Feedback requested "...bitch..."

g'em

nipplenuts wrote: »

Girls have an odd relationship with that word. They'd prefer to be called kuntz!

Necessary to the thread how? Or is that 'humour'? Or are you trying to show that women are somehow over-reacting when branded with derogatory slur? The acceptance of that kind of shite in these threads is what makes it hard to have an adult converstaion.

nipplenuts wrote:

But you know, these things are only offensive and degoratory if you allow them to be. In the thread title there is no personal attack, so it is not of itself offensive.

So should we adopt a policy of "say what you like - if someone finds it offensive that's their problem!". the absence of a personal attack makes it no less offensive. I don't see the title as offensive towards me as an individual, I think it's a derogatory way to speak to any person and crosses the line. Again, even AH has to have boundaries.

nipplenuts wrote:

If you feel offended by the word in its context used, you must spend every day mortified.

No-one tells me to "Swallow, bitch" on a day-to-day basis so why would I be mortified?

WindSock

It's not that the term Bitch was used, it's the fact that it is used as a directive in the title - Swallow Bitch.

To be told what to do followed by 'Bitch' in a sexual act is fairly degrading alright.

All about context....

Tigger

there are few enought regular female posters in ah indeed on boards

the thread could have easily been called swallow its for yer own good

also men can get breast cancer

kaimera

WindSock wrote: »

It's not that the term Bitch was used, it's the fact that it is used as a directive in the title - Swallow Bitch.

To be told what to do followed by 'Bitch' in a sexual act is fairly degrading alright.

All about context....

and if bitch was swapped for 'babe' or 'darling' or anything else is that not the exact same thing??

Ponster

kaimera wrote: »

and if bitch was swapped for 'babe' or 'darling' or anything else is that not the exact same thing??

IMHO, no, it's far from being the same thing.

Dragan

Have we had any input from the OP of the thread, or how he feels about being branded a sexist wanker ( thats my own take on it from the opinions expressed as to why it might be offensive ) despite having a decent post history and never showing any wankery or sexist tendencies up to now? ( that i have seen ).

Or is the source of the title not important in context of the issue?

At the end of the day, to call something offensive you need to imply that someone was an offender.

I seriously doubt the OP in this case meant anything offensive or derogatory and for me, that is a key part of the issue.

kaimera

Ponster wrote: »

IMHO, no, it's far from being the same thing.

why?

is it not condescending and degrading in the same context?

Ponster

Dragan wrote: »

Have we had any input from the OP of the thread, or how he feels about being branded a sexist wanker...

I don't think he's been branded a "sexist wanker" yet, but the choice of title did maybe give an insight into the OP's mind.


This is the 3rd time that this chain-email urban legend has been posted on boards.

The first 2 times (from 2004!) the thread titles were the following :


Interesting New Research

Women - Read this immediately!


Had the OP picked one of the 2 thread titles this feedback thread would never have been created I think.

Mr. Presentable

g'em wrote: »

.

So should we adopt a policy of "say what you like - if someone finds it offensive that's their problem!". the absence of a personal attack makes it no less offensive. I don't see the title as offensive towards me as an individual, I think it's a derogatory way to speak to any person and crosses the line.

Not what I'm saying at all. Maybe I'm not explaining myself too well

What I am saying is that if I call you xxxx and you are mortally offended, I'll use it next time I want to offend. If you don't react, I won't. Disarm the word, if you will.

For what it's worth, I found the thread title deliberately provocative and unnecessary. But I can't think of a word that would offend me just by its presence.

Einstein

I personally think, and flame if u want, but if somebody else, who had no real history etc on Boards had posted that thread & title, they would have probably been given a warning along with having the title edited, without asking anybody what they think (i.e. this thread)

The title doesnt shock me, I just didnt expect to see it tbh!

Dragan

nipplenuts wrote: »

For what it's worth, I found the thread title deliberately provocative and unnecessary. But I can't think of a word that would offend me just by its presence.

Lots of thread titles are deliberately provacative. As i said, this could set a very interesting precedent and would require more than a few thread titles to be changed in the future, and possibly retrospectively.

javaboy

The title of this thread offends me greatly. It has no place in Feedback. I'd expect filth like this in AH maybe but I nearly swallowed my false teeth when I saw this profanity in Feedback. For shame OP.

Dinter

I wasn't shocked by the title but when I saw it I didn't bother reading the thread at all because I figured it would be fairly inane.

It's the equivalent of tabloid headlines, loud, brash, juvenile and purposefully offensive to ensure nobody notices the lack of substance or even importance of the content. I don't bother reading tabloids hence don't bother reading their electronic counterparts.

I can see why the subject matter would be in AH but the whole title thing reeks of childish mysogyny.

John Mason

this is a really lame thread

i dont see the difference between "would you go to Peru to eat pussy" and "swallow bitch".

they are both rather crude but completely inoffensive to me.


I wonder if the "swallow bitch" thread had been start by a member of the female species, would this thread have ever been started?

Dragan

Thaedydal wrote: »

I followed what is boards policy and reported the post.

Okay Thae, please don't take this personally as it is simply a point i am making, but you did, in a way, NOT follow boards policy.

You saw a thread title that offended you and yes, you reported it. Then you took the subject that you felt had offended you and started a thread about it in another forum, with a relatively targetted audience and appeal about the dialogue in porn and how it affects us.

Then you mentioned within that thread the AH thread that started off the thoughts. In a way, you drummed up a small campaign about this, rather than reporting it and seeing it fly off into the ether to be acted upon or not as other users do.

I'm very sorry, but i am just seeing a double standard here. You were offended, you reported. If other people are offended, you say they should report it.

Should they then start discussion about it in a Forum where it doesn't belong, selling the idea to a limited portion of boards that may be considered to be a bit biased in its view?

Genuine question and as i said, not attacking you. This is just how i see this having gone.

Also, i find you reference to entering "pussy" into the swear filter as pointless. You have not asked for "bitch" to be entered into the swear filter ( that i am aware of ).

Beruthiel

The poll set up in this thread means diddly squat due to the fact that approx 90% of posters on this site are still men.

I'm not shocked by the thread title, it's AH, you expect nothing less then childish, crass, inane stupidity from most of the people who post there.

The kind of person who posts stuff like that probably wouldn't know what to do with a real live woman, let alone speak to her.

Pighead

Beruthiel wrote: »

The kind of person who posts stuff like that probably wouldn't know what to do with a real live woman, let alone speak to her.

Pighead didn't have a single post in that thread.;)

Beruthiel

Pighead wrote: »

Pighead didn't have a single post in that thread.;)

Well done Piggie, you drag the IQ of AH into the double figures. Top Marks

Earthhorse

Overheal wrote: »

joking aside Im flabberghasted that some people (especially ones who know me (especially from my PI posts)) would think I was trying to be misogynistic.

I don't think anyone thinks that, that that was your intention. The title was in bad taste and probably misogynist. That doesn't mean you're misogynistic.

People say sexist and racist things in their lives; it doesn't mean they're racist or sexist.

Dragan wrote: »

Have we had any input from the OP of the thread, or how he feels about being branded a sexist wanker ( thats my own take on it from the opinions expressed as to why it might be offensive ) despite having a decent post history and never showing any wankery or sexist tendencies up to now? ( that i have seen ).

See above. I think you're overreacting. Nobody is branding him in the manner you're suggesting.

Dragan wrote: »

Or is the source of the title not important in context of the issue?

Not really. Why should it be?

Dragan wrote: »

At the end of the day, to call something offensive you need to imply that someone was an offender.

Well you need to imply that what they did was offensive but you can also accept that it was unintentionally so.

Dragan wrote: »

I seriously doubt the OP in this case meant anything offensive or derogatory and for me, that is a key part of the issue.

As do I and he hasn't been infracted or banned for this so far as I know. His thread has not been locked. He's had one word removed from a thread title. He edited his first post out of choice.

Dragan wrote: »

Lots of thread titles are deliberately provacative. As i said, this could set a very interesting precedent and would require more than a few thread titles to be changed in the future, and possibly retrospectively.

This isn't a court of law. This doesn't really set any precedent at all. Thread titles have been edited before and they'll be edited again. I really think you're making this into a bigger issue than it is. AH is strong enough to survive one deletion of the word "bitch".

pink fluffy bunny wrote: »

I wonder if the "swallow bitch" thread had been start by a member of the female species, would this thread have ever been started?

Doubt it would have made a blind bit of difference.

seamus

For the record, the thread title isn't even remotely in the realms of misogyny. Look it up in a dictionary.

It's sexist at a push.

faceman

Personally i avoid any sexually related thread in AH as it all boils down to which one of the male posters can come up with the wittiest one liner or say how massive they are in the sack etc and reminds us how nerdy the internet can be.

I didnt see the original thread before it was edited so i cant comment on it. I would however how issue with the thread in its current state, as its now just a smart title and an article with the OP offering no narrative on the article. Note i find Overheal on boards to be a decent skin so Im not having a pop at him at all.

I dont always subscribe to the "report post or it doesnt count" line that is often bandied around. Sometimes it shouldnt take a post being reported to highlight that something may be amiss nor does the volume of reported posts always indicate the gravity of an issue with a thread or post.

Did i find the thread and content offensive? No. Does that mean that thoes who did find it offensive are wrong? Of course not.

AH is AH thats all well and good. But AH is not the Thunderdome, TCN or BGRH and hopefully never will be!

Dinter

kaimera wrote: »

and if bitch was swapped for 'babe' or 'darling' or anything else is that not the exact same thing??

Well tbh "swallow darling, it's for your own good" sounds like someone trying to get someone they love to, I dunno, take distasteful medicine or something. Or a person in an equal couple making playful use of an article they'd read in the paper about swallowing semen for your health.

However "swallow bitch" conjures an image of a woman huddled, crying on the ground with a man stood over her with his hand raised after driving a meaty kick into her side as punishment for her temerity in refusing.

Not quite the same image at all really.

Crash

Thread title: probably mildly offensive, i'll give it that.

However, I read more ignorant, xenophobic, racist, offensive things in half the given threads on AH - that thread title doesn't even come close.

Dinter

seamus wrote: »

For the record, the thread title isn't even remotely in the realms of misogyny. Look it up in a dictionary.

It's sexist at a push.

So bitch as a term doesn't show hatred or contempt for women then no?

seamus

No.

Misogyny is an overall hatred or mistrust of women. Hating one woman or even one hundred women doesn't make one a misogynist. The word "bitch" is generally directed at an individual, therefore isn't misogynistic.

The word "bitch" doesn't even necessarily confer hatred.

Being sexist and being misogynistic aren't the same thing. There are plenty of men who feel that women are inferior, but that doesn't make them misogynistic, it makes them sexist.

Kold

Beruthiel wrote: »

The kind of person who posts stuff like that probably wouldn't know what to do with a real live woman, let alone speak to her.

I'm sorry but is this not an attack on the OP? Completely unfounded. It's like me saying the type of person who would report the thread title is slightly homely and overcompensates by demanding respect for every facet of their existence at every open opportunity.

Nevyn

If I should have used the word Cat in context with the thread I started in AH to avoid offending people then fair enough I will take that on board. If any one found it offensive I hope that they would have reported the post and asked for the thread title to be changed or pmed me and asked and I would have.

Dragan

Dinter wrote: »

So bitch as a term doesn't show hatred or contempt for women then no?

No, it doesn't. This would imply that any usage of the term "bitch" would be aiming to do that, irregardless of context.

As many people have already pointed out, it's all about context.

Hell, my girlfriend called me "bitch" the other as we were joking, i seriously doubt she hates or feels contempt for women.

Or is it different when a dude says it?

Because, frankly, that would be sexist.

Kold

Thaedydal wrote: »

If I should have used the word Cat in context with the thread I started in AH to avoid offending people then fair enough I will take that on board. If any one found it offensive I hope that they would have reported the post and asked for the thread title to be changed or pmed me and asked and I would have.

Well that's b*llocks really because all this will lead to is reporting left, right and centre for trivial crap. Just take the thread title with a pinch of salt, no one is calling any individual member a b*tch so put down your flaming torches.

CuLT

Everyone's a little bit sexist
Sometimes.
Doesn't mean we go
Around committing sex crimes.
Look around and you will find
No one's really gender blind.
Maybe it's a fact
We all should face
Everyone makes judgments
Based on sex
If we all could just admit
That we are sexist a little bit,
And everyone stopped being
So PC
Maybe we could live in -
Harmony!~

Shamelessly adapted from Avenue Q