Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Huffpo, feministing, skepchick etc...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Huffpo, feministing, skepchick etc...

    So I was thinking, We are constantly seeing posts on the forums referencing Huffpo, feministing and other notorious feminist hang outs. The typical post goes like this:

    Hey guys, Over on huffpo they are talking bad about us. here's a link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_traffic .

    Then we all dutifully click on the link, and read the article. My suggestion is to copy the text out of the website, and embed it as a quote into our posts. I know the couple of hundred people who view any given thread on here isn't going to make a big dent in their statistics, but I find myself over on huffpo all the time, going from article to article, kind of like watching a train wreck. The one click from here leads to 3 clicks on the site.

    There are 2 or three articles a day on this forum, linking us to one of these sites. Each article is viewed by 2-300 people. Going with the lowest numbers 2 articles, at 200 people is 400 clicks. If we each click on one other article, and you are adding 800 hits to their traffic a day. Totaled up over a year it's 250,000+ hits on their site. They are charging other companies advertising for our actions. These numbers are not accurate, or taken from anything verifiable, they are simply an estimate based on what I see on here, and probably a low estimate at that. They are, however, an example of how our small actions over time add up in positive ways for people we know to be vile.

    I'm not suggesting that we stick our heads in the sand and ignore what they are doing, just take the time to report the full article, and remove a little traffic from their sites,

  • #2
    You can't copy the entire article without violating copyright law. Fair Use limits the amount of text you can quote to a couple of paragraphs at the most.
    https://christianrestoration.wordpress.com/

    Comment


    • #3
      linking the original article is used as a method of source verification, a nod towards intellectual honesty despite the fact that most of this shit we simply couldn't make up if we tried.

      If our views are even noticed enough to get sites like huffpo to self censor their Insanity and man hate because they know we're watching them or if they decide to cater to the articles that get more traffic because of us and post yet more man hating BS and thereby causing feminism yet more bad press
      ether way it's a victory for us.
      "It is the greatest inequality to try to make unequal things equal." - Aristotle

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by NameNotImportant View Post
        You can't copy the entire article without violating copyright law. Fair Use limits the amount of text you can quote to a couple of paragraphs at the most.
        You can grab an entire article, as long as its for non-commercial use.

        "17 U.S.C. § 107
        Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

        the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
        the nature of the copyrighted work;
        the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
        the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
        The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors."
        The ancient shitposter returns.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by MrScruffles View Post
          You can grab an entire article, as long as its for non-commercial use.

          "17 U.S.C. § 107
          Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

          the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
          the nature of the copyrighted work;
          the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
          the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
          The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors."
          The less you take, the more likely that your copying will be excused as a fair use. However, even if you take a small portion of a work, your copying will not be a fair use if the portion taken is the “heart” of the work. In other words, you are more likely to run into problems if you take the most memorable aspect of a work. For example, it would probably not be a fair use to copy the opening guitar riff and the words “I can’t get no satisfaction” from the song “Satisfaction.”
          http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview.../four-factors/

          I'll stick with the lawyers on this one. The smaller the portion the less likely to be sued over copyright infringement.
          https://christianrestoration.wordpress.com/

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Jack H. View Post
            If our views are even noticed enough to get sites like huffpo to self censor their Insanity and man hate because they know we're watching them or if they decide to cater to the articles that get more traffic because of us and post yet more man hating BS and thereby causing feminism yet more bad press
            ether way it's a victory for us.
            I understand the any press is good press theory, but something in the back of my brain keeps balking at the thought that my surfing activity is stuffing even more money in their pockets. Our viewership of these articles probably constitutes less than .1 of a percent, but even that tiny fraction adds money to the coffers.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Eric B View Post
              I understand the any press is good press theory, but something in the back of my brain keeps balking at the thought that my surfing activity is stuffing even more money in their pockets. Our viewership of these articles probably constitutes less than .1 of a percent, but even that tiny fraction adds money to the coffers.
              You can avoid having them get money from you viewing their pages by using a free proxy service and/or installing ad blocking/donottrackme software for your browser.
              https://christianrestoration.wordpress.com/

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by NameNotImportant View Post
                You can avoid having them get money from you viewing their pages by using a free proxy service and/or installing ad blocking/donottrackme software for your browser.
                Offering solutions to problems, I like it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I was actually about to post about an article I read on HUFFPO today, then I read this thread.

                  Why the Men's Rights Movement Is Garbage -by Anne Theriault (feminist blogger) - http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/anne-th...b_5049999.html

                  I need to take a moment here to talk about the Men's Rights Movement, because there seems to be some confusion. Actually, there seems to be a whole lot of confusion.

                  Over the past little while, I've had a number of people challenge me on calling out men's rights activists (hereafter referred to as MRAs). "But men are oppressed too," people say. "Feminism is sexist, and it teaches men that masculinity is wrong." "Straight, white men aren't allowed to be proud of themselves anymore." "If you believe in equality, then you should want men to have the same type of activism as women." "Everyone is entitled to their opinion."

                  First of all, yes, everyone is entitled to their opinion. But let's not pretend that all opinions are created equal -- some are based on fact, and some are total bullshit. Like, I could tell you that I believe that vaccines cause autism, and that would be my opinion, but it would also be demonstrably untrue. So let's not pretend that all opinions should be given the same consideration, because we both know better than that.

                  Second of all, let's get one thing straight: men, as a group, do not face systematic oppression because of their gender. Am I saying that literally no men out there are oppressed? No, I am for sure not saying that. Men can and do face oppression and marginalization for many reasons -- because of race, class, sexuality, poverty, to name a few. Am I saying that every white cishet dude out there has an amazing life because of all his amassed privilege? Nope, I'm not saying that either. There are many circumstances that might lead to someone living a difficult life. But men do not face oppression because they are men. Misandry is not actually a thing, and pretending that it's an oppressive force on par with or worse than misogyny is offensive, gross, and intellectually dishonest.

                  MRAs believe that feminists are to blame for basically everything that's wrong with their lives. The Men's Rights Movement is a reactionary movement created specifically to counter feminism, and most (if not all) of their time and resources go towards silencing and marginalizing women.

                  They do things like starting the Don't Be That Girl campaign, a campaign that accuses women of making false rape reports. They attend feminist events in order to bully and intimidate women, they flood online feminist spaces with threatening messages, and they regularly use smear campaigns and scare tactics to make the women who don't back down afraid for their physical safety. They do literally nothing to actually resolve the problems that they claim to care about, and instead do everything they can to discredit the feminist movement.

                  There are certainly issues that disproportionately affect men -- the suicide rate among men is higher, as is the rate of homelessness. Men are more likely to be injured or killed on the job or because of violence. Men who are the victims of domestic abuse or sexual assault are less likely to report these things. These are the issues that MRAs are purportedly working on, and by "working on" I mean "blaming feminism for."

                  The problem is that none of these things are caused by feminism, or equal rights for women, or anything like that. You know what's actually to blame for a lot of these issues? Marginalizing forces like class and race, for one thing. I mean, it's not rich white men who are grappling with homelessness or dangerous workplaces or gun violence. You know what else is to blame? Our patriarchal culture and its strictly enforced gender roles which, hey, happens to be exactly the same power structure that feminism is trying to take down.

                  The patriarchy has some fucked up ideas about masculinity, ideas that make men less likely to seek help for issues that they perceive to be too feminine -- such as being hurt or raped by a female partner, not being able to provide for themselves, or not seeking help for health issues like depression and anxiety.

                  On a societal level, it means that resources are not as readily available for men who face these challenges, because patriarchal ideas tell our courts, our governments and our charitable organizations that men don't ever need that kind of help. Yes, the patriarchy overwhelmingly privileges the interests of men, but it also hurts men. It hurts men in all the ways that MRAs are apparently so concerned about, which means that you would think that MRAs would be totally on board with dismantling the patriarchy, but they're not. Instead, they would rather blame women for their problems.

                  See, the problem with the Men's Rights Movement is that they are not doing anything concrete to resolve any of the above issues. They are not raising money to open shelters for homeless or abused men. They are not starting up suicide hotlines for men. They are not lobbying for safer workplaces or gun control.

                  Instead, they are crying about feminism, pooh-poohing the idea of patriarchy and generally making the world a sadder, scarier, less safe place to live in. In fact, I would argue that their stupid antics are actually a detriment to the causes that they claim to espouse, because they're creating an association between actual real issues that men face and their disgusting buffoonery. So good job, MRAs. Way to screw vulnerable men over in your quest to prove that feminism is evil. I hope you're all really proud of yourselves.

                  The Men's Rights Movement is not "feminism for men." It's not some kind of complimentary activism meant to help promote equal treatment of men and women. And it most certainly is not friendly towards women, unless we're talking about women with crippling cases of internalized misogyny.

                  I believe in equality for men and women, but I also believe that we're not born with an even playing field. Women still face disenfranchisement, discrimination and a lack of basic freedoms and rights, and although feminism has done a lot of great work over the last century or so, we still haven't undone several millennia's worth of social programming and oppression.

                  So that's why it's not "men's turn" to have a social justice movement. That's why we have the fem in feminism. That's why fairness and equality involve promoting the empowerment of women, rather than promoting the empowerment of both genders in equal amounts. Because, to use a stupid analogy here, if one person starts out with no apples and another person starts out with five apples and then you give them both three apples each in the name of fairness, one person still has five more apples.

                  So yes, let's talk about issues that affect men. Let's come up with solutions for problems that disproportionately hurt men, like suicide and homelessness and violent deaths (while at the same time recognizing that the fact that there are issues that affect more men than women does not mean that men are oppressed because of their gender). Let's work on opening up shelters for abused men, let's create campaigns bringing awareness to the fact that men are also the victims of rape, and let's pressure the government to improve workplace safety. But let's find a way to do this that's not at the expense of women. Instead, let's join together and fuck up the patriarchy real good, because that way everyone wins.

                  p.s. If you actually think that straight white men aren't encouraged to be "proud" of themselves you need to check your privilege a million times over and then check it some more because seriously.
                  This was linked to by a male friend of mine who lives in the UK on facebook. I was hesitant to respond because I don't like debating friends, but I had no idea he was pro-feminist/anti-MRA.
                  So I tried to politely tell him my thoughts on the issue and what I thought was wrong with the article. I listed a lot of real issues that are trying to be dealt with by the MRM with sources and he said that he didn't have time to respond to such a big post till later. I hope that he will be reasonable but I have no idea how deep in the feminism pit he is.

                  I also linked him to this video about the gender pay gap myth and how in some cases men earn a lot less than women:
                  Last edited by Brandi; 04-01-2014, 01:08 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    It is not considered proper form to copy a full article. We here have an unwritten policy of a paragraph of two with comments or opinions and then proper linkage to the original author and/or site. Where you can go a little further on this is when you are commenting on each statement, paragraph or what not. But even then, proper linkage to the originating location and/or the author is prefered.

                    TMOTS (Al)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      ^If it's against the rules to not link then so be it. Edited in the link to my prev post.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X