USF It was not your post at all. It was another post that triggered it. The post called for cutting the throat of offenders - thus, murder. FYI: This site has a stated policy against violent threats.
Threats (according to state, federal and case law) can be direct or in-direct in nature. Suggesting the murder of anyone for any reason can land said individual and the website in huge legal trouble
. THAT sir is a reality. You can flaunt all the bravado you claim true...but at the end of the day, words mean things and courts mean even more...and they ain't fkin around these days.
As for priorities of the site...(news flash)I don’t set them
. I only observe that some of us have been seeking national and/or state-based support for survivors, as there are little-to-no resources for us. Sexually abused or raped women usually have ample resources at the county, state and federal level. When it comes to men and boys...it’s simply not there for us.
Now, we can sit back and wait for public policy support and change (that means laws, funding and programs BTW). Or we can take the lead and make things happen. I tend to not sit on the sidelines wringing my hands in hope that someone else will pick up the ball and run with it. I pick it up myself and run it down field!
My mention of this factor of hope for support through media, legislation and membership roles increasing does not constitute a shift or even suggested shift in priorities. Just because I mention
a factor or an issue, it does not reflect diversion from our intended purpose.
Is the primary goal and intention of this site healing and recovery? Hell yes. Does that mean all else needs to be neglected? Hell no. I've heard that organizations can actually
multi-task.(no shit...I've heard this for real) Why, I've even heard of other 501c3 organizations work on healing AND fund-raising AND legislative action all at the same time (can I get a "wow?")....All Gods children say "WOW."
I've even heard that Mothers Against Drunk Driving have done all three very very successfully for many years now. They raised money, they invoked legislative action (another example of public policy change for those of you in Rio Linda) and they support families hurt by drunk driving. MADD has had laws changed, sentencing guideline dramatically changed, public awareness dramatically increased. Before MADD came along, drunk driving was a passive non-issue that got NO public attention
And let's just imagine for a moment what a site like this might be able to do with an extra $1-2,000,000 in federal grants. Naw...fk it...let's just remain as we are and ensure
limited outreach and effectiveness.OR...Let's try not being so short-sighted!! Hell, with the size and gravity of CSA, we ought to be twice the size and power of MADD by now.
Should we be sensitive to one another? YES when it comes to sensitive "trigger" issues...just because you disagree with my opinion does not mean I am inherently wrong or you are inherently right, that’s why they are called opinions.
Well...I'll suggest that as an element of defense for the anti-abortion activists...or the white supremacist...or the NAMBLA site. Fk dude...the NAMBLA site must be chock-full of opinions. I bet they would LOVE to come here and express their opinions.
What's good for the goose...as they say. I mean after all, as you say, it IS their opinion they are expressing, and opinons...as you say..."cant be inherently wrong".
Shit dude, they will be SO fkg happy to hear that.
I've got to suggest some of my past law professors that they cite this cannon of common law. There are no rights or wrongs...just equal opinions.
"in my opinion your honor...my client had every right to voice HIS opinion calling for the execution of Jews in New York City...it was his opinion, and he's entitled to it!...I rest my case."...."it was my client's OPINION your honor that the anti-abortion website in question ought to encourage murdering some doctors...its their opinion and they ought to be able to express it!"
Again, the post in question called for the cutting of people's throats.
Beyond legal issues, that kind of verbal violence can scare people away from the site. Not everyone is a tough, knife-wielding thug bent on revenge. Some potential members or users of the site are still children…some are women…some are guys who are simply not violent and don’t want to be associated with anything that promotes violence. Why, do you know there are actually people out there who find dialogue about murdering people to be repugnant?
So what happens then? They click-on (buh-bye) and we never get to meet them to explain that “that’s really not what we are about here at MS…we just let people post things about murder cuz...well...they got opinions...ya know….here…look at the Off Topic Forum…we got funny stuff there
...have some punch and cookies?”
Is this horse dead yet or shall I beat-on?