My thoughts on Neoma's actions (as if they matter at all)

[justiceischeap]

This discussion thread was locked by Neoma (a host of the Feminists group).

Special Elections:
If everyone would take a moment and take a few deep breaths and think of this from a non-emotional place by silence or agreement, you "elected" Neoma as main host when Redqueen quit. She points this out very clearly in posts #15, #18, #21, #23, & #24. At that time not one member of the group disagreed with this decision. So to claim now that she somehow "grabbed" or "usurped" her position is disingenuous at best--one person made that decision for the group. And instead of being angry at the person who made this decision for the ENTIRE group, a lot of you have opened up a can of whoop ass on Neoma when your silence tacitly screamed your approval. She then makes a decision to block iverglas from the group, and again, she made a very clear case as to why she did this (and I will go on the record as supporting that decision 1000%). For the brief 24hrs that block was in place, there was, finally, a harmony among the group--people were actually talking and listening about why transphobic comments were bad; there was no over-the-top defensiveness and it seemed like we could all breathe for a moment and amazingly, there were no tired claims of vengeance or vendetta's. That's when a small few of you decided that Neoma was no longer allowed to be the main host that you did indeed elect.

Some of us suggested we wait a few days and calm down, Redqueen agreed with this sentiment but a day later, it was decided this "election" must happen with iverglas leading the charge that Neoma MUST resign. For all appearances sake, for those of us who pay attention to this sort of thing, it looked like iverglas had a personal beef with Neoma for blocking her and the perception is that something happened behind the scenes because suddenly a special election is called for. Yet, 24hrs earlier, not a peep from one of you. It wasn't until Redqueen actually unblocked iverglas that talk of special elections were held. Then there is some question about whether or not Redqueen acted on her own (which she says she did but seabeyond denies -- I'd like that bit cleared up) to unblock iverglas. If she did act on her own, then people should be DEMANDING that she resign as host as well. You cannot have that double-standard, folks. Where is the fairness in that to Neoma?

Some of us asked that the elections be held longer than three days, but nope, can't do that. I believe I read a comment that said if we waited longer, it'd only give Neoma time to rally her crew. And woe be the person that publicly supports Neoma (so much for a safe community for all--to me, at this point, it's really only a safe community for a few and it certainly isn't safe for Neoma or anyone who supports her but I know for a lot of you, her actions of removing all the other hosts will never be forgiven).

So it was decided by some of you that "we" must get her out now. Some of the members of this group only come on this site on weekends, keep that in mind. Basically, what irks me, is that some of you are making a decision for them just like the decision was made for you to make Neoma main host to begin with. Again, I ask, where is the fairness in all this for all the members of the group?

You're Fired!
Let me just paste the group SOP below (emphasis mine):

A safe community where all those interested in discussing and trying to resolve the problems that are inherent to women in society can come and work together, without having to defend the basic premise that issues do exist which specifically affect and limit women, their rights and their potential.

What I want to ask the former group of hosts is the following--why after this hateful rant from iverglas aimed at the LGBTQ community and LGBTQ members of this group was action not taken to make this a safe place for ALL (and I'm not talking about some jury decision to simply hide a truly hateful post)? I didn't see one host condemn her comments and I didn't see one member of this group condemn those comments either.

And again, I have to ask, why would LGBTQ members NOT feel uncomfortable after reading that and not having our hosts take action? It took an almost all-out flame war for some of you to believe us when we told you that some comments were transphobic. It took non-hosts to ferret out the fact that the very person you had initially defended, was in fact, a sock puppet. Yet, somehow, again, it's our fault according to one.

I've been talking all week since the sock-puppet debacle about appearances and perceptions... they matter. If they didn't I would never once have to write the above paragraph.

And I'd like to ask another question that hasn't been answered satisfactorily by the person y'all want as your main host again: Why is it in the "election" thread, the only two people iverglas decided to "engage" with just happen to be the two lesbian's she doesn't feel are worthy to host this group? Redqueen asked for people to state what makes them uncomfortable, several people reply. I am the only one iverglas takes to "task" for answering Requeen's question though a couple other's answered as well. Again, how am I supposed to perceive that and trust the hosts will do something about it, even after it's pointed out to them? Am I being too "sensitive?"

Another example, I'd like to point out: When someone suggests that a member from the LGBTQ community be considered as a host, so everyone in the feminists group has a voice, once again, one person objects to this, and if I recall that post is hidden as well. Which, then becomes a "vendetta" by the LGBTQ to target her. If she can't see that these words are wrong but a jury can, then that's a problem. Just the fact that she would have a problem with someone from the LGBTQ representing other LGBTQ feminists on this board should have been dealt with by the hosts.

So I am formally asking the following: When we get the whole hosting situation figured out, please do something about this. Some of us have told you numerous times that we are uncomfortable in this group because of iverglas' comments. I'm sure this will be perceived as a call-out but I'm just finally answering the questions she always hounds me to answer.

Neoma: A Few Suggestions
If you're going to lock threads, at least let people know why you're locking them. Again, it's all about perceptions. You're looking a bit tyrannical.

Second, if you have proof this move was sanctioned by the admins, meaning it's not just an interpretation of the rules, please post it. This would go a long way to bolster your claims and make you appear less... tyrannical.

Hosts:
Maybe this group needs a time out from hosts for a while and let the juries handle any situations that may arise. This would certainly keep a lot of the finger pointing in check.

If you decide to go ahead with choosing hosts, I think Mineral Man made some great suggestions in this thread on how to do it.

The End is Nigh
I only got the courage to start posting in this group about a month ago. A friend of mine, her quote is my signature line, started engaging me about feminism and I thought I'd like to learn more and maybe participate in this group. I was reading through the group host/statement of purpose thread when I came across La Lioness Priyanka's comment about feeling the SOP may be a bit exclusionary. I read the ensuing sub-thread and made the biggest mistake of my DU life, I replied to iverglas. It's a decision I regret to this very day because her reply to my, what I thought was a well-reasoned post, was to have something that happened in the LGBT group brought up (this is after the hosts over there decided to block her--which I had no part in other than driving while gay, apparently). After that was thrown out there, she then decided to reply to the actual post. No, "Hey, how ya doing? Welcome to the group," for me, just jumped on with both feet and a sledgehammer--not once have I really been welcomed to this group. What I hoped would be a learning experience has been ruined by a tired grudge, attempts to bully, claimed ignorance by the hosts, it's quite turning me off the whole feminism thing to be honest--if this is what I am to judge it by, and again, it's all about appearances, then I don't judge feminism worthy of me. I am a better person than some of the crap that has been going on around here.

And with that I bid adieu!

P.S., I don't care to read rationalizations--any time the points above are brought up, that's all there seem to be, is people rationalizing what's been going on.

Good solid answers at this point would be welcome.

P.S.S: To Jury members, I really am not calling any one out, I'm trying to get some questions answered honestly and I'm making the claim that one specific person is the apex of this problem. There are more than enough links provided to see what I'm saying is indeed the truth.