victim identity

victim identity Adam . . 9/21/14 2:38 AM
RE: victim identity Adam . . 9/21/14 12:45 PM
RE: victim identity Richard Zen 9/21/14 7:09 PM
RE: victim identity Bill Glamdring 9/22/14 10:21 AM
RE: victim identity Bill Glamdring 9/22/14 11:24 AM
RE: victim identity ftw 9/22/14 11:36 AM
RE: victim identity Bill Glamdring 9/22/14 11:47 AM
RE: victim identity Bill Glamdring 9/22/14 9:20 PM
RE: victim identity Bill Glamdring 9/22/14 10:01 PM
RE: victim identity Bill Glamdring 9/22/14 11:20 PM
RE: victim identity Bill Glamdring 9/22/14 11:32 PM
RE: victim identity Bill Glamdring 9/23/14 9:39 AM
RE: victim identity Bill Glamdring 9/23/14 10:30 AM
RE: victim identity Florian 9/23/14 1:14 PM
RE: victim identity Bill Glamdring 9/23/14 9:44 PM
RE: victim identity Laurel Carrington 9/24/14 12:07 AM
RE: victim identity Laurel Carrington 9/24/14 12:24 AM
RE: victim identity Laurel Carrington 9/24/14 12:35 AM
RE: victim identity Simon Ekstrand 9/24/14 1:45 AM
RE: victim identity Zed Z 9/24/14 2:02 AM
RE: victim identity Daniel M. Ingram 9/24/14 2:10 AM
RE: victim identity ftw 9/24/14 2:49 AM
RE: victim identity Laurel Carrington 9/24/14 9:13 AM
RE: victim identity Bill Glamdring 9/24/14 9:40 AM
RE: victim identity Florian 9/24/14 9:59 AM
RE: victim identity Richard Zen 9/22/14 10:57 AM
RE: victim identity Richard Zen 9/23/14 12:00 AM
RE: victim identity Richard Zen 9/23/14 12:05 AM
RE: victim identity Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem 9/23/14 10:26 AM
RE: victim identity Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem 9/23/14 12:06 PM
RE: victim identity Richard Zen 9/23/14 11:29 AM
RE: victim identity M C 9/23/14 12:45 AM
Adam , modified 7 Years ago at 9/21/14 2:38 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/21/14 2:38 AM

victim identity

Posts: 613 Join Date: 3/20/12 Recent Posts
The "sawfoot thread" kind of inspired me to write something - wow did I write a lot... oops

I think bullying and "being bullied" are very similar. If you are the bully you are putting people down to make yourself feel "bigger", that's pretty simple. If you are the bullied you are still making yourself feel bigger "I am the ignored one, the abused one, the righteous one." If those who are bullied don't get enough sympathy or get tired of ruminating about the unfairness of it all, then sometimes they do really drastic things to upset the status quo. Those who benefit from the status quo because things are going well for them often reinforce the idea that the bullied are helpless, righteous victims and the bullies are nasty people who hold all the responsibility to change. This is just a shallow display to prevent those who are bullied from becoming active rather than passive victims. If you tell people they are righteous and that those oppressing them should be the one to change those who are bullied will just keep living as they have been and nothing will change (thus achieving the goal of that false sympathy).

I remember in highschool there was this one kid who got bullied alot. He would ask questions in class to show how smart he was and he gave off the air of being above everyone else. One day at lunch a friend of mine threw salad in his hair. He didn't come to school for a few days and it was rumored he had threatened to kill himself. This event led to his mother becoming extremely upset with the school and eventually to an assembly being held in which the narrative was basically that people should be nice to each other an that the bully had broke that rule and was a terrible person for doing so. The logic seems airtight from that perspective.

As I said however the "bully" in this case was a friend of mine, I remember him as being one of the nicest, coolest people I'd ever met. In that moment when he put the salad in the kids hair, the kid was really asking for it, talking loudly in a know-it-all voice weedling people with little comments intended to get a reaction and also sometimes making fun of othered "bullied" people. So who caused the salad being dumped on the kids head leading to him feeling that he was left out and a victim to the point of him wanting to kill himself? It is very one sided and blind to say that it was solely the fault of the bully.

Was it helpful to have the assembly where the bully was blamed and the bullied was put on a pedestal? It probably kept the bullied person from becoming desparate for a little while longer. But it didn't make him fit in or be part of the group like he *claimed* to want. If he really wanted to be part of the group he would have acted like everyone else. Instead he wanted to play the victim card, remain righteous and special, and remain an outcast. After that event people were superficially nice to him and he pretended that people being superficially kind made him happy. In reality it probably just kept making him feel like a misunderstood outcast who people just pretend to like, and he probably told himself constantly that he wanted things to be different. It probably seemed 100% like real pain but it was really just a shallow display like the confidence of the bullies or the sympathy of the sympathizers. All the worlds a stage and all the men and women merely players right? I don't really understand why people (including myself) keep the play going. I think the victim identity is probably the most fundamental one that all identities share, otherwise why would we keep perpetuating this world of suffering.

I think this is a huge part of what awakening is - realizing that nothing can control you or influence you directly. Events can't make you unhappy but choosing to argue against their existence (or perhaps more accurately, believing that you don't want them to be happening) can.
Adam , modified 7 Years ago at 9/21/14 12:45 PM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/21/14 3:45 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 613 Join Date: 3/20/12 Recent Posts
I guess it does sound like that rhetoric. And it probably gets easier to say these things the higher up you are on the social ladder.

I do think the victim identity is present as soon as someone says that something "should or must stop" reguardless of whether that thing is illegal or not (in fact believing that something that is shouldn't be is identical to what i mean by the victim identity).

The causes that bring about such laws aren't as simple as being just a codification of the beliefs of that particular victim identity, perpretrators and victims are both required for such crimes and for such laws to arise.

edit:
im questioning whether it was a good idea to make this post in the first place... it is probably not the most skillful way to say what i am trying to say and it is probably not the most skillful time to say it.
thumbnail
Richard Zen, modified 7 Years ago at 9/21/14 7:09 PM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/21/14 7:09 PM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 1656 Join Date: 5/18/10 Recent Posts
Boy this entire Sawfoot thing has gone out of control but sadly it's predictable and the reality of serotonin is everywhere.

http://www.dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/discussion/-/message_boards/message/5005983

  • Getting respect feels good because it triggers serotonin. The good feeling motivates you to seek more respect, and that promotes survival. You may say you don't care about getting respect, but you can easily see this dynamic in others. In the animal world, getting respect clearly promotes an individual's DNA. They're not thinking about genes, of course. Mammals seek social dominance because serotonin makes it feel good.
  • All living creatures have serotonin, even amoeba.
  • In mammals, serotonin is the good feeling of having secure access to food or other resources.
  • Social dominance is the calm, secure feeling that your needs will be met.
  • Nice people, don't talk about the competition for resources in nature. In polite society, it's forbidden to acknowledge that social dominance feels good. But everyone has a brain that longs for the good feeling of serotonin. Everyone can see this motivation in others. You don't have to push your way to the top, you just need to feel that the resources you need to survive are secure.
  • You may get annoyed when you see others trying to secure their position. But when you do it, you think, "I'm just trying to survive."
  • How we feel in social dominance has a lot to do with our expectations and perceptions.
  • We tell ourselves status doesn't matter and everyone is equal, but each brain keeps track of how it stacks up against others. Expectations build from experience, making people sensitive to slights. Happy chemicals flow when our expectations are exceeded. When our expectations are disappointed, we perceive it as a threat.
  • Everyone wants to be special. When you see others being special, you say you want equality. When someone gets ahead of you, your cortisol starts flowing. It's easy to see this in others, especially those you dislike. It's hard to see it in yourself, but the universality of this urge is apparent when you know how animals strive to be special.
  • Build pride in something you've done once a day. This can avoid extremes of constant approval seeking or dejected cynicism.
  • When mammals gather, they try to dominate each other. There is frustration in both the dominant and subordinate positions.
  • The dominant position is the "hot seat" and the responsibilities can create worry.
  • Being subordinate relieves you of the "hot seat" but can be a problem when dominant people make decisions on your behalf.
  • Try and enjoy the positive side you are on depending on which status you have because it can change throughout your life.
  • Take quiet satisfaction on the subtle influence you have on the world.
  • Find ways to leave a legacy even if it's small.
You can see that hierarchies can exist in any culture or system that involves at least 2 mammals. This includes anywhere where there is Buddhism, (including this site). People need to expect this.

Examples where I see this:
  • Rivalries between family members
  • Rivalries between neighborhoods
  • Rivalries between schools
  • Rivalries between companies
  • Rivalries between management and line employees
  • Rivalries between cities
  • Rivalries between regions
  • Rivalries between neighboring countries
  • Rivalries between classes
  • Left wing vs. Right wing parties
  • Special interest groups vs. the majority
  • Revolutionaries vs. Old Guard
  • Younger Generations vs. Older Generations
  • Rivalries between different psychology types 
  • Men vs. Women
  • Marginalized cultures vs. Mainstream cultures
  • Rivalries between races/cultures/sexual orientation
  • Healthy vs. Unhealthy
  • Deemed intelligence vs. deemed unintelligence
  • Did I miss any?
There's a healthy area of competition where certain people should be leaders and others followers but this can be tenuous when people become addicted/used to the power and they lose the virtues that got them there in the first place. This creates a flux where leadership has to change.  That's why I like the symbol of the ring of power in Lord of the Rings. As soon as you gain absolute power you get corrupted by it. Smaller forms of power can still have a corrupting affect.  It's pretty clear that this is so pervasive it's not going anywhere. I can see it when those who were mere employees moved to management positions.  Their behaviour altered almost instantly.

The best place is to focus on your own behaviour and see if you're adding to the problem or not, because that is a difficult business enough to be mindful of.  Just noting my greed/aversion shows that it constantly pops up whether it's acceptable or not.

To me the moderators should keep it about practice on this site (including materialist vs. religious views) so it remains interesting and multiplicity can surivive.  That's all I would expect.
Bill Glamdring, modified 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 10:21 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 10:21 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 11 Join Date: 9/22/14 Recent Posts
Are you seriously bringing feminist theory into this? 

This is not a forum for feminist theory. Why would you do anything like that?

This is a forum for practice. I will tell you right now why there aren't more women here, it's because 95% of the time I talk with women about practice, they actually find the idea of a goal oriented practice weird, and aren't interested in meditation as anything more but a general stress reductive. So they don't come.

Please get out with this nonsense. Please leave with this nonsense. You can not demand that everything be covered in protective padding because of some negligent, unintelligent rambling.

Women will come to participate in this forum when they actually have a practice to participate about. We do not do anything that deters them.
thumbnail
Richard Zen, modified 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 10:57 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 10:57 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 1656 Join Date: 5/18/10 Recent Posts
Jen Pearly:
Hi, Richard. So you saw that mess last night. . . . emoticon
You can see that hierarchies can exist in any culture or system that involves at least 2 mammals. This includes anywhere where there is Buddhism, (including this site). People need to expect this.

Yeah, this pretty much goes without saying. I went to grad school for 10 years and literary theory was all about deconstruction and New Historicism. So this knowledge has been quite conscious for me for a long time, longer than I've been a Buddhist by far. I identified as a feminist for a long time, and, in many conventional and philosophical/theoretical respects, still do. Heirarchy  is actually built into our languages, our signifcation systems, our laws. No way around it, so one must deal with it, with oneself, with the other. It is difficult necessary work. Morality is never mastered.

There's a healthy area of competition where certain people should be leaders and others followers but this can be tenuous when people become addicted/used to the power and they lose the virtues that got them there in the first place.

In the case of patriarchy, I'm not sure it is completely accurate to say virtues got men dominant over women in the first place. I think women historically were disempowered and are so even today, although perhaps more subtlely than when they couldn't even own property, merely because of the brute physical strength of men.

The lack of presence of women on this site in and of itself should, at least I would think, prompt all the men here to ask themselve what implictly or overty is going on here that makes women unwelcome. Why is this question not spoken out loud and discussed, like, at all? All these other ways you guys are mentioning of reverting this elephant-in-the-room question to what any individual practitioner should be working on within herself, via dharma practice, is, from an important conventional-world perspective, an avoidance of a sociopolitical question that is going to have effects even if everyone here goes on pretending that it won't.
To me the moderators should keep it about practice on this site (including materialist vs. religious views) so it remains interesting and multiplicity can surivive.  That's all I would expect.

I communicated with Daniel in the middle of the night last night (3:30 a.m., to be precise). He pointed out to me that when this site works well it tends to be on threads that discuss the practice. When problems erupt, it is almost always on a thread discussing topics other than practice. Sawfoot apparently has no practice to discuss, so his threads seem to be hotbed of wedge politics, if you will allow the mixed metaphor.

When you say the moderators should keep it about practice (including materialist verus religious views), I'm unsure what you mean. Do you mean that scientific materialist naysayers should be able to assert and discuss that worldview so long as they have a meditation practice? I'm just wondering what criteria for participation you specifically have in mind. These are important considerations. I think that the guidelines are currently too vague and need some clarity and specificity. That's why I'm asking. What is okay here? What is not? If we require members to have a "practice," what kind of practice? I know Buddhists who almost never meditate but spend a lot of energy in morality training. Is that "practice"? Or is this purely a formal-meditation discussion forum? And how do we know whether someone has a meditation practice? How do we patrol and enforce such a weird behaviorial requirement? So, although I agree that when discussions stick to the goals of the site matters go well, how can "you must have a practice" be an enforceable requirement for speech acts?

I think, more to the point of behavioral expectations, there needs to be a list of unacceptable speech acts, definitions/examples of them, and an objective schedule of consequences. And a stated appeal process. Clarity, honesty, and consistency in enforcement, in my experience as an instructor, are always healthful in policies meant to govern a discourse community.
One thing I would like to dispel is that men here don't want women to show up. I haven't seen any overt posts that assert women aren't allowed.  I want women to know this stuff and benefit from it. There have been some great women meditators but in a lot of arenas women also have a lack of interest in meditation (especially when the limited emotion models are talked about).  I've talked to women at work about it that weren't interested just the same as many men who aren't interested. Also some people plainly say "screw you I love my emotions and desires GO AWAY!". emoticon That's a valid point of view as well.  I think people who have healthy habits and a successful life are much less likely to want this practice than someone who has a screwed up life and lots of unhealthy habits. There is a good chunk of the population that doesn't need cognitive therapy and meditation. I believe everyone could learn to optimize things more with these practices (positive psychology/working with intentions/further reduction of stress) but unless there is a deep need people won't be searching for it. Basically anyone who has addictions/depression could benefit from this practice and should try it, but because of a lack of awareness and because of an association with a religion people are skittish. Look at how many lurkers there are emoticon

On materialism, yes I want scientific naysayers who have a meditation practice (me in the case of debatable parts of The Powers) should be allowed.  Buddhism isn't mainly about the powers but about reducing dukkha. So as long as people want to reduce dukkha they should be welcome. There's also a practical element in that spreading practices that reduce dukkha to more and more people would require that views which are political/social/scientific should have no bearing on the practice. This is because clinging to views is the problem. Having views isn't a problem. Right view and inherent existence/cause and effect should be applicable to many people's beliefs and from surveying many meditation teachers, authors etc, they have their own political/social/economic beliefs just like anyone else and may have had them before they meditated.  Clearly they are okay with their views and only if they secretly cling to them is there a conflict in the practice.

For enforcing rules in forums the best practices I've seen are as follows:
  • Close threads that are off-topic/useless that have nothing to do with Buddhism/psychology/self-help/stress reduction. For example some political topics that are controversial and have NOTHING to do with Buddhism are prime for trolling. In fact when you read trolling manuals on the net (yes they are there :lolemoticon they tend to bring up sore topics in politics because they know that people hold strong emotional views about them and can't resist weighing in which feeds the cycle. If people want to talk about a whole bunch of off-topic things there are 1,000s of forums that can satisfy this.
  • Ban trolls. This doesn't mean banning people who have a vigorous debating style. It means when it's obvious that someone is just trying to get a rise out of people then they should be banned. They could always be reinstated if they desire to follow the rules. Maybe do a 2 strikes you're out rule. Whatever the mods think is appropriate.
I think some of these things are in place but are lax because most people follow these obvious rules.

My favorite times on this website is when there's an increase of transcendental dependent arising of posting in practice journals and interesting posts where people are trying to grasp more advanced areas and move forward in their practice. It sucks when there are few practice journal posts and the most popular topics are debating boring off-topic things.
Bill Glamdring, modified 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 11:24 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 11:24 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 11 Join Date: 9/22/14 Recent Posts
Yes. Please. When we consider the total volume of women I've conversed with about practice, rather than just those interested in meditation, it's 99.9% who think it's weird or don't care at all.

I just want to say, before this leaves and never comes back (about which I just could not give birth to a large enough shit about why that should happen) that the way you just announce this and expect everyone to cater to this point of view absolutely and unequivocally is just disturbing.
ftw, modified 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 11:36 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 11:36 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 60 Join Date: 6/10/14 Recent Posts
Well, my coworker and a good friend who is also nice looking btw (yep she's a woman) is my only dharma friend. We talk a lot about spirituality in general and exchange ideas on this and that. It's fun since it's like we're having this little sectret nobody else knows about. emoticon
She's into yoga and I'm into insight meditation. She has goals in meditation too but is to afraid to reach them at this point. Meditation scares her (ghosts and expansive - "no body" feeling after only couple of minutes). I hope our conversations bring here at least micrometer closer to her goals.

Regards,
ftw

PS:
Jen, for what it's worth I apologize if my words were to harsh. Clearly your post about 3T blew the roof off for me. It was a first sec respond and maybe I should have used more appropriate language despite being in battleground section. But that was the way I felt at that point(not going into details here). My reaction would be the same if you were of opposite sex. Please don't turn this into sexist thing. There really is no need for that. Believe me. I felt a lot of empathy for you when you joined the forum and opened up in your thread. Some of the participants didn't really help to say the least.
Anyway, there's approx 6 hours of meditation practice between that incident and now. Let's just say there was a lot of distraction to my concentration practice. emoticon Clearly I have tons of work to do too. ;-) 

with metta
Bill Glamdring, modified 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 11:47 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 11:47 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 11 Join Date: 9/22/14 Recent Posts
Yes: It is not and never was a sexist thing.

Please remember this is a forum to discuss practice.
Bill Glamdring, modified 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 9:20 PM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 9:20 PM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 11 Join Date: 9/22/14 Recent Posts
Please. For being so well versed you should be able to put two and two together. It is referring to feminist theory. This is not a discussion grounds for feminist theory, and it is not okay to wrap everything in shrink wrap because of completely superficial appearances. 

Get out. Get out of here with your feminist theory.

This is a forum for practice.

I value this forum as a forum for practice.

It is a forum for practice. 

Respect this and leave with your feminist theory. 

Women are welcome to come and talk about their practices. 

I value it. Do not fuck with it by broad sweeping generalizations that have no root in fact.

This is just a forum for practice. Just participate in it as a forum for practice.

I VALUE it as such. It gives actual value to my life. 

Do not hold this hostage because of feminist theory and flimsy superficial appearances. 

Thank you. If you think this is an over reaction, you need only pay attention. My trust with your feminist type has worn thin, and I am making this clear:

This is a forum for practice. 

Thank you for your participation.
Bill Glamdring, modified 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 10:01 PM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 10:01 PM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 11 Join Date: 9/22/14 Recent Posts
IF you can not stand to participate without foisting about feminist theory, then yes, get out. Thank you for recognizing the value of this place as a forum for practice. 
thumbnail
Richard Zen, modified 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 12:00 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 10:13 PM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 1656 Join Date: 5/18/10 Recent Posts
Jen Pearly:
Richard:
For enforcing rules in forums the best practices I've seen are as follows:

  • Close threads that are off-topic/useless that have nothing to do with Buddhism/psychology/self-help/stress reduction. For example some political topics that are controversial and have NOTHING to do with Buddhism are prime for trolling. In fact when you read trolling manuals on the net (yes they are there :lolemoticon they tend to bring up sore topics in politics because they know that people hold strong emotional views about them and can't resist weighing in which feeds the cycle. If people want to talk about a whole bunch of off-topic things there are 1,000s of forums that can satisfy this.

  • Ban trolls. This doesn't mean banning people who have a vigorous debating style. It means when it's obvious that someone is just trying to get a rise out of people then they should be banned. They could always be reinstated if they desire to follow the rules. Maybe do a 2 strikes you're out rule. Whatever the mods think is appropriate.
I think some of these things are in place but are lax because most people follow these obvious rules.

My favorite times on this website is when there's an increase of transcendental dependent arising of posting in practice journals and interesting posts where people are trying to grasp more advanced areas and move forward in their practice. It sucks when there are few practice journal posts and the most popular topics are debating boring off-topic things.

Thanks for sharing your views on what should be enforced. It is interesting to me that you define "on topic" as 
"psychology" and "stress reduction," not to mention "Buddhism," which I went ahead and mentioned anyway. Is Morality Training "on topic"? Or is it "off topic"? This is a hard one, isn't it? Because anything and everything "political" can be seen as part of "daily life" and "morality," no? Ethics and "politics" with a little "p" are often indetinguishable.

I don't think Daniel regards this as a site dedicated to "Buddhism." I suggested that he create a section for discussing the intersections of culture and Buddhism (ie, "Mushroom Culture" and other subtopics), and he did, but he wouldn't use the word "Buddhism" to name it. He considers this a site about "meditation," no matter what tradition that comes from. So is TM discussed here, too? And why do we have a section on Morality and Daily life if the site is about "meditation"?

It gets messy, does it? So how can we decide what is "off topic" and gets shut down? There are dangers in including and in excluding. It is really very morally tricky.

As for closing off-topic threads and banning trolls, has that occurred here, or are you speaking of other sites you have been on? I'm not sure (yet) who all the moderators are here, but my understanding is that some are very busy and sometimes go quite a while without visiting. There doesn't seem to be a lot of coordination. And the "rules" are far from clear on the portal. I think it is problematic, as I've said, to say a rule for speech acts here is that the member must have a meditation practice. Not discoverable, not enforceable. I think more to the point are the speech acts themselves. What is fine, and what crosses some line?

Trolls . . . yeah, a big problem. So, should the moderators just observe some definitions of trolling behavior and then watch for patterns that fit? And then ban the person by consensus or vote among the mods?

Jenny

Hi Jenny,

I'm trying to chat with you but the chat isn't working and it deleted a shitload of messages LOL.  I need your email address so I can paste what I wrote. This chat system needs some TLC.
Bill Glamdring, modified 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 11:20 PM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 11:20 PM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 11 Join Date: 9/22/14 Recent Posts
No. It's not funny. There is absolutely nothing funny about this and your arrogance stemming from something that was trivial and superficial. All of this "cognitive dissonance" is purely manufactured by you and has no substance in reality.

There is no effort to contain or curb you. There is no sexist discrimination going on. This is a stupid illusion on your part, especially in this particular circumstance. It is not okay to parade yourself around and happily turn everything you encounter into a female space.

I reiterate myself again: This is a forum for practicing. Not some a female acceleration program. Get out of here with your claims of patriarchy and victimization. It simply does not exist.

I do not tolerate you telling us that we are sexist pigs. It is simply unnacceptable. You have a preremptory, pretentious beliefs that this is the case, that everything here is a woman's issue.

No: This is a forum for discussing practice. You just waltz around claiming that the world is a certain way without regard for the feelings of other people, Get Out.

This is not acceptable. Your narrow black and white thinking is just Not Acceptable. And more so: it is not acceptable for you to hold this place hostage just because you want everything to be about women's rights. 

Leave us alone. Mind your own business. 

Get out if you feel absolutely compelled to foist feminist theory over the smallest reaction. Nothing can be done for you if you can not distinguish triviality from things that are actually significant to speak about. Get out with your feminist theory. 

Your resposne that you've "heard" me and you "reiterate" is primitive. 

Do you not realize what you are doing? 

Leave other people alone. Stop bullying and shaming and intimidating with your feminist ideology. Get out with your feminist ideology. 

Your 100% black and white responses to me are proof that you actually think this way, when I say you are not allowed to hold this forum hostage for your feminist ideology, you just unbuckle your belt and let it all hang out. This is ridiculous. There is actually something at stake here: a forum, and you crassly make a feminist oppression issue over unintelligible banter.

This is not okay. Get out with your feminist delusions that have no regard for other people. 
Bill Glamdring, modified 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 11:32 PM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 11:31 PM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 11 Join Date: 9/22/14 Recent Posts
If you did not think in such black and white terms you would notice that there is actually something important and significant here that matters for people, like having this forum, and instead, you are fancifully making it so it's all about you and your female narrative, ignoring any consequences you might have, ignoring the effects it could have on the people who use this forum, ignoring everyone but yourself and your narrow ideology. 

Stay away from this forum with your feminism. There is no oppression here. Women can come and talk about their practice if they have a practice, no one will stop them, and people will say what they know to say.

That is all. Your quasi oppression and claims that I am oppressing you belay nothing but your insensitivity towards others.

Get out with this feminist ideology. It is not okay to project this onto innocent bystanders.
M C, modified 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 12:45 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 11:34 PM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 116 Join Date: 2/27/13 Recent Posts
I also have a problem with gender relations being brought up here unless it is absolutely necessary. It is a sensitive subject for all genders and I don't think this is the place to solve them.
thumbnail
Richard Zen, modified 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 12:05 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/22/14 11:50 PM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 1656 Join Date: 5/18/10 Recent Posts
Jen Pearly:
Richard:
For enforcing rules in forums the best practices I've seen are as follows:

  • Close threads that are off-topic/useless that have nothing to do with Buddhism/psychology/self-help/stress reduction. For example some political topics that are controversial and have NOTHING to do with Buddhism are prime for trolling. In fact when you read trolling manuals on the net (yes they are there :lolemoticon they tend to bring up sore topics in politics because they know that people hold strong emotional views about them and can't resist weighing in which feeds the cycle. If people want to talk about a whole bunch of off-topic things there are 1,000s of forums that can satisfy this.

  • Ban trolls. This doesn't mean banning people who have a vigorous debating style. It means when it's obvious that someone is just trying to get a rise out of people then they should be banned. They could always be reinstated if they desire to follow the rules. Maybe do a 2 strikes you're out rule. Whatever the mods think is appropriate.
I think some of these things are in place but are lax because most people follow these obvious rules.

My favorite times on this website is when there's an increase of transcendental dependent arising of posting in practice journals and interesting posts where people are trying to grasp more advanced areas and move forward in their practice. It sucks when there are few practice journal posts and the most popular topics are debating boring off-topic things.

Thanks for sharing your views on what should be enforced. It is interesting to me that you define "on topic" as 
"psychology" and "stress reduction," not to mention "Buddhism," which I went ahead and mentioned anyway. Is Morality Training "on topic"? Or is it "off topic"? This is a hard one, isn't it? Because anything and everything "political" can be seen as part of "daily life" and "morality," no? Ethics and "politics" with a little "p" are often indetinguishable.

I don't think Daniel regards this as a site dedicated to "Buddhism." I suggested that he create a section for discussing the intersections of culture and Buddhism (ie, "Mushroom Culture" and other subtopics), and he did, but he wouldn't use the word "Buddhism" to name it. He considers this a site about "meditation," no matter what tradition that comes from. So is TM discussed here, too? And why do we have a section on Morality and Daily life if the site is about "meditation"?

It gets messy, does it? So how can we decide what is "off topic" and gets shut down? There are dangers in including and in excluding. It is really very morally tricky.

As for closing off-topic threads and banning trolls, has that occurred here, or are you speaking of other sites you have been on? I'm not sure (yet) who all the moderators are here, but my understanding is that some are very busy and sometimes go quite a while without visiting. There doesn't seem to be a lot of coordination. And the "rules" are far from clear on the portal. I think it is problematic, as I've said, to say a rule for speech acts here is that the member must have a meditation practice. Not discoverable, not enforceable. I think more to the point are the speech acts themselves. What is fine, and what crosses some line?

Trolls . . . yeah, a big problem. So, should the moderators just observe some definitions of trolling behavior and then watch for patterns that fit? And then ban the person by consensus or vote among the mods?

Jenny
If Daniel wants a wide area of conversation then creating more off-topic (non-practice related) threads is necessary. How about a Scientific Materialist Thread?  Closing topics is something I've seen in other forums. They usually look at the topic and see if it's an issue designed for insults and hatred and close it. Sometimes they close it because it isn't interesting. This would be in situations where any sane breathing human can tell it's an uninteresting topic. 

I've also seen in forums the ability to take multiple threads and put them together because they are about the same topic.  That may be more difficult for threads from different posters asking the same diagnostic questions "Is this the AP? Is this Stream Entry?"

Your description of banning trolls by consensus based on well known trolling behaviour is exactly what you need because this stuff is out there for people to study, and they study it and partake of it in all forums. Narcissists LOVE this stuff:

http://www.wikihow.com/Be-a-Troll

What crosses the line? I think hate speech that you would see as hate speech in any other legal situation. That's rare and I've not seen that on this site but it's a no brainer.  Racism/sexism/homophobia/libel/personal stalking/gaslighting.  Again it has to be obvious before a ban and sometimes a harsh warning is what moderators do and people change their behaviour.  The ones that persist are usually banned and then allowed to return if they change their behaviour. Sometimes they are banned again and should stay banned because it's obvious they won't change their behaviour.

I think keeping a section on the powers will have to be there because it is in Buddhism and Magick is in other traditions. I think it's pointless to interrupt someone's thread unless both parties want to engage and that's the purpose of the thread.  If someone is hijacking a thread (especially a practice thread) and attacking the person's views then I would look at that as trolling.

Though this thread was very hard to resist for me emoticon

http://www.dharmaoverground.org/web/guest/discussion/-/message_boards/message/2536831

The morality and daily life area is a part of Buddhist Sila so that makes sense.

Hopefully that's helpful in someway.

Richard
Bill Glamdring, modified 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 9:39 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 9:39 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 11 Join Date: 9/22/14 Recent Posts
Excuse you? This is not apeshit but a measured response to the zeitgeist of the times, but thanks for diminuating my response. It's proving to be the only thing we can expect from you out of this.

You do not respectfully disagree with me. 

This is not an attempt to subterfuge the system and tilt it in my favor. It is a direct declaration from me to you which you insist to interpret in all the nefarious Big Brother ways. 

You please take a break. You consider yourself and your callow feminist ideology. I have no idea why you think it is meaningful to show me the ropes of administration. You are merely ignoring a declaration I am making from myself to you, without regards for me and others. 

Like I said, if you can not distinguish between trivial matters and those that actually deserve attention, then nothing can be done for you. The only reason you got an apology is because you bullied it up and made a huge stink about it.

You say "How realistic is it that my entire experience on this site is ruined by your one comment above?" Please. Please. How realistic is it? I do not want to find out. Therefore my response to this posting. 

I do not want to find out. So I say take your callow feminist ideology away and do not hold this site hostage because of it. If you can't respect that, then what the fuck are we talking about?

I think that is pretty clear. It is a memorandum from me to you. You are just choosing to interpret it as a greater struggle, and you are ignoring everyone but your self in this. 

Take your callow feminist ideology and leave.

This is a site for discussing practice, and I value it. Take your callow feminist ideology and leave. I have no interest in seeing what feminist elan will do to a what is basically a sanct environment of discourse and views. 

Would you like me to make the retarded declaration that YES it is obvious I am being highly reactive, but then say that NO it is that I am being highly RESPONSIVE? Please. Trivial minutia that means nothing. You can not grok the underlying meaning/importance of my communications? Please, Jen, do you not understand the world is bigger than you? 

Get away from this site with feminism. Do not harrass it.

Please. Get out with your extreme analysis. 

It is not "territory" it is UTILITY. This site is a valuable utility to us all.

Keep your feminism away from it.
thumbnail
Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem, modified 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 10:26 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 10:26 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 2227 Join Date: 10/27/10 Recent Posts
Jen Pearly:
About hate speech--I've definitely seen a couple of posts here that fit the legal definition. Those threads have just in the past few days been deleted, or are in the process of being deleted.

Oh. I'm actually a moderator as well. I don't know if I necessarily agree about deleting those threads without notice. That being said the site rules on what mods do with what process and notifying whom are remarkably non-existent.
Bill Glamdring, modified 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 10:30 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 10:30 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 11 Join Date: 9/22/14 Recent Posts
AS IF I have been telling YOU to leave. 

You can not tell that I am only talking about your feminist ideology? This is not the place for it. This is not okay. You think you are "Right"? Please. You got a whole thread censored because you can't distinguish between nonsense triviality and something that's actually important!

And you do not respect the forum. You demand the forum cater to you. You do not say "oh, yeah, I can respect the forum and the people here and keep discussion non politicized over meaningless trivialities". You don't say this, you say " I am not leaving ".  

It is not okay to bully people and turn everything into a female space in which you may object to absolutely anything Just Because, regardless if it was even a problem or intent in the first place.


And YES this thread HAS BEEN hijacked, and it was hijacked by YOU and your FEMINIST POLITICAL AGENDA. 


It's not okay to shame everyone into being nice to you Jen. It is not okay to censor the forum in the way you have done.

Seriously: what are we even talking about! 

You have even yourself said that you were not offended! That you didn't personally care!

You have not said all you will say about it, you have just taken a bully role and ignored the nuances of all the potential participants here. 

For the last time there is nothing sexist about this forum and it is not okay to censor the forum thanks to meaningless trivialities.


You have not "said all you have to say", you have haughtily ignored us and  just decided you're right without consideration for others.


Do not delete this thread. You can not just delete anything you do not like. 
thumbnail
Richard Zen, modified 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 11:29 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 11:23 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 1656 Join Date: 5/18/10 Recent Posts
I don't think this thread is hijacked because we are talking about what is victimization and what is not and trying to get it straight.

A hijacking example would be someone with a Powers practice thread that is personal and a skeptic like me comes in and says "Hey how can you believe such bullshit? Are you crazy?"  That's hijacking.  Most threads like this are quite open but practice threads usually are more for encouragement and advice on improving practice on the goal the OP is aiming at.  Having a Battleground thread makes sense for debate topics and works well. Trying to discourage people from their goals should be more in the Battleground threads than a practice thread.

The closest thing to hijacking that's occurred with regularity is when the Buddhism vs AF thing was going on. It was mainly as a proselytizing wave that hijacked some threads.   This has pretty much died down now that a lot of people who supported it are distancing themselves from it.  It's more a hybrid practice here with Richard disowning what people do here with his practice.

Now we have a Powers wave so keeping things clean and neat is better. I would like to see Daniel's subjective reports on his powers practices but we shouldn't be interrupting it with discouragement.  There should be a Battleground thread where someone posts a thread "I don't believe in Buddhist Powers and here's why."  Those who want to engage can do so and those who don't want to can continue their practices.  Most practices are threads are Concentration/Metta/Insight so I don't find the disruptions as bad as I've seen in other forums.

You want to know about Gaslighting? emoticon

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

Gaslighting or gas-lighting is a form of mental abuse in which false information is presented with the intent of making victims doubt their own memory, perception, and sanity. Instances may range simply from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents ever occurred, up to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim.The term owes its origin to the play Gas Light and its film adaptations, after which it was coined popularly. The term has been used in clinical and research literature.


thumbnail
Beoman Claudiu Dragon Emu Fire Golem, modified 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 12:06 PM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 12:06 PM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 2227 Join Date: 10/27/10 Recent Posts
Jen Pearly:
Hi, BCDEF. I'm not the one who deleted or is deleting them. Daniel is.

Jenny
Ah ok, thanks for clarifying. 
thumbnail
Florian, modified 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 1:14 PM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 1:14 PM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 1028 Join Date: 4/28/09 Recent Posts
Bill,

Enough.

Florian (mod)


Bill Glamdring:
... 
Bill Glamdring, modified 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 9:44 PM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/23/14 9:44 PM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 11 Join Date: 9/22/14 Recent Posts
Jen Pearly:
Wow!  You are engaged in name calling now.

Since you are so upset, Bill, and I'm done with conversing with you, why don't you take up your problem with the other mods or the owner?

I don't see a single instance on here I "engaged in name calling". You want to tergiversate and ignore the important substances that fall under this discussion? I bring these serious concerns up and these are the only measures of yourself you respond with?

You are just representing your kind, or, wait, are you not?
thumbnail
Laurel Carrington, modified 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 12:07 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 12:05 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 440 Join Date: 4/7/14 Recent Posts
What is the "correct" response in this situation? What is the compassionate response, one that honors what is real and true? 

Jen, you have clearly acknowledged that you wish to change the culture of this forum. You perceive it as male dominated, not a fully safe place for women to express themselves. I am at something of a disadvantage because I did not read the original thread, only this one. But people have been spelling out their positions here, and this is how I read yours. 

Bill, you are expressing anger at what you believe is a dangerous and polarizing position on Jen's part, one that could harm the forum's true purpose. You also resent Jen's seizing the moral high ground, as far as I can tell. You strongly desire that Jen cease and desist her dangerous agenda. 

I might begin by asking whether the forum does in fact tolerate or even encourage sexist behavior in some of its participants, or whether it is by virtue of its demographic intimidating to women. The next question might be whether it's appropriate for anyone who believes it does some or all of these things to try to change it. 

I'll begin with the first question. I think it essential that people feel free to be themselves as we talk about stuff that is inevitably personal and way out of the mainstream. There tends to be a lot of aggressive energy here, people getting in each other's faces. We need to be able to hash stuff out and let people do that. I would not want to see anyone make it her mission to change this. Aggressive energy may be intimidating to some lurkers, some female, others male. But to say that it should change in order to make this place more hospitable to women is unfair to both men and women. A woman is, first and foremost, an adult. If adults are intimidated by a particular culture, they are free to go elsewhere, or maybe examine their fear and use it as an opportunity for self-inquiry. 
thumbnail
Laurel Carrington, modified 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 12:24 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 12:23 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 440 Join Date: 4/7/14 Recent Posts
On the other side, though, sometimes people are out of line. Honesty means we call them out. People can get into a contest over who has the right to silence whom. One person has told Bill to cool it. He finds it impossible to stop, though, because he isn't getting what he wants, which is an acknowledgement of what may be right in his position. Under the current circumstances, I don't expect Jen to provide that. So here is what I'll say:

Bill, if Jen is in her way demanding a safe place for her (and other women) to discuss practice, then you get to do the same. What is conducive to safety? There need to be some filters on what people get to say. Who decides, and who decides who decides? You are willing to allow people to label bad behavior as long as people don't attribute it to sexism. Can you, though, imagine any circumstance at all where a person's comment might be justifiably labeled as sexist? Have you ever seen such comments here? I personally have not, but I haven't read everything by a long shot. 

Jen, if you want to embark on a campaign to change the culture here, what do you envision doing? Is there a point at which such a campaign might end up doing more harm than good? The men who are participating on this forum have as much right as the women to express themselves. 

I guess this is it for now. Peace be with you. 
thumbnail
Laurel Carrington, modified 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 12:35 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 12:35 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 440 Join Date: 4/7/14 Recent Posts
I need to add that I am having trouble getting messages from people, especially as I used to have another account here with a different email and picture. Both accounts have the same name. I didn't plan it that way, but it just happened. I don't know the password for my old account either! Sorry. Maybe Daniel and I can fiddle with it and get it straightened out sometime. 
thumbnail
Simon Ekstrand, modified 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 1:45 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 1:45 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 245 Join Date: 9/23/11 Recent Posts
Hi Jane,

Jane Laurel Carrington:
I need to add that I am having trouble getting messages from people, especially as I used to have another account here with a different email and picture. Both accounts have the same name. I didn't plan it that way, but it just happened. I don't know the password for my old account either! Sorry. Maybe Daniel and I can fiddle with it and get it straightened out sometime. 


I disabled your alternate account so it no longer shows up in the messages form.

Simon
Zed Z, modified 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 2:02 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 1:54 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 15 Join Date: 8/4/11 Recent Posts
Jane,

Thanks for this, it is good to have somebody with an honest and good intention to mediate between the different sides. However, I think/feel that your assessment fits only partially.

1. I think Bill is a troll. Maybe he is Sawfoot's current reincarnation. His join date is just one day after the other thread's deletion, and he made posts only to this thread. He is way too agressive for a serious meditator. Yes, regular practitioners can be negative, argumentative, angry or sometimes even outright agressive. But time after time (and typically increasingly more often as they progress) they also have moments of mindfullnes which lead to more measured and skillful behavior. Ranting about alleged feminist oppression for days is at best childish but certainly not skillful. And it is not representative of this site's culture. Anyways, even if people did not explicitly distanced themselves from sexism that does not imply that they are sexists. Under the assumption that Bill is indeed a troll, his activity can be thought of as an attempt to insinuate that this is a bigot, opressive community.

2. As for Jen, I think her case is more about responsibility. She got strong DhO positions very quickly. She became the editor of MCTB2 (and as a result has special access to Daniel's time) and now even a moderator. Even if her assessment that this is an opressive place is true one cannot change it that quickly and voluntarily. But I think that assessment is by and large not a good fit. She was insulted by one long time contributor at the heat of the other thread (which was itself a giant provocation of the community by Sawfoot) who later, in this thread, explicitly apologized to her.

Jen,

I didn't want to talk about you "behind your back", so the above is also addressed to you - if this matters at all.

Z

Ps. I'm a mostly read-only member, but I do lift weights have a regular meditation practice which I feel often benefits from the DhO. That's why I felt I should share my thoughts.
thumbnail
Daniel M Ingram, modified 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 2:10 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 2:10 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 3231 Join Date: 4/20/09 Recent Posts
I think that people are quick to rise to the bait here on both sides and that calmness, tolerance, and politeness should be increased when possible.

I find all this drama to be very far from what I wish to see here. Where it is coming from, I can't be certain. Obviously, it takes all sides to tango.

Let's try to back up, quit pushing everyone's buttons, quit responding when they are pushed if possible, and get back to helping people learn useful things they can do to explore these fascinating realms.

Daniel
ftw, modified 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 2:49 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 2:49 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 60 Join Date: 6/10/14 Recent Posts
Daniel M. Ingram:

Let's try to back up, quit pushing everyone's buttons, quit responding when they are pushed if possible, and get back to helping people learn useful things they can do to explore these fascinating realms.

Daniel


My apology was sincere and also an attempt to move things into direction you're talking about above. I'm a bit dissapointed that it was used as an argument for proving someone's point. Speaking of proving a point, my ego is going to have to be satisfied with what I've just said and nothing more.

ZedZ, I shar your opinion on the troll part. Either that or very angry meditator emoticon

Jane Laurel Carrington,
Thank you for wisdom.
thumbnail
Laurel Carrington, modified 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 9:13 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 9:12 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 440 Join Date: 4/7/14 Recent Posts
Thanks to the three of you. I feel concerned that I was too easy on Bill--he really was over the line. I think I was really responding to others who may have felt their position was being excluded. Bill is hardly the right spokesman for that position and angry rants that escalate are trolling. 

In part I was thinking about a comment I heard on a recent retreat, from a psychologist. He said that anger is often given short shrift by Buddhists, and that people may mistakenly think repression is the answer to strong emotion. This, of course, is a losing strategy.

It may make sense to open a thread on anger and practice. In my own case, I used to be angry pretty much all the time; once one provocation lost its punch I'd find another. This practice has dialed down that reactivity to the point that I rarely get angry at all, and even then it blows over quickly. Fear is a different thing, unfortunately, but that's not the point here, which is that I don't think slapping down one's own or another person's anger is necessarily the best approach. But Bill was repeating the same rant over and over, and no one needs that. 

Thanks again, everyone.
Bill Glamdring, modified 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 9:40 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 9:37 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 11 Join Date: 9/22/14 Recent Posts
Sorry, no, I'm not a troll. I wrote those messages over and over again because they were meant to be read over and over again.

I do not respect this type of behavior and have actually seen such thinking ruin innocent people's lives, so I am here to say No and to hold her accountable. 

I honestly do not understand what this big hooplah really is, in total seriousness, I'm wowed that respect for the forum at large isn't touched on by our friend Jen here. 

You think this is a troll? Please. I have seen real life feminist trolls ruin peoples real life lives. It's not alright to just parade it around this place for those squirrel reasons.

End of discussion. I am happy I am understood.
thumbnail
Florian, modified 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 9:59 AM
Created 7 Years ago at 9/24/14 9:59 AM

RE: victim identity

Posts: 1028 Join Date: 4/28/09 Recent Posts
I'm locking this thread.

Florian (mod)