Is "forcing" positions on other members a valid view?

I think our respective governments need to start policing the internet more efficiently.
The "thought police"?
The internet as a whole is used by many to impose their beliefs on others...be it religious or the current so-called 'woke' ideas. Too many impressionable people are influenced by this and I think our respective governments need to start policing the internet more efficiently. Instead of which, they are encouraging it. The world of sport and women's rights are being violated.
You're joking, right?
 
I agree with you!!..I want to hear what everyone says and I often consider ideas with which I disagree just to figure out if they have validity
I think I sit somewhere in between your point of view and that stated in the post you responded to just above where you responded to mine, (i.e. Lavinia's post).
Why I say this is because its taken me maybe twenty years of trying to deal with those attacking you, (my/our position, "ironically on fathers rights"), to begin to be able to cope well enough with it.

My first posts on the subject were on the " Gingerbread" forum, and in about two weeks my argument generated a pretty huge response with about two hundred, (or was it two thousand comments). Some were supportive, one man saying he agreed contact with his "real/biological father" might have prevented others from abusing him, as was stated in a study carried out at Oxford University.

The main attacks came from one man, who if memory a rves me correctly was known as "Dave", (he chose to try to twist my words around and say I'd accused all stepfathers of being abusers, or him personally at least, which of course I hadn't at all, as I believe any man who can fulfill that role well deserved admiration, as I know I couldn't).

There we have it, there is a real problem because so many are prepared to believe such rubbish is true, or think themselves clever when putting forward a complete load of cross as fact to tool the rest of us, and in such torrents its hard to cope with even when you're hardened to it!
 
Last edited:
Have you ever wondered what the internet would be like if it were impossible to be anonymous? Suppose your real name and location were visible to everyone. I suspect interactions would be much more civil and fake information much rarer.

I think anonymity brings out the worst in people. And, yes, that's my real ugly face.
Your face is NOT ugly. Quite handsome in fact.
 

Is "forcing" positions on other members a valid view?​

The main attacks came from one man, who if memory a rves me correctly was known as "Dave", (he chose to try to twist my words around and say I'd accused all stepfathers of being abusers, or him personally at least, which of course I hadn't at all, as I believe any man who can fulfill that role well deserved admiration, as I know I couldn't).
Folks get a bit touchy when a subject hits close to home

Taking things personal, and sometimes out of context, sets a stage of fractured dialogue

Sometimes the world seems empty of care, valid or not
 
It has been commented here by a couple of people that David's OP hasn't been answered as yet. I believe it has, to the best of anyone's ability to understand exactly what he means since he refuses to give an example. Forcing a position suggests something physical, and I doubt that was his intent, so the alternative is reading the responses given. Some folks are darn pushy when it comes to attempting to convince another of their opinions, ideas, beliefs, etc. However, validity plays no part in this dynamic since who's to determine what is or is not valid in such a situation? Best to drop this now for there is no tried and true answer to it at all.
 
Your face is NOT ugly. Quite handsome in fact.
You are too kind, RadishRose. It's much worse close up. It's so bad, I have to squint when I shave or I get the shivers.

Back on the subject: I'm not a radio amateur. But, I've spent hours listening to them. It used to be that getting a license was not easy. You had to take a written test on theory and procedures and you had to be able to send and receive Morse code. Contacts were virtually all very polite and civil.

Then came Citizens Band radio and anybody could be on the air. The difference was dramatic. There was all kinds of garbage.

Sadly, in an effort to increase members, efforts were made to make it easier to obtain a ham license. And, civility has gone down even among hams. Nasty words and even jamming now sometimes occur.

I was on the internet before there were browsers, and you had to know a little programming language. There wasn't much content then, but forums like Usenet were pretty civil. But, that didn't last.
 
You are too kind, RadishRose. It's much worse close up. It's so bad, I have to squint when I shave or I get the shivers.

Back on the subject: I'm not a radio amateur. But, I've spent hours listening to them. It used to be that getting a license was not easy. You had to take a written test on theory and procedures and you had to be able to send and receive Morse code. Contacts were virtually all very polite and civil.

Then came Citizens Band radio and anybody could be on the air. The difference was dramatic. There was all kinds of garbage.

Sadly, in an effort to increase members, efforts were made to make it easier to obtain a ham license. And, civility has gone down even among hams. Nasty words and even jamming now sometimes occur.

I was on the internet before there were browsers, and you had to know a little programming language. There wasn't much content then, but forums like Usenet were pretty civil. But, that didn't last.
Ah, I remember Usenet......
 
It has been commented here by a couple of people that David's OP hasn't been answered as yet. I believe it has, to the best of anyone's ability to understand exactly what he means since he refuses to give an example. Forcing a position suggests something physical, and I doubt that was his intent, so the alternative is reading the responses given. Some folks are darn pushy when it comes to attempting to convince another of their opinions, ideas, beliefs, etc. However, validity plays no part in this dynamic since who's to determine what is or is not valid in such a situation? Best to drop this now for there is no tried and true answer to it at all.
Let's just see if folks think differently to yourself, or agree and allow the thread to slip away, (as so many, if not all, obviously do, "unless someone stubbornly keeps kicking it back up again", see "Our parents sayings" about to do just that!!! :). ).
 
Have you ever wondered what the internet would be like if it were impossible to be anonymous? Suppose your real name and location were visible to everyone. I suspect interactions would be much more civil and fake information much rarer.

I think anonymity brings out the worst in people. And, yes, that's my real ugly face.
i don't know how much total transparency would help. People are people and often the worst people are the ones who think they can cure societal ills by targeting others. And even in the 3D, face to face world many people have become generally less civil, while their are still some of us that Mr. Rogers' Mom called 'the helpers'.

1) FB for a time if not still asks for real names, but i know for a fact they do not do anything check info on profiles are real---it is full of conflict, name-calling and personal attacks by some, others stay civil and avoid the problem makers, some try to mediate. Plus it's too easy for people to hack others profiles on FB.
2) How many times have authorities discovered people revealed horrible intentions in their social media? Sometimes because others became concerned and reported them, other times because the authorities seize their devices after they've done the deed and find their rants.

i also have my real face out as avatar. Have for most of my time online--i tend to be a 'what you see is what you get' kind of person.
 
i have really enjoyed the responses on this thread (except for the sidebar bickering, which emotionally i understand but don't feel added any substance to the discussion).

Personally i try my 'mental ignore' first--it is usually enough. Very rarely if someone is particularly pushy (usually personally not opinion/discussion wise) i will actually use a site's ignore/block feature. Most often over the years i've used that only when someone was pming trying to establish a more 'intimate' relationship. i'm open to pm'ed questions, or comments someone wouldn't feel comfortable making publicly but i am so over the 'come ons' i still get on FB (where i stay because with some of my family that's the easiest way to converse frequently) and occasionally on smaller sites, thankfully not here! (Knock wood).

i can't recall if i shared this graphic on SF before. If i did it was probably before the OP, and maybe some of the commenters joined us. So i'm going to put it here. Like some of our other members i appreciate people who are willing to consider other perspectives/opinions, and i try to stay willing to take some mental steps to look at something from another side.

RealityGraphic.jpg
 
I think I sit somewhere in between your point of view and that stated in the post you responded to just above where you responded to mine, (i.e. Lavinia's post).
Why I say this is because its taken me maybe twenty years of trying to deal with those attacking you, (my/our position, "ironically on fathers rights"), to begin to be able to cope well enough with it.

My first posts on the subject were on the " Gingerbread" forum, and in about two weeks my argument generated a pretty huge response with about two hundred, (or was it two thousand comments). Some were supportive, one man saying he agreed contact with his "real/biological father" might have prevented others from abusing him, as was stated in a study carried out at Oxford University.

The main attacks came from one man, who if memory a rves me correctly was known as "Dave", (he chose to try to twist my words around and say I'd accused all stepfathers of being abusers, or him personally at least, which of course I hadn't at all, as I believe any man who can fulfill that role well deserved admiration, as I know I couldn't).

There we have it, there is a real problem because so many are prepared to believe such rubbish is true, or think themselves clever when putting forward a complete load of cross as fact to tool the rest of us, and in such torrents its hard to cope with even when you're hardened to it!
Thank you for your sharing explanation and I am sorry you were upset. Believe me I understand...over the years I had my 'fair share' of attacks (on a political thread). At one point I decided to continue with the conversations but try to be very civil and patient and to learn to use the more harsh comments aimed at my POVs and then to redirect my thinking and emotions. LOL at this point I am grateful to those who were the harshest because I really know I have learned to see things differently without becoming as angry and/or hurt as I was before. I still react more than I should to some topics but I have come a long way.
 
Some people think their belief is valid and correct while another is not just from a few words typed on the stupid internet. This is one of many forum behaviors, has been going on for years, and I am used to it. For those who aren't, a forum is for something to do when you are bored and think maybe someone else has said something interesting, it's not the formula for change no matter how badly anyone thinks it should be.
 
The internet as a whole is used by many to impose their beliefs on others...be it religious or the current so-called 'woke' ideas. Too many impressionable people are influenced by this and I think our respective governments need to start policing the internet more efficiently. Instead of which, they are encouraging it. The world of sport and women's rights are being violated.
Though I abosultely share your feelings about womens' rights, just the words, "...policing the internet...." give me the heebs.
 
Have a friend here in the building, nice guy, be he is like Norm from Cheers, an opinion on everything. But with this guy, there is little wiggle room..he does not like other opinions, especially those not of his conservative world view. We were chatting yesterday, a few of us, and he was on his high horse about the shooting at the Tops supermarket up here , as t was racially motivated. And HIS opinion was not positive toward the VICTIMS...or blacks in general.
I choose not to engage, but I said I would respect his right to have that opinion, if he would respect MY opinion to not share it.
 
Have a friend here in the building, nice guy, be he is like Norm from Cheers, an opinion on everything. But with this guy, there is little wiggle room..he does not like other opinions, especially those not of his conservative world view. We were chatting yesterday, a few of us, and he was on his high horse about the shooting at the Tops supermarket up here , as t was racially motivated. And HIS opinion was not positive toward the VICTIMS...or blacks in general.
I choose not to engage, but I said I would respect his right to have that opinion, if he would respect MY opinion to not share it.

It's best not to, will only frustrate you and expose yourself further to his disrespect.
 
You are too kind, RadishRose. It's much worse close up. It's so bad, I have to squint when I shave or I get the shivers.

Back on the subject: I'm not a radio amateur. But, I've spent hours listening to them. It used to be that getting a license was not easy. You had to take a written test on theory and procedures and you had to be able to send and receive Morse code. Contacts were virtually all very polite and civil.

Then came Citizens Band radio and anybody could be on the air. The difference was dramatic. There was all kinds of garbage.

Sadly, in an effort to increase members, efforts were made to make it easier to obtain a ham license. And, civility has gone down even among hams. Nasty words and even jamming now sometimes occur.

I was on the internet before there were browsers, and you had to know a little programming language. There wasn't much content then, but forums like Usenet were pretty civil. But, that didn't last.
Sorry to hear about the decline in civility among HAM radio operators. My Dad, who died in 1995, was a HAM. In 1988 the National Association flew him to a conference in Dallas because he was successful in recruiting young folks to it and they wanted him to talk about it. He never mentioned them loosening the license requirements but we generally had other things to talk about on visits.
 
When I find I am in the presence of a racially prejudice person I do not trust them anymore. We break apart also when I find out someone is prejudice from someone, I lead them into a conservation to see if they really are then we split apart.
We all have to try to be careful when stating generalities, or making assumptions that may not hold true in all circumstances.

I met a man I found I got on pretty well with, when he was working in a fairly menial job in a government establishment in London, (when you first worked together with him there was a slight feistiness, but soon overcome).

Anyway, for reasons I won't go into he'd ended up declining the opportunity to take his breaks with work colleagues in the tearoom, staying instead close to his workplace with a quite religious workmate, (whose conversation was limited let's say, and yet he was another really good hearted guy).

One way or another, maybe after I showed such surprise he didn't/wouldn't use the tearoom, he changed his habits and started using it again.

He'd had an interesting life as a younger man, once running a mobile disco, and he had many wise sayings, some he'd mentioned when I used to tell him about my troubles, (he'd been similarly excluded from his kids lives as well).

The reason for mentioning him here, is that he was honest enough to say as a black man, how often he came across racism in the black community in London too, (a revelation to someone with no idea about these things as this country bumpkin admits he is!).
 
Last edited:
Have a friend here in the building, nice guy, be he is like Norm from Cheers, an opinion on everything. But with this guy, there is little wiggle room..he does not like other opinions, especially those not of his conservative world view. We were chatting yesterday, a few of us, and he was on his high horse about the shooting at the Tops supermarket up here , as t was racially motivated. And HIS opinion was not positive toward the VICTIMS...or blacks in general.
I choose not to engage, but I said I would respect his right to have that opinion, if he would respect MY opinion to not share it.
Cliff Clavin (the mailman) was more opinionated than Norm. Norm was probably the most amiable character in that show and was usually more focused on his next beer than anything else.

I wouldn't have respected your neighbor's opinion because there's nothing about racism that should be respected.
 


Back
Top