Vaccines and Cyberbullying - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 08:15 AM - Thread Starter
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,049
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Can we speak candidly? Lately, the non-vaxxers and delayed/selective vaxxers have been sharing articles that, at least in my mind, cross the line between criticism and cyberbullying. In another thread yesterday, I defined cyberbullying as the use of an electronic medium to threaten, harass, intimidate, or defame one or more individuals.

Recently, I have seen mainstream news sources make the editorial decision to run articles containing insults such as kooks, nutjobs, stupid, selfish, and freeloaders. Phil Plait ran an op-ed in a Canadian newspaper in which he squeals with delight at everyone who cyber-bullied Jenny McCarthy on Twitter. (She asked what people look for in a mate, and respondents posted things like "one who isn't an anti-vax freak")

In social media and newspaper article comments, I have repeatedly seen the comment that Darwin will win and won't it be nice when all of the "anti-vaxxers" and their children die off. (So they *do* want to see children die of vaccine-targeted diseases, after all. Who knew? eyesroll.gif)

And don't even get me started on the pseudo-skeptic bloggers.

Cyberbullying, and even just catty insults that you personally don't see as cyberbullying, erode away at credibility. They show me that people are relying on their emotions instead of their intellect. Also---by the way---it's wrong to bully and insult people.

IME, 100% of the perpetrators don't own up to their behavior. "So saying that X and Y makes me a troll?" "Those people don't deserve my respect." "That's not bullying! You're so sensitive!" "But . . . but . . . I need hits on my blog!!"

So I have two questions.

Bullying happens first because bullies choose to bully and second because bystanders enable the behavior. You and I can do something about the latter. Have you ever had the courage to break into a comment thread or social media conversation and tell a perpetrator to knock it off? Example: "Hey, I'm on your side where vaccines are concerned. But that's uncalled for, and you're not helping our cause." If you haven't, would you consider it?

Second, is there any recourse we could take to hold news media accountable? A lot of outlets have ombudsmen. Time Magazine, unfortunately, doesn't. We need to hold them to a higher standard of journalistic integrity and professionalism. Time could just as easily tell an op-ed writer to nix the name-calling before the piece gets published.

There's a growing streak of anti-intellectualism in our culture that just terrifies me. greensad.gif Sigh.

Anyway, what are your thoughts?

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is online now  
#2 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 09:19 AM
 
rainbownurse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 799
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

I 100% agree with you, and couldn't have put it better. I think that we do need to hold everyone to a standard. I always try to think "If I was sitting with this person, having a cup of tea, would I be saying this to their face?" 
I think as well, wording can have a huge effect (someone pointed this out in another thread)
saying "Rainbow, that comment was rude" is different than saying, "Rainbow, YOU are rude" 
One is making a statement about something I said, another is making a statement about me. 
 

rainbownurse is offline  
#3 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 09:47 AM
 
rachelsmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 1,557
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)

Yes, I'd say that a lot of the articles and blog posts that have been going viral lately qualify as bullying.  Some of them also qualify as propaganda.  The whole nature of the "debate" has just gotten surreal; health doesn't even seem to be part of it anymore.

rachelsmama is offline  
#4 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 10:43 AM
 
mama24-7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: with the dust bunnies
Posts: 2,441
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)

I've wanted to start a thread about this kind of thing.  It seems a popular MO to use name calling, threats & other cyberbullying behavior when one doesn't have a valid argument. It's quite prevalent in a lot of areas - here, promoting genital integrity, promoting normal infant feeding as opposed to "parental choice" in that arena & probably other places.  

 

I'm on twitter where I spread information about genital integrity & work to dispel the myths.  There are people there who name call parent's who've allowed their child to be circumcised.  I don't agree w/ it & I've posted that in a few cases.  I've also posted general things about how we need to let the facts speak for themselves & take the high road.  I don't know if it's becuase those name callers are mad that they themselves were circ'd so they let their anger come out or they truly believe it's an effect method to combat the pro-circ world we live in.  

 

I generally ask questions vs. stating what I believe.  In the past couple of days, someone here didn't liek that.  People in general don't.  But I feel it a better way to get at the logic or lack thereof.  I think it's a lot easier to just call someone a name (or otherwise bully) than it is to come up w/ a logical, thought out argument.  We see people taking short cuts all the time & in this, things are no different.

 

I will consider calling people out on their abusive behavior more often.

 

Sus

applejuice, Turquesa and BeckyBird like this.

Baby the babies while they're babies so they don't need babying for a lifetime.
mama24-7 is online now  
#5 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 11:27 AM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,282
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 138 Post(s)

Blogs/articles do go over the top on both sides of the issue.  This is a hot topic.  It wouldn't be called that if only one side got heated. 

 

As far as Time and other online news articles, I unfortunately think it's inevitable.  They depend on page hits and advertisements to make money.  Nice respectful articles don't attract readers.  They just don't.  I'm not sure anything is going to change that reality.  It's the way humans are. Sensational headlines are used for the same reason. People don't click on boring headlines and people don't read boring articles. 

 

I don't think that these kind of articles are going to persuade people who are firmly non vax.  A study in Pediatrics recently showed that even just presenting facts about diseases/vaccines didn't change NVers minds.  So I don't think thats the purpose of these articles.  Does it help persuade fence sitters? Maybe maybe not.  Of course some are going to be turned off, but it will turn a light bulb on for others.  I know that reading sciencebasedmedicine/respectfulinsolence helped me when I was still researching and on the fence.  


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#6 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 12:28 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,282
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 138 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turquesa View Post


Recently, I have seen mainstream news sources make the editorial decision to run articles containing insults such as kooks, nutjobs, stupid, selfish, and freeloaders. Phil Plait ran an op-ed in a Canadian newspaper in which he squeals with delight at everyone who cyber-bullied Jenny McCarthy on Twitter. (She asked what people look for in a mate, and respondents posted things like "one who isn't an anti-vax freak")


Cyberbullying, and even just catty insults that you personally don't see as cyberbullying, erode away at credibility. They show me that people are relying on their emotions instead of their intellect. Also---by the way---it's wrong to bully and insult people.

 

 

I'll just add that I find the "hugs" that this post is getting pretty ironic considering this post: http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1399405/is-it-fair-to-criticize-individuals-in-support-only-forums

 

I think you were the only non vaxxer who agreed that personally attacking people/public figures shouldn't be allowed on the support forums.

 

So I do find it a bit hypocritical to agree with your post but then disagree that this behavior shouldn't be allowed on support forums.  

 

Replace nutjobs, stupid, selfish with pharma shills, bad mothers, evil, money hungry  and you'll see these kind of statements being made in the support forums about Paul Offit and other PVers.


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#7 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 02:46 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)

Tea, I have been reluctant to post on this thread precisely because I knew someone would call us hypocrites.

 

I think there is a huge difference, though, between what Turquesa is talking about and people wanting the right to call Offitt an ass (or whatever) on the INV forum.

 

The National Post and Time Magazine are different than INV.  INV is a message board with a fairly small amount of mothers talking amongst themselves.   The National Post and Time are well read and typically well respected news magazine.  They have an audience that we don't, and frankly should be bound by professional codes of ethics. 

 

I will speak for myself and say that I have always found pro-vaxxers overall  to be more hostile and bullying than non-vaxxers. It gets tiring to always be the whipping boy.  I am really not interested in it anymore.  Throw the first 1000 punches and then get upset when people snap back?  Puhleeze.  Perhaps you will say that that is out there but MDC is not an island, and we cannot be, given real laws affect real people.  Real bullying and real exclusion affects real people.  Perhaps hate just begets hates - and yes, people hate non-vaxxers.  That might be a bigger issue than vaccines, tbh.  It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the long term. 

 

I will also add that I do not entirely trust the motives of this whole "they shouldn't be mean to Dorit on the INV" brigade.  Pro-vaxxers absolutely do want to control the message - and not just on MDC.  Consider the whole Chili's debacle.  An organization that does a lot of good in helping autistic children not to wander (really big deal!) has a fund raising source cut off because it dares to say there may be a vaccine-autism link. Pro-vaxxers repeatedly argue against balanced news coverage - they do not want the other side (i.e. vaccine critical) heard when it comes to vaccination. I believe that if VOS had more posters, they would absolutely be arguing that they should be able to say what they want about Jenny McCarthy and the like. That is an assumption, but it is one based on experience and I have been here a long time. What is good for the goose is apparently not good for the gander.....

 

Alas, my rambling in the last two posts are not necessarily relevant.  Time and National Post are not INV.  Apples to ducks or lizards or something.  Pointe Finale. 

 

ETA:  

Mirzam, BeckyBird and samaxtics like this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is offline  
#8 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 02:48 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

Blogs/articles do go over the top on both sides of the issue.  This is a hot topic.  It wouldn't be called that if only one side got heated. 

  

Please find one recent article from a very mainstream news source where pro-vaxxers are called "pro-vax cranks" or nutjobs".  Comments do not count.  Thanks. 

Mirzam and samaxtics like this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is offline  
#9 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 03:27 PM
 
rainbownurse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 799
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)

We can't control what national news sites and mainstream blogs post. What we can do is try to hold ourselves and each other to a higher standard. I have seen/read some pretty nasty things from BOTH sides on this very website. 
I think part of holding ourselves and each other accountable is reporting comments that cross the line between a debate, and being nasty. I know on other forum sites I frequent, the mods encourage reporting when the UA is not adhered to, because they cannot be everywhere all the time. 
It doesn't matter what "side" you're on, we all need to agree that there is no place for insults, name calling and personal attacks in a proper debate forum

rainbownurse is offline  
#10 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 05:08 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,282
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 138 Post(s)

It  is hypocritical, Kathy.  Sorry, theres no way around that. 

 

You don't like name calling or cyber bullying or the trashing of celebrities when the name callers are on the other side, but continue to argue that you and other mothering members should be allowed to do the exact same thing here.

 

Like rainbow said, we cannot control what news sites publish on the internet. 

 

We aren't in elementary school anymore. The argument "they do it so we should be able to do it too" is pretty silly.  This is a private forum that has rules.

 

Either it's wrong when the media does it or it's not.  You can't simultaneously say you disagree with cyber bullying and name calling while making the argument that it should be perfectly fine for you to do so here. 

 

Two wrongs do not make a right.

 

Edit to add:  The non-vaccine members here had no problem with instantly flagging and removing any post with the economic term "free rider".  Which is again hypocritical. You don't like it when offensive things are said about your side, and agree they should be removed, but then simultaneously argue you should be able to do the same to the other side.  As you said, "What is good for the goose is apparently not good for the gander..."

chickabiddy and prosciencemum like this.

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#11 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 06:07 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

 

Actually, I no longer care if you trash the NV side.  Have fun.  Do it on VOS.  Members exempt.   It has been happening all along on debate anyways…so what difference does it make? 

 

I want to discuss and occasionally trash the pro-vax side as I see fit  (members exempt)... and will do so on INV.  

 

 

I have noticed you failed to provide a mainstream news article where pro-vaxxers are bullied.  

 

I am calling them like I see them:  there is a large portion of the pro-vax world who are bullies and are controlling, and I have no desire to play nice with them.  

 

I find it very interesting that some of you are so offended/threatened by NV not wanting to be passive whipping-boys.  Against the playbook, eh?

applejuice and BeckyBird like this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is offline  
#12 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 06:25 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,282
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 138 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

 

Actually, I no longer care if you trash the NV side.  Have fun.  Do it on VOS.  Members exempt.   It has been happening all along on debate anyways…so what difference does it make? 

 

I want to discuss and occasionally trash the pro-vax side as I see fit  (members exempt)... and will do so on INV.  

 

 

 

What an interesting turn around! You sure cared three days ago, and even personally thanked ICM for moderating and "being on board".

 

Part of her post that got "likes" from NVers said "You are all smart and articulate and can figure a way to express yourselves without resorting to name calling. " 

 

Directly after that post you said "Sorry, ICM, and glad to have you onboard tonight!"

 

Sorry, sounds like desperate back pedaling on your part. 

 

You are being hypocritical and don't like being called out on it. Understandable. 

 

Edit: Here's the thread,  http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1399336/measles/200


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#13 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 06:51 PM - Thread Starter
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,049
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
OK, anyone who's seeing this thread as a competition between who belongs to the more righteous "side" of the debate needs to re-read the original post because it doesn't come even close to the point I was making. When it comes to cyber-bullying, we have a responsibility to stand up to *our own side.* This is something that Mama24-7 totally gets in the context of the circ debate. blowkiss.gif

Bullying behavior feeds on support and attention from the bystanders in the perpetrator's inner circle. When we were in middle school, it was scary to stand up to a ringleader who was being mean because it could mean losing friends and becoming the new target. But today, we're grown women and mothers and need to get over it.

Tea, I really don't care who's calling it out---a two-faced hypocrite or the Pope himself. Cyberbulling is cyberbullying. It's also serious stuff. At best, it sets a crappy example to our children. At worst it leads to the victims committing suicide.

Even if someone is inconsistent or even a hypocrite, there comes a time to step up, do the right thing, and remind someone that their behavior is unacceptable. You may be mocked as a result, but it shouldn't stop you. And it will go miles toward building a civil online society and sparing a victim from emotional and other repercussions.

Whatever we do, let's not belabor the fallacy of stating that someone's argument, (or agreement with my post) is invalid because you find them inconsistent or hypocritical. http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/13-ad-hominem-tu-quoque.

For this thread, I mostly had in mind the culture we live in *outside* of MDC, the latter of which fortunately doesn't have any serious bullying. But yes, we're accountable for our behavior here, as well, all the way down to the passive-aggressive statements about sheeple and conspiracy theories. What scares me is that there is a quick slippery slope between the repressed anger that many of us feel here and unfettered cyberbullying.

Anyway, I think we can make a substantial and direct impact on the problem by calling out cyberbullying. It will prove more challenging to make an impact on news media. But it can be done.

I think that making excuses for media outlets, ("Well, that's what people want," "That's how it is." "They need ratings," etc.), is enabling and even condoning their behavior. None of the major outlets get my business because I find their yellow journalism, cherry-picked issues that they're willing to cover, spin-doctoring, and talk-down-to-viewers approach downright insulting to my intelligence. And I am disgusted by how they kowtow to their corporate sponsors. I know I'm not the only one who feels that way. (NPR and BBC are my go-to sources. I'm not always rah-rah about them, but they do a much better job than the others).

Consumers have made a huge impact on changing childbirth in hospital settings, (allowing fathers into delivery rooms, rooming in, etc.), and getting business like Whole Foods and Stonyfield Farms on board with going GMO-free. I think we can make a similar dent in the corporate media. When it comes to non-vaccine-compliant parents, these outlets are actively participating in cyberbullying. As their patrons, we need to let them know that what we're seeing is unacceptable.

I'll close with a link to a statement that Pope Francis made on World Communication Day. I know that most of you probably don't share my faith, and that's fine. You don't even have to click on the link. I just think there's some wisdom to glean here about humanizing cyber-communication, even when I can't personally always live up to the principles. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/francesco/messages/communications/documents/papa-francesco_20140124_messaggio-comunicazioni-sociali_en.html

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is online now  
#14 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 07:04 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,282
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 138 Post(s)

@ Turquesa

 

The logical fallacy you posted is not applicable. I'm not arguing that what you (and kathymuggle) are saying is wrong because she's being hypocritical.  You guys are right.  These kinds of comments are mean and hurtful and wrong.   

 

Your link says: 

 

Logical Form:

Person 1 is claiming that Y is true, but person 1 is acting as if Y is not true.

Therefore, Y must not be true.

Example #1:

Helga: You should not be eating that... it has been scientifically proven that eating fat burgers are no good for your health.

Hugh: You eat fat burgers all the time so that can’t be true.

 

That's not my argument. My argument is that it's hypocritical to say that it's wrong or not ok for one side to say or do something while arguing that it's ok for the other side to do it.  

 

Surely you agree? You were one of the only NVers who stated they believed it was wrong to personally attack people on the INV forum.  Have you changed your mind? If not, I'm not sure why you are making the argument that PVers should speak up against their side but you shouldn't.   

 

Also, if you are reading the articles and clicking on the links you are giving them business. 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#15 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 07:11 PM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,099
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post

 

Replace nutjobs, stupid, selfish with pharma shills, bad mothers, evil, money hungry  and you'll see these kind of statements being made in the support forums about Paul Offit and other PVers.

 

Replace Paul Offit with Jenny Mc Carthy and I feel offended. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 Sorry, theres no way around that. 

 

Like rainbow said, we cannot control what news sites publish on the internet. 

 

We aren't in elementary school anymore. The argument "they do it so we should be able to do it too" is pretty silly.  This is a private forum that has rules.

ah, there is a way - EDIT - one can just google the number of threads (let's say that mention Jenny Mc Carthy and who said what)  and maybe if one is so "do as I say not as I do" - they could edit out what they wrote - what an idea!

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

Edit to add:  The non-vaccine members here had no problem with instantly flagging and removing any post with the economic term "free rider".  Which is again hypocritical. You don't like it when offensive things are said about your side, and agree they should be removed, but then simultaneously argue you should be able to do the same to the other side.  As you said, "What is good for the goose is apparently not good for the gander..."

 

How about a "thumb" up to a post in a section where one is not even to post in made by a REGUAL?  No problem giving a "thumbs" up to a post calling me a murderer for exercising my LEGAL rights? 

 

I find the use of a "thumb up"  expressed by a "PRO-vaccine REGULAR poster" HIGHLY offensive to me and my fellow non-vaccining parents! It is inappropriate as much as typing it out - I can't grasp why this REGULAR is even allowed to still be a member - I would LOVE an answer to that one! 

 

Isn't that a violation?

applejuice and kathymuggle like this.

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
#16 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 07:21 PM
 
chickabiddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,472
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)

The post that calls non-vaxing "murder" has no thumbs-up at all.


Carseat-checking (CPST) and WAH mama to a twelve-year-old girl.
chickabiddy is online now  
#17 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 07:25 PM
 
dalia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I have been called a "killer" and it has been suggested that my children should be taken away. That's cyber-bullying. It is awful and it needs to stop. I also HATE the term sheeple and will say so. Terms directed to parents are not okay. Free-rider is offensive and is cyber-bullying as well.
applejuice and Turquesa like this.

Wife to one amazing husband superhero.gif, SAHM to DS bouncy.gif 10/09, DS babyboy.gif 10/19,  one furbaby dog2.gif, and lots of chicken3.gif!

 
joy.gif

dalia is offline  
#18 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 07:38 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

 

 

Directly after that post you said "Sorry, ICM, and glad to have you onboard tonight!"

 

 

And do you know what I said sorry for?  No, you do not.  

 

ICM said this:

 

Ok, you all are posting so quickly that mods can't get around to taking action on flags before discussion on moderation starts up.Give us a minute, please. I removed two posts with the term "free loader / free rider".  And then like 5 posts that went on to discuss the post that I removed. On this thread or another like it, I already explained that this is an unwelcome term. Please do not post to further discuss the use of that term. That is not a welcome term. You are all smart and articulate and can figure a way to express yourselves without resorting to name calling. 

 

I apologised because I had written a post that needed to be removed while she caught up.  

 

You may think I am being hypocritical but I think you are being assumptive. 

 

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

 

Directly after that post you said "Sorry, ICM, and glad to have you onboard tonight!"

 

Sorry, sounds like desperate back pedaling on your part. 

 

You are being hypocritical and don't like being called out on it. Understandable. 

 

Edit: Here's the thread,  http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1399336/measles/200


There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is offline  
#19 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 07:45 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

That's not my argument. My argument is that it's hypocritical to say that it's wrong or not ok for one side to say or do something while arguing that it's ok for the other side to do it.  

 

Surely you see there is a weight issue here.  Prov-vaxxer have been more offensive, bullied more online.  

 

It is hard to believe you care at all when your opening post in this thread was this, which I certainly read as dismissive:

 

"Blogs/articles do go over the top on both sides of the issue.  This is a hot topic.  It wouldn't be called that if only one side got heated. 

 

As far as Time and other online news articles, I unfortunately think it's inevitable.  They depend on page hits and advertisements to make money.  Nice respectful articles don't attract readers.  They just don't.  I'm not sure anything is going to change that reality.  It's the way humans are. Sensational headlines are used for the same reason. People don't click on boring headlines and people don't read boring articles. "


There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is offline  
#20 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 07:46 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,282
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 138 Post(s)

The "Sorry" part isn't what's hypocritical. 

 

It's the "glad to have you on board tonight!" part that is.

 

You like having a moderator on board when they are moderating the other side, or deleting posts from the other side.   

 

But you don't think that offensive posts should be moderated or deleted when it comes from the NV side, and you are now back pedaling saying you don't care what we say about NVers because you realize that calling Andrew out for using the term "free rider" while arguing that your side should be able to name call and personally attack PVers is hypocritical.  

 

You can't have it both ways, Kathy. 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#21 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 07:48 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

The "Sorry" part isn't what's hypocritical.

 

It's the "glad to have you on board tonight!" part that is.

 

I think you would rather discuss what you perceive as my hypocrisy than the much more important issues Turquesa raised.  Way to deflect…but I should stop rising to the bait.  Have a good night.

 

ETA:  and if you agree with Turquesa, may I suggest you prove it?  Actions speak louder than words.  I do not recall you ever telling a pro-vaxxer to knock it off when they are being verbally agressive.

applejuice and dalia like this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is offline  
#22 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 07:51 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,282
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 138 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

Surely you see there is a weight issue here.  Prov-vaxxer have been more offensive, bullied more online.  

 

It is hard to believe you care at all when your opening post in this thread was this, which I certainly read as dismissive:

 

"Blogs/articles do go over the top on both sides of the issue.  This is a hot topic.  It wouldn't be called that if only one side got heated. 

 

As far as Time and other online news articles, I unfortunately think it's inevitable.  They depend on page hits and advertisements to make money.  Nice respectful articles don't attract readers.  They just don't.  I'm not sure anything is going to change that reality.  It's the way humans are. Sensational headlines are used for the same reason. People don't click on boring headlines and people don't read boring articles. "

 

I'm not sure why you find it dismissive.  I said unfortunately

 

I'm just being realistic, here.  Boring and nice blogs and articles don't get the kind of traffic that snarky ones do.  Places like Times are dependent on page hits and advertising, it's just the way it is.  

 

I didn't say I agreed with it, I just said it's inevitable. 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#23 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 07:54 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,282
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 138 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

I think you would rather discuss what you perceive as my hypocricy than the much more important issues Turquesa raised.  Way to deflect…but I should stop rising to the bait.  Have a good night.

 

Nope, I agree with Turquesa. 

 

We don't have control or a say about what the Times or other news sites choose to post, however.  We do (sort of) have a say about what should be accepted here on mothering. 

 

You are the one deflecting and refusing to acknowledge that you're position is hypocritical. 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#24 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 07:55 PM
 
dalia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Teacozy, if someone called me a murderer or said my children should be taken away would you try and put a stop to it? Would you stick up for me? Just curious.
Turquesa likes this.

Wife to one amazing husband superhero.gif, SAHM to DS bouncy.gif 10/09, DS babyboy.gif 10/19,  one furbaby dog2.gif, and lots of chicken3.gif!

 
joy.gif

dalia is offline  
#25 of 68 Old 04-09-2014, 07:58 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,282
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 138 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalia View Post

Teacozy, if someone called me a murderer or said my children should be taken away would you try and put a stop to it? Would you stick up for me? Just curious.

 

I absolutely think that's wrong and don't even have any idea which post you guys are talking about.   I'm guessing it was deleted? Because I didn't see it. 

 

Whoever said that should have their post deleted and be temporarily (if not permanently) banned. 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#26 of 68 Old 04-10-2014, 04:08 AM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,099
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post

I absolutely think that's wrong and don't even have any idea which post you guys are talking about.   I'm guessing it was deleted? Because I didn't see it. 

Whoever said that should have their post deleted and be temporarily (if not permanently) banned. 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalia View Post

Teacozy, if someone called me a murderer or said my children should be taken away would you try and put a stop to it? Would you stick up for me? Just curious.



Dalia you didn't get your question answered, sorry to see that.

I will say I am one that would personally defend you and others and stick up for this bullying.

I just don't get it??? There are posts all the time that link to those who bully yet it go after members directly instead.
applejuice and dalia like this.

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
#27 of 68 Old 04-10-2014, 05:57 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turquesa View Post



Second, is there any recourse we could take to hold news media accountable? A lot of outlets have ombudsmen. Time Magazine, unfortunately, doesn't. We need to hold them to a higher standard of journalistic integrity and professionalism. Time could just as easily tell an op-ed writer to nix the name-calling before the piece gets published.


Anyway, what are your thoughts?

 

The recourse we have is with our dollars.  With something like Chili's it is easy - avoid.  Perhaps let others know why you avoid.  

 

With things like the National Post or Time Magazine it is trickier.  If you have a paper copy, you can cancel…whether or not you want to and at what point is up to you.  If my favourite paper posts a vaccine-bully article, should I cancel my subscription?  It is a hard call, because they might have merit in other ways.  I might let one nasty article go, I would not let several.  There are companies I avoid due to issues I have with them.

 

The online thing is trickier.  If I look at their site, I am a hit, if I comment, I am generating discussion….and all of this drives advertising dollars.  And yet, I want to look (most of the time!).  I think it is important to know what others are saying, I think it is important to share such information so  people understand the nastiness that is out there about people exercising their legal choice.  


There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is offline  
#28 of 68 Old 04-10-2014, 08:06 AM - Thread Starter
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,049
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post





Dalia you didn't get your question answered, sorry to see that.



I will say I am one that would personally defend you and others and stick up for this bullying.



I just don't get it??? There are posts all the time that link to those who bully yet it go after members directly instead.

 



That's awesome you'd go to bat for her, but I'm more interested in whether people would do the same for their opponents that they're willing to do for their allies.

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is online now  
#29 of 68 Old 04-10-2014, 08:09 AM - Thread Starter
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,049
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post

 

I absolutely think that's wrong and don't even have any idea which post you guys are talking about.   I'm guessing it was deleted? Because I didn't see it. 

 

Whoever said that should have their post deleted and be temporarily (if not permanently) banned. 

 



You didn't answer her question.
serenbat likes this.

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is online now  
#30 of 68 Old 04-10-2014, 08:10 AM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,099
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turquesa View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post





Dalia you didn't get your question answered, sorry to see that.



I will say I am one that would personally defend you and others and stick up for this bullying.



I just don't get it??? There are posts all the time that link to those who bully yet it go after members directly instead.

 



That's awesome you'd go to bat for her, but I'm more interested in whether people would do the same for their opponents that they're willing to do for their allies.

I absolutely would NOT!

 

I would not lift one finger to help someone who has posted comments from sites and by those who wish to attack me for exercising my legal choices and they go on to hide behind them! I can think of several posts made on here by those on the "other side" by groups and individuals bent on removing my rights. NO WAY!


 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off