Venting No, Chad, you’re not the Pro-lifer Police so stop acting like it

[Larysa]

So many posters are now picking at any perceived inconsistency in a post, in a fantasy of trying to out a pro-lifer.

It's just nasty.

Often it's clear (from past history if you need more convincing) that the person is in all likelihood just another desperate person in pain. But, oh no, Chad and his cronies have to get their jibes in.

Dare to say "lol" as you describe your pain? Chad will see you and call you out.

Have a problem that Chad doesn't immediately understand? You'll be challenged on your intentions.

Planning to take SN but worried about being overheard as no choice but to do it at home? Apparently your concerns are "weird". Strong implication that you're aiming to fail.

One poster was even told they weren't "eloquent" enough to be over 18.

These are all examples I've seen in the last few hours.

What do you think you're achieving with these posts? That you'll unveil the next potential Tantacrul and be a hero? That you will shame some "attention seeker" off the site?

Prioritising a half-arsed attempt to call out a fantasy infiltrator instead of providing support, kindness or just fucking scrolling on by is a dick move.

If you have serious concerns that someone is underage or has nefarious intentions, then obviously report it to the mods.

 

[Meditation guide]

If there weren't pro lifers here or people faking so much or spreading false information, it wouldn't be necessary. I can't speak for anyone else but from my perspective it's sad what's happened here.

All of these false reports of taking SN, or the many scaremongering posts are obvious to someone who spent a lot of time here in the past. I don't mind calling them out.

 

[Larysa]

If there weren't pro lifers here or people faking so much or spreading false information, it wouldn't be necessary. I can't speak for anyone else but from my perspective it's sad what's happened here.

All of these false reports of taking SN, or the many scaremongering posts are obvious to someone who spent a lot of time here in the past. I don't mind calling them out.

The examples I gave above, and many others, are not necessary.

Simply report to mods if you have genuine concerns. Is that not what you'd advise as an admin, @RainAndSadness?

 

[Meditation guide]

The examples I gave above, and many others, are not necessary.

Simply report to mods if you have genuine concerns. Is that not what you'd advise as an admin, @RainAndSadness?

Why let them operate in secrecy? Expose them. What's wrong with that?

If they get to spread their lies in public then they should be prepared to be called out on it.

I haven't seen the examples you gave but they don't sound very serious.

 

[Larysa]

You are surprised by the SaSu rule on reporting to mods, rather than harassing posters who are misbehaving or breaking rules?



Seems very clear.

Why let them operate in secrecy? Expose them. What's wrong with that?

If they get to spread their lies in public then they should be prepared to be called out on it.

I haven't seen the examples you gave but they don't sound very serious.

Yeah, this is exactly the problem. People acting as one-man vigilantes, based on their own personal opinions.

Your perception of a poster is not foolproof. That's why there are mods to intervene.

Desperate people posting on here have been undermined, shamed and accused of lying. In a place where they should be able to expect support. You don't think that's very serious? I disagree.

I can see that there may be a limited number of situations where you want to call out someone for dangerous posting (at the same time as reporting to mods) but that's not what I'm talking about. What I've seen, and described above, is self-appointed forum police being insulting to clearly vulnerable posters. Presumably to make themselves feel like freedom fighters. It certainly appears to be totally against the ethos and rules of this site.

 

[SexyIncél]

Could you please link to those posts? So we can evaluate them

 

[Larysa]

Could you please link to those posts? So we can evaluate them

No. That would be targeting people.

I wanted to raise the issue as I think it is increasing, and it bothers me. Not start harassing people myself.

 

[SexyIncél]

No. That would be targeting people.

I wanted to raise the issue as I think it is increasing, and it bothers me. Not start harassing people myself.

Sigh. The way I normally do it is intervene in the thread, then link to my own post. Or you could link to the thread, not the individual post

But I suppose that's the problem escalating early to name-calling ("Chad", "dick move"). It's hard to walk it back & diplomatically analyze posts

I don't recall seeing posts quite like this, so have no opinion on the matter

 

[Larysa]

Sigh. The way I normally do it is intervene in the thread, then link to my own post. Or you could link to the thread, not the individual post

But I suppose that's the problem escalating early to name-calling ("Chad", "dick move"). It's hard to walk it back & diplomatically analyze posts

I don't recall seeing posts quite like this, so have no opinion on the matter

I have no desire to walk anything back. I am concerned about how some people are being treated on here. I stand by exactly what I posted.

What you normally do is irrelevant as I have no intention of targeting individuals, however indirectly.

If you have no opinion, then it's hard to understand why you felt the need to comment.

 

[SexyIncél]

I have no need to walk anything back. I am concerned about how some people are being treated on here. I stand by exactly what I posted.

What you normally do is irrelevant as I have no intention of targeting individuals, however indirectly.

If you have no opinion, then it's hard to understand why you felt the need to comment.

Because you make aggressive claims without evidence to inspect. You say there's a problem, but act aggrieved when interested people don't immediately agree. A massive time-waster

If you were seriously concerned, you'd intervene more effectively. You seem to have a different agenda, like maybe the catharsis of bashing people

You seem quick to dish out heavy criticism & name-calling, but act defensive when people simply ask for evidence, in ways that avoid any constraints you invent

 

[Larysa]

Because you make aggressive claims without evidence to inspect. You say there's a problem, but act aggrieved when interested people don't immediately agree. A massive time-waster

If you were seriously concerned, you'd intervene more effectively. You seem to have a different agenda, like maybe the catharsis of bashing people

You seem quick to dish out heavy criticism & name-calling, but act defensive when people simply ask for evidence, in ways that avoid any constraints you invent

Aggressive, hey? For characterising these posters as Chad? Sure.

"Interested people"? What you and one other guy comments, I don't immediately withdraw my concerns or follow your instructions, and that's a problem for you? I'm just holding my boundaries.

The 'catharsis of bashing people' applies to to those posters I am referring to - the irony, eh?

You certainly seem keen to attempt to derail this thread. I have no wish to engage with you further. You are acting in bad faith imo.

 

[SexyIncél]

Aggressive, hey? For characterising these posters as Chad? Sure.

"Interested people"? What you and one other guy comment, I don't immediately withdraw my concerns or follow your instructions, and that's a problem for you? I'm just holding my boundaries.

For the record, I recall the other person in this thread (Meditation guide) isn't a "guy" nor a "Chad". Not that Chuckles here cares

 

[Larysa]

I never called any individual a Chad. Google "archetype", @absurdtimeline. It should help you moderate your anger at the use of that term.

"Chuckles"? I get the feeling you don't like women disagreeing with you. I smell misogyny.

Clicking ignore for you now, as you seem determined to derail, and I have no desire to see any more of it.

 

[SexyIncél]

"Chuckles"? I get the feeling you don't like women disagreeing with you. I smell rank misogyny.

Easy smears of misogyny tend to be a weeeee bit more effective, when you hadn't just unapologetically misgendered a woman. Next time, maybe?

(btw, if anyone wants to talk seriously about fighting misogyny irl — assisting abused girls/women — please feel free to make a new thread & ping me. I have experience that's maybe helpful)

 

[Meditation guide]

For the record, I recall the other person in this thread (Meditation guide) isn't a "guy" nor a "Chad". Not that Chuckles here cares

How did my name come up here as a chad?

I have so much time invested in this site I guess I feel like I can spot the phonies. I'm not about to start insulting just anyone. I don't usually do that. But I probably am more of a Karen. At least sometimes.

 

[Larysa]

How did my name come up here as a chad?

It didn't. Absurdtimeline is just doing their best to stir and derail.

A genuine discussion on the type of posting I'm concerned about seems unlikely due to derailing and a general lack of interest.

That's fine. I just hope that anyone who has been undermined and had their despair and pain minimised and doubted on here might find this thread and know that not everyone is OK with such behaviour.

 

[FuneralCry]

Sadly this is just the consequence of posting on the public internet, nowhere offers relief from the insensitivity of humans.
The issue with this site is that it can attract trolls who are looking to get reactions out of people but also there are many people obsessed with the people who are against this site to the point that they randomly label suffering people asking for advice or just venting as being that, I saw that recently.

And I also think many people on here don't understand what the word venting even means but anyway I just use this site to vent about wanting to die so I'm personally not bothered if others take issue with my posts. But I do feel bad sometimes when suffering people who are looking for support are met with insensitivity as after all this is the only place we can be open about wanting to die.

 

[SnowWhite]

IMO the internet is the internet at the end of the day. You're always gonna find trolls, people thinking that their opinion or voice matters the most, people lying, people pretending to be someone they're not, hostility, and arguments. On one side of the fence there'll be people who lie, on the other side people who go after anything they perceive as lying. The end result: arguments and threads turning into personal attacks.

Also you'll get people that overuse tags (venting and story in particular) or people that post recovery shit in 'Suicide Discussion' and suicide shit in 'Recovery', which just leads to the crossover nobody needed

As fucked as it is, it's often the corners for people like us online that get attacked or attract trolls the most, just because they know they'll get an easy reaction.

 

[SexyIncél]

Just to be clear, the OP could very well be overall correct; regardless of errors, rhetoric or refusal to put up case studies to learn from. Helpful to keep an eye out & support OPs (who aren't themselves bullies)

 

[Larysa]

refusal to put up case studies to learn from.

People posting on here aren't "case studies" to be used to "learn from".

(Why can I still see posts after I've clicked ignore? )

 

[SexyIncél]

People posting on here aren't "case studies" to be used to "learn from".

To the contrary. When I intervened to stop a pro-lifer from harassing a transgender woman (calling another woman "a horrible cunt"), I wrote:

"Here's some context. I'm mentioning the original poster here as a case study, not to pick on an individual, but to point out a pervasive phenomenon that most people are conditioned not to see"

Whereas you feign respect for their posts, but your actions show otherwise. Whatevs, this is 2 levels of meta & getting boring. Maybe you're having a bad day or something

 

[Larysa]

To the contrary. When I intervened to stop a pro-lifer from harassing a transgender woman (calling another woman "a horrible cunt"), I wrote:

"Here's some context. I'm mentioning the original poster here as a case study, not to pick on an individual, but to point out a pervasive phenomenon that most people are conditioned not to see"

Whereas you feign respect for their posts, but your actions show otherwise. Whatevs, this is 2 levels of meta & getting boring. Maybe you're having a bad day or something

Somehow your posts are still showing for me.

I don't give a shit about examples of your self-identified heroism, and your endless ad homs against me are as predictable and dull as all fuck.

As I don't seem to be able to block you, and you don't seem to be able to quit trying to get the last tired jibe insult in, I'll mute the thread. Hope that works.

 

[Meditation guide]

The drama on this site is stressful. But that's what happens and why I keep to myself a lot.

 

[Cloud Busting]

I've definitely noticed a lot of toxic positivity on this site and I see no problem in calling it out.

Considering how suicidal people are treated, can you blame people for lacking trust?

 

[locked*n*loaded]

You know, the reluctance of the OP to provide examples of these "desperate people posting on here (who) have been undermined, shamed and accused of lying", and who are being maligned by these alleged "pro-life policemen" Chads, could be indicative of one pro-lifer protecting their own brethren pro-lifers, under the guise of not targeting them.

Is that kinda what you mean by a "Chad" calling out those that seemingly appear to have a pro-life agenda? lol

Yeah, I'd like to see some evidence of these assertions, too. That's usually the way valid arguments are made - with evidence.

 

[John Ryder]

Damn, had to unlike OP just so I could like it all over again

 

[lopsidedcrawdad1]

You know, the reluctance of the OP to provide examples of these "desperate people posting on here (who) have been undermined, shamed and accused of lying", and who are being maligned by these alleged "pro-life policemen" Chads, could be indicative of one pro-lifer protecting their own brethren pro-lifers, under the guise of not targeting them.

Is that kinda what you mean by a "Chad" calling out those that seemingly appear to have a pro-life agenda? lol

Yeah, I'd like to see some evidence of these assertions, too. That's usually the way valid arguments are made - with evidence.

There was one on my goodbye post the other night when I thought I was going to drink my SN but didnt.

 

[locked*n*loaded]

There was one on my goodbye post the other night when I thought I was going to drink my SN but didnt.

A pro-lifer? Of course there are pro-lifers on this forum. And LE. And Psychology students, as well.

Desperate people posting on here have been undermined, shamed and accused of lying.

The OP's assertion is that people being targeted as "pro-lifers", or as I like to call them, "anti-choicers", by the "pro-life policemen" Chads, are not pro-lifers at all.

There was one on my goodbye post the other night when I thought I was going to drink my SN but didnt.

But, that was entirely your decision to not drink your SN, right? I mean no one talked you out of it, did they?

 

[lopsidedcrawdad1]

A pro-lifer? Of course there are pro-lifers on this forum. And LE. And Psychology students, as well.


The OP's assertion is that people being targeted as "pro-lifers", or as I like to call them, "anti-choicers", by the "pro-life policemen" Chads, are not pro-lifers at all.


But, that was entirely your decision to not drink your SN, right? I mean no one talked you out of it, did they?

I never claimed they did. It was just an asshole doing exactly what the post were commenting under described. You argue with everything

A pro-lifer? Of course there are pro-lifers on this forum. And LE. And Psychology students, as well.


The OP's assertion is that people being targeted as "pro-lifers", or as I like to call them, "anti-choicers", by the "pro-life policemen" Chads, are not pro-lifers at all.


But, that was entirely your decision to not drink your SN, right? I mean no one talked you out of it, did they?

You implied you think the OP is lying about that happening and that theres no evidence, then I just told you that its happened in my post, and then you shifted the goal post. I never claimed it had any impact on whether I drank my SN or not. It just annoyed me

 

[locked*n*loaded]

You implied you think the OP is lying about that happening and that theres no evidence, then I just told you that its happened in my post, and then you shifted the goal post. I never claimed it had any impact on whether I drank my SN or not. It just annoyed me

No. That's not what I implied at all. I implied that they themselves are an anti-choicer and they (the OP) are standing up for their fellow anti-choicers by targeting these so-called "Chads" for attacking the pro-life brethren. I never said that there weren't any pro-lifers on this site.

I never claimed they did. It was just an asshole doing exactly what the post were commenting under described. You argue with everything

"Did" freaking what? Never claimed they did what? All I asked was a freaking question if any of them talked you out of taking your SN. I didn't say THEY DID, and I didn't say THEY DIDN'T. I asked a freaking question. If you feel the need to attack just because someone asks you a legitimate question, they I suggest you just hit the ignore on me and all will be well. I'm not the one who responded to your posting in this thread. You responded to one of my postings. If you don't like my postings, don't respond. It's really as simple as that.