Both of these are things that therapy can help with.

Moreover, it's not the case that the Asker said, "don't tell me to get therapy." So I don't see where therapy answers would be out of bounds here even if this site had a strict "answer the question ONLY within the Asker's own stated terms" rule. If the site did have such a rule, I think I would argue strenuously that the rule ought to have a "therapy" exception because the nature of being stuck in one's own mental processes often rules out therapy without basis. But that's not the rule on MetaFilter, so I don't have to make that argument.

I also don't see, in the answers that have been allowed to stand in the thread, any answers telling the Asker how to find a partner, which is the thing the Asker has said he doesn't want. I see a bunch of answers telling him, "it gets better; here's my own story, or the story of someone I know" in a way that might very well be helpful to the Asker.

I think you're misreading the question and the thread, cupcake1337.
posted by gauche at 6:59 AM on October 29, 2013 [12 favorites]


It occurs to me that "is like" is not exactly the same in every way as "exactly the same in every way." Is exactly why moderation (and especially deletions) are done on a case-by-case basis and why there is no set of rules laws to appeal to. Because, the moment we had such laws, MeTa would be full of tiresome threads trying to prove that some deletion was or was not within the laws. Which would get in the way of the snark. And wasps.

Although, I admit, hearing cortex shout "I am the Law!" might make up for some of the pain.
posted by GenjiandProust at 7:32 AM on October 29, 2013 [2 favorites]


If therapy can be helpful, it can be helpful. How to get access to therapy is a different question than whether therapy can be helpful.

It's also one with answers, as many people have chimed in to note, above. But the fact that therapy is not universally easy to access has nothing to do with the value or utility of therapy itself, which is the basis for the valid recommendations.
posted by Miko at 7:51 AM on October 29, 2013 [2 favorites]


I have a stack of resources like this that's getting big enough that I've started considering whether a Deezil-esque mental health self-care profile might be of some use...

I think this would be great, and I'd follow a resource on this. The reason I say this is because a. where I am, therapy is pretty much non-existent, so people have to rely on books (rare, difficult to get) and online resources if they ever feel like they could benefit from therapy. And b. because I happened across a couple of exercises in a book (I kind of assume that they are CBT-ish things, don't know enough to figure that out) which had a huge beneficial impact on me.

So I'd be a great fan of a resource where information is organised by problem rather than diagnosis (such as low self-esteem, apathy, agitation, anxiety, whatever), possible actions, maybe concrete exercises to try out, further resources. If anyone were to do something like this, I would happily contribute the couple of things which I found helpful/ saw being helpful to others.

I also wonder if the "There is Help" page in the Wiki could be made more visible, like in one of the links at the bottom of each page etc, or if it could be sent as an auto-email to people asking questions that contain pre-set keywords, or even people googling the site using certain keywords, such as anxiety, depression, etc.
posted by miorita at 7:53 AM on October 29, 2013 [8 favorites]


if it could be sent as an auto-email to people asking questions that contain pre-set keywords, or even people googling the site using certain keywords, such as anxiety, depression, etc.

As much as I am very fond of the ThereIsHelp page, automatically sending it to people is something we would actually never do. Any MeFite is welcome to link to it in any thread or send it to anyone, but we really err on the side of contacting users automatically as rarely as possible. Not that that wasn't a good suggestion, just explaining early that it's not something we would do here.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:57 AM on October 29, 2013 [3 favorites]


"Therapy is only available if you are healthy, wealthy and curently employed."

Bullshit.

I specifically know LGBT resources in LA that provide therapy for everyone, regardless of income or insurance, including homeless people. There's a bureaucracy to deal with, but it's there. And I'd imagine that with a couple hours worth of googling and phone calls, I could find sliding scale or other low-cost therapists.
posted by klangklangston at 8:14 AM on October 29, 2013 [9 favorites]


miorita: " So I'd be a great fan of a resource where information is organised by problem rather than diagnosis (such as low self-esteem, apathy, agitation, anxiety, whatever), possible actions, maybe concrete exercises to try out, further resources. If anyone were to do something like this, I would happily contribute the couple of things which I found helpful/ saw being helpful to others."

I love this idea. When it was being put together a bunch of excellent past threads about therapy weren't included in the ThereIsHelp "Therapy" links section because they simply weren't relevant to the 'crisis-oriented' purpose of that page. But if there had been a place to put them, a separate, kickass resource could have easily been formed.

AskMe is a vast archive of helpful knowledge, and I think it's kinda awesome that a few wiki pages have been turned into helpful indices which make finding that info easier.

Cortex and Jessamyn, would you be okay with us creating a separate page devoted specifically to therapy-related threads and resources on the wiki? It would (hopefully) expand the scope of that section from ThereIsHelp without reducing the original page's utility.
posted by zarq at 8:29 AM on October 29, 2013 [4 favorites]


Maybe I'm just particularly sensitive this morning, and this is kind of a derail, but can we not get into the habit of referring to people with disabilities as "suffering" from their disabilities as multiple people have inadvertently done in this Metatalk? It's quite ableist and it's definitely one of those micro-aggressions often aimed at people with disabilities.
posted by Conspire at 8:33 AM on October 29, 2013 [1 favorite]


Cortex and Jessamyn, would you be okay with us creating a separate page devoted specifically to therapy-related threads and resources on the wiki?

Sure. The wiki does not belong to us and is not official. People are welcome to do what they want with it and we're okay offering guidance of people would like some. I think there's a good set of pages that could be put together. I think there is already one about how to find a therapist? Or is that on ThereIsHelp?
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:42 AM on October 29, 2013


"I'm not saying you are Genghis Khan on PCP; I'm saying you're like Genghis Khan on PCP."
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 8:47 AM on October 29, 2013 [7 favorites]


jessamyn: "Sure. The wiki does not belong to us and is not official. People are welcome to do what they want with it and we're okay offering guidance of people would like some. I think there's a good set of pages that could be put together. I think there is already one about how to find a therapist? Or is that on ThereIsHelp?"

OK, thank you!

The wiki's Frequently Asked Questions on Metafilter has a minimal reference to cost of therapy in the Health section, and of course there's the Therapy section in ThereIsHelp, which does include both finding a therapist and links to specific threads related to depression and drinking. But there hasn't been a page strictly devoted to therapy broken down by problem. Will set one up today.
posted by zarq at 8:50 AM on October 29, 2013 [3 favorites]


my exact words were that it "is like" raping someone who's balckout drunk. "is like" is not exactly the same in every way as "exactly the same in every way."

my god, bill clinton's posting to metafilter


You'd like to think that, wouldn't you? In fact, this nuance is very important. This is why you cannot say to someone "you are an asshole" but you can say "you are being an asshole".
posted by Tanizaki at 8:59 AM on October 29, 2013 [2 favorites]


Can we maybe postpone -- forever -- the discussion of how it's okay to say that things-that-are-not-rape are like rape?
posted by gauche at 9:02 AM on October 29, 2013 [15 favorites]


I'm not calling anyone Hitler. I'm just saying that somebody in this thread reminds me of a carbuncle on Hitler's ass.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 9:04 AM on October 29, 2013 [3 favorites]


You'd like to think that, wouldn't you?

How can you say that "he'd like to think that," when, for all any of us know, he may not like it one bit?
posted by octobersurprise at 9:04 AM on October 29, 2013


Maybe I'm just particularly sensitive this morning

Yes you are. It's not being ableist, it's not a micro-aggression, and if I want to say I'm suffering from depression, you can assume that that's what I'm doing.
posted by gadge emeritus at 9:06 AM on October 29, 2013 [10 favorites]


Conspire, some people really *are* suffering and need help.
posted by capricorn at 9:07 AM on October 29, 2013 [1 favorite]


In fact, this nuance is very important.

The nuance is important but it's not germane to this discussion. Bringing up rape in an AskMe thread that is not about rape, particularly if you are saying that someone is doing something that is similar to raping someone is just not okay, full stop. It's immediately derailing and it's rarely helpful. This is not the "you are an asshole/you are acting like an asshole" distinction which is at issue here. It's basically Godwinning a thread. If someone would like to give this Law a name, that would be helpful.

This is something that most people know and some people need to have spelled out for them so I am spelling it out. This is not some edge case "Can someone help me understand this bad sexual situation I was in?" sort of question where saying "That sounds like rape" is possibly on-topic and appropriate. And even if it were that sort of thread, people still need to be mindful of other people and realize that there are very few ways to tell someone that they may have committed sexual assault and it's a situation requiring tact and empathy.

That was not what was happening in this AskMe thread.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:12 AM on October 29, 2013 [22 favorites]


my exact words were that it "is like" raping someone who's balckout drunk. "is like" is not exactly the same in every way as "exactly the same in every way."

my god, bill clinton's posting to metafilter

You'd like to think that, wouldn't you? In fact, this nuance is very important. This is why you cannot say to someone "you are an asshole" but you can say "you are being an asshole".


Are you here to support "staying friends with someone who expresssed feelings for you" is like "raping someone while blackout drunk"? It's just a question of nuance?
posted by sweetkid at 9:13 AM on October 29, 2013 [5 favorites]


If someone would like to give this Law a name, that would be helpful.

Does the namesake have to agree to it?
posted by griphus at 9:24 AM on October 29, 2013 [16 favorites]


The Law of Inappropriation
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 9:34 AM on October 29, 2013 [1 favorite]


The Law of Inappropriation: Appropriating someone else's pain for your lame hyperbolic metaphor is cannibalism.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 9:38 AM on October 29, 2013 [10 favorites]


The "suffering" narrative is used as a tool to pigeonhole people with disabilities into certain culturally-mandated perspectives around disabilities, and implies that a person with a disability cannot have a fulfilling life unless they somehow "transcend" the disability. The issue with this statement is that firstly, not all people with disabilities will view their disability as a purely physical/mental impediment, but also as a matter of identity. To call a disability "suffering" isn't even accurate, because much of the suffering associated with disability isn't even inherent to disabilities, but arise from external forces such as discrimination or stigma.

But even moving beyond respect for differing identities, it is important to recognize that these words are oppressive in how they enforce certain aspects of stigma, misinformation and social inequity around disability. While the sentiment seems to be that we need to give people with disabilities support within our social systems, the "suffering" narrative is does exactly the opposite: it forces people with disabilities to take a highly medical, physical ailment approach to their disability, creates a black-and-white portrayal of ability as a binary that ultimately results in othering of people with disabilities, and erases the value of disability as a necessary social identity. The result is that it unwittingly perpetuates stigma around disability, and unfairly places the blame of disability upon the sole individual for having a disability rather than the social systems in which they are operating on that disadvantage them in ways beyond their physical/mental differences.


Resources:
Ableism and The Medical Model of Disability
On internalized ableism - "We need to stop Ableism in our every day conversations and living activities!"
Ableism and the Language of Suffering

On Ableist Language
posted by Conspire at 9:45 AM on October 29, 2013 [19 favorites]


> If someone would like to give this Law a name, that would be helpful.

How about "Tufnel's Law", named after Nigel "This goes up to eleven" Tufnel?
posted by benito.strauss at 9:50 AM on October 29, 2013 [1 favorite]


Cupcake: the hell of it is, the advice parts of what you were saying was actually good - however, by adding some other stuff, you shot yourself in the foot. Let me explain.

Here's one of the comments that got deleted.
regarding staying friends: keep in mind that the regular "friend" relationship you've been having with him is actually a a relationship where he courts you and you don't have to do anything extra. i'd bet this is a "boyfriend without benefits" situation. i think continuing to be "friends" is selfish because, in this context, being "friends" is most likely not the kind of relationship two friends usually have.

i think you should tell him discretely that you're not interested, and that you won't be seeing him or his SO for at least a year. continuing to be friends is like having sex with someone even though they are blackout drunk: they hypothetically should be able to judge for themselves, but because of the mental state they are in the responsibility is on you to not hurt them.
There's actually some worthy advice in there, which I'm going to excise and reproduce here:
regarding staying friends: keep in mind that the regular "friend" relationship you've been having with him is actually a a relationship where he courts you and you don't have to do anything extra.

i think you should tell him discretely that you're not interested, and that you won't be seeing him or his SO for at least a year.
Now, see, that's actually decent advice in my book - it points out to the OP that "unfortunately the way he's been acting to you has been informed by something different on his part", and advises her to "maybe keep your distance for a while to give him a chance to get over it." In fact, other people are advising that same thing in that thread.

So it looks like the real problem came when you also said these things:
i'd bet this is a "boyfriend without benefits" situation. i think continuing to be "friends" is selfish because, in this context, being "friends" is most likely not the kind of relationship two friends usually have.

continuing to be friends is like having sex with someone even though they are blackout drunk: they hypothetically should be able to judge for themselves, but because of the mental state they are in the responsibility is on you to not hurt them.
Those bits aren't advice. They're you espousing your opinion on the issue of "whether or not to stay friends" in general, and they're you espousing your opinion on "is this or is this not like rape". And the OP didn't want to get into general discussions like that, she just wanted advice about her specific opinion.

So the question becomes - why DID you add those statements to what was, honestly, some good advice?
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:50 AM on October 29, 2013 [5 favorites]


Conspire, I can only speak for myself when I say: Please do not lecture me on how I can and cannot refer to myself. This is what it feels like you are doing.

You were right the first time - this is a derail.
posted by gadge emeritus at 10:04 AM on October 29, 2013 [17 favorites]


I have created a Therapy page on the wiki. For the moment, it contains a copy of the links in the Depression section from ThereisHelp. Please feel free to edit what's there.

Anyone can edit the wiki and these projects are most comprehensive when many people contribute. Please feel free to log in or set up an account and then add any relevant resources or links you would like.

Per miorita's initial suggestion, I placed a note at the top of the page that it will be organized by problem / symptom rather than diagnosis -- but by all means, do discuss ways you would like it to develop... or simply structure it yourselves. :)

I am notoriously bad at responding to memail so I've just added an email address to my profile. If you would like to add links to the page but aren't comfortable working with wiki markup language, please feel free to email them to me.
posted by zarq at 10:06 AM on October 29, 2013 [8 favorites]


My other suggestion is to move rather than copy stuff when appropriate because if someone changes links in one section they would not know to change them in another and they could get out of sync. If I have some time this evening I'll poke around in it a bit, i don't mean to just be dumping this all back on you, zarq.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 10:10 AM on October 29, 2013 [3 favorites]


No worries! Thank you. :)

That makes sense. My instinct would be to keep the Depression links on the ThereIsHelp page and simply put a link to that section on the Therapy page. Making a person who is dealing with a crisis go to separate pages to find what they need seems suboptimal. I could be wrong, though, so whatever y'all think is best.
posted by zarq at 10:18 AM on October 29, 2013 [1 favorite]


"You'd like to think that, wouldn't you? In fact, this nuance is very important. This is why you cannot say to someone "you are an asshole" but you can say "you are being an asshole"."

Aww, bullshit. That "nuance" is irrelevant; staying friends with someone who would like to have sex is not like raping someone who is blackout drunk in a massively more significant way than they are alike. They have a huge, salient difference, and pretending that this is an important instance of nuance is sophistry at best, disingenuous idiocy at worst.

My hangnail is not like the Holocaust just because of the nuance that they start with "H" and involve suffering.
posted by klangklangston at 10:21 AM on October 29, 2013 [22 favorites]


This is actually not the first time that cupcake1337 has said something along the same lines that, if you are a woman, and you continue to interact with a man who wants to fuck you / feels that you him sex / etc., that's akin to raping him.

In fact, the last time I noticed him saying something along these lines, he wasn't even saying that women who interact platonically with men were doing something akin to raping the men. He was in fact saying that the inability of men to obtain "sex under the terms they want it", ALONE, was sexual assault or rape.

Not that it "was like" sexual assault or rape. But that it WAS sexual assault or rape.

So even if you're not interacting with the man AT ALL, platonically or otherwise, and he can't obtain "sex under the terms he wants it" from you, you're sexually assaulting or raping him.

He's been trying to further this particular idea on Metafilter for a long time. That men not getting the sex they want are being sexually assaulted/raped.

I believe that cupcake1337 is trying to further his ideas that men are OWED the sex that they want, to the point that not giving it to them should be considered a crime and people who do not give men the sex they want, on the terms of those men, should be considered criminals.

In my opinion, trying to make people believe that they owe someone else sex that they don't want to have, is one of the most despicable things that you can do. He's actually trying to further the idea that it should be considered a crime -- that women not bending over and taking a deep dicking on demand should be a crime. Essentially, he's trying to further the idea that rape should be a legal right that men have.

I can't even describe how abominable I find this. I can't believe that he is still here openly playing his disgusting games around this, that he's been doing it for a year and a half here and probably longer before I noticed it.
posted by cairdeas at 10:45 AM on October 29, 2013 [58 favorites]


Wow, how starkly vile
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 10:54 AM on October 29, 2013 [5 favorites]


So even if you're not interacting with the man AT ALL, platonically or otherwise, and he can't obtain "sex under the terms he wants it" from you, you're sexually assaulting or raping him.

Not disagreeing that this is a not a winning strategy, but picking one twenty-word comment from a thread over a year ago that was specifically about sex work and then going on a lengthy paraphrase about what you think it's implying isn't really cricket. cupcake1337 is welcome to explain what he means further but I think the level of extrapolation you're putting in to that comment is hyperbolic and not particularly helpful to this conversation.

he's trying to further the idea that rape should be a legal right that men have.

That is not the feeling that I get. Put another way: if that is his view, it will not find traction here and if he wants to continue to espouse that view, he will be unwelcome here. If that is not his view, he's entitled to explain himself and have a discussion with people as a member of this community.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 11:02 AM on October 29, 2013 [9 favorites]


I would also just like to say:

cupcake 1337: my exact words were that it "is like" raping someone who's balckout drunk. "is like" is not exactly the same in every way as "exactly the same in every way."

pyramid termite: my god, bill clinton's posting to metafilter

Tanizaki: You'd like to think that, wouldn't you? In fact, this nuance is very important. This is why you cannot say to someone "you are an asshole" but you can say "you are being an asshole".


No, Tanizaki, you are utterly wrong. The "nuance" in this particular case is not "very important." Just because nuances are significant sometimes doesn't mean that they are significant ALL THE TIME, and I'm surprised that you don't seem to know that.

The "nuance" between saying a woman who is not giving a man the sex he wants is raping him, and saying that a woman who is not giving a man the sex he wants is doing something "like" raping him, does not make a shred of difference to the fact that comparing someone who isn't just submissively spreading her legs for someone she doesn't want to have sex with, TO A RAPIST, is an utterly despicable comparison to make.
posted by cairdeas at 11:04 AM on October 29, 2013 [6 favorites]


I believe that cupcake1337 is trying to further his ideas that men are OWED the sex that they want

Definitely. The "boyfriend without benefits" line by itself implies the whole fucked-up transactional view of sex that seems to be a very frequent component of cupcake1337's view. This whole misogynistic line of pity-the-unfucked-menz discussion, projected into many other discussions of gender politics where it's quite irrelevant, has become a very predictable element of cupcake1337's participation on the site and I too would like to see it stop.
posted by RogerB at 11:08 AM on October 29, 2013 [26 favorites]


Jessamyn, he went on try to continue that line of argument to me via memail, so it's not really a paraphrase of what I "think" he's implying.

"That is not the feeling that I get." Then I guess you and I have very different feelings about this.

If that is not his view, he's entitled to explain himself and have a discussion with people as a member of this community.

What he's actually going to do is continue to troll and make disingenuous statements and convoluted justifications. Whatever, I'm not going to make any argument that he shouldn't be allowed to do that, but honestly, he's not going to have any kind of real "discussion as a member of this community."
posted by cairdeas at 11:08 AM on October 29, 2013 [1 favorite]


It's ok, Tanizaki is doing that asinine internet lawyer thing where a particular statement is turned into the abstract without considering the context, because they think they're going to show these dumb libruls a thing or two.
posted by planetesimal at 11:09 AM on October 29, 2013 [17 favorites]


I mean, it's honestly very easy to find out if my "paraphrase" is "hyperbolic extrapolation."

cupcake1337, in situations where men are unable to obtain sex that they want from someone, and the person they want it from is continuing to interact with them platonically -- do you believe that person is doing something that could be compared IN ANY WAY to rape or sexual assault?
posted by cairdeas at 11:16 AM on October 29, 2013


cairdeas: " cupcake1337, in situations where men are unable to obtain sex that they want from someone, and the person they want it from is continuing to interact with them platonically -- do you believe that person is doing something that could be compared IN ANY WAY to rape or sexual assault?"

Thank you for asking. I'm curious to see what his answer is. I was not privy to your email conversation, but felt your interpretation of that single comment seemed to read more into it than I thought was there.
posted by zarq at 11:19 AM on October 29, 2013


cupcake1337 hasn't bothered to contribute to this thread that he started since yesterday evening, so I doubt you're going to get an answer.
posted by palomar at 11:22 AM on October 29, 2013


Well zarq, cupcake1337 already said, in this very thread,

my exact words were that it "is like" raping someone who's balckout drunk.

so I'm not sure why his answer would be like a curious mystery ... he basically already gave his answer quite starkly several times. But sure, I'm open to seeing what his next variation is.
posted by cairdeas at 11:22 AM on October 29, 2013


cupcake1337, I hope you take the advice of EmpressCallipygos to heart. Some aspect of your comments are useful, but then you resort to hyperbole, name-calling, shaming, or all of the above that makes them come off as unnecessarily mean. They get flagged to death and stick out as too tough-love and we delete them. If you want them to stay, limit them to the useful bits.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:28 AM on October 29, 2013 [6 favorites]


palomar: cupcake1337 hasn't... contribute[d] to this thread that he started since yesterday evening

Gosh I wouldn't want to come back here anymore either.

cupcake1337, I think it's safe to say that the people participating in this discussion would much rather you were here participating with a willingness to grow as a person rather than somewhere else continuing to feel alone. Yeah, even despite some of the harsh things said.
posted by carsonb at 11:28 AM on October 29, 2013 [1 favorite]


cairdeas: " so I'm not sure why his answer would be like a curious mystery ... he basically already gave his answer quite starkly several times. But sure, I'm open to seeing what his next variation is."

I saw him say it once. Not "several times." Can you please point out any times I might have missed?

Also, he's since clarified that he was only speaking about the ability to give consent:

cupcake1337: " so, i wouldn't say i equated it, i'd say i said "they are similar in at least one important way" and that important way is that in both situations a person's ability to give consent (have sex/just be friends) is impaired in such a way that they can't credibly give consent."

It is a shitty, stupid, offensively asinine, melodramatic and completely unhelpful-to-the-OP comparison that he made, but I do not think him saying that means he is saying -- as you said, "if you're not interacting with the man AT ALL, platonically or otherwise, and he can't obtain "sex under the terms he wants it" from you, you're sexually assaulting or raping him."
posted by zarq at 11:29 AM on October 29, 2013 [1 favorite]


Of course at this point I would not be surprised to find out that's what he was thinking. But it does not appear to be what he is saying at the moment.
posted by zarq at 11:32 AM on October 29, 2013


I think the comment cairdeas linked from the sex worker thread backs up her paraphrase of it. I know not everyone thinks so, but I do.
posted by sweetkid at 11:32 AM on October 29, 2013 [5 favorites]


Zarq, honestly, it makes it better to compare the ability of a man to "consent" to friendship with a woman he wants sex with, to the ability of a woman who is blackout drunk to "consent" to sexual intercourse? Really and truly? I want to start posting photos of teenage girls who hung themselves after not "consenting" to gang rape while they were blackout drunk. We're going to compare a woman who is trying to have a platonic friendship with a man, to taking away his consent in a comparable way to the people who ripped away the consent of those girls while they were blackout drunk? Are we seriously having this conversation? For him to come up with his latest justification and say "no, it was only the consent aspect I was talking about," does not make it any better at all.
posted by cairdeas at 11:37 AM on October 29, 2013 [4 favorites]


no, it is an absolutely horrible comparison.
posted by sweetkid at 11:39 AM on October 29, 2013


I want to start posting photos of teenage girls who hung themselves after not "consenting" to gang rape while they were blackout drunk.

I appreciate that you are upset about this but we're getting into "please take a walk" time if you're heading in this direction.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 11:41 AM on October 29, 2013


Fine, Jesssamyn. It's cool for cupcake1337 to make the comparison, as a way to troll and make his vile points, but it wouldn't be cool for me to show the actual human beings behind that comparison. Happy to take a walk.
posted by cairdeas at 11:43 AM on October 29, 2013 [2 favorites]


I kind of feel like there's not a whole lot more to come of debating in his absence what he might have thought/meant. I don't get the impression there's much serious debate here over whether the rape comparison that started this was gross, and it was deleted besides. Escalating the argument in here by bringing up shock-value comparisons feels like kind of going in the wrong direction.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:43 AM on October 29, 2013 [3 favorites]


Holy shit mathowie pointed me out as someone with good advice I feel like I should give an acceptance speech or something
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 11:44 AM on October 29, 2013 [24 favorites]


cairdeas: "Zarq, honestly, it makes it better

Don't put words in my mouth. If you need clarification of what I am saying then by all means ask. I did not say it "makes it better." I did not say in any way that I approve of the comparison he was making. If you re-read my comment, I am condemning the comparison.

I am simply saying that when he limits the comparison to consent alone it alters his meaning away from what you are accusing him of.

I want to start posting photos of teenage girls who hung themselves after not "consenting" to gang rape while they were blackout drunk.

If you can't speak civilly to me without this sort of nasty bullshit then we are absolutely done here.
posted by zarq at 11:46 AM on October 29, 2013 [1 favorite]


You know what, I am actually done here regardless. Have a nice thread folks.
posted by zarq at 11:46 AM on October 29, 2013 [2 favorites]


ugh don't let rogue cupcakes tear us apart everyone
posted by sweetkid at 11:49 AM on October 29, 2013 [20 favorites]


The context of that comment in the sex worker thread really does leave little room for interpretation, to be honest.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 11:49 AM on October 29, 2013 [11 favorites]


I'm a big fan of this extension of don't-be-a-dick:
I really think there ought to be a rule - if you're going to impersonate someone else's beliefs, you have to present a version of their argument that they would, themselves, recognize and agree with.
posted by 0 at 11:53 AM on October 29, 2013 [9 favorites]


My instinct would be to keep the Depression links on the ThereIsHelp page and simply put a link to that section on the Therapy page. Making a person who is dealing with a crisis go to separate pages to find what they need seems suboptimal. I could be wrong, though, so whatever y'all think is best.

I think that is best.

I have a lot of fondness for ThereIsHelp and I think the Therapy page should mutually link to ThereIsHelp, but that the content of the Therapy page should be threads about therapy - how to get it, what happens in it, how to pay for it - rather than the discussions of individual symptoms/diagnoses which is the bulk of ThereIsHelp. I think the Therapy page should be a subcategory of ThereIsHelp, essentially - it's one kind of help you can get, and here is some info about it.
posted by Miko at 11:55 AM on October 29, 2013 [2 favorites]


And now I feel dumb because there is already an entire section on Therapy in ThereIsHelp, a section which I helped to build and had completely forgotten the existence of.

So anyway, I kind of think that we already have the structure in place that we need there. If it's ever needed, anyone could just post a link to the Therapy category of ThereIsHelp. I don't think we need an extra page, which would just probably cause confusion and uneven updating as jessamyn notes.
posted by Miko at 11:57 AM on October 29, 2013


I see cairdeas's account has been disabled. I hope she comes back soon. Unlike cupcake1337, she has been a consistently good contributor to the site.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 11:58 AM on October 29, 2013 [43 favorites]



I see cairdeas's account has been disabled.


that makes me very sad.
posted by sweetkid at 12:03 PM on October 29, 2013 [10 favorites]


Yeah, I don't like this either.
posted by gauche at 12:08 PM on October 29, 2013 [4 favorites]


Yeah, pretty unhappy to see a valuable member leave over another round of cupcake1337 bullshit. I don't guess there's anything that could have been done to prevent it that wouldn't stomp all over good moderation practices, but it still sucks. I know which of the two participants I'd rather have remain a part of the conversation here.
posted by Ipsifendus at 12:10 PM on October 29, 2013 [22 favorites]


I'm a big fan of this extension of don't-be-a-dick:
I really think there ought to be a rule - if you're going to impersonate someone else's beliefs, you have to present a version of their argument that they would, themselves, recognize and agree with.


Corollary: If one throws a party, and brings the punchbowl, and makes the punch, and then drops something resembling a turd into the punch, and then refuses to even try to show that what is floating in the punch isn't an actual turd, then one has made turd punch, even if some of the ingredients are artificial.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 12:12 PM on October 29, 2013 [9 favorites]


my god, bill clinton's posting to metafilter

You'd like to think that, wouldn't you?


I would! Because Bill Clinton is a great American, a very smart man and a really good writer, who could share with us an amazing trove of first-hand knowledge about recent history and the way our country is governed.

That is what you meant, right?
posted by escabeche at 12:20 PM on October 29, 2013 [13 favorites]


Oh my god, no. No. I was just -- just! just now! -- writing cairdeas a dumb fangirl MeMail effusively thanking her for her contributions and clicking over to find that I could not send it because her account is disabled felt getting socked in the gut.

I'm having trouble using my words because I'm so overwhelmingly bummed about this, so I'll just say that I really, really hope she comes back soon.

*sniffle*
posted by divined by radio at 12:26 PM on October 29, 2013 [9 favorites]


"You'd like to think that, wouldn't you?"

I find it impossible to see those words and not hear them in the voice of Wallace Shawn.
posted by Chrysostom at 12:33 PM on October 29, 2013 [4 favorites]


Add me as a voice saying it's pretty shitty that cairdeas disabled their account as a result of this. Not shitty of her, just a bad result. Hopefully the walk is shortlived.

Sigh.
posted by ish__ at 12:34 PM on October 29, 2013 [2 favorites]


Let's not assume the worst. Cairdeas is an excellent member, grounded and with a good head on her shoulders. Though I know these are serious issues, it's entirely possible it's a self-imposed break to allow her to regain some distance. I know I've needed that at times, because there are some very provoking individuals and situations. A break is not a permanent goodbye, and I hope we see her return soon.
posted by Miko at 12:35 PM on October 29, 2013 [26 favorites]


Chiming in as another person who really hopes cairdeas comes back soon.
posted by phunniemee at 12:35 PM on October 29, 2013 [6 favorites]


Chiming in as another person who really hopes cairdeas comes back soon.


Me too. Come back soon, cairdeas.
posted by palomar at 12:38 PM on October 29, 2013 [6 favorites]


Same here. If you're reading this, cairdeas, I hope your break is temporary. You've brought a lot to MeFi and we'll miss you.
posted by Metroid Baby at 12:43 PM on October 29, 2013 [6 favorites]


I do too
posted by spunweb at 12:46 PM on October 29, 2013 [2 favorites]


cairdeas is an excellent member of the site, and this is terrible news.
posted by GenjiandProust at 12:47 PM on October 29, 2013 [4 favorites]


I've found cairdeas's comments to be thought-provoking and often insightful, and I hope we get to see more of them in the future.
posted by Lexica at 12:55 PM on October 29, 2013 [4 favorites]


zarq's account is now also disabled?
posted by Falconetti at 12:59 PM on October 29, 2013


He said he wanted to take a break. He does that now and then.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:00 PM on October 29, 2013


Well, shit.
posted by Space Kitty at 1:27 PM on October 29, 2013 [1 favorite]


It seems like the evolution of this thread was pretty inevitable. After the rape comment there was no way this was going to turn into anything but The cupcake1337 Show. Quite a feat for someone who bailed on the conversation some 100+ comments ago....pretty much when it became clear this MeTa was not about community consensus on moderation guidelines and community standards. He's been here long enough to know how comments like that are going to go down and been in enough rules v. guidelines threads to know that he's gotten all the clarification he's gonna get.

I can't think of a way to avoid this in the future. Don't feed the trolls on awful rape comments means staying silent on awful rape comments. Feature, not a bug in this case.

Closing down go-nowhere threads early opens up yet another bitter fight about heavy-handed moderation and how much range folks need/want in MeTa. Feature, not a bug in this case.

This business of exploiting members' sensitivity to rape and gender issues while taking advantage of mod patience and MeTa's wide latitude gets old after awhile.

Overall there have been far messier threads and this doesn't come close to the worse ones. Still, I wouldn't complain one little bit if this gets closed up soon. Quit while we're ahead and all.
posted by space_cookie at 1:38 PM on October 29, 2013 [7 favorites]


More like quit before we get further behind.
posted by Area Man at 1:48 PM on October 29, 2013 [4 favorites]


After the rape comment there was no way this was going to turn into anything but The cupcake1337 Show.

Which rape comment? The deleted AskMe answer that jessamyn provided (per request) or the year-old one from the Blue that cairdeas decided to discuss? I hope cairdeas returns as well, but calling this The cupcake1337 Show like he intended this thread to be about rape rather than (alleged) inconsistent moderation practices is rather revisionist. The only person responsible for cairdeas disabling her account is cairdeas herself.
posted by 0 at 1:50 PM on October 29, 2013 [2 favorites]


...calling this The cupcake1337 Show like he intended this thread to be about rape rather than (alleged) inconsistent moderation practices is rather revisionist...

Considering the frequency with which he finds himself in imbroglios regarding issues of consent and sexual assault, I have a seriously hard time believing he didn't know exactly what the repercussions would be of his request to air a deleted comment with that odious statement in it.

Why he keeps doing it is something I don't want to speculate on.
posted by griphus at 2:01 PM on October 29, 2013 [23 favorites]


cupcake1337: "my exact words were that it "is like" raping someone who's balckout drunk. "is like" is not exactly the same in every way as "exactly the same in every way." so, i wouldn't say i equated it, i'd say i said "they are similar in at least one important way" and that important way is that in both situations a person's ability to give consent (have sex/just be friends) is impaired in such a way that they can't credibly give consent."

If you are this committed to a drunk-consent metaphor, go with, "It's like urging a drunk friend to jump in a fountain on a freezing cold night -- they're not really in a state to give informed consent." If inability to give consent is your key point, there are a lot of other comparisons you could make!

Saying "saying something 'is like' rape isn't saying it IS rape" is weasel words of the worst sort. It's totally disingenuous unless we're deep in a philosophical discussion about the meaning of "is."

And comparing something that isn't rape to rape is like saying "I AM A TROLL AND LOOKING FOR A FIGHT." I think you probably know that, but in case you don't? COMPARING THINGS THAT ARE NOT-RAPE TO RAPE WILL 100% ENSURE NOBODY CARES ABOUT THE CONTENT OF YOUR COMMENT, because comparing not-rape to rape is really appalling. It will make people angry, and it will make people not like you. If you actually want to communicate with people, don't do that anymore. Just don't. It's awful. If you were actually ignorant of the fact that language of this sort is incredibly inflammatory and hurtful and that the use of it puts you in a very negative light, NOW YOU KNOW.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 2:03 PM on October 29, 2013 [19 favorites]


The only person responsible for cairdeas disabling her account is cairdeas herself.

Are you just here to pile on? This isn't the first time you've gotten into it with her on men's rights and rape issues with her here.
posted by empath at 2:43 PM on October 29, 2013 [17 favorites]


I believe you must misunderstand my statement. There is nothing disparaging cairdeas in the sentence you quote. It simply means it was her own decision to press the red button.
posted by 0 at 3:04 PM on October 29, 2013


Don't feed the trolls on awful rape comments means staying silent on awful rape comments.

No it doesn't. Talk about the issues here as they relate to the site. Talk to other users civilly and don't threaten the site with posting graphic suicide pictures, even if your heart is in the right place.

If the issue is that people despise other users, there's actually not much that MeTa can help you with and people will have to make their own peace with those sorts of issues. We're here to talk, but the days of MeTa being for pitchforks and torches is solidly over and has been for some time.

We have been trying to stay on top of this general issue--people making gross anti-woman comments in AskMe--for some time now. We delete comments. We tell people to cool it. We've been available and accessible in this thread. We're not telling people to be silent, we're telling people that the rules of the site don't change just because they feel that something is super important. I hope cairdeas comes back and I believe she will come back when she wants to come back.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 3:05 PM on October 29, 2013 [9 favorites]


but calling this The cupcake1337 Show like he intended this thread to be about rape

I'd call it the cupcake1337 show because of the performance-like nature of his rhetorical strategies, and because they have the well-rehearsed character typical of a long running and often repeated theatrical production. His intentions don't particularly enter into that.
posted by Ipsifendus at 3:08 PM on October 29, 2013 [8 favorites]


It's totally disingenuous unless we're deep in a philosophical discussion about the meaning of "is."

To be fair, there are a fairly vocal group of members who seem to be doing exactly this sort of thing. They evidently believe they are having extremely abstract philosophical discussions while others are talking about their lived experiences. Weirdly, this is most evident in gender, sexuality, and race threads....
posted by GenjiandProust at 3:11 PM on October 29, 2013 [39 favorites]


yeah, funny that.
posted by sweetkid at 3:19 PM on October 29, 2013 [3 favorites]


Which rape comment? The deleted AskMe answer that jessamyn provided (per request) or the year-old one from the Blue that cairdeas decided to discuss? I hope cairdeas returns as well, but calling this The cupcake1337 Show like he intended this thread to be about rape rather than (alleged) inconsistent moderation practices is rather revisionist. The only person responsible for cairdeas disabling her account is cairdeas herself.

I can't see how cupcake1337 could think that the publication of that first comment would vindicate him. His failure to recognize the inflammatory nature of a comparison to rape is of a piece with his previous failures to understand consent and sexual assault, even as people have explained his misunderstandings to him. Regardless, he urged the mods to publish his answers, which, it turned out, the mods had rightly deleted. Others took him to task for them, and then still others took him to task for the rest of his nastiness with respect to gender and sex.

The only person responsible for this whole thread is cupcake1337 himself.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 3:21 PM on October 29, 2013 [11 favorites]


I've installed a brain-app that floats a 3-D hallucination of Admiral Akbar over my vision every time that Post Button Narwhal appears. It suffices to warn me of the dangers of clicking Narwhals.
posted by carsonb at 3:23 PM on October 29, 2013


"but the days of MeTa being for pitchforks and torches is solidly over and has been for some time."

OCCUPY META!

BLACK BLOC!
posted by klangklangston at 3:43 PM on October 29, 2013 [1 favorite]


I'll miss zarq and cairdeas
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 3:57 PM on October 29, 2013 [5 favorites]


Me, too. I hope they both come back.
posted by gauche at 4:02 PM on October 29, 2013 [3 favorites]


Seriously. If anyone reading this has a way to contact them off-site, please let zarq and cairdeas know that they are missed and that we'd all be glad if they could come back after they cool down and get some mental space away from the shittiness in this thread. This sort of BS shouldn't have to cost us two of our best members.
posted by Scientist at 4:27 PM on October 29, 2013 [20 favorites]


I'm posting this under a sock puppet account because I was raped by a 60 year old man when I was a 13 year old girl, and prejudiced people have a nasty way of treating rape victims as if they're permanently broken and/or mentally unstable.

I am a frequent user, cupcake1337, you have seen my posts before.

Rape is the worst possible thing that has ever happened to me, either in my real life or my most horrible nightmares. I wish that I could explain it in a way that would make you understand, but I don't believe that we have powerful enough words in the English language to describe it. Suffice to say, if I was give the option between being shot in the head, or rapped again, I would choose to end my life. I say this with total honesty and without exaggeration.

One of the most unfortunate realizations that I have had to face in my life, is that there exists a subset of people who are incapable of understanding why rape, or rape analogies, are so tragic. It's a never ending slew of "it's just putting my penis in a woman's vagina for a little while. That's what they're made for. It can't be that big of a deal. They'll get over it, etc." I've had to accept that, for these people, unless they experience some type of Deliverance episode (which I would not wish on any person or creature no matter how horrible they are), they will never understand.

I don't know if you're one of those people. I have no way of knowing, so I'm not going to waste your time or mine by trying to explain. People up thread have already done it for me anyway. What I do want to say is this:

You are hurting me.

I am not the OP of the original question, but I did happen to read your comment before it was deleted, and it hurt me. It hurt me because it treated one of the most horrible instances of man's inhumanity to man as if it's comparable, in any way, to a "boyfriend without benefits" situation. This kind of cavalier analogy is grossly insensitive and furthers the tragic belief that rape "isn't that big of a deal." I've had to deal with that my whole life, and do not want to deal with it here on MetaFilter

Yes, people do post totally unhelpful advice and inconsistent derails that don't answer the question, but they're doing it in good faith and not to the detriment of others.
Even if you completely disagree with what I've said, know that you're still hurting me.
posted by Socks for all your socking needs at 4:57 PM on October 29, 2013 [110 favorites]


I just read this thread from the beginning, and have one question... how much more obvious could it be that cupcake1337 is a malicious troll who takes delight in causing damage to this community? It was apparent from the initial posting, very clear when his deleted comments were restored and proven to me without a shadow of a doubt with the links to past comments.

Pushing two members in good standing into disabling their accounts in one MetaTalk thread? That'll earn him a gold star at 4chan, people, but it does not belong here.
posted by oneswellfoop at 5:37 PM on October 29, 2013 [26 favorites]


So I am the OP of the original question, and all I can think -- beside "goddamnit, this isn't how anonAsk should go" -- is... yeah, wow, I'm really glad the mods deleted those responses (thanks, mods!). I actually didn't see them until they appeared in this thread, which is a good thing. Because hey, cupcake1337, I actually was once raped when I was blackout drunk, and I am having a tough time imagining how I would have reacted if you would have told me to my face that what happened to me was in any way similar to what I would be doing to a person by wanting to remain friends with them after they had expressed feelings for me. Man, I'm way too old to talk shit on the internet anymore, but that's a really messed up thing to say to someone you don't even know.

The weird part is that even if I would have seen those comments when they were originally posted, I would have had the same immediate thought: "Bet I know who wrote that." Now, I don't even want to begin to contemplate what it would be like to be a person who is willing to type or say things like that on the regs. And I feel real compassion for you and all of your similarly-minded brethren insofar I am able because I think horrifying sentiments like that are necessarily born from a lonely and lowdown place. But think about that, think about the kind of image you are presenting to MeFi and its readers: that is your visible presence here. I would have known you wrote those comments even if they were unsigned.

In spite of the fact that most of us are using pseudonyms, it's so important to remember that every person involved here is actually real! And it's bad to be inconsiderate, it's bad to be short-sighted and judgmental, it's bad to hurt real people's feelings. The folks on Ask could be your next door neighbor, they could be your best friend. At the very least, you could give them the courtesy of addressing them like you would a neutral acquaintance in search of advising -- presumably so in need that they are moved to reach out to you, a person with whom they are only acquainted -- with at least a modicum of compassion and care. Part of the reason AskMe is such an amazing resource is because people who are moved to reply seem to respect that idea almost universally. Why else would they even feel the need to answer?

The mods didn't delete your answers because they were "tough love," and telling yourself that is a cop-out. You're not being treated unfairly. You're veering so wildly toward the unsympathetic, ignorant, and offensive that I readily recognize your username as the pseudonym of a man who is either engaging in some kind of online sexist performance art or a true believer in the notion that women are either prudish feminazis or weird sexy aliens. It has nothing to do with consistency except insofar as you consistently appear to be someone who struggles to treat virtual strangers with empathy, humanity, and respect. Does that answer your question?
posted by divined by radio at 6:04 PM on October 29, 2013 [166 favorites]


Wow. That is a beautiful and courageous comment, divined by radio. Nobody could have said it better. Thanks for stepping out of the shadows and making your voice known, because what you just wrote is one of the most powerful things I have seen on this site in a long time and now I can say that at least something good has come out of this thread.
posted by Scientist at 6:19 PM on October 29, 2013 [9 favorites]


Just a shame divined by radio pretty much had to step out of the shadows to address some rightfully deleted ugliness, which cupcake1337 - surprise! - was able to resurrect here on the Gray. Nthing the sentiment that I don't know why this tiresome, callous blowhard is allowed to ride the wheels off his hobby horse at the expense of the general well-being of the community. Enough is enough already.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 6:25 PM on October 29, 2013 [20 favorites]


I also don't know why he's allowed to remain here. He isn't participating in good faith. Just give him back his $5 and send him on his way.
posted by empath at 6:29 PM on October 29, 2013 [8 favorites]


The amount of pain that cupcake1337 has caused other Mefites today is much too high.

I wish everyone the best.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:30 PM on October 29, 2013 [1 favorite]


I agree, Misantropic. Unfortunately it isn't just today.
posted by futz at 6:51 PM on October 29, 2013 [3 favorites]


Please close this. Or start the bennin.
posted by disclaimer at 7:21 PM on October 29, 2013


Yeah, I don't feel like there's a whole lot elsewhere for this to go at this point. I wanted to keep it open for a while in case cupcake1337 intended to respond to anything but twenty four hours on I don't think that's really in the cards, so I'm gonna go ahead and close this up.
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:26 PM on October 29, 2013 [3 favorites]


« Older Thanks for the education   |   I'm looking for a comment about buying a used car Newer »

This thread is closed to new comments.