SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Drupal founder Dries Buytaert expelled Larry "Crell" Garfield from the Drupal community (archive) for his involvement in the BDSM community. Garfield claims this was done at the demand of Drupal Security team member Klaus "klausi" Purer and unknown others secretly pressuring Drupal leadership to have him removed for his private sex life.
takyon: From Larry's response:
I am involved in two such communities, specifically the BDSM community and the Gorean (Gor) community. The former is by far the larger of the two and more varied, although I spend more of my time and activity in the Gorean community. It's a small community, and sadly much of what is found online about it is utter crap, just as most in the BDSM community find the "50 Shades" representation of BDSM to be harmfully misleading. The Gorean subculture is inspired by a science-fiction book series written from the 1960s onward to today, and predicated on a strong sense of personal honor, integrity, and community. It also practices consensual Master/slave relationships, and has a strong gender bias toward male-Dom/female-sub relationships, but that is not the cornerstone of Gorean culture. There are other groups that are biased the other way, or have no gender bias. There are even groups in Chicago (where I live) that have regular "fem-dom" parties. To each their own.
It's the same Gor that was adapted into two films, one of which appeared on an episode of Mystery Science Theater 3000.
(Score: 3, Funny) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday March 27 2017, @02:15PM (10 children)
Pretty much tells you everything you need to know about the difference between 3rd Gen Feminists and 2nd Gen Feminists. 2nd Gen-ers were about equality and liberty regardless of gender. 3rd Gen-ers are opposed to both regardless of gender.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday March 27 2017, @05:42PM (6 children)
Yeah, you're not alone in observing that large chunks of the so-called 3rd wave are somewhere between farcical and outright traitorous. The anti-trafficking stuff I do runs into this bizarre and obvious fifth column that's inserted into the "sex-positive" contingent of the third wave that has this utter obsession with legalizing prostitution or--as anyone who has observed it, let alone lived it, will call it--*commercialized rape.* Dig a little deeper into the networks of the most vocal of this type and you start seeing squicky connections.
I've been called, get this, "whore-phobic" for wanting the Nordic Model (or to be more precise, a sensical, reasoned version of it that doesn't accidentally enable pimps). And accused of being afraid that someone "more sexually adventurous" would "steal my man." There are at least 3 wrong assumptions in there, by the way.
So what's a girl to do?! I'm already on a lot of peoples' shitlists for being insufficiently extreme about certain things. Maybe we need a "fourth wave?"
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday March 27 2017, @07:44PM (4 children)
I've been called, get this, "whore-phobic" for wanting the Nordic Model (or to be more precise, a sensical, reasoned version of it that doesn't accidentally enable pimps).
You can't get rid of pimps. If you look elsewhere in the entertainment industry, there are all sorts of supervisor/support personnel such as managers, producers, book agents, editors, etc who perform the same roles that pimps do in the prostitution industry. The huge difference is that those other industries are legal and hence subject to a variety of regulations that usually prevent the sort of dysfunctional relationships that pimps are infamous for.
My view is that having and enforcing normal workplace rules will eliminate virtually all of the problems that pimps are known for.
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Monday March 27 2017, @10:21PM (3 children)
Insightful and reasonable.
Unfortunately, there seems to be a weird dichotomy for "small government" types - where regulation exists, and seems to work, it is wanted. Where it doesn't yet exist, or isn't working (and in both cases, someone is being explioted, or someone is 'missing out'), they complain about they don't want the regulation.
I don't think you can keep everyone happy. Trying to keep *most* people safe and free of exploitation is noble, but also likely to fail, especially if the sorts of people at Drupal keep acting like this.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday March 27 2017, @10:55PM (2 children)
Unfortunately, there seems to be a weird dichotomy for "small government" types - where regulation exists, and seems to work, it is wanted. Where it doesn't yet exist, or isn't working (and in both cases, someone is being explioted, or someone is 'missing out'), they complain about they don't want the regulation.
What's weird about it? You seem to be saying where regulation is proven to work, then "small government" types are for it. And where it's not proven to work, then they aren't. Doesn't seem weird to me, but I'm probably not getting your point.
I don't think you can keep everyone happy. Trying to keep *most* people safe and free of exploitation is noble, but also likely to fail, especially if the sorts of people at Drupal keep acting like this.
Drupal is its own reward. When the organization is more concerned about weird crap like this than delivering useful code, it's well on its way to becoming irrelevant. It's not that hard to come up with replacement organizations to replace Drupal. Nor is it that hard to leave Drupal, especially if there's a boot print on your tail bone.
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Tuesday March 28 2017, @12:19AM (1 child)
Either the free market is free, so companies can hire and fire at will, or regulation is needed.
"You can't fire (or not hire) based on skin colour, repigion, etc etc"
"You can't hire ( " ) based on sexual preferences"
..
Where does it stop?
For a true "small governement" proponent, step one: free to hire, fire, descriminate, exploit, at will. Free means employees can go elsewhere, right?
Companies can also collude, pollute, avoid tax (tax is theft, after all)
Some regulation? Just a little bit pregnant?
More on topic, Drupal deserves to shrivel up and blow away.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday March 28 2017, @12:40AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 28 2017, @07:29AM
Not only the difference between 2nd generation and 3rd generation of feminists is not real, the only reason this difference is talked about is because of political success of 2nd gen in terming any opposition into "misogyny" and "wants to put women back into the kitchen/1960" or some other similar adhominem. Furthermore the constant propaganda convinces us that feminism is an ideological movement and not a purely political one. "Do you believe in equality? Then you are a feminist and you are just too stupid to not know that." Of course the reality is not that. Feminism has, and it is implied from its name as such, a political movement which wants to put women in more powerful position. It doesn't care who foots the bill as long as it is not women. Functionally it has always portrayed the dominant workforce as an enemy. It is cis-white-het-male in europe, it is islam in middle east, it is hindu in India, it is buddhists in buddhism. Wait one generation and you will find the 4th generation talking about how great 3rd generation of feminists were who were fighting the devil incarnate aka Trump while 4th generation of feminists only want to have more power in already equal society. Why? Because in this equality debate, there is no voice of men. Well, maybe election of Trump stops this nonsense, but lets see.
See, historically manhood was defined by the ability to follow the system (i.e. honor), to protect and provide women. Hence by design the system attracted more men. But now, when we are opulence is way-of-life and government and machinery takes care of most basic needs, licking pussy has become the new standard of manhood. It is only recent that lack of sex has become an insult. When that happens, you can expect corruption to be institutionalized. What is surprising is that while the geeks/nerds were the first people to suffer this - they were the ones being ostracized for 'not being cool' by the girls and their jocks - but because they ended up making a lot of money and hence made the geeky things ultimately look cool, the newer generation of script kiddies are the bullies and not the bullied.
A simple metaphor is look at it as a power game between the queen and the king where queen wants the diamond and the throne in the name of female peasantry, then demonizes slutty behavior [thoughtcatalog.com] to keep those rights with only the "worthy women". King on the other hand, who controls the wealth, is under no moral obligation to pretend that he is worried about the male peasantry. At the end, it is the male peasantry that pays the price for this whole show, literally by paying more tax and then removing themselves from the gene pool (army/suicide).
Posting anonymous so avoid abuse.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday March 27 2017, @09:11PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Gaaark on Tuesday March 28 2017, @12:42AM (1 child)
What i've noticed is that it used to be about 'strong women' and equality and (you know the songs, sing along with me) "I am woman hear me roar" and "R.E.S.P.E.C.T.".
Now all i hear is women allowing themselves to be called 'Bitches', and hearing "He my babbie daddy" (isn't that the stupidest phrase someone could say, besides "Who are you wearing?", heard at celebrity fuck-tard things).
Women used to want respect. Now they are fine with being 'bitches' and unmarried baby portals?
Damn. Aretha Franklin: are you still ALIVE?
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday March 28 2017, @01:42AM
Sort of. You're comparing feminists to women though. Given the changes to feminism over the past couple decades, most people (even most women) utterly refuse to associate themselves with the movement anymore.
Today's feminists are not for equality because that negates their every push for special treatment. They're also not for strong women because strong women flat refuse to shut up and do what they're told.
See Christina Hoff Summers vs. Anita Sarkeesian if you need further detail.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.