Dear “John” of Boycott American Women:
I don’t make a habit of arguing but I will attempt to redirect at least once because my training as a public school teacher begs me to consider your comments thoughtfully and provide meaningful feedback.
Also, I feel sorry for you and I love teachable moments.
First, most full grown adults would advise against the use of name calling. It is not an effective communication practice. For instance, if I called you a Hostile Pond Pooper, you’d likely stop listening to anything else I say, which is unfortunate because I have really good advice for you. But I would never call you such a name in a public forum, because I generally try to avoid pooping in the pond.
As for your writing, John Rambo: being finished with the writing does not mean the writing is finished. That said, you might want to reconsider posting the same message over and over and over again; if you are capable of formulating new ideas, try to mix it up or move on. Lifelong learners reflect on and improve their performance.
Also, consider the fine line between audience and agenda. For instance, if I were a hard core conservative meat eater, I would not try to sell a copy of my book Cows Smell Good When You Cook ‘em to vegan bloggers. Vegans are not an appropriate audience for a hard core conservative meat eating agenda. Likewise, pro-ana blogs would be a huge strategic fail, since those folks don’t even eat, period. I would spread my message to folks who are inclined to agree that cows smell good when you cook them, like people who think chickens smell good when you cook them. Hopefully this makes some sense to you.
Additionally,you might consider applying the SHIT method to your online harassment activities. what is the SHIT method? Significance, Harm, Inherency, Totality
S: Why is your topic significant? Here, make an appeal to your reader as to why they should continue to read.
H: What about this issue sounds off the harm alarm to you and/or your readers? This is where you explain all about your significant issue.
I: Why does the problem exist and/or persist? What other factors contribute to or happen as a result of the issue? This is the inherency part, and I never figured out a better way to explain it, but just using the word will inherently make a significant improvement to your writing. Ya dig?
T: Totality is like a conclusion. A bad thing to do here is to call your readers whores, or any name that you wouldn’t address your mother/daughter/teacher/mail carrier by. So, whore, bitch, unchaste slut monster, uppity feminist nazi, etc…totally not a good way to tie things together.
So, there you have it: S.H.I.T. But wait John Rambo, there’s more! In addition to tapping the fine b'hinds of third world mail order brides, consider tapping into ethos, pathos, and logos, as well.
Ethos: Are you a credible source of information? Limiting your readers’ ability to interact with you doesn’t do much for your credibility. Signing off as an armed vigilante who was popular with 6th grade boys 20+ years ago does not do much to increase your credibility either. Or lovability*
Pathos: Does your argument appeal to the emotions of your audience? You know how everyone likes pictures of kittens? Super big time pathos. Consider a picture of American Women killing cute, fluffy kittens. That would totally make people Boycott American Women.
Logos: Are you being logical? If your discussion is logical, you do not need to name call. For instance, if a clerk made an error and over charged me, I would not attempt to reconcile the situation by calling the clerk a whore or wittle baby. I wouldn’t call anybody a wittle baby, ever, actually because ‘wittle’ is not weally a word.
Btw, nice use of the word chaste. It invokes an old-school Masterpiece Theatre/ Jane Austen vibe (talk about an uppity bitch-- Jane Austen wasn’t even American). Say, if you fancy words like unchaste, perhaps you are also a fan of Downton Abbey? That Lady Mary is no lady! But I digress…
Your community organizing efforts to Boycott American Women need improvement. We support your boycott, sir. American Women are beggin' you to boycott. Don’t date us. Don’t open the door. Don’t read our blogs. Don’t marry us.
In closing, let us summarize: you demonstrate a meaningful commitment to verbal abuse, universal generalizations, and pussy shaming (what's wrong with feline companionship of the domestic variety?), while at the same time harassing/annoying American women. Work towards garnering support, and avoid gathering enemies because the internet has a long memory. And women—we are legion. Everywhere, all the time, hear us roar, etc.
*and isn't lovability the heart of the matter here?