-2

Regardless of the background issue, the situations described are about dealing with different people, one is private and the other is a group, one prioritizes an affective relationship and the other one a public relationship. Both questions have different objectives in the situations I'm trying to deal with.

Question 14708: How to politely encourage my girlfriend to support the value of men when with friends who say men aren't necessary?

Question 14092: How to politely tell a group of feminists some of their arguments are misandristic and are affecting my community?

Edit: I just read this great answer and I'm feeling a tad envious but also still hopeful, I know someone around here could offer great advice if my questions were not being still rejected. I already complied with your requirements. This doesn't feel right.

2
  • 1
    Your second question is now closed as "too broad" rather than duplicate. – Em C♦ May 5 '18 at 19:54
  • 1
    I fixed it, it was coming out as broad because the context I provided came from previous experiences elsewhere, the particular situation I'd like to handle is not broad and that's now explained better. – J A May 5 '18 at 21:47
6

I have to agree that technically speaking these are not duplicates. 14092 is about approaching a group, 14078 is about asking his girlfriend to take a stand for your principles.

That means 14092 should be reopened because it now has the wrong close reason. That does not make it a good question (yet) for several reasons:

  • You should make it a standalone question, so that we don't have to go to the other one to read what it's about. You can still refer to it though.
  • That makes it less broad, because it now seems to be about any group and any standpoint.
  • You should tell what your access to that group is. From the other question it looks like 'none'. In which case the answer is "you can't".
  • Take out the rants and opinions. I have the impression you are writing your questions and comments from an upset. Don't do that, wait some time, and read again what people are telling you. They are here to help.

As an example, Catija just made an edit (boldface question) to your 'girlfriend' question which gives it much more focus.

As an aside: Why ask the 'group' question anyway if the 'girlfriend' question has not been resolved/answered yet?

8
  • Thank you for your answer @Jan. I'm improving my questions so they stand better as separate questions. Can you explain what do you mean by "From the other question it looks like 'none'."? In relation to the 'aside', I'd like to be better prepared to deal with both separate situations if needed, and to clarify, I wouldn't be asking the group anything, I'd be informing them about how those types of comments are perceived, and to my girlfriend, yes, I'd be asking her for support. – J A May 5 '18 at 19:33
  • I think you'll find the question related to my personal situation to be ready now, I'm reviewing the other one now. – J A May 5 '18 at 20:53
  • Done, I'm now being specific about the situation, provided context, and offered compass about why I need help with these different social interactions which do share a background but ultimately the advice i'm asking for is very different. – J A May 5 '18 at 21:30
  • @JA There's no possible way to politely walk up to a "group of people" and tell them why their views are wrong. It doesn't matter how wrong they are and how right you are. The goal of this Stack Exchange is to enhance interpersonal skills. Therefore, the answer to your question is to not talk to them in the first place. You can't just start arguments when people make a passing comment, even if it is stupid. Toughen up. If they are constantly and frequently cornering you and shoving their ideas down your throat, that's another situation, worthy of a question. – Clay07g May 5 '18 at 23:29
  • I disagree, but if that's the outcome of this little enterprise here, then I guess I've learned a valuable lesson about this online community and whatever little value it has brought to my life. As I said initially, I will get justice with or without your help. Thank you all for engaging as politely as possible. I'm disengaging now. – J A May 6 '18 at 0:35
  • 2
    @JA I hope the valuable lesson you've learned is that we are not the "Personal Vendetta Validation Stack Exchange". Come back when you want to improve your Interpersonal Skills. – Clay07g May 6 '18 at 0:47
  • @Clay07g What you are posting here seems like the beginnings of a great frame challenging answer - if you can put it in nicer terms. Why not give it a go? – sgf May 6 '18 at 23:56
  • 1
    @sgf Because I don't think I'm strong enough to put it in nicer terms. – Clay07g May 7 '18 at 1:16
3

Just my opinion, I certainly don't speak for everyone, but I would say that they're exact duplicates because it doesn't look like either were asked in good faith.

The first looked like you were trying to bait a discussion about your anti-feminist sentiments. And the second looked like you were still trying to have that discussion after the first was closed.

I say that they looked like you were baiting, because of the over all tone. The original username used to post the first question "wndacova duhde" reading phonetically as "undercover dude" the use of the phrase "our gender" as if the only users reading the question would be like minded men... The profile image, apparently grabbed from a website: https://www.improbable.com/2008/10/page/2/

Frequently, the UCE [Under Cover Employee]'s feeling of alienation results from the distorted perceptions associated with highly stressful situations...

Then there were the more obvious overtones in the comments section that seemed to verify the suspicion that you asked in order to advertise your anti-feminist beliefs.

Basically it all looked an awful lot like you posted with the agenda of having a debate about your anti-feminist or anti-misandrist views, rather than posting an honest question about a situation that you were actually facing.

That's not what the site is for, so your questions probably should remain closed.

14
  • It seems to me like you are making way too many assumptions to arrive to the conclusion that I don't have good faith. – J A May 5 '18 at 20:21
  • 4
    @JA Nah, just reading comprehension and practice... You're not the first to do this sort of thing. – apaul May 5 '18 at 20:24
  • Being too confident in your practice is exactly what entails to rely on prejudice. You know nothing about me, apaul. – J A May 5 '18 at 20:47
  • 2
    @JA I only know what you said in your questions and comments. Then again, that was more than enough to form a conclusion about your intentions here. – apaul May 5 '18 at 20:50
  • 3
    Those questions were closed for good reasons, but I really don't think the mods are closing questions based on assumptions of the question's intentions (at least I really hope not). The other answer on this meta question is much more objective and seemingly accurate. – Clay07g May 5 '18 at 23:18
  • @Clay07g Mods can see flags and deleted comments... – apaul May 5 '18 at 23:28
  • @Clay07g to put it lightly, there's more to the story than is currently visible to the average user. – apaul May 5 '18 at 23:30
  • 1
    @apaul I'll take your word for it (even without the deleted comments, the question is kind of a rant). Perhaps the user is too much trouble for a decent question. However, it's very important on a Q&A website to remove the user from the question, so I dislike the idea of closing questions based on invisible intent. – Clay07g May 5 '18 at 23:33
  • @Clay07g How do you feel about visible intent? – apaul May 5 '18 at 23:43
  • 1
    @apaul If it can be removed from the question, that should be the first option. If not (the asker refuses), then yeah, close it. In this case, I'd agree that his intentions are fairly clear, but not a glance. Most users who are browsing looking for general advice aren't going to see both his questions, the timeline, the meta question, his comments, etc. Luckily, we have rules that make it so most ill-intended questions get closed, because they are normally too broad (hypothetical), or off-topic (how do I tell people they're wrong). The rules help make the decision objective. – Clay07g May 5 '18 at 23:51
  • @Clay07g Eh, it's nice in theory, but we've already experimented with editing bad faith and trolling questions. It usually ends badly for everyone involved. – apaul May 5 '18 at 23:55
  • @Clay07g Long story short, it's probably a bad idea to encourage bad faith questions by editing them into scope. It tends to encourage more such questions. – apaul May 5 '18 at 23:56
  • 2
    @apaul That involves too much subjectivity for me. But as this site is community-driven, it's perfectly acceptable for us to handle questions differently. It would be nice to see people use their votes-to-close more. Every time a moderator has to bypass the 5 votes to close, it is a failure on the community, or a jump-of-the-gun by the mod. – Clay07g May 6 '18 at 0:04
  • @Clay07g True. But when it looks like obvious troll is obvious, it's usually better to vtc and flag. Editing to salvage draws the process out and encourages people to post stuff that we probably don't want. – apaul May 6 '18 at 0:08

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .