Avenger, by virtue of the fact that you keep posting this "Hyerdahl
FAQ" over and over and over again, I have to say that I think that you
are trying to use a sledgehammer in a futile attempt to kill a fly
buzzing around the glassware.



On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 05:57:06 GMT, "Avenger"
 wrote:

> The Hyerdahl FAQ
>                                    Version 1.2
>
>You may have noted a poster named Hyerdahl.
>Who is Hyerdahl?
>How does Hyerdahl work?
>How do you deal with Hyerdahl?
>Read on.
>
>-----------------------------
>Who is Hyerdahl?
>
>Hyderdahl is a long-time contrarian poster on soc.men. However, her
>agenda is not, as it might first appear, either feminism or a rational
>discussion of issues. Her agenda, as most posters have realized over
>years of dealing with her, involves assuming the mantle of feminism in
>order to empower herself. To understand Hyerdahl, you need to
>understand that although she uses feminism as a cover, her purpose
>here is purely personal.
>
>She may strike you as one of those mumbling street people who grab you
>by the arm and talk in endless streams without making any sense, lost
>in their own world of disturbed need. Unfortunately, the analogy is
>apt.
>
>One of the most insecure people you'll probably ever meet, she is not
>open to rational discourse, because the truth is not paramount for
>her, as it is with innocent posters who reply to her. Only her own
>empowerment is important, something that's quickly identifiable as the
>common thread behind her rapidly shifting positions. As you'll find if
>you reply to her, she'll change her point of view dozens of times or
>more in a single discussion in order to assure herself she's the
>winner.
>
>She's gone by various pseudonyms over the years, including Carol Ann
>Hemmingway, Parg2000, Pargeon, Hyerdahl, Hyerdahl1, Hyerdahl3, etc.
>
>
>-----------------------------
>How does Hyerdahl work?
>
>Hyerdahl is intelligent, but her unrelenting sense of insecurity
>drives her posts. She operates in four specific ways to reassure
>herself that she's "winning":
>
>1.) Uses formulaic answers that don't address the issue (e.g., Man:
>"Fathers should have more visitation rights." H: "Men
are no longer
>allowed to shirk their child support responsibilities.") This allows
>her to reply rapid-fire to many posts in an attempt to dominate
>discussion without investing much real effort.
>
>2.) Wants to speak for all "women," in a classic attempt at
>self-empowerment (e.g., Man: "Fathers should have more visitation
>rights." H: "Women no longer have to listen to what you say.")
>
>3.) Uses outright lies to try to make a point, as in, "There is no
>message of gender supremacy [from feminists]; there is only legal
>equality."
>
>4.) Says that women now have guns to control men; the power need here
>is obvious.
>
>5.) Posts many anti-male news items to the group in an attempt to bait
>other posters and dominate and/or steer discussion. This is a standard
>troll tactic. Flooding news groups is against the usenet charter.
>
>Keep in mind that she'll quickly get abusive and personalize the
>discussion if things don't appear to go her way. She has also
>frequently accused women who argue with her of being men.
>
>
>-----------------------------
>How do you deal with Hyerdahl?
>
>Do not take her at face value. When you realize that she's not arguing
>the facts, but interested only in advantage over others and self
>empowerment, you'll understand why she shifts ground so rapidly and
>will ignore rather than concede a point. You'll also understand why,
>when you corner her, she becomes abusive rather than give ground that
>should be given.
>
>Do not believe you can discuss issues with her rationally, arriving at
>some sort of conclusion. Hers is a megalomaniac neurosis and if you
>play into it without thinking, you'll find that her world has only one
>paradigm: she must always win.
>
>Most posters here have learned to ignore her. She's been here for many
>years, and she's not about to change. That's a practical treatment,
>but if you want a more humane solution, bear in mind as you reply to
>her that you're dealing with a mentally disturbed person who has
>become very needy. With that understanding, she won't get under your
>skin and you can deal with her humanely. Don't drain a lot of energy
>with her; we're here to discuss men's issues, not get sidetracked into
>endless ad hominem attacks.
>
>



------------------------------------

grizzlieantagonist{at}yahoo.com

"Ladies and gentlemen - let's have a round of applause for tonight's
player of the game - FRAN-CIS-CO SAN-N-N-N-TOS!
    - Brian Anthony (P.A. announcer at Grizzlie Stadium), June 11, 2004


"Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their
disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites; in proportion as
their love of justice is above their rapacity; in proportion as their
soundness and sobriety of understanding is above their vanity and
presumption; in proportion as they are more disposed to listen to the
counsels of the wise and good, in preference to the flattery of knaves. 
Society cannot exist unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be
placed somewhere, and the less of it there is within, the more there must
be without.  It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things that men
of intemperate minds cannot be free.  Their passions forge their
fetters."
     
     - Edmund Burke, Letter to a Member of the National Assembly (1791)


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/13/05 4:56:54 AM ---