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

Gender issues in After Hours - Your feedback requested.

1192022242528

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 12,408 ✭✭✭✭El Guapo!


    Kooli wrote: »
    I disagree that there's a strong distinction between a malicious comments and a sexist joke. I think that's just a testament to how used to sexist jokes we've become that some people see them as harmless.

    Imagine if every time someone mentioned a black person someone said 'they should go back to the jungle'. If we heard that enough we might think that's just a harmless racist joke. But due to a cultural shift, we are now not used to that kind of thing so it's very clear that a racist joke just isn't OK.

    So I don't think we can say sexism is not OK, but sexist jokes are. It doesn't make sense.

    If it was meant ironically, then that's different because the butt of the joke would have been sexist people, rather than women. But as it was written I wouldn't have thought that was the joke.


    I'm not saying that there is always a clear line between a harmless joke and a malicious comment. Quite the oppostie.
    There are some comments that are clearly harmless inoffensive jokes, and there are some that are quite clearly sexist comments which I agree should not be tolerated.
    But then there is a grey area. An area where a comment could be seen as a joke by some, or highly offensive by others. This is where the mods need to use their discretion and common sense.
    And I think in that type of situation then maybe the best course of action would be to delete the post and send the poster a quiet pm to explain why it has been deleted. Rather than leaving the post in plain sight and banning the "offender".


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭Scioch


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    For what it's worth, there has been some behind-the-scenes discussion between Jaxxy and the AH mods, and it has been accepted that the post was intended ironically. It wasn't clear at first that it was intended that way, hence the infraction; it has now been accepted that it was intended that way, hence the infraction has been removed.

    I look forward to a time when there will be no need to post something like that even ironically, because the idea that it could have been posted any other way will be a distant memory. In the meantime, hopefully we've all learned something.

    But there is no need to post something like that ironically now. That user had any amount of ways to engage and chose to do so using a sexism remark. What does it matter if they meant it to be sexist or not ? I thought this was the whole issue, people comfortable using language like that regardless of intent.

    How does allowing it in this manner help in ridding the forum of it ?


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,780 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    It clearly wasn't a malicious post.
    If it was "clearly" anything, there wouldn't be a debate about it.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,027 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    For what it's worth, there has been some behind-the-scenes discussion between Jaxxy and the AH mods, and it has been accepted that the post was intended ironically. It wasn't clear at first that it was intended that way, hence the infraction; it has now been accepted that it was intended that way, hence the infraction has been removed.

    I look forward to a time when there will be no need to post something like that even ironically, because the idea that it could have been posted any other way will be a distant memory. In the meantime, hopefully we've all learned something.
    For me this balances out the thread debate. Various opinions, then discussion and then the system works. +1

    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.



  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,780 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Scioch wrote: »
    How does allowing it in this manner help in ridding the forum of it ?
    Who says it's allowed?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭Scioch


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Who says it's allowed?

    I assumed the reversing of the infraction meant the poster did nothing wrong. But your saying its not allowed but not dealt with as clear cut sexism.

    Yeah thats alright. :o


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 27,944 ✭✭✭✭ Noah Incalculable Barometer


    So it's hard work to not be a dick about women is it? Is it really that difficult? Struggling, are ya?

    But hey, given it's so crazy making, trying not to be an arsehole about women, let me help you out again since it's so terrible, 'having to think'

    God, do you really have to be so abrasive?


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,953 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    So it's hard work to not be a dick about women is it? Is it really that difficult? Struggling, are ya?

    But hey, given it's so crazy making, trying not to be an arsehole about women, let me help you out again since it's so terrible, 'having to think':

    When commenting about women, try not to make belittling comments about cooking, making sandwiches, cups of tea, being in the kitchen, staying in the kitchen, being barefoot in the kitchen, being barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, a woman's place being in the kitchen, bridal wear and white goods being the same colour for a reason, women not yet having gone to the moon because it doesn't need cleaning, women's only function being to cook a meal for a guy, women being useless if they cannot cook, so on.

    Yes, let's all get antagonistic shall we? You should calm down.


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,780 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Scioch wrote: »
    I assumed the reversing of the infraction meant the poster did nothing wrong.
    Careful with the assumptions. The infraction was an indication that the poster did something wrong. The reversal meant that it was accepted that the intention was not only not malicious, but actually the opposite.

    Whatever the intention, it's not something we want to see posted. I think Jaxxy understands that now, and I'm hopeful that everyone else is getting the message too.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    oscarBravo just so I'm clear on it: Jaxxy posted it as a joke/sarcasm/etc and the mods didnt' realize it, got told what the point of the post was and the infraction removed. But, posts like that aren't welcome in AH at all?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,938 ✭✭✭mackg


    God, do you really have to be so abrasive?

    +1, an admin belittling a poster like that really doesn't encourage discussion in my eyes.


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,780 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    oscarBravo just so I'm clear on it: Jaxxy posted it as a joke/sarcasm/etc and the mods didnt' realize it, got told what the point of the post was and the infraction removed. But, posts like that aren't welcome in AH at all?
    That's a fair summary.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,658 ✭✭✭✭The Sweeper


    ejmaztec wrote: »
    Yes, let's all get antagonistic shall we? You should calm down.

    I'm sorry if that came across as angry or not-calm. It was actually typed in the heat of scorn, not in anger.

    I find it outrageous that you think it's 'work', 'having to think' before you post to the internet.

    Not being a dick about women isn't difficult - it's not like taking up a new diet, or a huge exercise regime, or undertaking university study, or converting to a religion.

    It's about simply not doing something.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭Scioch


    I think my "work" here is done.

    Issue was raised, issue was examined, issue is being dealt with. Mods, Admins, posterfolk, thank you for entertaining my opinions of which some may have been pure jibberish.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,423 ✭✭✭Morag


    So it's hard work to not be a dick about women is it? Is it really that difficult? Struggling, are ya?

    But hey, given it's so crazy making, trying not to be an arsehole about women, let me help you out again since it's so terrible, 'having to think':

    When commenting about women, try not to make belittling comments about cooking, making sandwiches, cups of tea, being in the kitchen, staying in the kitchen, being barefoot in the kitchen, being barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, a woman's place being in the kitchen, bridal wear and white goods being the same colour for a reason, women not yet having gone to the moon because it doesn't need cleaning, women's only function being to cook a meal for a guy, women being useless if they cannot cook, so on.


    You forgot the one about the wizards sleeve...


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,658 ✭✭✭✭The Sweeper


    Sharrow wrote: »
    You forgot the one about the wizards sleeve...

    You're not helping.

    Site banned for six months. :pac:


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


    I originally infracted Jaxxy's post.

    I marked the post with an infraction because on the face of it it appeared to be the kind of remark we want to remove from AH.

    The subsequent private message conversation I had with the poster indicated that the intent of the post was misunderstood on my part as oscarbravo has already explained. I accepted the explanation and asked for the infraction to be overturned in this case as I felt it was unfair to the poster in question.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,953 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    I'm sorry if that came across as angry or not-calm. It was actually typed in the heat of scorn, not in anger.

    I find it outrageous that you think it's 'work', 'having to think' before you post to the internet.

    Not being a dick about women isn't difficult - it's not like taking up a new diet, or a huge exercise regime, or undertaking university study, or converting to a religion.

    It's about simply not doing something.

    I know it's not, or shouldn't be difficult in the normal sense, but as has already been shown, things can get misconstrued and land people in hot water, albeit temporarily in the case on which I commented.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,658 ✭✭✭✭The Sweeper


    Look, all I can say is try not to be too worried about it, but try to get into the spirit of it. We're not hiding behind stones with the AH attack-mods on leashes, waiting for someone to post 'apron' so we can set the mods on them.

    I know what you're saying regarding the post we were discussing, but that case has been discussed and resolved and is perfectly summed up by Brutal Deluxe.

    We're trying to change a part of the atmosphere of After Hours. We're not trying to kill the fun, spoil the wit, or make it all about srs bznz. It's like we have this big moderating mixing desk, and we're trying to turn up the fun for everyone, by turning down the 'bitches' background noise.

    I could (and indeed have, sometimes abrasively and sometimes not so much) given lists of examples of unacceptable posts, but honestly, those lists in themselves are really quite pointless.

    I cannot change people's behaviour by giving them information. I can only encourage people to change their own behaviour by making them think.

    If it were possible to change people's behaviour by giving them information, nobody would speed when driving, nobody would binge drink, nobody would smoke, everybody would turn off the tap while they brush their teeth and everybody would turn off the lights in rooms they're not sitting in.

    In order to change someone's behaviour you have to make them think about what they're doing. Specifically, I need posters to think before they post. Before you hit 'post quick reply' I need you to pause and think 'should I?' and if you're sitting there wondering for more than a half a second, don't post it.

    As it stands, the most effective way in the short term to make people stop and think 'should I?' before they post is hold the threat of an infraction or a ban over their heads. I'm hoping that this bleeds into 'Why shouldn't I?' and the answer to that question will gradually change from 'because I'll be banned', to 'because it's obnoxious and demeaning and it marginalises a big chunk of posters on these forums just because they're female, and this is a community, and nobody should be marginalised within a community because of their gender (or religious persuasion or sexual preference or country of birth or skin colour)'.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 328 ✭✭BlueSmoker


    Look, all I can say is try not to be too worried about it, but try to get into the spirit of it. We're not hiding behind stones with the AH attack-mods on leashes, waiting for someone to post 'apron' so we can set the mods on them.

    I know what you're saying regarding the post we were discussing, but that case has been discussed and resolved and is perfectly summed up by Brutal Deluxe.

    We're trying to change a part of the atmosphere of After Hours. We're not trying to kill the fun, spoil the wit, or make it all about srs bznz. It's like we have this big moderating mixing desk, and we're trying to turn up the fun for everyone, by turning down the 'bitches' background noise.

    I could (and indeed have, sometimes abrasively and sometimes not so much) given lists of examples of unacceptable posts, but honestly, those lists in themselves are really quite pointless.

    I cannot change people's behaviour by giving them information. I can only encourage people to change their own behaviour by making them think.

    If it were possible to change people's behaviour by giving them information, nobody would speed when driving, nobody would binge drink, nobody would smoke, everybody would turn off the tap while they brush their teeth and everybody would turn off the lights in rooms they're not sitting in.

    In order to change someone's behaviour you have to make them think about what they're doing. Specifically, I need posters to think before they post. Before you hit 'post quick reply' I need you to pause and think 'should I?' and if you're sitting there wondering for more than a half a second, don't post it.

    As it stands, the most effective way in the short term to make people stop and think 'should I?' before they post is hold the threat of an infraction or a ban over their heads. I'm hoping that this bleeds into 'Why shouldn't I?' and the answer to that question will gradually change from 'because I'll be banned', to 'because it's obnoxious and demeaning and it marginalises a big chunk of posters on these forums just because they're female, and this is a community, and nobody should be marginalised within a community because of their gender (or religious persuasion or sexual preference or country of birth or skin colour)'.

    Basically a different view point, dosen't mean someone is wrong, it's when you try to inforce that view point by generalistaion and heresay, that is when you are wrong.

    And all of us have being wrong, including the mods we are the most beautiful thing human, we believe, we think, we have opinions, we love, we feel. But the best/worst thing is we decide,( we believe, we think, we have opinions, we love, we feel.) how to use it. And sometimes we fail to see another as a seemlier person, that's when we fail :)


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 29,509 Mod ✭✭✭✭randylonghorn


    So what? A post should be considered on its merits, and not on anything that is known or supposed about the poster.
    Sometimes its merits are inextricably linked with what is known about the poster though.

    Ok, the following is deliberately an extreme example, but it makes the point I think:

    A female member of Boards who has been around for years, is known personally to many others here, starts a thread on Parenting > Pregnant along the lines of:

    "Hi folks, I've just discovered I'm pregnant and I'm scared to death!!"

    I have no doubt the responses would be supportive, constructive and helpful.

    The next day, a MALE member of Boards who has been around for years, is known personally to many others here, starts a thread on Parenting > Pregnant along the lines of:

    "Hi folks, I've just discovered I'm pregnant and I'm scared to death!!"

    Do you think he will get the same response? ... from other posters, or from the mods? SHOULD he?

    Sometimes the merits of a post are inextricably linked with what is known about the poster, or what they have chosen to present about themselves.

    Context and intent ARE important. We don't ignore them in real life and we're fooling ourselves if we think we can ignore them on Boards.

    And yes, that often makes life difficult, especially for mods, but "one size fits all" rules which ignore context and intent don't work either, and make life equally difficult.
    Does it matter that I am male when I say that I find something to be misogynistic?
    No, not in that context, your gender is irrelevant.



    By the bye, can we have a bit less of the "being a dick" comments? Because if we're talking about language that is inherently sexist ... :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 328 ✭✭BlueSmoker


    Sometimes its merits are inextricably linked with what is known about the poster though.

    Ok, the following is deliberately an extreme example, but it makes the point I think:

    A female member of Boards who has been around for years, is known personally to many others here, starts a thread on Parenting > Pregnant along the lines of:

    "Hi folks, I've just discovered I'm pregnant and I'm scared to death!!"

    I have no doubt the responses would be supportive, constructive and helpful.

    The next day, a MALE member of Boards who has been around for years, is known personally to many others here, starts a thread on Parenting > Pregnant along the lines of:

    "Hi folks, I've just discovered I'm pregnant and I'm scared to death!!"

    Do you think he will get the same response? ... from other posters, or from the mods? SHOULD he?

    Sometimes the merits of a post are inextricably linked with what is known about the poster, or what they have chosen to present about themselves.

    Context and intent ARE important. We don't ignore them in real life and we're fooling ourselves if we think we can ignore them on Boards.

    And yes, that often makes life difficult, especially for mods, but "one size fits all" rules which ignore context and intent don't work either, and make life equally difficult.

    No, not in that context, your gender is irrelevant.



    By the bye, can we have a bit less of the "being a dick" comments? Because if we're talking about language that is inherently sexist ... :D

    But your argument is based on precieved genders, and well known posters, what if you don't know a persons gender, or who they are? example being me do you know what gender I am (without checking back through my posts, cause that's too easy, and not something you would generally do when posting in a thread in AH)

    Now check out my posts, I can't have kids, or very unlikely I will, if I wasn't discussioning this with you, I may have being upset.

    But you can't moderate everything, as if it's a script, that X+Y=Z in general it might, but alot of the time it doesn't, particularly in AH.

    So the mods job in AH is too protect alot of ideas, and peoples personas, without breaking the law.

    Most people won't have a problem in protect an idea, outside their range, if it was so close to them, but we are asking the mods to do an exordinary job, too solve and protect other(strangers) peoples ideas.

    But I agree it should be open to interputation:)


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,006 ✭✭✭donfers


    Look, all I can say is try not to be too worried about it, but try to get into the spirit of it. We're not hiding behind stones with the AH attack-mods on leashes, waiting for someone to post 'apron' so we can set the mods on them.

    I know what you're saying regarding the post we were discussing, but that case has been discussed and resolved and is perfectly summed up by Brutal Deluxe.

    We're trying to change a part of the atmosphere of After Hours. We're not trying to kill the fun, spoil the wit, or make it all about srs bznz. It's like we have this big moderating mixing desk, and we're trying to turn up the fun for everyone, by turning down the 'bitches' background noise.

    I could (and indeed have, sometimes abrasively and sometimes not so much) given lists of examples of unacceptable posts, but honestly, those lists in themselves are really quite pointless.

    I cannot change people's behaviour by giving them information. I can only encourage people to change their own behaviour by making them think.

    If it were possible to change people's behaviour by giving them information, nobody would speed when driving, nobody would binge drink, nobody would smoke, everybody would turn off the tap while they brush their teeth and everybody would turn off the lights in rooms they're not sitting in.

    In order to change someone's behaviour you have to make them think about what they're doing. Specifically, I need posters to think before they post. Before you hit 'post quick reply' I need you to pause and think 'should I?' and if you're sitting there wondering for more than a half a second, don't post it.

    As it stands, the most effective way in the short term to make people stop and think 'should I?' before they post is hold the threat of an infraction or a ban over their heads. I'm hoping that this bleeds into 'Why shouldn't I?' and the answer to that question will gradually change from 'because I'll be banned', to 'because it's obnoxious and demeaning and it marginalises a big chunk of posters on these forums just because they're female, and this is a community, and nobody should be marginalised within a community because of their gender (or religious persuasion or sexual preference or country of birth or skin colour)'.

    it's a single forum on a discussion forum - fair play for trying to stamp out sexism, a noble goal but i personally think you are going about it in completely the wrong way, in a mind-numbingly predictable, reactionary and counter-productive way but heh i don't particularly care as i know this "battle" is largely cosmetic and of little significance in the real world, maybe it'll boost a few egoes on here or give some people a sense of purpose or a feeling like they're making a difference, and for what little it is worth, getting rid of a few internet trolls, a large proportion of whom are probably thoroughly respecting of women in the real world but choose to act the maggot because they know it riles

    it is however, rather depressing, that so much self-importance and so little insight is being shown in terms of dealing with the problem

    "don't be a dick to women" eh, surely we can all agree on that, let's shorten it "don't be a dick" - i mean are we being sexist if we single them out or sexist if we don't, i don't know what door to walk through to get my cool hat anymore

    how about the problem of defining what dickish behaviour is, assuming there is a set and fixed standard is always wrong, (don't say this, but you can say that if you use exclamation marks and a smilie maybe, initially i wasn't sure about that but you explained in a pm to the mods that you meant it ironically bla bla bla - farcical stuff)

    how about trying, say, to not proport to be able to distinguish between irony and malicious intent on a lean media from a faceless net user

    how about discussing the nature of offense in the virtual realm, the "shouting down" and "belittling" (really - is someone narrowing my text box???) of posters and asking if you are perhaps equating realworld scenarios 100% with what is written on here, at least from the offendee's perspective - let's get real and examine or at least discuss why people behave differently online and why you can't always fix realworld interpretations of where your reaction should lie

    how about the problem of asking why people post this stuff, you know, i'm sure there are people who hate women out there, i've met very few, but it's too convenient and simplistic, i mean to cast them as such satisfies everybody to a degree as the troll gets the righteously indignant reaction s/he seeks and the whistleblower gets some kind of feeling of deluded empowerment and so the cycle is repeated ad infinitum as each sustains the other and nothing is solved - bigger picture is worth looking at

    how about asking what this new "war on internet misogyny" says about your attitudes to women, on the opposite side of the spectrum to the misogynists maybe but still utterly sexist


    ......i could go on and on but it's not worth it, i am completely and totally wrong and in the minority here because i don't regard this as important as many of you do, but at least I am aware of my skewed perspective and acknowledge it, not trapped in some dogmatic "this is the way it is guys and gals" straitjacket

    nobody can make a justifiable case for sexism, that's all you need to know, everything else here and there, the trolling and the reactionary foot-stamping is just noise

    if it makes certain people feel better, go ahead, it changes, almost certainly, nothing


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,658 ✭✭✭✭The Sweeper


    donfers, with all due respect I could address any of your points, but given this is something we're obviously taking quite seriously, and you 'don't particularly care', believe our efforts are 'largely cosmetic' and 'of little significance in the real world', and you've already said you're 'completely and totally wrong and in the minority', I'm not going to take the time.

    I think it's very unfortunate that you believe these efforts have anything whatsoever to do with ego, and that you're insinuating (I think?) that the admins are somehow carrying out a perverse experiment in torturing the poor AH users because they want to feel big about themselves.

    That's not what this is about. However, given you don't care and think you're wrong already, I can only leave your post to stand on its own merits.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,658 ✭✭✭✭The Sweeper


    By the bye, can we have a bit less of the "being a dick" comments? Because if we're talking about language that is inherently sexist ... :D

    That's a whole other thread. :(

    We've had quite an extended discussion on how to change 'dick' to something else all-encompassing, but there just isn't a single word that does the trick. If you have suggestions please do share them - we'd love to hear a rewording that fits.

    'Don't be a dick about women' is an extension of our core site rule - 'don't be a dick'. It's unfortunate that we're where we are at the moment, but it seems to be necessary to add 'about women' to the end of the core rule because it's become a specific problem and there is no balance.

    We thought about 'don't be uncivil' but man you should see the number of DRP fights that zoom in on the word 'uncivil' and posters debate their actions versus the express meaning of 'uncivil'. The closest I could ever think was 'don't be obnoxious' but I'm not quite sure that even captures the full range of unwanted behaviour as well as 'don't be a dick' does.


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,780 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    "Don't be an asshole" would at least have the benefit of gender neutrality, but we'd still have people complaining about us being abusive to them for using the phrase.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,263 ✭✭✭Gongoozler


    I think you should change it to 'Don't be a cunt' for a while - gender equality and all that :D Plus, I think it may have more of an effect since most people agree that it's a harsh sounding word.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Ella


    Gongoozler wrote: »
    I think you should change it to 'Don't be a cunt' for a while - gender equality and all that :D Plus, I think it may have more of an effect since most people agree that it's a harsh sounding word.
    It's too harsh of a word. "Dont be a tit" would be less offensive.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,027 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    "Don't be a dicktit" cover all bases...

    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
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    How about something really simple: don't cause trouble?

    It isn't insulting, offensive, gender-specific and the most people can get upset about is "hey, I didn't cause trouble" and then gets told "well it was causing trouble because of X; nobody is saying you're a bad person or a troublemaker".

    Unless they're a known troll, in which case the phrase "feck off" seems to work :D


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement