Gender issues in After Hours - Your feedback requested.

flyswatter · 21-08-2012 1:07am

Super-Rush wrote: »

I don't think its that bad in After Hours these days. I'm not saying there isn't an issue there, but i don't think its as bad as you are saying it is.

Agreed, it's definitely an exaggeration.

Tombi! · 21-08-2012 1:16am

Super-Rush wrote: »

I don't think its that bad in After Hours these days. I'm not saying there isn't an issue there, but i don't think its as bad as you are saying it is.

I reckon the person that posted it is a bit of a feminist and is looking at it from a point of view of the "oppressed" kinda thing. Nothing wrong with that or anything but that's what I think about it.

I can see how someone would think it but you're right anyhows, it's not that bad.

randylonghorn · 21-08-2012 2:45am

*sigh*

And unfortunately, the dismissal of the comment on the basis that it was posted by 'a bit of a feminist' who is 'looking at it from a point of view of the "oppressed" kinda thing' goes a long way to proving you wrong and Kooli right, despite the progress which I do think has been made! >.<

Tombi! · 21-08-2012 2:52am

randylonghorn wrote: »

*sigh*

And unfortunately, the dismissal of the comment on the basis that it was posted by 'a bit of a feminist' who is 'looking at it from a point of view of the "oppressed" kinda thing' goes a long way to proving you wrong and Kooli right, despite the progress which I do think has been made! >.<

Proving me wrong? What?

Nodin · 21-08-2012 8:11am

randylonghorn wrote: »

*sigh*

And unfortunately, the dismissal of the comment on the basis that it was posted by 'a bit of a feminist' who is 'looking at it from a point of view of the "oppressed" kinda thing' goes a long way to proving you wrong and Kooli right, despite the progress which I do think has been made! >.<

Arguing from the specific to the general. To be blunt, there are no dismissals that are going to render this true.

It's very jarring to go somewhere like AH and it's literally like feminism was never invented.

Not a one.

Kooli · 21-08-2012 8:19am

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

I reckon the person that posted it is a bit of a feminist and is looking at it from a point of view of the "oppressed" kinda thing. Nothing wrong with that or anything but that's what I think about it.

I can see how someone would think it but you're right anyhows, it's not that bad.

Well spotted. I actually said that specifically in my post??

And I also said that I think of feminism as the default position of normal, progressive people. It's just a belief that men and women should be treated with equal respect and given equal opportunity and no one should be discriminated against because of their gender - not exactly revoluntionary stuff.
But you seem to think of it as some reason my opinions shouldn't be taken quite so seriously? Your post was extremely dismissive. I said in my post that people who point out sexism are silenced, and dismissal is a part of that.

Someone who is a feminist (male or female) will notice sexism and misogyny a lot more easily than someone who isn't (male or female). So I'm not sure I get the idea of having a thread in feedback where we can all decide if we're 'OK' with sexism or not. And if there are enough people who don't have a problem with it, we're all going to agree that sexism isn't a big enough deal and it's cool to continue with it? Seems kind of spineless and backward.

Can you imagine doing the same thing about racism? (I know it's different, but I'm just comparing). Asking a majority white group if there is a problem with racism on the board? Then getting a majority response that the jokes are 'just banter'? And anyone who calls out racism is told 'yeah but they're just saying that because they're into civil rights, and they're looking at it from an 'oppression' point of view'. Um, yes exactly!!

So weird...

Wibbs · 21-08-2012 11:58am

randylonghorn wrote: »

*sigh*

And unfortunately, the dismissal of the comment on the basis that it was posted by 'a bit of a feminist' who is 'looking at it from a point of view of the "oppressed" kinda thing' goes a long way to proving you wrong and Kooli right, despite the progress which I do think has been made! >.<

Indeed. However that can go both ways. Micky D summed it up well earlier in the thread when he said;

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Using terms like "rape culture" and "feminazism" and all the other terms are counter productive in my opinion. It only serves for trenches to be be dug deeper, it creates a divide between posters.

It would be brilliant if we could discuss the topic without the sensational sound bites.

And for me phrases like "It's very jarring to go somewhere like AH and it's literally like feminism was never invented." are pretty close to sensationalist. Never mind highly arguable in the current After Hours forum as a whole.

Kooli · 21-08-2012 12:04pm

Wibbs wrote: »

Indeed. However that can go both ways. Micky D summed it up well earlier in the thread when he said;
And for me phrases like "It's very jarring to go somewhere like AH and it's literally like feminism was never invented." are pretty close to sensationalist. Never mind highly arguable in the current After Hours forum as a whole.

What's wrong with the term rape culture?
Feminazi is a derogatory term for a feminist, but rape culture is a widely accepted term that is used in academic circles and isn't derogatory about anyone?

And I'm sorry people think my term was sensationalist, but I do find After Hours like a time warp when it comes to issues of gender.
Actually no I take that back, I'm not really sorry...

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.

Nodin · 21-08-2012 12:21pm

Kooli wrote: »

..........

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.

I'm not seeing how a subjective series of unchallenged hysterical claims would aid moderating/running a forum in any way shape or form.

Morag · 21-08-2012 12:26pm

Kooli they just don't get it and honestly don't want to be seen to be capitulating by using terms which they consider 'extremist. There are too many who will dig thier heels in, at this stage as long as it results in actions being taken which will hopefully change the culture then that I think is the best we can hope for.

There are too many who will nit pick and have knee jerk reactions to certain terms
and will spend too much time on that.

Tombi! · 21-08-2012 12:26pm

Kooli wrote: »

What's wrong with the term rape culture?
Feminazi is a derogatory term for a feminist, but rape culture is a widely accepted term that is used in academic circles and isn't derogatory about anyone?

It's not helping anyone, that's the problem. I'm talking about using a term like rape culture.

We already discussed it and it basically came down to: there isn't a rape culture in AH and it's way over-the-top to assume so.

Secondly, rape culture (generally) applies only to women and not men. Which, while there is clearly a bigger problem for women in AH, we're trying to stop sexism in general, not just for the women.

g'em · 21-08-2012 12:30pm

Nodin wrote: »

I'm not seeing how a subjective series of unchallenged hysterical claims would aid moderating/running a forum in any way shape or form.

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.

21-08-2012 12:35pm

Sharrow wrote: »

Kooli they just don't get it and honestly don't want to be seen to be capitulating by using terms which they consider 'extremist. ..........
There are too many who will nit pick and have knee jerk reactions to certain terms and will spend too much time on that.

The problem with using sensationalist terms is that they weaken any argument, on either side. Saying things like "it's literally as if feminism was never invented" is sensationlist and it gets people's backs up.

I say this in the exact same way I told Outlaw Pete he had lost his argument, despite, IMO, many of his points being valid.

at this stage as long as it results in actions being taken which will hopefully change the culture then that I think is the best we can hope for.

But what else is there to ask for? a change in culture is what this whole thread is about and what the is being aimed for, and that is absolutely beginning to happen.

Nodin · 21-08-2012 12:41pm

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.

It's a perfectly accurate term to describe such an exaggerated claim. It's "lazy" in the sense that I often use it to describe similarily ridiculous efforts as a cursory search of my posts will show.

Are you trying to imply that me using one of my stock phrases "proves" that

It's very jarring to go somewhere like AH and it's literally like feminism was never invented.

is somehow true?

Or that it proves people listing a series of subjective feelings with no regard for the facts would be somehow helpful in running a forum?

Morag · 21-08-2012 1:34pm

Nodin are you aware of the origin of the term hysterical and the history attached to it?

Morag · 21-08-2012 1:38pm

Deleted User wrote: »

The problem with using sensationalist terms is that they weaken any argument, on either side. Saying things like "it's literally as if feminism was never invented" is sensationlist and it gets people's backs up.

It is hyperbole but people use that when they are frustrated and there are days when reading the post in AH would make me certainly despair and
feel that we have make sod all progress on how women are treated.

Deleted User wrote: »

But what else is there to ask for?

The acceptance of the moderate feminist philosophy

Deleted User wrote: »

a change in culture is what this whole thread is about and what the is being aimed for, and that is absolutely beginning to happen.

Yes it is happening but I do understand that it is hard to have these discussion when that is the way they are talked about brings up miscommunication and it is the unwillingness to allow certain terms be used
cos people can't be arse educating themselves about it is a way of shutting down the discussion.

Tombi! · 21-08-2012 1:44pm

Sharrow wrote: »

Nodin are you aware of the origin of the term hysterical and the history attached to it?

I know exactly where you going with that.
Arguments like this isn't helping.
Do you know why?

Because you're focusing on it as "protect the women". To put it bluntly: it's unfair and it's sexist towards both men and women.
You're actively trying to find fault with anything that somehow relates to putting down women and trying to force people to think AH is some place where women should fear for fear of being objectified.

It's nothing like that, there is no rape culture in AH. It's just a bunch of dicks being dicks.
Hence the thread is to find out what shouldn't be allowed.

Sharrow wrote: »

we have make sod all progress on how women are treated.
The acceptance of the moderate feminist philosophy

Stuff like that is what we're trying to avoid, completely.
It's about both genders, not just women. You cannot say "well we want sexism gone but let's focus about the women first, they're more important".

Look, being a feminist is fine, nobody has issues with that. It's an issue when you come here and try to turn the thread from "sexism in AH" to "protecting the women in AH".
I get that you think AH is worse off for women, fine. But if you ignore the problems on one side of the fence then you're not any different from the people who dismiss you as a femnazi. I'm not saying you are one or anything but the point is, you're acting the same way the men who scream "femnazi/stupid bitch/etc/" at any woman who wants equality.

Ickle Magoo · 21-08-2012 1:47pm

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

I get that you think AH is worse off for women, fine. But if you ignore the problems on one side of the fence then you're not any different from the people who dismiss you as a femnazi.

Do you think there are proportionate problems?

oscarBravo · 21-08-2012 1:48pm

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

You cannot say "well we want sexism gone but let's focus about the women first, they're more important".

But maybe you can say "let's focus on the women first, because there's a much bigger problem of sexism towards women than towards men" - despite what a certain serial re-registering somebody would have you believe.

Tombi! · 21-08-2012 1:54pm

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Do you think there are proportionate problems?

I don't understand. Can you dumb it down or something?

oscarBravo wrote: »

But maybe you can say "let's focus on the women first, because there's a much bigger problem of sexism towards women than towards men" - despite what a certain serial re-registering somebody would have you believe.

Keyword being first. But you can't ignore that it goes on both sides of the fence. And um, what were you about re-regs for?

Ickle Magoo · 21-08-2012 1:57pm

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

I don't understand. Can you dumb it down or something?

You are suggesting that it goes for both sides of the fence - I'm asking if you think it goes proportionally - 50-50, you know?

Tombi! · 21-08-2012 1:58pm

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

You are suggesting that it goes for both sides of the fence - I'm asking if you think it goes proportionally - 50-50, you know?

Oh, right

No, of course not. But I don't think it's fair to act as it only occurs on one side.

Annasopra · 21-08-2012 1:58pm

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

I don't understand. Can you dumb it down or something?

Keyword being first. But you can't ignore that it goes on both sides of the fence. And um, what were you about re-regs for?

Seriously?

Are you trying to claim that sexism against men is as big a problem as sexism against women in AH?

Tombi! · 21-08-2012 2:00pm

mango salsa wrote: »

Seriously?

Are you trying to claim that sexism against men is as big a problem as sexism against women in AH?

No? I'm just saying that if you want to deal with the issue of women being victims, fine. But you can't just go "women are more important" and leave it at that.

My name is URL · 21-08-2012 2:04pm

mango salsa wrote: »

Seriously?

Are you trying to claim that sexism against men is as big a problem as sexism against women in AH?

Is it a competition or something? Sexism is sexism.. regardless of whether it's aimed at men or women.

Why the fcuk are so many people trying to frame it as a 'them vs us' thing?

Anyway, since this thread was started, the mods have been doing a top job in cracking down on the issue when it arises. What more can people ask for? This thread is just going round in circles now.

21-08-2012 2:05pm

Sharrow wrote: »

It is hyperbole but people use that when they are frustrated and there are days when reading the post in AH would make me certainly despair and
feel that we have make sod all progress on how women are treated
The acceptance of the moderate feminist philosophy

Yes it is happening but I do understand that it is hard to have these discussion when that is the way they are talked about brings up miscommunication and it is the unwillingness to allow certain terms be used
cos people can't be arse educating themselves about it is a way of shutting down the discussion.

But the fact that it is hyperbole is what frustrates those who are attempting to add to the debate.

Unfortunately there are people out there whose minds will never be changed and who will never accept that women are equal. There is little we, as posters, can do about their own personal views,what we can do though is make sexism unacceptable on this site, which is the ultimate objective here.

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

Oh, right

No, of course not. But I don't think it's fair to act as it only occurs on one side.

I fully agree that if is sexism on one side isn't tolerated, then sexism on the other should not be tolerated either. I don't think anyone disagrees with that.

The issue though, is that men don't appear to feel intimidated in After Hours in the same way that women do.

Ickle Magoo · 21-08-2012 2:06pm

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

Oh, right

No, of course not. But I don't think it's fair to act as it only occurs on one side.

I don't think anyone is - I think the mods are trying to tackle gender issues against female posters because they are the majority of the gender issues being experienced.

Annasopra · 21-08-2012 2:07pm

My name is URL wrote: »

Is it a competition or something? Sexism is sexism.. regardless of whether it's aimed at men or women.

Why the fcuk are so many people trying to frame it as a 'them vs us' thing?

Anyway, since this thread was started, the mods have been doing a top job in cracking down on the issue when it arises. What more can people ask for? This thread is just going round in circles now.

Sexism is generally a much much bigger problem for women than it is for men!

g'em · 21-08-2012 2:08pm

Nodin wrote: »

It's a perfectly accurate term to describe such an exaggerated claim. It's "lazy" in the sense that I often use it to describe similarily ridiculous efforts as a cursory search of my posts will show.

Are you trying to imply that me using one of my stock phrases "proves" that

It's very jarring to go somewhere like AH and it's literally like feminism was never invented.

is somehow true?

Or that it proves people listing a series of subjective feelings with no regard for the facts would be somehow helpful in running a forum?

fwiw I don't agree with what Kooli is saying. I respect her point of view though. I don't think it's conducive to the discussion to be using sensationalist terminology but the onus is on other people not to react to it. Otherwise it's a "she made me do it" defense. And calling someone hysterical for a comment like that is too far. It's yet another term that's used to put down women in an argument of which there isn't a parallel for men (but I'm open to correction). 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).

I'm not getting at you, I'm trying to say that without people even realising it arguments in AH get reduced to "she's just being hysterical" without even seeing it.

So Kooli's remark may be subjective, but in all honesty I think there's some fact in there too.

Tombi! · 21-08-2012 2:11pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I fully agree that if is sexism on one side isn't tolerated, then sexism on the other should not be tolerated either. I don't think anyone disagrees with that.

The issue though, is that men don't appear to feel intimidated in After Hours in the same way that women do.

Oh that's true alright but I was just worried we would go from "stomping out sexism" to "let's not say anything that might offend women". Clearly it's a bigger problem for women but to pick and choose what gender is something I'd not like to see.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I don't think anyone is - I think the mods are trying to tackle gender issues against female posters because they are the majority of the gender issues being experienced.

True but I was moreso speaking to Sharrow/koolio since they seem to be more fixiated on the women's problems rather than sexism in general.

Scioch · 21-08-2012 2:16pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

But maybe you can say "let's focus on the women first, because there's a much bigger problem of sexism towards women than towards men" - despite what a certain serial re-registering somebody would have you believe.

But doesnt that create an issue (or perceived issue) right off the bat of discriminating against men to some degree ? Isnt that what gets peoples backs up on these issues ? Its heading in the direction of female quotas to try and force equality. When all it really does it give women equality at the expense of guys which wont create a culture of equality. I think this is what makes it so hard to really get equality. Women feel discriminated against, and the solution often seems to appear to be to discriminate against men to even things out.

That whole "its like feminism never happened here" thing is simply absurd. The vast majority of AH users that I have encountered are intelligent people who respect individuals as individuals and dont discriminate on those grounds. But the manner in which people often engage isnt pc.

But if its an issue for users then it should be dealt with, I dont want to see anyone feel like they are being discriminated against or intimidated. But if discrimination is the problem then deal with discrimination. Dont focus on particular groups just roll it out equally to everyone.

Morag · 21-08-2012 2:20pm

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

I know exactly where you going with that.
Arguments like this isn't helping.

Actually you don't.
All you have done is demonstrate that you also don't know the origin of the word.

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

Look, being a feminist is fine, nobody has issues with that. It's an issue when you come here and try to turn the thread from "sexism in AH" to "protecting the women in AH".

You are the one who keeps equating it with protectionism.

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

I get that you think AH is worse off for women, fine. But if you ignore the problems on one side of the fence then you're not any different from the people who dismiss you as a femnazi. I'm not saying you are one or anything but the point is, you're acting the same way the men who scream "femnazi/stupid bitch/etc/" at any woman who wants equality.

I don't ignore sexism which effects men and your strawmanning of this thread is getting tedious.

Annasopra · 21-08-2012 2:22pm

Scioch wrote: »

But doesnt that create an issue (or perceived issue) right off the bat of discriminating against men to some degree ? Isnt that what gets peoples backs up on these issues ? Its heading in the direction of female quotas to try and force equality. When all it really does it give women equality at the expense of guys which wont create a culture of equality. I think this is what makes it so hard to really get equality. Women feel discriminated against, and the solution often seems to appear to be to discriminate against men to even things out.

I'm sorry that is absolute nonsense. Sexism is a problem in AH. The problem is predominantly one of sexism against women. Adressing this issue is in no way whatsoever discriminating against men. It is creating a more respectful culture for men and women in AH.

Tombi! · 21-08-2012 2:23pm

Sharrow wrote: »

Actually you don't.
All you have done is demonstrate that you also don't know the origin of the word.

You are the one who keeps equating it with protectionism.

I don't ignore sexism which effects men and your strawmanning of this thread is getting tedious.

Sigh, I think it's just best if you and I don't respond to one another. I think you're using terms that are over the top and acting that way.
I don't think either of us will see eye to eye, ever. So agree to disagree?

oscarBravo · 21-08-2012 2:24pm

Scioch wrote: »

But doesnt that create an issue (or perceived issue) right off the bat of discriminating against men to some degree ?

Honestly? No. Sexism against women is a bigger problem in AH than sexism against men. As a bigger problem, it more urgently needs to be addressed.

Scioch · 21-08-2012 2:28pm

mango salsa wrote: »

I'm sorry that is absolute nonsense. Sexism is a problem in AH. The problem is predominantly one of sexism against women. Adressing this issue is no way whatsoever discriminating against men. It is creating a more respectful culture for men and women in AH.

It is when you focus on one and ignore the other no matter the big difference in the size of the issue. As I said if you want to tackle discrimination then tackle discrimination. But there is an air of protectionism about this when you allow the non pc, insulting, hostile, discriminatory stuff to continue but say "Hey, women feel intimidated, watch what you say".

Why isnt it users feel intimidated by hostile, discriminatory posting, watch what you say. ?

Ickle Magoo · 21-08-2012 2:28pm

Scioch wrote: »

But doesnt that create an issue (or perceived issue) right off the bat of discriminating against men to some degree ?

Surely that would only be the case from those presuming that the status quo is correct and fair? If the aim is to shift the balance from being disproportionately unwelcoming to one gender so that both sexes are able to enjoy the forum equally then I'm not sure how that could be viewed as discriminatory?

Morag · 21-08-2012 2:30pm

Deleted User wrote: »

But the fact that it is hyperbole is what frustrates those who are attempting to add to the debate.

I get that but this was that posters first post to the thread in which they vented their frustration, yes there was hyperbole but instead of seeing they were frustrated they were labeled as hysterical and rounded on.

Which is part of the reason most people won't post in these feedback threads.

Deleted User wrote: »

Unfortunately there are people out there whose minds will never be changed and who will never accept that women are equal. There is little we, as posters, can do about their own personal views,what we can do though is make sexism unacceptable on this site, which is the ultimate objective here.

We are always going to treat men and women differently it's the way of the world all we can do it try and not use those differences to denigrate either gender.

Deleted User wrote: »

The issue though, is that men don't appear to feel intimidated in After Hours in the same way that women do.

That I think comes down to numbers and unthinking sexism.

Scioch · 21-08-2012 2:30pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

Honestly? No. Sexism against women is a bigger problem in AH than sexism against men. As a bigger problem, it more urgently needs to be addressed.

But surely its part of a bigger issue of discrimination as a whole.

Tombi! · 21-08-2012 2:32pm

Scioch wrote: »

It is when you focus on one and ignore the other no matter the big difference in the size of the issue. As I said if you want to tackle discrimination then tackle discrimination. But there is an air of protectionism about this when you allow the non pc, insulting, hostile, discriminatory stuff to continue but say "Hey, women feel intimidated, watch what you say".

That was my concern too.
But I feel that it'll never happend and I trust the mods not to let it happen.

Why isnt it users feel intimidated by hostile, discriminatory posting, watch what you say

It is that just with sexism. It'll ideally get stopped about men and women but as of now, women are getting it worse so the focus is on them moreso. It's not being dropped though for men.

oscarBravo · 21-08-2012 2:38pm

Scioch wrote: »

It is when you focus on one and ignore the other no matter the big difference in the size of the issue.

I don't think anyone's proposing that we ignore the other.

Scioch wrote: »

But surely its part of a bigger issue of discrimination as a whole.

Yes, it is. And it's the bigger part of that bigger issue, so it would be remiss not to give it the extra attention it deserves.

Scioch · 21-08-2012 2:39pm

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

It is that just with sexism. It'll ideally get stopped about men and women but as of now, women are getting it worse so the focus is on them moreso. It's not being dropped though for men.

There is no need to focus on them more so because the problem is universal. A fix for one is a fix for all. And sexism comes from discriminatory attitudes in my view, so the fix should be implemented on that level and apply it to everyone and we will all be equally as accountable for what we say no matter who its directed at.

Tombi! · 21-08-2012 2:41pm

Scioch wrote: »

There is no need to focus on them more so because the problem is universal. A fix for one is a fix for all. And sexism comes from discriminatory attitudes in my view, so the fix should be implemented on that level and apply it to everyone and we will all be equally as accountable for what we say no matter who its directed at.

Yes but when there is more of one part (sexism against women) it should be dealt with and have more focus towards it.

Wibbs · 21-08-2012 2:42pm

Kooli wrote: »

What's wrong with the term rape culture?
Feminazi is a derogatory term for a feminist, but rape culture is a widely accepted term that is used in academic circles and isn't derogatory about anyone?

A widely accepted term in very rarified and leftist gender studies circles in US colleges. The same kinda circles where Black studies came up with and rigidly believe in such notions as Cleopatra was black. Outside such circles it's open to serious debate. A debate usually ignored because of it's sacred cow position.

When it was brought up earlier in the thread(for god knows what reason) and a defintion was posted I went though it point by point and with the exception of one example(which was still highly debatable) there was bugger all evidence of it to be found in After Hours. When examples were requested the paucity of subsequent replies was plain for all to see. Ranged against that are the consistent and pretty long standing actions of the mods of that forum to stamp it out, when it occurs. We've all seen enough mod actions that do so. I saw one this very morning where a couple of yahoo's jumped in early on the engagement ring thread and were snipped by Dr. B. It's not a new thing either.

And I'm sorry people think my term was sensationalist, but I do find After Hours like a time warp when it comes to issues of gender.
Actually no I take that back, I'm not really sorry...

Of course it was sensationalist. "literally like feminism was never invented" is sensationalist and wildly inaccurate to boot, never mind insulting to the vast majority of the folks who post and moderate the After Hour forum. You heard it first folks according to a minority, we're all unthinking anti feminists supporting a rape culture. Jesus.

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.

Sorry I don't understand this at all. I'm afraid that's called discussion. It's a discussion forum.

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.

Why? Because your claims may not stack up? Because it wont be in whatever image of feminism you extol? Yea it's called discussion where everyone gets the chance to put their opinion in and that opinion gets to stand tall or fall flat on it's arse for the benefit of all. Or maybe you'd like some sort of gender sensitive handbook handed down from on high? So long as it agreed with some of course.

Sharrow wrote: »

Kooli they just don't get it

What? Unless this is a quasi religious type debate then the examples you gave either have or do not have any evidence behind them with some grey areas in the middle. So far beyond nebulous hunches and feelings and rhetoric about anti feminist/rape culture the examples given for this in AH are thin on the ground.

and honestly don't want to be seen to be capitulating by using terms which they consider 'extremist.

Because it is extremist. It's nothing to do with "capitulating" or any of that. If your evidence stacks up it requires no capitulation, merely agreement and then action to stop it.

When folks have contributed non histrionic* thoughts on the real silliness and examples of stuff that isn't on, there has been widespread agreement and widespread action has been taken by the AH mods. To be fair to the mods, they'd already got a pretty good handle on most of it to start with.

There are too many who will nit pick and have knee jerk reactions to certain terms
and will spend too much time on that.

If calling AH part of a rape culture and a place where feminism never happened isn't kneejerk I don't know what is.

The acceptance of the moderate feminist philosophy

If terms like "rape culture" is a part of the "moderate feminist philosophy" then some rejigging of moderate may be due. Of course it's not part of it for the majority of feminists male or female. Or maybe they "just don't get it"?

G'em wrote:

And calling someone hysterical for a comment like that is too far. It's yet another term that's used to put down women in an argument of which there isn't a parallel for men

It's pretty much used for both these days G. Given the fact that most people, men and women are blissfully unaware of the root of the term, that kinda backs that up. There was a male equivalent, "neurasthenia", basically neurotic, but if you called someone or their argument neurasthenical people would look at you funny.

Don't get me wrong G I have most certainly seen women being put down as hysterical, but equally have seen it used where the person male or female wasn't genderising the term. I've also seen neurotic used on women and that's technically the male term, yet no comment is passed. People are either being dicks or not, the terms used just add to their dickery.

*no it doesn't have the same root. Comes from the latin for dramatic actor.

Annasopra · 21-08-2012 2:43pm

Scioch wrote: »

There is no need to focus on them more so because the problem is universal. A fix for one is a fix for all. And sexism comes from discriminatory attitudes in my view, so the fix should be implemented on that level and apply it to everyone and we will all be equally as accountable for what we say no matter who its directed at.

The problem of sexism isn't universal.

Scioch · 21-08-2012 2:46pm

mango salsa wrote: »

The problem of sexism isn't universal.

The problem of discrimination is and thats where it all emanates from.

Annasopra · 21-08-2012 2:48pm

Scioch wrote: »

The problem of discrimination is and thats where it all emanates from.

In this case the mods want to tackle sexist discrimination. That is not a universal problem.

Scioch · 21-08-2012 2:56pm

mango salsa wrote: »

In this case the mods want to tackle sexist discrimination. That is not a universal problem.

Sexist discrimination in relation to women. Hence my point. Instead of dealing with the problem of discrimination and how it affects users its broken up into sub problems to suit which ever group is most aggrieved at any particular time.

The problem wont go away no matter how much you pick at it. If you want equality you have to enforce it on a level where it will apply to everyone equally.

Annasopra · 21-08-2012 3:06pm

Scioch wrote: »

Sexist discrimination in relation to women. Hence my point. Instead of dealing with the problem of discrimination and how it affects users its broken up into sub problems to suit which ever group is most aggrieved at any particular time.

The problem wont go away no matter how much you pick at it. If you want equality you have to enforce it on a level where it will apply to everyone equally.

You can't adress the issue of sexism equally if there is clearly an existing massive inequality in the first place. Sexism in AH and in the world in general is predominantly a problem faced by women.

Scioch wrote: »

Instead of dealing with the problem of discrimination and how it affects users its broken up into sub problems to suit which ever group is most aggrieved at any particular time.

This makes no sense whatsoever. Dealing with sexism is actually a part of dealing with discrimination.

How would you suggest dealing with the problem of discrimination?

oscarBravo · 21-08-2012 3:09pm

Scioch wrote: »

Instead of dealing with the problem of discrimination and how it affects users its broken up into sub problems to suit which ever group is most aggrieved at any particular time.

Yes. As I've explained, that's a fairly standard approach to problem solving: fix the bigger problems, while keeping an eye on the smaller ones to make sure they don't turn into big ones.

So far, what I'm seeing from you is a criticism of this approach, but not a reasoned criticism. Why would it be better to apply equal weight to what are clearly unequal problems?

Gender issues in After Hours - Your feedback requested.

Comments