My Mistake
I dropped a long comment over at Cold Desert a while ago.An anonymous commentor had made the statement that "A moderate Muslim is one who leaves more than a neck when they behead someone". This 'nony and I have met in a few places on the 'net.
I dislike broad generalisations, 'cos they're wrong. So I was a little pissed. Then I read the justification, which didn't actually provide any. It was just a sort of pro-American screed which I think many US citizens might have disagreed with.
But I riposted, point for point. And I must have done a job of it, because the same 'nony (I assume) posted a comment that begins:
"Metro doens't [sic] get it. Never did. Never will."Which is what he really wanted to say, but you can read the rest of it here if you like.
I replied to that one too, and I actually don't feel that good about having done so.
See, 'nony was here a while ago and made what I thought were some refreshing statements regarding the nature of our discourse together. I kind of hoped there might be a chance for something like a rational dialogue.
Now posting to blogs that I read with remarks like "All Muslims want to behead people" (paraphrasing) is instigation. But it's like The War Against Terror thing. How do I know I'm right if I let the opposing viewpoint try to force me into adopting his tactics?
I want to think about how debate is being framed on this blog. Perhaps there's a chance to salvage this. After all, I'm honestly not trying to blast anyone's worldview apart. Just trying to introduce another way of looking at things.
So I'm going to try an experiment. Keep the rhetoric toned down a little, if I can. After all, as 'Nony said: "Kinda tough having a debate however, if we simply think the other is wrong".
If we approach it with an open mind, maybe we can get past the name-calling and anger. Besides, I'm sure conflict is no good for the digestion, and I'm still partial to Jumpin' Jack's once in a while. Or I would be, did we have one here.
For some reason I'm really craving a Jumpin' Jack's burger right now. First place I ever had blueberry soft-serve ice cream, or Swiss cheese on a burger ... Mmmmm.
posted by Metro @ 2:28 pm
5 Comments:
Metro - Nony here. Sorry bro, I never made the post you're making reference too. Just waiting to comment on something relevant to my life is all. From now on, I'll sign off as Nony. That way you'll know it's me.
Sorry again bro..the men in white coats won't let me use my real name.
When people are anonymously commenting, they tend to get more carried away which leads to more insults and name calling.
I am again questioning the validity of allowing anonymous comments.
Nony:
Glad to have you back, and not a little relieved the other one wasn't you.
And congrats on claiming an identity, for all the right reasons (not least of which is your good name).
Still, between the two of you you've got me thinking, so the exercise isn't wasted.
Ahmad: I sympathize. It's enough sometimes that we post on these divisive topics, particularly when we do so in strong terms.
Still--the fact that some folks post anonymously is a valid part of the discussion. In a way, we're all anonymous. It's just that we lay claim to an identity called by a name.
Offline, for all anyone knows I'm a Dallas Cowgirl.
So, that explains the Cowgirls outfit in your size I saw tucked away in the bottom of a packing box.
Something you try on in front of the mirror when no ones around?
IH
Pseudonymous isn't anonymous; this is an important distiction that came up early in the blogging game, like ten years ago.
All anonymous commenters are at risk of being mistaken for one another. It is in their own best interests to choose a pen name.
Post a Comment
<< Home