TMP antics summary.

Here you can discuss anything froth related that does not fit into another forum, or indeed any nonsense that should enter your head.

Moderator: FU!UK Committee

Re: TMP antics summary.

Postby General Paranoia » Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:39 am

toofatlardies wrote:
Bill, I do feel that I need to ask for some clarification. When I first approached you with my suggestion that some polls could be worded in a less confrontational manner, you were very robust in stating that people should be allowed to say what they didn't like as well as what they liked. Debate was important and that was part of respecting the community.

Sadly now Dave Brown has been banned for asking whether, when you ask people to respect the community, you are showing the same consideration. Indeed, when you asked 'Do they respect the TMP community" Dave asked "Perhaps the more pertinent point here is – do you?".

Using your own guidelines that the TMP community should be allowed robust debate within a respectful context, I think it is not unfair for Dave to question whether, in banning people and removing messages from posters who showed support for my initial request, you are living up to your own goals.

Personally I wish this spat had never happened and that you had not made it a matter for public consumption and, more to the point, comment. However, now the cat is rather out of the bag, I think it would only be fair for you to tell us whether posters are breaking the rules and insulting the community if they make any comment on this matter? Certainly nobody who has supported your position has been banned or censured, no matter how vociferous. Yet people asking the simplest of questions have been removed from the site. That does seem like respect is not being spread very evenly across the community? I am sure that is not intentional, it's just the way it seems to some commentators who probably don't fully understand the internal machinations and by-laws of this site.

So, to try to defuse the situation so that there is no further need to eject people from TMP, could you please clarify what people can and cannot say, specifically, so as to avoid being censured. The problem as I see it is that people are not sure where respecting the community begins and ends. I'm sure you'll understand how difficult that makes it for people to comment.

Many thanks

Richard
Editor in Chief Bill wrote:It also 'thins the herd' so to speak, so that marginal and under-financed companies fall off the radar, leaving the better managed companies to dominate the news sphere.
TMP - killing off small companies!
User avatar
General Paranoia
 
Posts: 9894
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 11:13 am
Location: Helping Bill make the right choices

Re: TMP antics summary.

Postby Macunaima nli » Fri Aug 16, 2019 3:13 am

Aethelflaeda's heroic post explaining extensively and in-depth why the so-called “politically neutral” TNP is, at the very best, as “neutral” — and courageous — as Vichy France.

Bill, of course, censored this almost immediately, but it is set her for posterity. Hat’s off to Aethelflaeda!

http://www.freezepage.com/1565912015ZDJQHNZLBP

'll make it easy:

Every age has its own preferred terms of political emasculation. Teddy Roosevelt called Woodrow Wilson a "white-handy Miss Nancy." Adlai Stevenson was dubbed "Adelaide." Michael Dukakis was called a "pansy," George H.W. Bush a "wimp" and John Kerry — in a subtle feat of gendered rhetoric — an effete "flip-flopper" who "looks French." It's not just individual politicians who are painted as deficient in their manhood, either. Ideas and coalitions get the same treatment: Irving Kristol observed in the 1990s that "the American welfare state has had a feminine coloration from the very beginning"; Orrin Hatch once called the Democrats "the party of homosexuals."

These days, the preferred insult is a new addition to the canon: "snowflake." It is simultaneously emasculating and infantilizing, suggesting fragility but also an inflated sense of a person's own specialness and a naïve embrace of difference. It evokes the grade-school art classes in which children scissor up folded pieces of construction paper and learn that every snowflake is unique, and every person is, too. But in the Trump era, it feels as if the classroom bully has tipped over the craft table and is wielding the scissors triumphantly in the air.

So when the Montana congressional candidate Greg Gianforte body-slammed the Guardian reporter Ben Jacobs, breaking his glasses, conservative commentators burst into a flurry of "snowflake"s. Rob O'Neill, a former Navy SEAL, went on Fox News to call Jacobs a "snowflake reporter," while anonymous Twitter users lobbed the insult at every opportunity: "Crying little snowflake got his glasses broken. Boohoo." Soon this bled into an indictment of the entire press. Julia Carrie Wong, also reporting for The Guardian in Montana, tweeted that a local woman walked past a table of journalists and labeled them all: "Snowflakes, snowflakes, snowflakes."

This derogatory "snowflake" has its roots in a 1996 novel, "Fight Club," by Chuck Palahniuk, whose narrator, beaten down into a shell of a man by his office-drone job and cookie-cutter condominium, finds himself by joining an underground men's street-fighting cult. Club members repeat a mantra that begins: "You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake." A 2005 afterword by Palahniuk said the book "presented a new social model for men to share their lives," one that would give them "the structure and roles and rules of a game" but not be "too touchy-feely." In the years since, a similar model has flourished in the online "manosphere," a constellation of men's-rights activist sites, pick-up-artist guides and bodybuilding forums that serves as a caldron for far-right politics.

The particular alignment of politics and gender behind "snowflake," though, was forged in the 1950s — a decade during which, even in public policy, masculinity became associated with all that is independent, instinctual and pugilistic, and femininity with the communal, nurturing and systemic. Early in the Cold War, the threat of Communism was cast as not only a red scare but also a pink one. At the same time, cultural critics warned of a sinister feminizing threat from within: the defanging of the middle-class man in office buildings. In 1956, William Whyte's "The Organization Man" denounced the "soft-minded" harmony of a corporate life that was predicated on "togetherness." Two years later, an Esquire essay by Arthur Schlesinger Jr. argued that men had retreated "into the womblike security of the group" — that democratic society itself constituted an "assault on individual identity." And if "people do not know who they are," Schlesinger wrote, it follows that "they are no longer sure what sex they are."

In the American political imagination, Republicans became men and Democrats became women — one group associated with the West and "real" masculinity, the other with the East Coast, with intellectualism and elitism, with femininity. The New York Daily News called Adlai Stevenson "fruity" but also an "egghead," dismissing his supporters as "Harvard lace-cuff liberals" and "lace-panty diplomats." Today, when conservatives razz liberals for their markers of high-class cultural refinement, from John Kerry's windsurfing to Barack Obama's arugula, they may call them "out of touch," but the subtext is that what they're really alienated from is their own manhood. When Jacobs was body-slammed, conservative critics zeroed in on the detail of the glasses: "What kind of a wuss files charges over broken glasses?" Derek Hunter of The Daily Caller asked. And when the Newseum acquired the spectacles for its collection, one Twitter critic sneered: "Another artifact for the Snowflake Museum."

These alignments between politics and gender are not natural or static: They have shifted, time and again, with changes in America's society and economy. According to E. Anthony Rotundo, the author of the 1994 book "American Manhood," colonial men were actually respected for a "communal manhood" that prioritized care for others, including children. It was later in the nation's history that the ideal turned toward individual achievements and, eventually, toward toughness, competitiveness and symbolic displays of virility.

Even recently, the ideal of traditional conservative masculinity has still been mediated by notes of femininity: a manly man who was soft around the edges, especially to women and children. Reagan was a grandfather figure; George W. Bush a "compassionate conservative." Former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger appeared in countless films as a muscled killing machine, but he also humanized his image with movies that placed him in classically feminine roles, like "Kindergarten Cop" and "Junior," in which he is actually pregnant. These days, the flagship model of the old-school G.O.P. man may be Vice President Mike Pence — an earnest patriarch who calls his wife "Mother" and won't dine alone with other women.

With President Trump, however, the masculine archetype seems to have regressed. Trump is less the strict father than the petulant child: a boyish figure who rejects advice, shirks discipline and refuses to be beholden to behavioral norms. He is rarely even seen as the patriarch of his own family; as Melania Trump said after he was caught boasting about assaults on tape, "Sometimes I say I have two boys at home." His supporters among the so-called alt-right, too, have, in addition to embracing racist views and conspiracy theories, worked to scrub away the sober adult trappings of conservative masculinity, branding them as compromised and conformist.


"Snowflake" didn't start off directed at liberals or leftists, but at young people: Just a few years ago, it was primarily a generational insult, used to accuse millennials of being the whiny, entitled products of helicopter parenting and participation trophies. But during the 2016 election, youth became confused with liberalism, and an entire political posture was infantilized. Asked recently about the proliferation of "snowflake" as a political insult, Palahniuk responded by talking about modern-day students, who he said were "very easily offended." Post-body-slam, Laura Ingraham tweeted of Jacobs: "Did anyone get his lunch money stolen today and then run to tell the recess monitor?"

Talk of "snowflakes" — like "triggering" and "safe space" — conflates the school campus with progressive politics generally, as if the whole worldview were suspended in childhood. It also revives the idea of a culturewide wussification that must be fought with a return to aggression, physicality and ego. This is what the insult argues for — a rough-and-tumble world in which raw power reigns and nobody ever asks for help or complains of ill treatment. This pose isn't merely aesthetic: There are those who truly believe that set free from etiquette, care and cooperation, they would prevail over others. The alt-right has even picked up the word "anti-fragile" and whipped it into a political strategy — embracing chaos and conflict because they think they're better suited to thrive in those conditions than weaker people are.

Are they, though? The truth is that people who use "snowflake" as an insult tend to seem pretty aggrieved themselves — hypersensitive to dissent or complication and nursing a healthy appetite for feeling oppressed. (Hence the delight people take, lately, in making "snowflake" jokes whenever figures on the right claim to have been victimized or treated poorly; when the conservative activist Cassandra Fairbanks sued a journalist who said she had made a "white power" hand symbol, citing emotional distress, one headline read "Pro-Trump Snowflake Triggered by Tweet.")

"Today's tough-guy posturing seems rooted, paradoxically, in threat and fear: fear of defeat, fear of lost status and fear that society is growing increasingly ill suited to tough-guy posturing in the first place. The narrator of "Fight Club," source of that "snowflake" mantra, was a delusional man coping with modernity by inventing a hypermasculine alter-ego, imagining himself as the man-cult leader Tyler Durden. But making an entire alternate masculine identity is a lot of work. It's always much easier to just call other people wimps and snowflakes — and hope they'll be intimidated enough to melt away
User avatar
Macunaima nli
 

Re: TMP antics summary.

Postby Aethelflaeda was framed » Tue Aug 20, 2019 3:42 pm

To be clear the post was a NYT article.
User avatar
Aethelflaeda was framed
 

Re: TMP antics summary.

Postby Derek H » Tue Aug 20, 2019 5:12 pm

And TMP has a policy of not allowing quotes longer than three paragraphs from news sources. It's supposedly for copyright reasons. http://theminiaturespage.com/faq/forums.mv
Pimping my blog at http://dereksweetoys.com/
User avatar
Derek H
 
Posts: 2148
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 10:01 am

Re: TMP antics summary.

Postby Macunaima nli » Mon Sep 09, 2019 3:35 am

And, once again, a bump for those newly arrived from Sweet William’s latest meltdown...
User avatar
Macunaima nli
 

Re: TMP antics summary.

Postby General Paranoia » Mon Sep 09, 2019 9:40 am

It's almost pointless now, Google is doing the job of this thread these days. There is nowhere on the interenet where Bill can hide from his past
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=a ... 0&bih=1298
Editor in Chief Bill wrote:It also 'thins the herd' so to speak, so that marginal and under-financed companies fall off the radar, leaving the better managed companies to dominate the news sphere.
TMP - killing off small companies!
User avatar
General Paranoia
 
Posts: 9894
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 11:13 am
Location: Helping Bill make the right choices

Re: TMP antics summary.

Postby Voice From Limbo » Mon Sep 09, 2019 5:25 pm

Still useful, though. People come here to see deleted posts/threads from Bill's latest antics. Some of them undoubtedly want to investigate references to previous fiascos, but are daunted by the thousands of pages on the Sad Cunts. They can get the digest version here.

Once the current episode of Bill's Insane Shenanigans sorts itself out, this will be a good place to archive it.
Voice From Limbo
 
Posts: 2162
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2018 9:04 pm

Re: TMP antics summary.

Postby General Paranoia » Thu Nov 21, 2019 11:29 pm

Bump for Bill 0;)
Editor in Chief Bill wrote:It also 'thins the herd' so to speak, so that marginal and under-financed companies fall off the radar, leaving the better managed companies to dominate the news sphere.
TMP - killing off small companies!
User avatar
General Paranoia
 
Posts: 9894
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 11:13 am
Location: Helping Bill make the right choices

Re: TMP antics summary.

Postby Boner Spam » Fri Nov 22, 2019 12:23 am

General Paranoia wrote:Bump for Bill 0;)

Stop that!
User avatar
Boner Spam
 

Re: TMP antics summary.

Postby Condottiero » Fri Nov 22, 2019 3:28 am

Boner Spam wrote:
General Paranoia wrote:Bump for Bill 0;)

Stop that!

Fish fisting forever!
*SVM MALLEVS CVNNORVM*

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose...
- Alphonse Karr
User avatar
Condottiero
 
Posts: 2938
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 5:16 pm
Location: Iserlohn Fortress

PreviousNext

Return to The Froth Pot

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 65 guests