Monday's Most Active Threads

The most active thread yesterday was titled, "USC and Columbia Protests" and posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. Threads about protests on college campuses, especially Columbia, have been rampant over the past several days. As anyone who has paid attention to the news will know, Columbia University's President was called before Congress where she was castigated for not doing enough about demonstrations. She returned to the college and asked the New York Police Department to arrest student demonstrators who had camped out on campus. The original poster of this thread criticized the arrests saying that things were "going to end badly". The original poster also criticized the decision by the president of the University of Southern California to cancel the graduation speech scheduled to be delivered by valedictorian Asna Tabassum, a Muslim woman, due to unspecified security threats. The original poster concluded, "These high level administrators seem completely clueless and out of touch with their student bodies." Many of the responses in the thread described incidents at other universities in which students were punished for demonstrating against the Israeli devastation of Gaza and the US complicity in what the students describe as "genocide". The situation at Columbia, in particular, has deteriorated rapidly since this thread has started. Unfortunately, there has been considerable misinformation spread, much of it showing up in this thread. Based on first-hand reporting, the student demonstrations on campus have been peaceful and, far from being anti-Semitic as some claim, actually include many Jewish students. However, outside campus, groups not associated with the University have gathered and have frequently been very aggressive toward visibly Jewish students and have engaged in anti-Semitic rhetoric. Opponents of the demonstrators have attempted to treat both groups as one, suggesting that the peaceful student groups are committing the activities of those outside campus. In addition, the thread contains a significant amount of scolding by those who do not think the students should be protesting and who accuse the students of being uninformed and naive. Many posters warn, sometime suggesting hope on their part, that the students are endangering their future job prospects. The situation on campuses and the opposition to demonstrators on the part of many DCUM posters reminds me of something Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. wrote in his famous "Letter from Birmingham Jail". King wrote:

I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to 'order' than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice [...]

This quote could be updated with regard to the Gaza conflict to include some Black and Brown moderates, but the sentiment remains the same. Moderates are far more upset about the disruption of campus life and the presence of students in tents than they are about the tens of thousands of lives lost in Gaza and the many more at risk of famine. They prefer the "negative peace" in which Gazans are killed quietly instead of the positive peace championed by the students.

Next was a thread posted in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum titled, "61% of single women in America are not looking to get into a new relationship compared to 38% of men". The original poster cites research by the Pew Research Center showing that single men are far more likely to be looking for a relationship or dates than single women. This is especially true among older singles. The original poster asks others what they think might be the cause of this. The third poster to respond provided a fairly comprehensive explanation that I think covered all bases and could have ended the thread. That poster argued that the value of marriage for women is to have families or to gain some financial security. Beyond that, marriage is often not a very good deal for women, especially as they age. Generally, women will be expected to do more for their spouse than their spouse does for them. Many women are afraid that they would simply be signing up to be a caregiver. As a result, for financially-stable women who don't want kids, marriage has very little to offer. Men who might be appealing partners are generally not available and those who are available tend to have considerable baggage. Men, on the other hand, are eager to get the advantages that women are expected to bring to the relationship, making this a far more attractive arrangement for men than it is for women. Hence the discrepancy. One poster summed this up by saying, "Women choosing to be happy alone vs pleasing someone and all the burden of taking care of someone else's life without necessarily a good emotional return." Several posters argue that this data is somewhat misleading. In their view, the single woman who are not interested in a relationship are responding to the lack of eligible men. If the right guy came along, they would be open to a relationship. Another argument is that the data is misleadingly presented and that digging into it reveals a significant impact from widows. Men tend to die earlier, and widows often don't have interest in another relationship. Overall, posters in this thread have a very dismal view of men who generally are seen as inept at most domestic tasks, incapable of offering emotional support, and more of a burden than a benefit. Men simply don't bring enough to the table. A few posters stand up for the guys, arguing that many, perhaps most, men don't fit that description. Nevertheless, the perception that men struggle to survive without the help of a woman while women can get by just fine without a man seems pretty pervasive in this thread.

The next most active thread was titled, "Please state your unpopular, secret pop culture opinion" and was posted in the "Entertainment and Pop Culture" forum. The original poster says that she finds Tina Fey and Amy Schumer to be spectacularly unfunny and thinks that Taylor Swift is "bland, boring, beige". These are basically fighting words in many quarters. On the other hand, the original poster is not bothered by The Kardashians. I cannot say how much I dislike these type of threads. I am much more interested in what people like than what they dislike. Taste is personal, so why do you need to put down things that others might like? The thread got sidetracked somewhat by a discussion of Amanda Knox, the American student in Italy who was convicted of killing her roommate. Knox was later exonerated but one poster's unpopular opinion is that Knox is guilty. Another reason that I hate threads of this type is that they simply become a venue for people's pet topics. Meghan Markle haters show up to hate Meghan Markle. Frankly, is hating Meghan Markle really unpopular? It seems like there is a cottage industry for it. Similarly, many posters don't like Taylor Swift's new album, but that is almost the consensus view on DCUM. Unpopular would be something like thinking that Taylor Swift is the Bob Dylan of her generation. More than one of DCUM's many transphobes came along to praise J. K. Rowling as "being right". Not only do I disagree with this assessment, but this thread is in the entertainment forum. Rowling's talent as an author would be on-topic but her attitudes toward transgender individuals are not really relevant to entertainment or pop culture. What might have been on topic is the fact that a Taiwanese performer, Nymphia Wind, won "RuPaul’s Drag Race" this week and was publicly praised by Taiwan's president who wrote, "Taiwan thanks you for living fearlessly." That was probably unpopular with J. K. Rowling and her acolytes on DCUM. A truly unpopular opinion was the suggestion that neither Harvey Weinstein nor Bill Cosby should have been jailed. That elicited considerable pushback.

The final thread that I will discuss today was posted in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum and titled, "Husband surprised me and I want to cry (not joyful tears)". The original poster begins by explaining that she has never had a room in her house that she could call her own. Her husband has an office and their kids have a playroom, but the original poster only shares rooms. This week she will be starting a new job for which she will work from home. Therefore, she spent four weeks converting the playroom to her office. She put a lot of effort into it and had finally created a space for herself. But then her husband, without telling her, changed the direction her desk had been sitting, brought in a black garbage can and large black printer that clashed with the light colors of the room. He also moved in an ugly light and put hooks on the wall. He left a note saying how proud he was of the original poster and that she deserved the job and the stuff he had given her. The original poster is so upset that he has ruined her space but doesn't want to appear ungrateful to him. She asks whether she should say something or just "suck it up". Posters are largely of two minds. One group says that she should appear appreciative and thank her husband, but over time slowly undo all of his changes. The second group thinks that she should stand up for herself and immediately tell her husband that she is thankful for the effort but that she wants to change things back. The one thing that everyone seems to agree upon is that she should not keep the room how it is. The only difference is how assertive she is about changing it back. Those responding are similarly divided about their perceptions of the original poster's husband's behavior. Some see it as well-meaning, if misguided and think his heart is in the right place. They seem to appreciate him trying. Others see the husband as controlling and question how he could not have a better understanding of his wife's desires. Some of these posters think the husband intentionally changed the room because he didn't want his wife to have something that she could call her own. As far as I can tell, the original poster didn't post in this thread again after the initial post. So apparently the advice was sufficient or she lost interest.