The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #86687   Message #1614559
Posted By: The Shambles
27-Nov-05 - 05:14 AM
Thread Name: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
Subject: RE: Less Noteworthy Mudcat Quotations
Is there such a organisation as the Constant Riders Under the Double Standard? For I see that many of the usual suspects are again gathered here and blindly and pedantically stumbling around under it for mutual support.

I fear the drive on our forum that has seen – what posters say – be overridden by who is saying it, has now reached a critical level. Those posters who are generally considered to be 'nice' can posts the most dangerous things and set the most negative examples and have these ideas supported. And can freely post abusive personal attacks - as long as they are directed at certain easy targets who are considered to deserve such treatment.

When those who are not now generally considered to be 'nice, can post requests for equal treatment and freedom of expression for all and have these attacked and be subjected themselves to abusive personal attacks. Even when they do not respond in kind to the many abusive personal attacks they are regulally subject to.

All of this when we have anonymous volunteer fellow posters who are supposed to be protecting all posters from this but when some of them also indulge in making these abusive personal attacks. These fellow posters are also supposed to protect all posters from racist posts.

Under this double standard - we have just recently seen an example of one the most racist and divisive threads ever started on our forum. Many contributors even commented that this thread was a 'good one'. I rather suspect that what they meant was that the person who started it was a 'nice' person so however uneasy they may have felt about some of what was being said – the 'nice' person saying this things should be supported. And that anyone who posted to disagree with what this 'nice' person was saying – must be truly 'nasty.

In some respect it did turn-out after a struggle to be – if not perhaps a good thread – but a better one. Mainly because of the sensible way that those who posted to disagree with the main points conducted themselves and made their arguments. This enabled the dangerous premise of the thread to be turned into a sensible discussion and the double standard to be at least questioned.

It's wise to question both your foe and your friend.