One thing you would do differently

@ghost-of-a-duke said
This wasn't her suggestion. Why the pretence that it was?

There is no "pretence that it was" her suggestion.

@fmf said
No. "You" refers to Suzianne. It is Very Rusty who has repeatedly been suggesting that the reason divegeester disagrees with her [i.e. Suzianne, who I refer to as "you" when I address her] is merely that he has some sort of sexual interest in her. No mistake. What I said was very precise.

Then direct your post at Rusty, not Suzianne. It wasn't her suggestion. Your post clearly implied it was when you wrote:

Yours is an odd brand of feminism. Suggesting that the reason a man disagrees with you..."

Not precise in the slightest.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Then direct your post at Rusty, not Suzianne. It wasn't her suggestion. Your post clearly implied it was when you wrote:

Yours is an odd brand of feminism. Suggesting that the reason a man disagrees with you..."

Not precise in the slightest.

Very Rusty can say these vaguely demeaning things if he wants to. I am just a bit surprised that Suzianne has gone along with it on a few occasions.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Not precise in the slightest.

You need to read the post as a whole.

When I said: "I am surprised that you go along with this rather demeaning banter"... the "demeaning banter" I was referring to was Very Rusty "suggesting that the reason a man disagrees with you [i.e Suzianne] - or is in conflict with you[i.e Suzianne] - is merely that he has some sort of sexual interest in you [i.e Suzianne]...".

If you think Very Rusty's riff is OK, so be it. If you think Suzianne not distancing herself from it is fine, so be it.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Then direct your post at Rusty, not Suzianne. It wasn't her suggestion. Your post clearly implied it was when you wrote:

Yours is an odd brand of feminism. Suggesting that the reason a man disagrees with you..."

Not precise in the slightest.

Then direct your post at Rusty, not Suzianne.

It's Suzianne's reaction that is more interesting in this situation, which has come up before. Sometimes her dignity as a feminist is undermined by the old "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" thing, perhaps.

-Removed-

Yes I saw that. It was interesting. However, on this occasion I am expressing some bafflement with why she doesn't give Very Rusty's belittling riff the heave ho. But, yeah: the 'sniffing panties' thing is another peculiar thing for a feminist to say, at least to my way of thinking.

@fmf said
As I say, yours is an odd ~ dare I say, even superficial? ~ brand of online feminism.

Said the man, who cannot understand feminism of any stripe.

@fmf said
I think what I have said about Suzianne's peculiar attitude to Very Rusty's banter on this occasion - and at least two previous occasions - is valid.

Well, it comes as surprise to no one, but I don't.

Not "peculiar" at all. As we already know, you are simply wont to describe it thusly to deligitimize it.

@fmf said
I think daft speculation about divegeester's clashes with Suzianne being somehow connected to how sexually attractive she might be to him is a rather demeaning way of talking about her/to her. Surely the men who rush to her defence as if she were a damsel in distress think there's more substance to her than being a sexual object that causes sexual frustration?

Whatever.

@fmf said
No. "You" refers to Suzianne. It is Very Rusty who has repeatedly been suggesting that the reason divegeester disagrees with her [i.e. Suzianne, who I refer to as "you" when I address her] is merely that he has some sort of sexual interest in her. No mistake. What I said was very precise.

And wrong.

@fmf said
You need to read the post as a whole.

When I said: "I am surprised that you go along with this rather demeaning banter"... the "demeaning banter" I was referring to was Very Rusty "suggesting that the reason a man disagrees with you [i.e Suzianne] - or is in conflict with you[i.e Suzianne] - is merely that he has some sort of sexual interest in you [i.e Suzianne]...".

If ...[text shortened]... usty's riff is OK, so be it. If you think Suzianne not distancing herself from it is fine, so be it.

Getting the hem of your skirt wet over this is an issue for you -- and your band of acolytes.

@fmf said
Then direct your post at Rusty, not Suzianne.

It's Suzianne's reaction that is more interesting in this situation, which has come up before. Sometimes her dignity as a feminist is undermined by the old "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" thing, perhaps.

The only ones "undermining" my "dignity as a feminist" are you two (so far), as I said, by design, in an effort to deligitimize me.

@suzianne said
The only ones "undermining" my "dignity as a feminist" are you two, as I said, by design, in an effort to deligitimize me.

Your posting often suggests more misandrist than feminist.

@fmf said
Yes I saw that. It was interesting. However, on this occasion I am expressing some bafflement with why she doesn't give Very Rusty's belittling riff the heave ho. But, yeah: the 'sniffing panties' thing is another peculiar thing for a feminist to say, at least to my way of thinking.

Rusty's brand of banter doesn't sharpen my spear. It's your histrionic attempts to deligitimize me that do that. Adults know how to pick their battles (well, some do).