Now They (CF) Ban My Wife, No Shame

I am amazed. The crazies at Christian Forums have banned my wife’s account, accusing her of being a sock puppet for my old account. She nearly never reads or posts, and Ive begged her to get in there and do as her mother says….tell the cow how it ate the cabbage, so to speak. She gets a little OCD meaning if she got engaged in the debate she would have a hard time dropping it, so she has read along from time to time and posted on very rare occasion. I think one of my adult children posted once or twice under my wife’s name a year ago or so.

My wife avoids it generally because she simply cannot stand either the perversion of the Bible or the absurd misrepresentations of my words, and the words of others.

In any event, I guess they so fear that we may use the same PC and I read along or influence her posting, the horror of same, and the loathing of me has lead them to a scorched earth policy.

I see that the area where I used to post is all but dead, going the same way as the old Family Life forum where these same women brought down the long arm of the law and sorted the men out so it was unsafe for men to post. Men went away, the forum died.

CF will not die, its far too diverse. But topically there is nearly nothing of import that can be discussed. It will digress into recipes and “one positive thing” threads. That, frankly is the best possible outcome because the alternative is the sisterhood coming down on a poor man who isnt represented, but his wife says he isnt meeting her emotional needs, so, they suggest he must be autistic.

Their banning of my wife, who happened to log in today, is just plain dumb.




16 thoughts on “Now They (CF) Ban My Wife, No Shame

  1. They are really doing a lot of judgmental stuff now. I use to post a lot there but all the topics are not interested. And the one about the husband not showing emotional intimacy I didn’t even try talking there. It’s a bad place to discuss the bible there period. However the banning of your wife’s account prolly has something to do with the ‘cliche’ of power users on that site. Every since the Dalrock things, a group of us have been judged so badly to the point that posters completely ignore our post. I’m come to the conclusion that all they don’t want the bible there. I’ve seen double mindedness, complete disrespect and among other things that staff and others allow. So yea I’ve limited my activity to viewing some issues and posting over in the society thread or help someone out with their computer problem.

  2. The Dalrock thing is not even against the rules. It says alot they fear being sanitized by outside scrutiny.

    Let them talk recipes!

    The only reason I keep mentioning them here is, well maybe a little selfish, but maybe it will censor the nonsense

  3. That’s the thing though… it was against the rules when they started complaining up the butt about it. Doesn’t matter if we been saying something for years.

  4. Here’s my biggest issue. Has anyone been banned or actioned in any way for the fact that women were reading in the men’s only area and then discussing in either in the women’s area or in PM’s or e-mails? Somehow I doubt it and that is very definitely a rules violation.

  5. I questioned that … I was reading about that. I’m just wondering if it’s men’s corner or in married mens personal forum.

  6. It was the married men’s forum. And the fact that it was happening is absolutely proven.

  7. Well they are left with a real page turner,

    Left me breathless…..
    Couldnt put it down…
    deep characters, adroit plots…..
    cant wait for the sequel…

  8. Figures… Guess there is no point of a married man talking about anything personal.

  9. Thanks… (Being Sarcastic) I just went and thanked the staff for their awesome configuration management.

  10. Married men can talk about may personal things. As long as it’s about his own failure or the failure of men in general.

  11. I have been told in no uncertain terms that the staff is not the problem? Are the moderators/chaplians paid over there, I wonder? I’m totally sick of the whole scene. LinkH posted a good video in there and the mods closed the thread because the women attacked the motive behind the video AND the veracity of the woman speaking IN the video. More “stuff” different day.

  12. The staff is not THE problem, but they are A problem. That lawyer got lawyerly with Link, and was allowed to persist in her rhetorical self destruction / forensic flourish. It was painful to read

  13. Pretty much what I was thinking. In refusing to correctly identify and address the problem, and in consistently taking one set of viewpoints over the other, they are contributing to the problem.

  14. If you look at the staff as genderless (not possible to do but just hypothetically) they would all be white knights of some degree or another…all there to protect women and womens feelings, which would be fine, but the white knight mistake is that that means never holding a woman to account

  15. I was thinking about dropping that Barbarosssa video about the tax attorney who lost his license to practice in there. I think it was a rare video where he didn’t use profanity. I can’t find it though….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s