EXCUSE ME? Blocked by hypocritical admin on GeekFeminism

Post Reply New Topic

Okay, I'm not by any means anti-feminist or anything, I'm actually rather Pro-feminist, so I was looking around Geek Feminist wiki. It wasn't bad, but I noticed all there topics on any male rights oriented thing just ignored all male rights and framed them as being an excuse to silence feminists, even going as far as saying "patriarchy hurts men too" is exclusively used silencing tactic, not something used to defend feminism from people who think feminists are misandric, which is how I usually see it used. None of them even explained what male discrimination does or does not play in feminism, they were just badly written, one-sided articles. They don't even acknowledge the multiple sides there are to feminism. Particularly, on the silencing page I noted to me it appears as certain pages are being used to silence men in the same manner said tactics are used to silence woman, and that the articles shouldn't be so one-sided, and said that I was open for any and all discussion. Well, here is the response I got:

Source

I wasn't even complaining about misandry, I was just stating that some articles should be worked so they don't appear to hypocritical and one-sided, as there are pro-feminist male right activists and they do have legitimate concerns, and not acknowledging such would reflect on the credibility of the wiki. Anyway, what bothered me the most is just how immature the comment on it was, someone like that should not be an admin for a wiki. I then went over to Monadic's talk to page to discuss the page deletion and how it was unprofessional by any means, but I discovered that, low and behold, I was blocked, because "LOL no". -_-



Also, I found he reverted all constructive edits I made, not even relating to male rights in anyway. For example, one article listed a group of non-rock musicians as being rock stars, so I corrected by using the appropriate term

What a bloody hypocrite. I talk about how a page is slightly hypocritical because it uses the same silencing tactics, and he responds by LITERALLY silencing me, closing any discussion. The wiki claims to be for all types of feminists, but apparently it's only for feminists who believe that men do not have the right to speak unless they subscribe to the exact same philosophy as the wiki admin. I've run wikis professionally before, and I know just typing the things he did are more grounds for banning someone than anything I did, let alone banning someone for something so minor. That is abuse of power and should be punished. Since I can't speak against anything since I'm freaking blocked, I'd like for someone else to speak on my behalf explaining how I was unfairly banned, and how such trigger happy behavior reflects negatively on the wiki as a whole. Here is the guilty admin's talk page, I'm not sure who is higher up is on the wiki totem pole, but I know he isn't at the top. Thank you.

Men's rights activists are not feminists.

No, but they aren't automatically anti-feminists either, that's the point. Feminist perspective of the masculinism movement is not automatically that it's misogynic, there is a range of feminist opinions on the movement. In the very least they can mention male feminists.

What are you even DOING on a feminist site???

As there are stupid men in the world, there are also stupid women.

Sounds like you just ran into a few.

Thanks for trying, though.

Said moderator is male.

Anyway, I looked into site policy, and they revert edits for swaying their point of view and often ban users who make such edits due to problems they have with trolls. However, they say discussion is allowed on talk pages, which all my activity outside of the harmless edit were, and that still doesn't excuse the immature "response".

Ah, excuse my misunderstanding.

But you are correct. It sounds like a nonsense site.

a man going on a feminist website makes as much sense as a Jew going on a anti-Semitic nazi website

Yes, last time i checked feminists were calling for the wholesale genocide of men.

Yes, you're competely right.

do some research. look up SCUM manifesto

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCUM_Manifesto

and read who stole feminism by Christina Sommers

Yeah, because we all know that inside all females is a Valerie Solanas waiting to break out.

It is sad that the extremists in any movement are the ones that are going to get the most attention, however. Level-headed thinking is not going to sell newspapers. Calling out for mass murder will. Too many people equate feminism with works like The SCUM Manifesto. As somebody who hates both misogyny and misandry (as well as somebody who harbors a bit of both within his heart), I find the practice of letting an extremist be the sole voice for millions of more level-headed people to be quite irresponsible.

You can always start many sock puppet accounts and troll them for their support of misandry! Maybe send the link to their site to 4chan for revenge! Or not it might be overboard hehe.

Last edited by AspieOtaku on 26 Jan 2014, 5:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Is it really vital that you have editing privileges for some random feminist wiki page in a roiling sea of wiki pages and Tumblr pages?

Let's be fair and use this as a yardstick for judging all men: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Manson

Or we could just try not being completely f*****g ridiculous, if that's not too difficult.

Some people like to silence other people if other people have opinions that are different from some people's opinions. They don't care about multiple sides of an issue or discussions with multiple perspectives.

Then the moderate majority should be that much more outspoken about the reality of their views. As it is, you don't see a lot of feminists actively condemning their activities.

It's no different than how anti-religious people hold up WBC as the spokes-church for all of Christianity, particularly Protestant Christianity. Sure, they make a few excellent points, as no doubt radical feminists do, but their preoccupation with God's impending wrath does not new converts make. Most Christian denominations are quick to distance themselves as much as they can from that kind of message.

Or if you look at right-wing politics, look at how the Republican establishment has gone into overtime quashing the Tea Party message (I prefer Tea Party conservatism to Republican abandonment of conservative values, incidentally, but I thought it was a good example).

If your goal is getting a certain message out and you have an internal radical faction that obscures that message, you need to at least make a show of exposing the radical element and eliminating it if you can (btw, I don't mean by force, but rather by changing perceptions on the outside to favor moderate views). I see the role of radical feminism within gestalt feminism as akin to the radical element within Islam: The radical element ultimately benefits adherents as a whole, therefore being more outspoken against it ultimately places adherents at a disadvantage (if not in direct danger). It makes it difficult for the majority to take a suppressive stance against radical elements within the movement, and it makes some of us wonder exactly just how much moderates actually believe in moderatism.