Hogan v. Gawker Royal RumbleFollow

You forgot that rousing call to female empowerment, "Have You Ever Beat Up A Boyfriend? Cause, Uh, We Have".
Absolutely agree on Facebook. Both interpersonal interactions and the numerous groups that exist for that kind of thing have to be much better than Jezebel's comment section. I just can't bring myself to agree about Tumblr. Deep down I fear it leads to far more crazy than reasonable interaction.

[quote=The One and Only Poldaran]You forgot that rousing call to female empowerment, "Have You Ever Beat Up A Boyfriend? Cause, Uh, We Have". [/quote=The One and Only Poldaran]

And that article was infamous and had a strong reaction by the commentators about how much ******** it was. Brought up/linked to as utter ******** even today and as anathema to the site and abusing parties. There have been a lot of ****** Jez writers and articles, but also some good (and unique/only) ones and the only alternatives so far proffered are Facebook and Tumblr. Which are not writing/journalist sites, of course. A lot of Jez writers are **** imo, but the site itself would not have an easy replacement. And as always you and others discount the salve of the comment sections. Including rather obviously the anonymous portion; which is not viable on Facebook for example, which insists upon real user-names. Not sure just how ignorant people here are about anonymity and protection, but like, kinda a lot of women, duh.

eta: tried to fix quotes, failed. Lo siento.

Edited, Jun 6th 2016 5:01am by Palpitus1

One of many, it seems.

Retaken Antioch yet, Poldaran?

Sorry, thought you must be kidding/satirical about those sites since I assumed from your history as an intelligent poster, you could not be serious in citing them as alternatives. Sorry I was wrong and you are :heh: serious. So: Salon, Slate, Vice, HuffPo.

Oh

my

Surprised you didn't also include Wired, or CBSsports, or the Wall Street Journal websites as bastions of women issues and a community commentariat. Do you randomly **** out of your *** when on the pot then call it found gold? Even if it's just ****? Come on now Jophiel.

Some people just need "Top Ten Worst New Yorker #Longreads" to help them through their lives.

Not sure I did that. And if I did/do grant an allowance that a small portion of that internet media entity is valuable, it's for (some of) the Jezebel articles of their own value, and even in the objectively ****** Jez articles, women (dozens? hundreds? billions?) can share and commiserate. If that's all it takes to argue something is a "shining jewel" than God hates the internet. There are huge sites dedicated to skepticism, World of Warcraft, science, personal photographs, cooking, etc. But gee, being thankful there's a tiny subsection about women issues of one site is seen as me being some kind of wild-eyed fanatic.

Gawker is no jewel in general and go-go Hulkster, but it still has partial, perhaps irreplaceable value currently. Not all the ****** random Salon and Slate comments sections and their awful commenting structure can change that tiny little internet (imo) fact.

If a new heavily trafficked-site "women commiserate. com" opened tomorrow I'd enjoy Gawker's continuing crash and burn. But neither of us are women so, like whatever, right? Not a big deal apparently. You misogynist Devil!!! >:0

If you think Jezebel is a shining example of women's issues discussions then you're part of the problem. HelloGiggles for starters.

So you agree that Jezebel is worthless?

Then hyperbolic as it may be you're part of the problem so neither dishonest or a strawman.

Again, you are just being binary. There's a wide range of areas between "worthless" and "shining jewel". How stupid/obstinate does someone have to be to pretend there is only one or the other. And this post of yours is also a deflection where you again don't answer my criticism.

Someone reaching out verbally to one single suffering woman is also not "part of the problem", you utter moron. A website that reaches out to more? "Part of the problem"?? The Fuck?????

p.s. please define what this "problem" is you're referring to. wtf.

A cogent 3-year old could out-debate you. Are you even now wearing diapers? What a pathetic showing in this thread. All due to binary obstinancy. Are you in fact Nick Denton? If the outcome of this debate was you owing me $140 million and declaring bankruptcy instead of apologizing and admitting error and ****** arguments, then you sure might be. lolgaxehardhead.

Notch has some employment tips for former Gawker staffers.

Why would we want to do that? Let them flounder and burn.
Is that what the kids are calling it these days?