[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Article on NOW Controversy Distorts the Truth
posted by Scott on Thursday April 19, @01:56PM
from the media dept.
The Media Marc Angelucci writes "Wired News printed an article on how NOW is creating controlled internet forums to avoid the "misogynist talk," "hate" and "verbal abuse" they allegedly receive in their internet forums. If some people were rude in the NOW forums, they should not be. But I have seen NOW take down messages from David Byron and others that were very polite attempts to engage in meaningful dialogue on the issues. NOW is telling half-truths and falsehoods as usual to justify their aversion to debate. If NOW wants to create controlled environments with no controversy for purposes of supportive discussion, that is wonderful. But if they are doing it just to avoid debate, which is very apparent, then they should be honest about it rather than lying and male-bashing to justify their cowardice. And the media should give balanced coverage of it by getting both sides of the story, which they did not. You can write a letter to the Wired News editor here newsfeedback@wired.com."

Source: Wired News

Title: NOW Provides Shelter From Scorn

Author: Robin Clewley

Date: April 16, 2001

Few Turn Out to Meet Patricia Ireland | Schuett Leaves The Liberator  >

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
NOW website controversy (Score:1)
by Trudy W Schuett on Thursday April 19, @04:50PM EST (#1)
(User #116 Info)
I just heard today from one of my writer friends that the NOW website is 'filtered' by AOL as being a hate group.
Can this be??????
Sure, we know it is, but it's a surprise to me that AOL would know that.
Re:NOW website controversy (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on Thursday April 19, @06:41PM EST (#2)
It would be really interesting if we could verify that.
Re:NOW website controversy (Score:1)
by Emanslave on Thursday April 19, @09:34PM EST (#3)
(User #144 Info)
Well Trudy, with all due respect, don't be so sure of yourself! I mean the state of NOW and their creation of their new website is kinda dangerous, but you know Ireland and her NOW cronies...they will go out of their way to abhor anything misogynistic, but encourage misandric behavior on the other end! I mean we can't infringe their right to express their views, but if it's going to be hateful in any way then such an act needs some serious exposure and they should take responsibility for it! ...I wonder what the Independent Women's Forum thinks about it! I'm speechless!

Scott, Adam, and especially Marc, what's your take on this?

Emmanuel Matteer
Re:NOW website controversy (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on Thursday April 19, @10:35PM EST (#4)
From what I saw, NOW was taking down messages that were factual challenges, not personal attacks or rudeness. Whether there were people making jokes about rape or things of that nature I do not know. But I didn't see it when I was there. And I saw women who were disagreeing with NOW in ways that were harsher than any male was (the males were discussing facts, mostly). But NOW, in the article, makes it all out to look like it was a bunch of verbal abuse and that it was only men doing it. My position is exactly what I wrote in the original posting. You might find out more about this by going to the Feminism On Trial message board at the NCFM (www.ncfm.org). Those people, especially David Byron (who is there alot), know more about what happened than I do. They even posted some of the delected exchanges there a few times. But aside from that I think it's better to spend the time writing to the editor about this, because the article was CLEARLY biased in that it did not even SUGGEST the possibility that there might be another side of the story. This type of crappy journalism is totally inexcusable and yet they get away with it all the time when it comes to gender, almost always with the men's issues getting shafted. Each letter we write has an impact, even if it's just a line or two.
Re:NOW website controversy (Score:1)
by Scott (scott@mensactivism.org) on Friday April 20, @12:17PM EST (#5)
(User #3 Info) http://www.vortxweb.net/gorgias/mens_issues/index.html
Hey Emmanuel,

Like Marc said, David Byron knows of what was going on first hand, and I recall him telling me on more than one occasion that NOW has been overzealous in censoring people (particularly men) who disagree with their views.

Whether they have the right to do this is another matter. Just as I wouldn't want a bunch of rabid feminists clogging up this site, I think NOW has the right to moderate its bulletin boards. People who want to set up forums to criticize NOW have the right to do so, so I don't think it's a violation of free speech. But I do think it's obvious that NOW doesn't want to deal with any criticism of their views, reasoned or otherwise.

Re:NOW website controversy (Score:0)
by Anonymous User on Friday April 20, @02:11PM EST (#6)
How've you been keeping Eman?

I've been keeping an eye on NOW's web-board and from the look of it, it's a civil war down there have a look:

Anyway I just got in, so I don't have time to link it.

Later guys and gals,
Adam H

Re:NOW website controversy (Score:1)
by Emanslave on Friday April 20, @09:19PM EST (#7)
(User #144 Info)
Yeah Scott and Andy...Perhaps you maybe right!
Let's just see or hear what happens!

[an error occurred while processing this directive]