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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Gender issues in After Hours - Your feedback requested.

Options
1…1516182021…28

Comments

  • Options
    #512
    Scioch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭Scioch


    mango salsa wrote: »
    I don't disagree with you that discrimination is a problem but you need to be able to identify what the discrimination is, who it's against and why it's discriminatory before you can tackle it. You can't just say lets tackle discrimination without defining it. AH has improved over the years - there is a lot less racism (against ethnic minorities and travellers) and homophobia than previously (presumably because the mods tackled these issues)

    Identifying the discrimination isnt hard. The problem as I see it is that when its identified it will only be tackled if it applies to a set number of things that are not acceptable to discriminate against. In the case of race, ethnic minorities, gender its an issue. In terms of religion, social status, intelligence its not.

    Yet discriminating against people for any one of those things has the exact same effect on a user in relation to the forum. The main thing I have gotten out of this thread is that women in AH feel unwelcome, and thats not right. But neither is anyone feeling unwelcome because of being discriminated against for anything.

    I think the mods do a great job of improving the forums, this thread is an example of that. They take it seriously when users dont get a fair shake for whatever reason. Thats not what this site is about, its about everyone having the opportunity to discuss and give their opinions and engage with each other.

    But I personally think that the issue of discrimination itself can be viewed as one problem and think tackling that problem and not just the problems that arise from it would be a better course of action and would benefit everyone who feels unwelcome and simultaneously tackle all problems that have the same effect on users as gender discrimination.


  • Options
    #513
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Sharrow wrote: »
    That maybe where it started but it is accepted a hell of a lot more widely these days
    Mostly in other rarified college gender studies faculties and in online blogs and musings and the like. It's an extreme, statistically and socially dubious theory taken as a given and it's easily debunked on many of it's points*.
    and is the common parlance when talking about the way sexist denigrating comments can add up to the type of attitude which results in 'slut shaming' and victim blaming (targeted at men and women).
    Again in the more rarified circles. In any event, at no point have you nor anyone else given examples of this in AH. Its much more a case of "oh we've seen them/can't find them now/I'm sure I could if I looked/AH feels unwelcoming to us type" "answers".

    Whatever about the wider world of Real Life, the plain and searchable fact is that in the vast majority of cases any examples that have cropped up are either nuked from orbit by the mod team, or torn to shreds by other members of the community, or both. Indeed it's such a sacred cow that even the most considered question surrounding the subject is rapidly hopped upon by others. Go ahead write up a post vaguely in support of victim blaming in rape and see how far you get. Not very far is the answer. The very subject of rape when brought up in AH or anywhere on this site is pretty undebatable or debatable within very narrow precepts(which I mostly agree with BTW). Murder for example is far more open to debate/challenge/discussion of degrees. Indeed it's a given that "rape is worse than murder" etc, so pardon me if I call shenanigans at the hyperbole driven application of "rape culture" when applied to the After Hours forum. As Micky D pointed out it doesn't help to inform this thread.

    Luckily cooler heads are prevailing and a practical and sensible debate and action are in play underneath the mindset vultures on both sides a circling.





    *Like I said it's very similar to the Black studies nonsense about Cleopatra. A large chunk of people would now believe her to be black, indeed would even consider it beyond the pale, even racist to suggest she wasnt. Just like to question "rape culture" might be considered sexist. Just another newly minted sacred cow, yet equally as daft, not backed up by evidence and all about some political guff and victimhood..

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #514
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Scioch wrote: »
    Identifying the discrimination isnt hard. The problem as I see it is that when its identified it will only be tackled if it applies to a set number of things that are not acceptable to discriminate against. In the case of race, ethnic minorities, gender its an issue. In terms of religion, social status, intelligence its not.

    Yet discriminating against people for any one of those things has the exact same effect on a user in relation to the forum. The main thing I have gotten out of this thread is that women in AH feel unwelcome, and thats not right. But neither is anyone feeling unwelcome because of being discriminated against for anything.

    I think the mods do a great job of improving the forums, this thread is an example of that. They take it seriously when users dont get a fair shake for whatever reason. Thats not what this site is about, its about everyone having the opportunity to discuss and give their opinions and engage with each other.

    But I personally think that the issue of discrimination itself can be viewed as one problem and think tackling that problem and not just the problems that arise from it would be a better course of action and would benefit everyone who feels unwelcome and simultaneously tackle all problems that have the same effect on users as gender discrimination.
    I get your points S, however this thread is about gender issues in AH and for the most part thats more an issue if you're a female member of the community.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Options
    #515
    Scioch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭Scioch


    Wibbs wrote: »
    I get your points S, however this thread is about gender issues in AH and for the most part thats more an issue if you're a female member of the community.

    I understand that and think that dealing with discrimination as a whole would be a solution to that. I'm not trying to hijack the thread just proposing a more wide reaching solution to the issues raised in this thread.


  • Options
    #516
    dr.bollocko
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 35,943 Mod ✭✭✭✭dr.bollocko


    Scioch wrote: »
    Identifying the discrimination isnt hard. The problem as I see it is that when its identified it will only be tackled if it applies to a set number of things that are not acceptable to discriminate against. In the case of race, ethnic minorities, gender its an issue. In terms of religion, social status, intelligence its not.

    Yet discriminating against people for any one of those things has the exact same effect on a user in relation to the forum. The main thing I have gotten out of this thread is that women in AH feel unwelcome, and thats not right. But neither is anyone feeling unwelcome because of being discriminated against for anything.

    I think the mods do a great job of improving the forums, this thread is an example of that. They take it seriously when users dont get a fair shake for whatever reason. Thats not what this site is about, its about everyone having the opportunity to discuss and give their opinions and engage with each other.

    I personally think that the issue of discrimination itself can be viewed as one problem and think tackling that problem and not just the problems that arise from it would be a better course of action and would benefit everyone who feels unwelcome and simultaneously tackle all problems that have the same effect on users as gender discrimination.

    The core of the community is always working hard to help stamp out discrimination.

    We're not saying, in this thread, that we're not going to tackle anything else or that anything is being ignored.

    In the reality of day-to-day moderating, reporting posts and the like, the discrimination takes many forms. When you're in a situation where you're compelled to move from the general to the specific the clear waters of improving the community become very murky because you don't want to disallow discussion unnecessarily but you do want to, as you say, give everyone a fair shake.

    We'd always view discrimination as a problem in its own right and are working to continue to tackle it head on. The reason for asking for feedback in the specific in this case is to know better and do better on a case-by-case basis.

    I think we're handling the overall problem quite well. But with the specific clusters from the main bomb you sometimes need a little more guidance.

    As I've said a good while back. This is not the only game in town. All issues have always been on the table for more discussion. But in this case we want to find out a little more about this one. Because to take a remit of ending all discrimination and treating all forms of it is a good manifesto....

    However in the murky world of day to day posting and moderating on a forum what seems like a straight forward remit becomes difficult to enforce without a little bit of help from the community you've been empowered to attempt to improve.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #517
    Kooli
    Registered Users Posts: 1,312 ✭✭✭Kooli


    Wibbs wrote: »

    Luckily cooler heads are prevailing and a practical and sensible debate and action are in play underneath the mindset vultures on both sides a circling.


    [/SIZE]

    My head is even less cool when I see comments like this.

    I hate the pressure to remain 'cool and calm' when discussing sexism or misogyny. I have no particular interest in remaining cool and calm when discussing serious issues that affect my life and can leave me feeling frustrated, powerless and angry on a daily basis. The emotions can be very real, but there's this idea out there that once emotion becomes involved we are suddently irrational hysterical women who have 'lost the argument' and 'can't be sensible'.

    I can still make sense when I'm angry and upset. And I think if someone is angry and upset, those feelings should form part of the discourse and part of the conversation, rather than being 'irrelevant'.


  • Options
    #518
    Tombi!
    Registered Users Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    Kooli wrote: »
    hysterical women

    You're missing the point. What about men who are using the label "femnazi" to describe people that want equality? Still being irrational, they are because they're using OTT words. They're still going from "calm and collected" to "going OTT with words".

    Where did you get the idea that the point was only about women?


  • Options
    #519
    Kooli
    Registered Users Posts: 1,312 ✭✭✭Kooli


    Brutal Deluxe wrote: »
    You're missing the point. What about men who are using the label "femnazi" to describe people that want equality? Still being irrational, they are because they're using OTT words. They're still going from "calm and collected" to "going OTT with words".

    Where did you get the idea that the point was only about women?

    No, sorry I don't mean that Wibbs's point was only about women.

    But I do think this is an argument that is more likely to be levelled at women in this kind of discussion because it is about the stuff of our lives. We are more likely to be feeling hurt, upset and angry when talking about sexism and misogyny than the men on the other side who think it either doesn't exist or isn't a problem, and it's a very common silencing device to say that if someone isn't 'cool and calm' then what they say has no value and I could not disagree more.


  • Options
    #520
    Tombi!
    Registered Users Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    Kooli wrote: »
    No, sorry I don't mean that Wibbs's point was only about women.

    But I do think this is an argument that is more likely to be levelled at women in this kind of discussion because it is about the stuff of our lives. We are more likely to be feeling hurt, upset and angry when talking about sexism and misogyny than the men on the other side who think it either doesn't exist or isn't a problem, and it's a very common silencing device to say that if someone isn't 'cool and calm' then what they say has no value and I could not disagree more.

    Ah, I see. Sorry about then.

    But anyone can get emotional. Hell, a few times you just need to walk away from it all if you get too emotionally involved.
    But the main point is: we all know there is a problem of sexism (a lot of it towards women) in AH. We're just debating on what is/is not okay.

    Nobody is dimissing you because you're getting emotional or whatnot. It's because of using words like "rape culture" when it honestly, has zero meaning for the problems in AH.


  • Options
    #521
    Wibbs
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Kooli wrote: »
    My head is even less cool when I see comments like this.
    Comments like what? That somehow stepping back and being cool headed and objective is a bad thing? Personally I prefer cool and calm. Hotheadedness rarely leads to much considered debate. Feck all to do with gender either. I'd be equally dismissive of some bloke getting up to high do and embarrassed after the fact when I myself get into such a state. I switch off and usually suggest they get back to me when they've calmed down. To be fair K people getting emotional in front of me in an argument really does irritate me more than most I'd say. Like I say I just switch off and yes TBH can be dismissive of them at that time. Why? I suppose for me there's always the feeling of emotional blackmail when the argument fails, whether that emotion be anger or whatever.
    I can still make sense when I'm angry and upset. And I think if someone is angry and upset, those feelings should form part of the discourse and part of the conversation, rather than being 'irrelevant'.
    Feelings backed up by observable facts are not irrelevant, however when the facts are scanty the feelings are usually untrustworthy. That's been my experience in my own life and with myself too BTW.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #522
    Dyr
    Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    g'em wrote: »
    Nodin, come on. You don't have to agree with someone's post but reducing it to hysteria? It's a lazy phrase that only serves to prove the point you're arguing against.

    Nodin was bang on the money. What you had there was a classic appeal-to-outrage argument being used. Seems to be a popular tactic in this thread.


  • Options
    #523
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Sharrow wrote: »
    Nodin are you aware of the origin of the term hysterical and the history attached to it?

    I'm sure theres a horrific patriarchal history to it of which I'm entirely unaware. However as thats nothing to do with its common usage and thats never the context in which I use the term, I'll intercept your semiotics lecture here and say its of no relevance whatsoever.
    g'em wrote:
    You've used it yourself, you admit that, and I will gladly go through your history to find such instances because you've just admitted that's the case. (Unless of course there's a 50:50 spread between you directing it at men vs. women, which I doubt is the case).

    Amazing - I use a word in the same context I always use it and next thing its a "wrong" word and you doubt I use it as much against one gender as the other.....If you can find one instance of me using it at a woman because she is a woman I'd be amazed. I'll expect an aknowledgment of what you've found during your research one way or the other.
    kooli wrote:
    it's a very common silencing device to say that if someone isn't 'cool and calm' then what they say has no value and I could not disagree more..

    That isn't what was raised, however. It was this section of your post I questioned -
    I don't see the point of a thread that aims to test the water and see what people's feelings are, if the aim is to argue against people's
    feelings.

    Maybe this thread is actually supposed to be a debate where we
    get to the 'right answer' and reach an 'objective conclusion'?? If so, that's
    fine but that should have been made more clear and I wouldn't have joined in.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80351090&postcount=460

    Again - if you can tell me how a forum is supposed to be moderated in an accurate manner based on unchallenged subjective emotional posts, I'd like to know.


  • Options
    #524
    mackg
    Registered Users Posts: 3,938 ✭✭✭mackg


    I think it's fair to say that there is an awful lot of people out there, myself included, that have no knowledge of the origins of the word hysterical similar to the way people use the phrase "rule of thumb". It had an original meaning that has been almost completely forgotten and has taken on a more practical meaning.


  • Options
    #525
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    mackg wrote: »
    I think it's fair to say that there is an awful lot of people out there, myself included, that have no knowledge of the origins of the word hysterical similar to the way people use the phrase "rule of thumb". It had an original meaning that has been almost completely forgotten and has taken on a more practical meaning.
    From Wikipedia:
    For at least two thousand years of European history until the late nineteenth century hysteria referred to a medical condition thought to be particular to women and caused by disturbances of the uterus (from the Greek ὑστέρα "hystera" = uterus)...
    I thought the uterus/hysteria connection was widely known; I'm surprised to learn that people don't understand how it's an unhelpful word to bring to a discussion on sexism and misogyny.


  • Options
    #526
    El Guapo!
    Registered Users Posts: 12,427 ✭✭✭✭El Guapo!


    Tbh, I think arguing over the correct use and origins of a word is incredibly pedantic and of no value to this thread.


  • Options
    #527
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    From Wikipedia: I thought the uterus/hysteria connection was widely known; I'm surprised to learn that people don't understand how it's an unhelpful word to bring to a discussion on sexism and misogyny.

    Personally I'd find an out-there statement like
    It's very jarring to go somewhere like AH and it's literally like feminism was never invented.

    far more unhelpful, buts thats perhaps because I'm trying to focus on the woods rather than the trees.


  • Options
    #528
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Dean09 wrote: »
    Tbh, I think arguing over the correct use and origins of a word is incredibly pedantic and of no value to this thread.
    That's not an invalid perspective, but try on the other point of view for a second: imagine you're a woman who's fed up of sexism and misogyny on an Internet forum; imagine similarly you're aware of the roots of the word "hysteria". Can you imagine how the use of the word is going to make you feel that the problem is getting worse instead of better?


  • Options
    #529
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Nodin wrote: »
    Personally I'd find an out-there statement like
    It's very jarring to go somewhere like AH and it's literally like feminism was never invented.

    far more unhelpful, buts thats perhaps because I'm trying to focus on the woods rather than the trees.
    Perhaps if you tried focusing on all of the woods instead of some of the trees, you could understand how both things can be equally jarring when coming from differing perspectives. Perhaps if you took a second to try to understand an opposing perspective instead of dismissing it, this whole conversation would be a lot more constructive.


  • Options
    #530
    Scioch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭Scioch


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    From Wikipedia: I thought the uterus/hysteria connection was widely known; I'm surprised to learn that people don't understand how it's an unhelpful word to bring to a discussion on sexism and misogyny.

    Words take on new meaning and mean different things. I wasnt aware of the connection and I'd wager a great many others are not either.

    Its a word and it was used to convey its meaning. Dwelling on past ridiculous associations with the word is nothing but pedantry. Considering the topic and discussion thats been had on how serious this issue is how helpful is it to start on about this kinda thing ? You gonna ban the use of the word hysteria on the grounds its sexist ?

    Just to add. I understand how it can be seen as unhelpful. But I give no time whatsoever to the argument that its an issue.


  • Options
    #531
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Perhaps if you tried focusing on all of the woods instead of some of the trees, you could understand how both things can be equally jarring when coming from differing perspectives. Perhaps if you took a second to try to understand an opposing perspective instead of dismissing it, this whole conversation would be a lot more constructive.

    If something is untrue, then not only is entertaining it a waste of time, but a path to error.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #532
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Scioch wrote: »
    Words take on new meaning and mean different things. I wasnt aware of the connection and I'd wager a great many others are not either.
    Now you are. Will it make you think twice before using it to describe a female perspective in a conversation about sexism?
    You gonna ban the use of the word hysteria on the grounds its sexist ?
    It would be a much better outcome if people decided for themselves that it wasn't a helpful word to use.


  • Options
    #533
    El Guapo!
    Registered Users Posts: 12,427 ✭✭✭✭El Guapo!


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Dean09 wrote: »
    Tbh, I think arguing over the correct use and origins of a word is incredibly pedantic and of no value to this thread.
    That's not an invalid perspective, but try on the other point of view for a second: imagine you're a woman who's fed up of sexism and misogyny on an Internet forum; imagine similarly you're aware of the roots of the word "hysteria". Can you imagine how the use of the word is going to make you feel that the problem is getting worse instead of better?

    I understand your point but I don't think anyone would take offence to the word based on its historical origins. I think most people would take it as its used on modern-day speech.
    If I'm honest I think anyone who does take offence to it would probably only be doing so to get a reaction and make something out of nothing, if you get what I'm saying.


  • Options
    #534
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Nodin wrote: »
    If something is untrue, then not only is entertaining it a waste of time, but a path to error.
    I'm not sure how the expression of a personal opinion can be "untrue". But fair enough: you're not going to entertain an opposing point of view. That's your prerogative, I suppose.


  • Options
    #535
    Millicent
    Registered Users Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    Dean09 wrote: »
    I understand your point but I don't think anyone would take offence to the word based on its historical origins. I think most people would take it as its used on modern-day speech.
    If I'm honest I think anyone who does take offence to it would probably only be doing so to get a reaction and make something out of nothing, if you get what I'm saying.

    Even outside of a historical context though, it is used quite often still to shut down a woman's argument, IME.

    Not to say that's what Nodin was doing but just pointing out that the word still has negative implications for some even today.


  • Options
    #536
    Scioch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭Scioch


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Now you are. Will it make you think twice before using it to describe a female perspective in a conversation about sexism? It would be a much better outcome if people decided for themselves that it wasn't a helpful word to use.

    I'll use it as I have always used it, because the meaning hasnt changed. I dont see a problem and never did. I only see people trying to create a problem.


  • Options
    #537
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I'm not sure how the expression of a personal opinion can be "untrue".


    'In my opinion, Oscarbravo has one eye in the centre of his forehead and voted for mandatory abortions'

    Bit like that, broken clock moments excepted.


  • Options
    #538
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Nodin wrote: »
    'In my opinion, Oscarbravo has one eye in the centre of his forehead and voted for mandatory abortions'

    Bit like that, broken clock moments excepted.
    You think that's a fair analogy for the post you're dismissing out of hand?


  • Options
    #539
    Tombi!
    Registered Users Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    Scioch wrote: »
    I'll use it as I have always used it, because the meaning hasnt changed. I dont see a problem and never did. I only see people trying to create a problem.

    Okay well what if you were having a heated debate with a woman and all of a sudden you said "calm down, you're only like that because it's that time of the month". It's the same thing (as hysterical) to a lot of women.

    Just because we don't intend to offend, doesn't mean it isn't offensive in certain contexts.


  • Options
    #540
    Scioch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭Scioch


    Millicent wrote: »
    Even outside of a historical context though, it is used quite often still to shut down a woman's argument, IME.

    Not to say that's what Nodin was doing but just pointing out that the word still has negative implications for some even today.

    Its used to shut down everyone's argument, I have never known the word to apply only to women. I've been dismissed as hysterical plenty of times.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #541
    Scioch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭Scioch


    Brutal Deluxe wrote: »
    Okay well what if you were having a heated debate with a woman and all of a sudden you said "calm down, you're only like that because it's that time of the month". It's the same thing (as hysterical) to a lot of women.

    Just because we don't intend to offend, doesn't mean it isn't offensive in certain contexts.

    Until 10 minutes ago I have never encountered that problem. I still havent encountered it as we are discussing how it might be a problem even though it hasnt been.

    I'd tell a woman she was being hysterical just as I'd tell a man he was being hysterical if I thought they were being hysterical. If a woman took real personal offence because of past meanings that were not implicit in what I said then I cant be held responsible.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement