1. i apologize for my emotional outburst in which i used unnecessary foul language in my replies to comments in 'why the patriarchy wants you to hate incels' thread. some comments there hurt my feelings at the time and i let my emotions get the better of me instead of responding in a helpful way, or simply reporting and moving on.

  2. i disavow and repudiate the toxic views expressed in the thread in which i was banned. i did not see the rest of the thread until after i was banned with the exception of one reply to my comment which i responded to and one reply which i ignorantly upvoted, not knowing the context but desperate for any show of agreement at the time in my upset mental state.

  3. i maintain that shaming men for sexual frustration is problematic in the same way as shaming men for height or wight, which our site has had struggle sessions over in the past, and is an example of an attitude that unintentionally upholds patriarchal thought.

  4. i vehemently disagree with the characterisation of my comments as 'using bell hooks as a cudgel to force accomodating violent misogynists'. i do not approve of any praxis to the end of accomodating misogynists or misogyny. i wished to express the argument in point 3 above, and to push back against problematic patriarchal attitudes as i see them, and i believe that my genuinely problematic emotional outburst undermined my ability to do so, and that my ignorant upvoting and the problematic nature of the rest of the thread led moderation to assume i was arguing along similar misogynist lines. to reiterate point 2 above, i was avoiding further engagement with the thread for my own mental health, only interacting with direct responses to me, and had blocked one of the users involved, so i did not see the rest of the thread, only the reports in the modlog after i was banned.

  5. i believe my comments should still have been removed for hostility in the first case, and for doubling down on a removed comment in the second case, and after seeing the modlog i am not upset with moderation for liberally applying bans in that situation. this is not a ban appeal, but a clarification of my views.

  6. i acknowledge that even caring enough about an anonymous website to post something like this, let alone all the unposted thoughts and feelings i've had over the course of this ban, makes me 'cringe' and 'terminally online' and i will do my best to 'touch grass' in the future. i will try to be more mindful of my mental health and avoid engaging with the site when i am in a negative headspace.

  7. i am not posting this because i believe it is necessary for my continued engagement with the site, but because i want to make my views clear, as i believe they have been misinterpreted, and to avoid causing trouble by posting in an inappropriate comm. this is not a callout post, this is not a ban appeal, i do not desire or seek any further actions against any user or moderator. I genuinely wish to express my desire to improve in terms of social interactions and feminist theory to the only online community that i feel safe participating in.

  • Dirt_Owl [comrade/them, they/them]
    ·
    18 days ago

    i maintain that shaming men for sexual frustration is problematic in the same way as shaming men for height

    Incelism is inherently misogynist and we should not compromise with them any more than we should accommodate someone who becomes racist because he has a bad experience with a black person.

    Besides, no one is called an incel for being frustrated with the dating scene. People are called incels for harrassing women and spreading harmful stereotypes and dating practices. These guys will shame women, send them death threats, as well as psychologicly and physically abuse them for the crime of being a woman and then cry victim when people call them Incels for it.

    • Philosophosphorous
      ·
      17 days ago

      i do not disagree with anything you say, as i have said i am not defending incels or misogynists. perhaps i am missing something, i am autistic and can have trouble interpreting things sometimes, but i honestly do not see how anything i have said could be construed as such. this is not about anything anyone called me, no one called me an incel as far as i know, and i agree that people that identify with that label are problematic in various ways, that is not what any of this is about. i do not intend any implications or subtleties beyond what i have literally typed. i am not trying to relitigate anything so i will not go into further detail. it was probably a bad idea for me to continue engaging on this site at all, i feel like my words are consistently misinterpreted no matter how explicit and precise i try to be with my language. i will likely not respond further in this thread, i was just disappointed to see a poster i always appreciated misinterpret what i have said in exactly the ways i was trying to avoid with precise language. i apologize if this comes off as inappropriately defensive for this comm, i did not know where else to put this, and i felt it necessary to address what i see as a significant and continuing misinterpretation of my words.

      none of this has been a defense of incels, none of this is to say we should not criticize and shun misogynists from our communities, i simply wanted to state that mockery of sexual frustration in itself will only hurt lonely comrades the way that body shaming, even against the most problematic people possible, only hurts comrades and is rarely noticed by those who actually deserve it. and upholds toxic views regarding sex and gender (such as: men have to be conquerors, if you fail at sex you are not a conqueror, introversion is weak and womanly, men are the active party and have to make the first move, not having constant casual sex means you are less of a man/person, processing emotions is labor for women and unbecoming of a man and therefore shameful to admit to feeling sadness or despair, etc.). the same way we should criticize donald trump for his policies instead of his body, or joe biden for his acitons instead of his age, we should criticize misogynists for their misogyny, for their views, for how they treat others, for their implausible anti-feminist conspiracy theories, not for their inability to perform to patriarchal standards of sexual conquest. thats all i'm trying to say and i will not post further.

  • NotThatKindOfFedPosting [she/her]
    ·
    18 days ago

    new post on /selfcrit

    it's just attacking the people who disagreed in the original thread

    I propose we promote this poster to moderator blob-no-thoughts

  • MiraculousMM [he/him, any]M
    ·
    17 days ago

    i vehemently disagree with the characterisation of my comments as 'using bell hooks as a cudgel to force accomodating violent misogynists'.

    You called another user ableist for stating that a lot of incels get in their own way and just expect sex from women with no effort on their part. When you were called out for this by another user you told them that they're the one perpetuating toxic patriarchy, ackshully, misrepresented hooks' core argument by implying she just spends the book shitting on other feminists for not caring enough about men, quoted walls of text from the book at them, and ended by telling THEM to stop "perpetuating patriarchal standards of sexual conquest". Yeah the removal reason seems pretty justified to me. Allow me to quote hooks at you now:

    Women have believed that we could save the men in our lives by giving them love, that this love would serve as the cure for all the wounds inflicted by toxic assaults on their emotional systems, by the emotional heart attacks they undergo every day. Women can share in this healing process. We can guide, instruct, observe, share information and skills, but we cannot do for boys and men what they must do for themselves. Our love helps, but it alone does not save boys or men. Ultimately boys and men save themselves when they learn the art of loving.