Gender issues in After Hours - Your feedback requested.

KeithM89_old

mango salsa wrote: »

I reported this thread today for being blatantly sexist

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056713636

The reason the mod gave for closing it was because of the London Mega Thread. I was annoyed that the moderator who closed the thread did not make any comment about the sexist nature of the thread.

No way that was sexist, it was just a bit of fun. (except maybe post 2)
If there had been a bunch of generalisations or offensive posts, i would have said something. If a thread was started about the male volleyball match i wonder if youd report it too.

Tombi!

mango salsa wrote: »

I actually do think that comments like the ones below are strongly sexist. The comments are derogatory and basically about leering at female athletes.

Yes but... it's not sexist. It's offensive, at best.
Sexism isn't about being a perv (nobody take that the wrong way, I'm not insulting anyone). It's about thinking women are inferior and so on. Slating all Irish women is borderline sexist but still pretty much against the rules for the most part.

You can't honestly think that men being men and talking about women like that is sexist, can you?

I will however agree that the comment, about them sacraficing their boobs could be considered sexist. Personally, I considered it a joke. It'd be like saying about male bodybuilders: they took steroids to sacrafice their testicles.

Poor taste but not sexist at all. If there was a bunch of jokes like that, then yeah, that's messed up and I'd imagine it'd be stated to not turn a thread into stereotypes.

Nodin

mango salsa wrote: »

I actually do think that comments like the ones below are strongly sexist. The comments are derogatory and basically about leering at female athletes.

Men leering at women??????????????? What is the world coming to.... Next you'll have women leering at men.....

Those posts are about 90% lust, as far as I can see. If you have a problem with the inevitable consequence of the beach volleyball clothing rules (it has to be "beachwear"), I think you'd be better off getting onto the authority that governs the sport. Likewise womens tennis and them remarkably short skirts.

Annasopra

KeithM89 wrote: »

No way that was sexist, it was just a bit of fun. (except maybe post 2)
If there had been a bunch of generalisations or offensive posts, i would have said something. If a thread was started about the male volleyball match i wonder if youd report it too.

I would report a post that said - let's get some arse and penis out yes. It's not fun to be leered at and told "get your tits out" - don't give a **** about the sport - I'm just leering at your tits and arse. Where's the "fun"?

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

Yes but... it's not sexist. It's offensive, at best.
Sexism isn't about being a perv (nobody take that the wrong way, I'm not insulting anyone). It's about thinking women are inferior and so on. Slating all Irish women is borderline sexist but still pretty much against the rules for the most part.

You can't honestly think that men being men and talking about women like that is sexist, can you?

I will however agree that the comment, about them sacraficing their boobs could be considered sexist. Personally, I considered it a joke. It'd be like saying about male bodybuilders: they took steroids to sacrafice their testicles.

Poor taste but not sexist at all. If there was a bunch of jokes like that, then yeah, that's messed up and I'd imagine it'd be stated to not turn a thread into stereotypes.

Yes I do believe men talking about women like that is sexist - I think that leering at women and making remarks about tits and arse objectifies women

Where's the joke? - all I see is some comment about getting tits out and a few about arses.

I don't see any humour or fun in the thread at all.

Tombi!

mango salsa wrote: »

Yes I do believe men talking about women like that is sexist - I think that leering at women and making remarks about tits and arse objectifies women

Where's the joke? - all I see is some comment about getting tits out and a few about arses.

I don't see any humour or fun in the thread at all.

But it's not sexist. It's not objectifying them.
It's being a dick with bad sense of humour maybe.

Do you find this thread sexist:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055192287

I'm sure you do. After all, any woman drooling over a man is objectifying them, right?

Nodin

mango salsa wrote: »

Yes I do believe men talking about women like that is sexist - I think that leering at women and making remarks about tits and arse objectifies women

Where's the joke? - all I see is some comment about getting tits out and a few about arses.

I don't see any humour or fun in the thread at all.

Thats your perogative. We're all entitled to our individual opinions. However, this site is not run by your definitions, standards or opinions, and has to cater to a number of other people. You reported the post, whoever saw it disagreed with you, and thats the way it goes.

Annasopra

Nodin wrote: »

Thats your perogative. We're all entitled to our individual opinions. However, this site is not run by your definitions, standards or opinions, and has to cater to a number of other people. You reported the post, whoever saw it disagreed with you, and thats the way it goes.

Fair enough - you asked for some feedback on gender issues and I gave it.

Tombi!

mango salsa wrote: »

Fair enough - you asked for some feedback on gender issues and I gave it.

There's still the a question I'd like answered (well two actually).
How do you feel about these thread: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055192287

And secondly, if that was in AH how would you feel about it?

dr.bollocko

There are always going to be people who think we are too strict. Others will think we are being too lenient. Discussions like this help us figure out the best way to tread that tightrope.

However there are always going to be people who think we are too strict and others who will think we are being too lenient.

Dravokivich

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

There's still the a question I'd like answered (well two actually).
How do you feel about these thread: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055192287

And secondly, if that was in AH how would you feel about it?

Not too sure what your issue is. If you want to play that card, there's also this http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055853138 thread in tGC.

In regards to the sexism issue that's appearent within AH. I'm rather ignorant of it as I honestly don't see much of it myself.

Edit: Should of read back through the thread, I get the context now Brutal Deluxe

g'em

Dravokivich wrote: »

In regards to the sexism issue that's appearent within AH. I'm rather ignorant of it as I honestly don't see much of it myself.

Another day another bullsh*t thread. This time it's Katie Taylor, Ireland's most successful female boxer but in AH it's all about "would you do her?" with horrible references to her appearance and sexuality to follow.

It's so disheartening. Sorry, but is it really that hard to see the sexist undercurrent when these threads pop up with such regularity?

Or is it just 'offensive' that a top-end female athlete is considered horn-fodder?

Dravokivich

g'em wrote: »

Another day another bullsh*t thread. This time it's Katie Taylor, Ireland's most successful female boxer but in AH it's all about "would you do her?" with horrible references to her appearance and sexuality to follow.

It's so disheartening. Sorry, but is it really that hard to see the sexist undercurrent when these threads pop up with such regularity?

Or is it just 'offensive' that a top-end female athlete is considered horn-fodder?

I never said it doesn't exist. I just said I've never seen it on the scale people proclaim it to be.

Regarding that thread, to me it started off with the intention of banter. Sure more guys are more likely to direct such banter towards women. It's been done before with Geogia Salpa/FAS Girl/Hunky Dory girls. There's only a couple of comments in it that implied a negative opinion of her which no one else within AH appeared to agree with. Overall that thread wasn't as bad as it's being made out to seem.

Lawliet

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

But it's not sexist. It's not objectifying them.

I don't think you understand what those terms mean.
Reducing a female to her anatomy is textbook objectification; you're not viewing these women as talented athletics just sexual objects for you to appreciate. And is it sexist because you're enforcing the idea of traditional gender roles; that a woman's function is to look pretty for men. Women drooling over men isn't the same thing, because it's not a manifestation of a larger system that is working against men based on their sex.

g'em

questioning her sexuality? Questioning her gender? That's not as bad as its being made to seem? Come off it Drav. It's anonymous internet warriorism and its beyond me how people find that funny.

I had a springform (or whatever that anonymous questionnaire thing is called) and it lasted two days before I started getting quite upset at the "are you really a man?" "Is your clitoris bigger or smaller than the average penis?" questions. No woman, famous or otherwise, should be subjected to that.

This woman is a national idol for young women in sports. It's every bit as bad as I'm 'making it out' when this is the way she is received on the largest forum on boards.

CodyJarrett

g'em wrote: »

It's so disheartening. Sorry, but is it really that hard to see the sexist undercurrent when these threads pop up with such regularity?

That is not sexist, those users are just idiots.

They'd make the same comments when Tom Cruise or John Travolta is mentioned - if they didn't, then you would have a point but they do (regularly) and so you don't.

On After Hours over the years (off the op of my head): Bono has always been called a midget, Biffo's weight was regularly remarked upon (as was G.Ryans) and conversely also: Tubs lack of it. Dunphy being ugly, Westlife, The Script being all being fags. The rumours on Ronan Keating's sexuality were regularly dragged up and even the circumstances of Stephen Gately's death wasn't seen to be something that couldn't be used to have a go at him and his group. Men not being bright enough to multitask, being lecherous and creeps when drunk, just being able to think with their penises (the list is endless) but men didn't light torches and hit FB - they challenge such nonsense with words (and still do).

Today there is a thread on men with long hair that doesn't make great reading if you happen to have long hair but I can guarantee if that was a thread on women with Short Hair, there would already be some women up in arms and complaining because of users suggesting that short haired women are just lezzers and no doubt it would end up locked and you'd have one of the usual female users in FB sanctimoniously whining and saying the poor mods have to lock threads there because of the bad sexist men on AH but that wouldn't be the bloody case, it would have been locked to shut up the usual whinging suspects who can't roll with the punches of that forum, like we all have to learn to.

In short: Men have always got just as much of a hard time on After Hours over the years, just as women do - men just don't complain as a group and so you wouldn't see it as an attack on men. Women like yourself make a song and dance of those threads when they involve women though and suggest that the comments are only made because of sexism - it's nonsense!

These constant insinuations (and outright accusations it would seem) that sexism is a plague of that forum is untrue and unjustified (always has been). An issue like many others deserving of some attention, sure but it's not anything like the problem that is made to look like it is by a small minority and it doesn't at all reflect well on the mods of that forum over the years either by the way, who have without question gone out of their way to make the forum more welcoming for women.

You have access to the AH Mod forum, which makes these remarks from you all the more incredulous - I suggest you use the search function next time you're there and I appeal to the mods of AH and ask them to not ignore the women that posted earlier at the start of this thread (the ones that said they saw no real evidence that sexism was a big issue going under moderated on the forum) as they count just as much as the element of users that constantly keep bringing this up. The squeaky wheel gets the oil for sure but in this case it would be a damn shame if that particular wheel got any more oil than it already has, as it doesn't need it.

g'em

Women like myself Cody? Interesting. Delve a bit more and explain that one for me.

Dravokivich

G'em, there's only 3 posts at most that do such within that thread. And if anything, others within AH ripped into them for doing such. So where's the problem with AH? The majority seemed quite clearly not to endorse that attitude carried by those 3 posts. If the majority are visibly against it, I can't see where the problem is with it in AH. Some stupid commentary from a very small subset of users is not representative of AH overall.

g'em

Sorry Drav, I should have explained better. I think the Mods of AH do a Stirling job. It's the toughest gig on boards and they carry it out with aplomb. I'm just saying that the crappy stuff happens more often than people think. I get the impression that Cody thinks I'm on a one woman mission to destroy AH or something, that's not the case. I'm saying that from my point of view its disheartening that there are still morons who find that funny.

Micky Dolenz

Not sure if I should thank your post.

What does aplomb mean?

Morag

dr.bollocko wrote: »

Discussions like this help us figure out the best way to tread that tightrope.

Hard to have that discussion or take part in it when posting means you get dismissed as being over sensitive/hysterical and the very thing which is meant to be discussed is denied to exist or be an issue.

Yitzhak Rabin

Sharrow wrote: »

Hard to have that discussion or take part in it when posting means you get dismissed as being over sensitive/hysterical and the very thing which is meant to be discussed is denied to exist or be an issue.

Are you not free to discuss it here?

Do you want a discussion where no one disagrees with you or something?

dr.bollocko

Sharrow wrote: »

Hard to have that discussion or take part in it when posting means you get dismissed as being over sensitive/hysterical and the very thing which is meant to be discussed is denied to exist or be an issue.

This is part of the reason why I wanted to post this in feedback where we can have a more two-sided discussion but I do take your point.

This thread is not the only game in town with relation to our take on this though.

Tombi!

Lawliet wrote: »

I don't think you understand what those terms mean.
Reducing a female to her anatomy is textbook objectification; you're not viewing these women as talented athletics just sexual objects for you to appreciate. And is it sexist because you're enforcing the idea of traditional gender roles; that a woman's function is to look pretty for men. Women drooling over men isn't the same thing, because it's not a manifestation of a larger system that is working against men based on their sex.

And what about the thread in tLL? Within a few pages you have women there mentioning Chabal (which I can understand why) and acting as though he's some... ape or robot that's there for their amusement.

It's the exact same thing.
Now if the thread(s) in AH did turn into a "women should be pretty for men" or "all women are good for is the kitchen/sex/etc", sure that's sexist.
But men drooling over women's bits or women drooling over what a largely built, caveman-looking man should do to them in the bedroom is both objectifying.

If you want sexism banned fully, it has to be for both genders. Otherwise you're being sexist against men.

Besides, the point is really to find the line that we're not to cross. If you can't leer at a man (or woman) in AH then you've gone from "stopping sexism" to "stopping free speech and kill AH". Yes, I know Boards is private.

But come on, women have boobs, the women were in beach attire.

The f**k am I not going to notice that.
Just like (from my women friends) wouldn't notice the largely built ment running around in tight tops and shorts.

You can't surely want to ban any comment that can be considered "offensive".

K-9

The Katie Taylor looks like trolling and attention seeking tbh, which they got.

Madam_X

It's totally disingenuous to say men get just as hard a time as women do on AH.

Good bit of "I don't see it so therefore it doesn't exist" on this thread.

Nothing wrong IMO though with commenting on women's appearance when they are posing, making money from their appearance etc (e.g. Salpa) but it's tacky on its own in relation to sports-women, especially sports-women who aren't interested in looking sexy (volleyball-playing women probably are in fairness). I don't see a problem with a bit of it accompanying a discussion re her sporting prowess though.

Morag

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

And what about the thread in tLL?

What about it?
This thread is about AH.

Tombi!

Sharrow wrote: »

What about it?
This thread is about AH.

AH has the most lax rules generally speaking.
If tGC and tLL can have threads about the opposite sex (and in fairness, tLL allows some pretty offensive comments, IMO) why shouldn't AH?

Morag

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

AH has the most lax rules generally speaking.
If tGC and tLL can have threads about the opposite sex (and in fairness, tLL allows some pretty offensive comments, IMO) why shouldn't AH?

While all forums have the same site rules they do not all have the exact same rules, so you can't expect parity across them all.

The remit of the tGC and tLL is to host discussion for each gender.
AH is a general forum and neither gender should be made feel unwelcome there.

dr.bollocko

I don't want anyone to feel like there is no point in saying something because they'll just get shouted down.

The gap between where we should be and where we currently are is something that has changed significantly in the past few years. However that's not to say we are fundamentally happy with this aspect of after hours or are resting on any laurels.

This is us as AH mods saying we do think things can be improved and we need more help from people to go about making improvements.

The task of trying to turn any feedback here or from previous discussions / reported posts / mods forum chats into a manifesto of any use is a large one on this issue. If anyone has any input they would prefer to go via PM than in here let me know and I will pop it in our mods forum for further review.

Tombi!

Sharrow wrote: »

While all forums have the same site rules they do not all have the exact same rules, so you can't expect parity across them all.

The remit of the tGC and tLL is to host discussion for each gender.
AH is a general forum and neither gender should be made feel unwelcome there.

So do you really think that we shouldn't ever discuss males/females appearance/attractiveness at all on AH?

Because that's honestly what I think you're trying to say.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056714496

How about that thread? Women treating men like objects there.
Is that okay? Or would you have that banned also?

I mean honestly, if you thought the thread about the volleyball team was sexist, then surely that thread should be closed?

I get why both threads (volleyball and the long hair one) are offensive.
I don't think they should be banned, though.