I can't pick a poll answer either. I'd say I limit my activity in politics because of a little of all the poll answers except the last.
Blatham - boo!
and i've got to speak politely, as i see my dad's just posted on another thread. i'll just put on my pleated skirt and glasses, fold my hands, and wait a moment. oops, he'll be able to read back
join in, blatham, join in.
It's true, my avatar seems to have cooled the guys down on Iraq. funny
hmmmmmm, now there's a technical challenge - creating a poll with options we like! :grin:
Yes, Blatham, you're welcome as always. But do be careful, we carry a big stick.
but that's ok, we're generally nice to handsome and intelligent guys like you. Actually, we love to have you around. But if you're here, will we get anything done? That's what I want to know.
Edited for typo.
Actually, I would like to take little k's question seriously for a minute. I don't contribute much to the politics threads because I don't have the time it takes to keep up and compose intelligible posts that will add to the discussion. Besides, I'm a horrible speller. I do read them, thereby staying informed. They are fascinating reading, if only the naughty hot heads would behave. Occasional and well placed lapses in behavior are appreciated, however. Too much politeness can be dull.
(Posting as I prepare a hearty dinner for daughter and I)
In social gatherings, family or friends, I far more commonly find myself talking with women rather than men. It isn't just that you guys smell nicer, though that is part of it. It's more that what might come out of your mouths is less predictable, and less filled with that huff of self-certainty. There seems to be an odd similarity to the way men commonly talk of sports and how they talk about politics. I truly have trouble with listening to intimations of chest puffing heroism, and that is something you women do very little of - in itself ironic, given your chests.
To quote our president in the State of the Union, "t is up to free men" to make the world safe for democracy. Hmmm, what happened to the other 55% of the citizens of the US and the world and the men and WOMEN in our military service.
I am not PC person as I have yet to understand the definition of what PC is but I am sick and tired of the use of the term men/man being used to define all humans. When I was a child it was common to use the term man/men as a generic term for the people of the world but sometime in the 70s thoughtful people stopped excluding the term women/woman from speech and writing. That was a good thing for women and is core to this discussion.
I follow American politics quite a bit more carefully than I do here at home for either federal or even provincial issues (other than 66-67 when I was very active in support of Trudeau). I'm not at all sure I could entirely explain why that is, other than the serendipity of one's curiosities. But a factor is certainly the consequences of America's policies for the world. Leonard Cohen said that as scary as it is, the US is the best hope for the future, and I think I understand what he meant.
I am a pacifist and think bar brawls just about the stupidest manifestation of humanity one might imagine. That alone throws me way over onto the left. I also have a pretty fat button on authority, and that puts me in the 'liberal' camp pretty solidly as well. And, I think feeding children and looking after folks who are in trouble a better use of funds than shiny weapons. And I think giving birth is easily as heroic as going over a hill because I got drafted.
Joanne
Yes, I understand. I would really love to see more women at the top. There was Thatcher, of course, but she was from some other planet than me.
But I notice right now that I've already spoken more than anyone else here. That's worrisome.
You know..we have that whole chest puffing problem as well...perhaps its our need to not puff our chests.
Minds..as like a collective of
I havent voted in the poll either as none of the options fit. After a while its kinda of like watching my mother nod and saying yes dear when she wasnt really listening, or my grandmother saying get out my kitchen and go watch some football.
Hmmmm - well, I do contribute from time to time, if I feel I know what I am talking about.
I am extremely interested in politics, but it is not a subject that occupies a humungous part of my brain, and I do not, as I think many of the major contributors in the politics threads tend to do, spend a lot of time reading about it. In fact, I find the whole world scene so distressing and depressing at the moment, that, given how much of my working life is spent at the dirty, pointy end of reality anyway, and that I feel I have little power at present to affect politics either nationally or internationally - (I can a bit at state level) - I am limiting my exposure to politics and keeping most of my reading on it pretty superficial.
I therefore generally find that politics dwellers have more detailed info about a given subject than I do - this is, of course, doubly true on mainly US based threads - and since I do not particularly wish to appear a fool, I tend to read and keep silent.
It is also true, as ehBeth pointed out elsewhere, that, to an observer from many other countries, US political dissension often seems to be quibbling endlessly about minute shades of right-wing opinion - however, given the impact on the world of US economic and political opinion, I find I like to keep an eye on you guys and what you think! This is especially true given the current dominance of quite extreme (for Oz) conservative thinking on our federal government, and the general move to the right of Oz and world thinking over the last 15 years. Our conservatives seem to follow yours, and Britain's, fairly blindly, so again it is instructive to watch the debate here.
I must say that I do find the aggressiveness of a lot of the debate rather off-putting - although I can be, and am often seen, as extremely aggressive in argument myself. I am also, having been fairly politically active over the years myself, not unaccustomed to fierce debate - however, since many of my close friends live, breathe and eat politics, I also tend to be relatively silent in their fights - just as they would be in debates over the things that I live, breathe and eat! (I have other friends to debate those things with - and I am very unsilent there!)
I also tend to enjoy discussion rather than fighting over stuff - though I get very fighty, too, from time to time - and I do very much value the real discussion that happens often on political threads here, and how I am able to learn from and appreciate the positions of good people whose opinions I value, while opposing .
In fact, the thing I am most enjoying in politics here, is learning more about the conservative viewpoint from people I respect - and more about the history and analysis of things from an informed and opposing viewpoint.
Some folk are just plain rude and ignorant in how they approach discussion - I tend to skim their stuff - others I know do not intend to come across as confrontively as, to most of us, they do - I try to reason myself out of seeing their posts as aggressive and unpleasant and just see the opinion being expressed. I think my hide is getting tougher slowly!
I feel divided about the tone thing - on the one hand, debate must be uncompromising, I think, on insisting on clear thinking and good research on facts. If we as women are scared to be called on sloppy thinking and lousy knowledge, well, tough titty - my brain is as good on this stuff as anyone's, and I am an idiot if I do not use it well. On the other hand, good debate does not need to be personally bruising - however, in such areas as well as in academe, it usually is - we may as well get used to it. We do not have to behave that way - I usually, if I am thinking well, can challenge without being demeaning of an opponent. So can a lot of the guys. A lot of them better than I can. And a lot of them better than I DO.
I hope gradually to wet my feet more here.
As for posting stuff from other countries - hmm - this is a largely American site, so much would have to be explained, I only have so much time, I feel so passionately about the situation in Oz, and so fiercely and woundedly about the wrongs here, and I am already doing the bits I can to address them, that I doubt I really have the time or emotional energy to do a lot of initiating political threads here. I am, mainly here for fun - though I enjoy the learning I am doing.
I will need to think about it.
Is it all just wanking? Not for this little black duck - I learn and I do change my mind.
Some folk like to fight on political threads just for the sake of it - well, I like to digress and be silly just for the sake of it - in an absurd world we gotta do something - both activities are, at the least, fairly harmless.
(...it is ok if I admit I like to puff out my chest, sometimes, too?...runs off blushing at her egocentricity and love of the limelight...)
I've been lurking here a while, and since blatham was not roundly trounced and stacked in the alley next to the dumpster, I'll take a chance and stick my head out here.
I'm not surprised by a clear majority expressing disapproval of "aggression" on the Political Threads. I really expected that would be the case. Lola, you dropped in to a relatively quiet and amicable stretch of that US/UN/Iraq thread. You and littlek have everyone's attention, but there wasn't much goin' on when you two walked in
That patricular thread is among the very oldest and most active on this Website. It's popularity cleary indicates the importance of the question to the members. It has far more posts than most topics have views, and it mis viewed many times for every post. It has become very contentious, disputatious, and otherwise disagreeable from time to time, but, DAMN! Its Got Legs (apart from your estimable stems, Lola)! Sure it attracts a hothead or two, or tempers flare. What I value in that thread is that it is frequented by a large number of thoughtful, level headed, well behaved folk. There are replies on that thread, whole multi-post exchanges, even, that would be more or less publishable as they are posted. That thread is rowdy, but it has been among the most active every day since Mid-November. There are a number of lighter, even silly exchanges too. There really are very few objectionable posts, and most of those are simple temper flares by folks who know better and are interacting amicably a page or two later. Apologies and concessions are not uncommon. It really is one helluva impressive thread for any forum.
There are other threads in Politics. A lot of them have vanishingly little if any objectionable content, yet very intriguing and informational substance.
Anyhow, that's what I think. I suspect much of the objection to aggressiveness in "The Politics Threads" has to do with that particulatr thread and its several closely related, roughly parallel companion threads. In general, imprudent behavior is dealt with rather well by the participants. Jerks don't last long when no one will play with them. Most folks have ill-considered moments. There are some very well-considered posts in The Politics Threads, and the overall discussions are quite engaging, well worth the occasional outburts of noise and exuberance. Frankly, I enjoy a thread that works up a sweat. There is some very powerful argument, persuasive rhetoric, and exquisite reasoning in The Politics Threads. I'll wade through a bit of bullshit to get to it. Its part of The Experience.
timber, ducking quickly back out of sight.
