Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

There is a thread in AH that is allowing offensive language about women

Options
245678

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    iDave
    Registered Users Posts: 3,750 ✭✭✭iDave


    username123 wrote: »
    I havent misquoted you. That is the expression you used in one of your posts on the thread. The entire post is:



    Despite asking me to change the quote here I notice you have not changed it in the thread in question?

    Im not interested in rewriting history, Im interested in knowing why boards.ie are allowing offensive and derogatory terms of reference about women to be used and not closing the thread in question.

    Some of the posts on that thread could be construed as hate speech. If you replaced the gender specific terms and replaced them with racist or homophobic terms I think the thread would have been closed pdq.

    ok as far as I see your using my comment to bulk up your own OP. The context of my comment, the comment I replied to and my original comment on the thread was making light of a bizarre 9/11 reference in that threads OP. Its very clear to anyone as pointed out here already my comment was a reference to the OPs wording. I did not refer to any individual or grouping in a derogatory way myself.
    I even agree with you on the overall thread. I went on to describe it as a dumb thread. Did you read that far?
    For the 3rd time please remove my quote.


  • Options
    #33
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    iDave, you made the post and you have to stand by it - even if you believe someone has taken it out of context. You don't get to demand that they remove a post you won't remove yourself from a different thread.

    What you do get is for anyone reading this thread to make up their own minds with the benefit of your explanation.


  • Options
    #34
    iDave
    Registered Users Posts: 3,750 ✭✭✭iDave


    Dades wrote: »
    iDave, you made the post and you have to stand by it - even if you believe someone has taken it out of context. You don't get to demand that they remove a post you won't remove yourself from a different thread.

    What you do get is for anyone reading this thread to make up their own minds with the benefit of your explanation.

    If my username is being dragged through the mud for a comment thats been grossly taken out of context then I can ask for its removal.


  • Options
    #35
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 81,915 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    iDave wrote: »
    I was quoting that threads OP. I forgot to add quotation marks. Please remove my quote from the thread please

    Yeah, in the middle of your reply? I think not.

    Thing is, your comment isn't being taken grossly out of context, it appears to be precisely inside of its context:
    iDave wrote: »
    Duggy747 wrote: »
    I'd say it was an inside job and somebody put explosives inside her to make it look like she was falling from a punch.
    Jimminy Mc Fukhead wrote: »
    Is there a conspiracy at work here. An inside job as Jim Corr would say. Did she fall from the punch or some carefully placed explosives?


    Edit: great minds duggy

    I'd say he deliberately starting talking to someone else to provoke her to punch the friend. Then public opinion would then allow him to launch an attack on the fat bitch. Its so obvious. How cant people see this.


  • Options
    #36
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    iDave wrote: »
    If my username is being dragged through the mud for a comment thats been grossly taken out of context then I can ask for its removal.
    You can ask, but that's all.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    The Backwards Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,299 ✭✭✭✭The Backwards Man


    That thread makes a mockery of all the big talk AH mods made about stamping out abuse and sexism imo. The whole thread is a premise to make offensive comments about women with impunity, particularly overweight or 'unpretty' ones, even with its edited OP.


  • Options
    #38
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    The Backwards Man wrote: »
    That thread makes a mockery of all the big talk AH mods made about stamping out abuse and sexism imo. The whole thread is a premise to make offensive comments about women with impunity, particularly overweight or 'unpretty' ones, even with its edited OP.
    No, it isn't. The original post wasn't sexist. It was insulting to one particular girl the guy had dealings with. His insulting language towards her isn't sexist, it's childish. People were told to stop the abuse, and they did. So, what's the problem now?


  • Options
    #39
    username123
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,484 ✭✭✭username123


    seamus wrote: »
    Except that's not the same thing. "Bitch" being a slang term for an unpleasant woman, like "bastard" or "prick" for a man. "Bitch" is not a colloquial synonym for "woman". Certainly not in Ireland anyway.

    There is no equivalent specific term to refer to an unpleasant homosexual or an unpleasant black man, so the comparison is invalid.

    Seamus, the above is nonsense and I'm sure you know it. Bitch is a slang offensive term for a woman, in Ireland. Fat bitch is referencing her appearance. Dirty headed scanger is also being used to reference women on appearance and behaviour. Ho is being used to reference women on their sexual behaviour.

    There are plenty of equivalent racist and homophobic terms.

    As Czarcasm has pointed out, we shouldn't tolerate this kind of language being used to reference one gender.


  • Options
    #40
    The Backwards Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,299 ✭✭✭✭The Backwards Man


    humanji wrote: »
    No, it isn't. The original post wasn't sexist. It was insulting to one particular girl the guy had dealings with. His insulting language towards her isn't sexist, it's childish. People were told to stop the abuse, and they did. So, what's the problem now?
    Disregarding the edited OP which I think is a two fingers up to the mods and should have been enough to finish the thread off, you don't see anything wrong with the flaming, nastiness, backseat modding, personal abuse and sexism that it still going on that thread?

    Fair enough.


  • Options
    #41
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    After the warning, when it stopped or those who continued got banned or infracted, and a discussion was had by many?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    The Backwards Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,299 ✭✭✭✭The Backwards Man


    humanji wrote: »
    After the warning, when it stopped or those who continued got banned or infracted, and a discussion was had by many?
    Oh Czarcasm is here now, everyone go say Three Hail Marys.
    Id never punch a pretty girl

    Some great discussion alright.


  • Options
    #43
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    The Backwards Man wrote: »
    Some great discussion alright.

    Lol so now some light banter/slagging (ZOMG I said SLAGging :eek:) between posters is on the same level as "personal abuse and sexism":rolleyes:


  • Options
    #44
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    Yeah, but what you didn't realise that those users had been sanctioned. And what you ignored were the other couple of hundred posts in the thread after that warning. If you don't like the topic, just don't read the thread. It's not the greatest thread in the world, but people want to discuss it.


  • Options
    #45
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    humanji wrote: »
    After the warning, when it stopped or those who continued got banned or infracted, and a discussion was had by many?


    I know moderation is a judgment call humanji but threads in AH have been closed for less, and closed permanently, not least for their sexist content, but also advocating, inciting, encouraging violence against another human being.

    Does the question of when it's OK to violate another human being REALLY need asking? Irish law says assault is illegal anyway, so the question is effectively moot.

    Do we really want AH becoming a breeding ground for "I viciously assaulted someone, am I a hero AH?" type threads?

    You call it childish, and on that basis allow the thread to remain open. It took AH long enough to shake off perception that it was a haven for immature knuckle draggers. That thread does nothing good for the forums reputation.


  • Options
    #46
    The Backwards Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,299 ✭✭✭✭The Backwards Man


    humanji wrote: »
    Yeah, but what you didn't realise that those users had been sanctioned. And what you ignored were the other couple of hundred posts in the thread after that warning. If you don't like the topic, just don't read the thread. It's not the greatest thread in the world, but people want to discuss it.
    I just picked a couple as an example H, many more posts of that ilk, from both sides too I must add.

    So that's how homophobic posts are to be treated in future then? Just don't read them?


  • Options
    #47
    Artful_Badger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,339 ✭✭✭Artful_Badger


    The Backwards Man wrote: »
    I just picked a couple as an example H, many more posts of that ilk, from both sides too I must add.

    So that's how homophobic posts are to be treated in future then? Just don't read them?

    Come on that was carded and he was told not to post again. Pretty quick too I might add.


  • Options
    #48
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    The Backwards Man wrote: »
    I just picked a couple as an example H, many more posts of that ilk, from both sides too I must add.

    So that's how homophobic posts are to be treated in future then? Just don't read them?
    The one that got the user infracted and banned from the thread?


  • Options
    #49
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    Artful_Badger wrote: »
    Come on that was carded and he was told not to post again. Pretty quick too I might add.
    And specifically because The Backwards Man reported the post, and brought it to my attention.


  • Options
    #50
    The Backwards Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,299 ✭✭✭✭The Backwards Man


    humanji wrote: »
    The one that got the user infracted and banned from the thread?
    Quicker than Alan Ladd there, I'll give you that.:pac:


  • Options
    #51
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    Czarcasm wrote: »
    I know moderation is a judgment call humanji but threads in AH have been closed for less, and closed permanently, not least for their sexist content, but also advocating, inciting, encouraging violence against another human being.

    Does the question of when it's OK to violate another human being REALLY need asking? Irish law says assault is illegal anyway, so the question is effectively moot.

    Do we really want AH becoming a breeding ground for "I viciously assaulted someone, am I a hero AH?" type threads?

    You call it childish, and on that basis allow the thread to remain open. It took AH long enough to shake off perception that it was a haven for immature knuckle draggers. That thread does nothing good for the forums reputation.
    If the topic was, "Is it right to defend yourself when attacked", would it be an acceptable thread? Is it just because one of the people happens to be a woman that makes it unacceptable? The OP's attitude to gloating about the incident was childish. The topic was not.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    Oh don't post in feedback they are quick to lock those.


  • Options
    #53
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Czarcasm wrote: »
    I know moderation is a judgment call humanji but threads in AH have been closed for less, and closed permanently, not least for their sexist content, but also advocating, inciting, encouraging violence against another human being.

    Does the question of when it's OK to violate another human being REALLY need asking? Irish law says assault is illegal anyway, so the question is effectively moot.

    Do we really want AH becoming a breeding ground for "I viciously assaulted someone, am I a hero AH?" type threads?

    You call it childish, and on that basis allow the thread to remain open. It took AH long enough to shake off perception that it was a haven for immature knuckle draggers. That thread does nothing good for the forums reputation.

    This from someone who used the words "special kind of cnut" in that thread.


  • Options
    #54
    Micky Dolenz
    Registered Users Posts: 44,080 ✭✭✭✭Micky Dolenz


    Czarcasm wrote: »
    I know moderation is a judgment call humanji but threads in AH have been closed for less, and closed permanently, not least for their sexist content, but also advocating, inciting, encouraging violence against another human being.

    Does the question of when it's OK to violate another human being REALLY need asking? Irish law says assault is illegal anyway, so the question is effectively moot.

    Do we really want AH becoming a breeding ground for "I viciously assaulted someone, am I a hero AH?" type threads?

    You call it childish, and on that basis allow the thread to remain open. It took AH long enough to shake off perception that it was a haven for immature knuckle draggers. That thread does nothing good for the forums reputation.

    Out of interest, does this thread offend you?

    I really am not getting the outrage here. To suggest that the AH mods are allowing sexism to slide is simply preposterous.


  • Options
    #55
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    Boards said it didn't want to be sexist.


  • Options
    #56
    Penny Tration
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,687 ✭✭✭✭Penny Tration


    The Backwards Man wrote: »
    Some great discussion alright.

    And before anyone asks 'did you report those? We don't always see them if they're not reported by users,' i reported the one aimed at Czarcasm.

    I applaud the fact that the mods stepped in, handed out infractions, and issued an on-thread warning.

    But the thread is just a thread where, in between the discussion, there's plenty of opportunity to slag off the 'fat bitch.'

    I dunno if it's sexist. 'Bitch' is certainly a term used to denote an unpleasant woman. But whether it's sexist or not, I thought AH was better than allowing women to be called 'fat bitches' (or 'fat basterds' if the op were discussing a man).

    Surprised at the amount of posts that were considered decent enough to miss an infraction or a yellow, tbh.


  • Options
    #57
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    The Backwards Man wrote: »
    Quicker than Alan Ladd there, I'll give you that.:pac:
    See, the system works when it works. It's just not infallible. As I said above, if I had been about when it started up I'd have been able to correct all the problems early on.


  • Options
    #58
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    humanji wrote: »
    See, the system works when it works. It's just not infallible. As I said above, if I had been about when it started up I'd have been able to correct all the problems early on.

    Who was? When was the post first reported?


  • Options
    #59
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    I couldn't report all the posts I wanted cos I had to wait 60 seconds each time


  • Options
    #60
    Zaph
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 47,283 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    efb wrote: »
    Who was? When was the post first reported?

    The post mentioned above was:

    Posted at 19:06
    Reported at 19:06 and again at 19:08
    Infracted at 19:12


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    circadian
    Registered Users Posts: 6,918 ✭✭✭circadian


    Czarcasm wrote: »
    It took AH long enough to shake off perception that it was a haven for immature knuckle draggers.

    So calling people knucle draggers is fine?


Advertisement