Advertisement
Boards Golf Society are looking for new members for 2022...read about the society and their planned outings here!
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards

Discussion on sexism

189101214

Comments



  • anewme wrote: »
    The concerns raised were from women.

    They are allowed to raise concerns if they believe warranted. That was the point of TLL Lounge thread.

    The tone of your posts here in a feedback thread indicate that yes, the concerns are totally valid.

    The language, style, choice of words, tone are constantly over agressive un necessary and hostile. Is it any wonder people wont post?

    Now, at this point, I am officially requesting that you direct further feedback that you have to the Mods.

    Given the tone of your posts last night, I really don’t think you can call someone out on being aggressive and hostile, do you??




  • Given the tone of your posts last night, I really don’t think you can call someone out on being aggressive and hostile, do you??

    Well personally seeming aggressive was not my intent. I'm rarely, if ever pissed off when posting, but it can look that way. I edited but not quick enough.

    Tis a strange one though, only women seem unable to post at times because posts can seem aggressive and hostile (which will happen in robust discussion). Yet, we have women who post relatively regularly in the forum anyway.

    So maybe the issue is not CA, but the lack of confidence of those who refuse to post.




  • anewme wrote: »

    The language, style, choice of words, tone are constantly over agressive un necessary and hostile. Is it any wonder people wont post?

    This paragraph that you’ve written above is exactly how you treated me, a woman, in this thread.

    I offered my feedback to the mods and admins in my first post. Just one sentence to say as a woman I wasn’t offended. You then questioned me on it and I replied why I did not consider it sexist.

    Then yourself and pwurple proceeded to talk about women like me being the problem rather than the person who made the post. You wrote about women like me needing an education. I was following the thread the entire time but I couldn’t post as you were looking down your nose at me trying to make me, a woman, feel unworthy of an opinion in your eyes.

    It was only when you decided to make a large post putting my two quotes at the top of it that I felt angry and responded. I did not put you down though, I told you to leave me alone.

    With regards to myself, you cannot claim some high ground about women being set upon as it is exactly what you had done to me.




  • anewme wrote: »
    If ...indicates you would be able or qualified.

    Previous point applies.

    Dont even try.

    Any place, any time.

    So this isn't agressive or hostile?

    Maybe stop digging :pac:


    You have some bizzare anewme vs "group" mentality that seems to actually has very little to do with sexism. You yourself didn't exactly treat women well (look above at Strawberry Milkshake post and how you turned on her)

    Its actually anyone who disagree's with you that gets into your crosshairs and attacked. Anyone disagreeing with you is automatically against you. Like how you kept claiming no one but you had an issue with the lasagne comment.




  • pwurple wrote: »
    It wasn’t towards you, that comment should have been before the quote.

    Is that your only response to the content of my post? The rest was too uncomfortable?


    You know, boards doesn’t exist in a parallel universe here. We have responsibilities to our community outside this bubble.


    Days after I raised an issue about the stream of comments describing women’s bodies in running clothes in highly sexualised and degrading ways, a woman jogging in Dublin was attacked. I will remind others that you don’t even have to log in to read the material being posted here.

    Graham Dwyer was a member here though iirc.


    Of all nations , we Irish have it branded on our memories what happens when we sweep sexualised abuse towards anyone under the carpet. Decades of it being ignored, erased from records, people silently reproached and moved on with no policy, no guidance on how to handle it. Discretion was the order of the day.


    Who amoung us these days still thinks that is a good idea? Because we have a history and a culture of handling any sexual abuses this way. Repeating these mistakes. Sticking heads in the sand and pretending it doesn’t exist.


    Openness, transparency and having a clear policy on sexualised abuse is, these days, understood to be best practice.


    Let’s see what boards can improve.

    Pwurple, there already IS a clear policy on abuse, of ALL kinds, not just sexualised abuse, on this site. The policy is report the post, let the mods deal with it.

    Pawwed Rig alluded to it yesterday, where there is a contentious issue, the mods come together and achieve consensus.

    Not one person here is saying that there isn't sexism on the various forums here, some forums more so than others. I'd say that most of us here would see a comment you reported for being sexist as the same, and something to be dealt with. No one here is disagreeing with you on that. What most of us are saying is that what we have in place works. You want a clearly defined policy, one that limits mod/admin options.


  • Advertisement


  • anewme wrote: »
    Its not about this thread only.

    Its about the thread in the Ladies Lounge where people are afraid to post for the exact pile on here.

    It's about the Ladies Fashions thread, talk about Camel toes and which are good or bad, and women being described as pigs who should not be out in public. It's about all of it.

    This is a feedback thread, it should not be used to pile on or bully posters and talk over them and about them as if they are not there.

    I think you may be seeing things that aren’t there and projecting




  • Given the tone of your posts last night, I really don’t think you can call someone out on being aggressive and hostile, do you??
    No. Why ignore them when you can engage them in debate and counter argument. If everyone was ignoring anewme and pwurple then this thread would be them telling the mods and admins about their issues with the Dubai 2 thread in particular and isms in general without anyone else saying, ehhh no.

    Now again here, I will ask that you address further feedback to the Mods, if that's ok with you.

    The post above, indicates that the use of 'them' was not generalised whatsoever and was directed at two posters only.

    Despite numerous times saying that this thread is also about previous thread in the Ladies Lounge and the Ladies Fashion thread, you claim that there is no sexism, but later claim not to have read the threads referred to. So you are disputing something that you havent actually read. Thsts not in the spirit of feedback and I'd ask Mods/Admin to consider this as well.




  • anewme wrote: »
    Now again here, I will ask that you address further feedback to the Mods, if that's ok with you.

    The post above, indicates that the use of 'them' was not generalised whatsoever and was directed at two posters only.

    Despite numerous times saying that this thread is also about previous thread in the Ladies Lounge and the Ladies Fashion thread, you claim that there is no sexism, but later claim not to have read the threads referred to. So you are disputing something that you havent actually read. Thsts not in the spirit of feedback and I'd ask Mods/Admin to consider this as well.

    Ok find a post where I have said there is no sexism.




  • pwurple wrote: »
    It wasn’t towards you, that comment should have been before the quote.

    Is that your only response to the content of my post? The rest was too uncomfortable?

    Well if the post wasn't directed towards me?
    I'm confused as to why my post wasn't just quoted?
    But snipped to present a specific sentence?
    But these things can happen during a discussion?
    I'm glad you mentioned comfort, it's a discussion with the aim of as you are so fond of "education".
    If I'm not uncomfortable, am I being appropriately challenged?
    If I am not being challenged? Am I even learning? Is anyone if there is no challenge?

    But to allay your worries, I am perfectly comfortable and even a little rested.
    pwurple wrote: »
    You know, boards doesn’t exist in a parallel universe here. We have responsibilities to our community outside this bubble.


    Days after I raised an issue about the stream of comments describing women’s bodies in running clothes in highly sexualised and degrading ways, a woman jogging in Dublin was attacked. I will remind others that you don’t even have to log in to read the material being posted here.

    Graham Dwyer was a member here though iirc.

    So you reported people sexualising and degrading women and then there was an attack.
    An unfortunate attack, that I hope the victim recovers from and that the assailant is brought to justice quickly for.
    I strongly doubt that any of the mods, admins or staff will appreciate your effort to paint them as vicariously complicit in that attack, or in Graham Dwyer's crimes.

    But that's the epitome of coincidence.
    Boards isn't normalising sexual assault. The mods are walking a line between facilitating discussion and recognising when action on posts/posters needs to be taken.
    The flexibility the don't be a dick rule allows in that response offers a far better chance of dealing with offensive posters than is currently afforded by the law.
    Laws and proscriptions are what have our sexual assault conviction rate in the sorry state it is.
    When rules lawyering becomes the norm, success is judged by acquittal and not conviction.

    Then you rather heavily imply that as Graham Dwyer was a prior member that boards users are predators.
    When an argument, no matter how well intentioned descends to hyperbole of this particular level, it becomes hard to lend it the credence the subject deserves.

    pwurple wrote: »
    Of all nations , we Irish have it branded on our memories what happens when we sweep sexualised abuse towards anyone under the carpet. Decades of it being ignored, erased from records, people silently reproached and moved on with no policy, no guidance on how to handle it. Discretion was the order of the day.


    Who amoung us these days still thinks that is a good idea? Because we have a history and a culture of handling any sexual abuses this way. Repeating these mistakes. Sticking heads in the sand and pretending it doesn’t exist.


    Openness, transparency and having a clear policy on sexualised abuse is, these days, understood to be best practice.

    Let’s see what boards can improve.

    Laying this at the feet of boards staff as a policy failure really defeats the entire theme of community IMO.
    The best communities online are a balance of norms and mores.
    Thankfully those social conventions evolve over time and I'd hope that societal and institutional silence toward abuse never recurs.

    There is always scope for improvement in moderation but as I have outlined earlier the egregious posts are actioned, the mods currently have scope to be quite flexible.

    But for sake of providing the admin staff a good view of best practice?
    What community forum has a complete and coherent policy that you feel could offer a model for boards?
    What are its highpoints, and how could boards make it better?
    Have you forwarded your preferred policy or made definitive policy suggestions to the admin team on what/where the line is?
    On how those transgressing your proposed lines be actioned?
    Further, can that particular policy be adopted by boards without unduly limiting the level of discourse or placing an onerous burden on mods and staff?

    I've already outlined multiple times why I believe that challenging troublesome posts and posters is important.
    Comparing me or any other boards member to a murderer only reinforces my point tbh.
    It's needless hyperbole.




  • pwurple wrote: »
    It wasn’t towards you, that comment should have been before the quote.

    Is that your only response to the content of my post? The rest was too uncomfortable?


    You know, boards doesn’t exist in a parallel universe here. We have responsibilities to our community outside this bubble.


    Days after I raised an issue about the stream of comments describing women’s bodies in running clothes in highly sexualised and degrading ways, a woman jogging in Dublin was attacked. I will remind others that you don’t even have to log in to read the material being posted here.

    Graham Dwyer was a member here though iirc.


    Of all nations , we Irish have it branded on our memories what happens when we sweep sexualised abuse towards anyone under the carpet. Decades of it being ignored, erased from records, people silently reproached and moved on with no policy, no guidance on how to handle it. Discretion was the order of the day.


    Who amoung us these days still thinks that is a good idea? Because we have a history and a culture of handling any sexual abuses this way. Repeating these mistakes. Sticking heads in the sand and pretending it doesn’t exist.


    Openness, transparency and having a clear policy on sexualised abuse is, these days, understood to be best practice.


    Let’s see what boards can improve.

    Are you suggesting Boards radicalized Dywer and that's how he became a murderer?

    Are you suggesting whoever attacked the girl in coolock was emboldened by what they read here?

    Women were attacked long before Boards , long before the internet long before tv etc it's not a new concept.

    Everyone agrees that there are problems, but the problems are caused by a minority.

    I genuinely can't understand why someone would stay in any thread and report 21 posts within it.

    Like everyone I've seen a subject on the front page I'm interested in, go in, see posts that are in bad taste come back out and get on with my day.....I'll often return later to see the same thread with "mod warning" in the title , more often than not a fairly unambiguous warning is put in the OP, if the first wave of posters really went to town on it, a list of thread banned posters will also be there.

    I think this approach works fairly well.

    I report posts but I do so very rarely, I would hope this works in my favour in so far as a mod will see a report from me and think " oh pc that's unusual , I'll take a peek now and see what's about" rather than "oh pc what the F is annoying her today, feck it I'm having my dinner first"

    Mods are volunteers , have full time jobs on the side :) , I think some people view the site as if it were a "work" intranet site that can impose fairly rigid standards. Even if there was an appetite for rigid standards there are not enough moderators to patrol 24/7 it would really be overkill for the minority of problem posters.


  • Advertisement


  • banie01 wrote: »
    Well if the post wasn't directed towards me?
    I'm confused as to why my post wasn't just quoted?

    Maybe it was because I was posting on my phone. :cool:
    Ironically enough, that point would be just as pertinent if you turned it towards yourself.
    I'll quote this though, as it's another good example of something interesting. :)

    For context, this was about vocal minorities. Now, women are not a minority, nor are we vocal ENOUGH. But here, I'm being accused of being TOO vocal it seems.

    I assume you know that being too talkative is another jibe commonly thrown at women to shut us down. In conversations where we are not the largest contributors, we are told to shut up ALL. THE. TIME. Let the men talk. Not told to shut up for rule breaking, just for existing, for speaking up.

    I think i've been told to "stop it" here a couple of times now, including by an admin, and even as OP I've contributed fewer words than most.

    Interesting one eh?




  • anewme wrote: »
    Really? You dont see the stream of posts alleging power trips, or perpetually offended, or being ridiculed as being in the spirit of genuine discussion surely?

    Something I see is multiple posts accusing people of bullying and piling on. To brand people as bullies and as part of some sort of hive minded group because they might happen to disagree with your pov, is that genuine discussion? Sometimes you’re just on the minority side of opinion and that’s how it is.




  • pwurple wrote: »
    I assume you know that being too talkative is another jibe commonly thrown at women to shut us down. In conversations where we are not the largest contributors, we are told to shut up ALL. THE. TIME. Let the men talk. Not told to shut up for rule breaking, just for existing, for speaking up.

    Funny, I don’t mix in circles like that because the majority of my colleagues and friends wouldn’t stand for it. Also, my boss is a woman so I probably wouldn’t be well served telling her to shut up.
    pwurple wrote: »

    I think i've been told to "stop it" here a couple of times now, including by an admin, and even as OP I've contributed fewer words than most.

    Interesting one eh?

    Ever consider that’s on the merit of your attitude or posting style and not what genitalia you have? Just a thought.

    PS I would hardly know what sex posters are on here unless it’s on a chatty thread or where their username might be a give away. Never knew Strawberry Milkshake or Leg End Reject were ladies until this thread actually...




  • pwurple wrote: »
    Maybe it was because I was posting on my phone. :cool:


    I'll quote this though, as it's another good example of something interesting. :)

    For context, this was about vocal minorities. Now, women are not a minority, nor are we vocal ENOUGH. But here, I'm being accused of being TOO vocal it seems.

    I assume you know that being too talkative is another jibe commonly thrown at women to shut us down. In conversations where we are not the largest contributors, we are told to shut up ALL. THE. TIME. Let the men talk. Not told to shut up for rule breaking, just for existing, for speaking up.

    I think i've been told to "stop it" here a couple of times now, including by an admin, and even as OP I've contributed fewer words than most.

    Interesting one eh?

    If I was to take a leaf out of your book.
    Now is when I'd ask why you ignored the rest of my comment?
    Was it too uncomfortable?

    But I'd like to think that in a feedback thread at least, that such juvenile pettiness is not my style(in life, not so much).
    Interesting aswell that a remark turned towards advising self reflection, that is a direct quote from you.
    Is me telling a vocal minority to shut up?
    Is that what you meant when you made the original comment?
    Should the men just shut up?

    Have I asked you to be quiet? Told you to shut up?
    Have I done anything rather than engage in discussion?
    Because if I have, I'd love an example to allow me address it.

    Noone other than you and anewme is assigning gender to a perceived minority in this discussion.
    One of the things I quite like about boards tbh is that in many of the discussions I have on here, they are in the main gender blind unless someone discloses their gender or if I have prior knowledge of theirs.

    It's one of the absolute strengths of online semi-anonymous fora.
    I do however find it interesting how often gender is fallen back on as a defence for beliefs both actual and assigned rather than discussed blind.




  • Are you suggesting Boards radicalized Dywer and that's how he became a murderer?
    No
    Are you suggesting whoever attacked the girl in coolock was emboldened by what they read here?
    No
    Women were attacked long before Boards , long before the internet long before tv etc it's not a new concept.
    No
    I genuinely can't understand why someone would stay in any thread and report 21 posts within it.
    Me neither
    I report posts but I do so very rarely, I would hope this works in my favour in so far as a mod will see a report from me and think " oh pc that's unusual , I'll take a peek now and see what's about" rather than "oh pc what the F is annoying her today, feck it I'm having my dinner first"
    Fascinating. You know what though, not everyone is the same. Some people get fed up after a year of seeing a situation deteriorate and say something.
    I think some people view the site as if it were a "work" intranet site that can impose fairly rigid standards.
    Nope.

    But I disagree with you. Having a fairly straightforward policy or standard on how to deal with it would cut the crap down tenfold.




  • banie01 wrote: »
    But for sake of providing the admin staff a good view of best practice?
    What community forum has a complete and coherent policy that you feel could offer a model for boards?
    What are its highpoints, and how could boards make it better?
    Have you forwarded your preferred policy or made definitive policy suggestions to the admin team on what/where the line is?
    On how those transgressing your proposed lines be actioned?
    Further, can that particular policy be adopted by boards without unduly limiting the level of discourse or placing an onerous burden on mods and staff?

    I've already done that earlier in the thread. You probably didn't read it. It's been buried in this swamp.




  • This paragraph that you’ve written above is exactly how you treated me, a woman, in this thread.

    I offered my feedback to the mods and admins in my first post. Just one sentence to say as a woman I wasn’t offended. You then questioned me on it and I replied why I did not consider it sexist.

    Then yourself and pwurple proceeded to talk about women like me being the problem rather than the person who made the post. You wrote about women like me needing an education. I was following the thread the entire time but I couldn’t post as you were looking down your nose at me trying to make me, a woman, feel unworthy of an opinion in your eyes.

    It was only when you decided to make a large post putting my two quotes at the top of it that I felt angry and responded. I did not put you down though, I told you to leave me alone.

    With regards to myself, you cannot claim some high ground about women being set upon as it is exactly what you had done to me.

    You are not keeping to the facts at all here.

    I quoted your posts as people were asking who was ok with or condoning the vile post. You said you were ok with the post, so why would you have an issue with your posts confirming that?

    because:

    QUOTE=Strawberry Milkshake;116789018]I see that comment as talking about 2 people who are scamming a system that’s there to help those who have nothing. I don’t see it as a comment against all women.[/QUOTE]

    QUOTE=Strawberry Milkshake;116792599]Because I am the same sex as those 2 chancers I should feel offended at the insults they received?
    Jog on and find someone else to educate.[/QUOTE]

    You wrote about women like me needing an education

    There is no reference at all to 'women like you" needing an education anywhere.

    There is no insult to you personally either.

    I put it to you then as I do now that the comment was vile and misogynistic and part of the problem on boards.

    Because someone is a 'Chancer' by your terms, there should not be open season to insult them, degrade them in the way that vile comment did referring their genetalia.

    No where was I rude to you, put you down, or call you a troll, perpetually offended or anything in that vein.




  • pwurple wrote: »
    I've already done that earlier in the thread. You probably didn't read it. It's been buried in this swamp.

    I'll take a read through, and sorry I missed it :)




  • Graham Dwyer ate rice krispies

    I hope Kellogg's have submitted to pwurple's policy demands as to how they run their affairs going forward

    If not, they're sexist.




  • Really just the worst kind of legitimacy grab attempt- pick something terrible, hoist anyone you disagree with up to it with staggeringly cheap and lazy rhetoric, demand absolute adherence to your own wishes.

    Play the victim as soon as anyone protests!

    Very, very hard to take that kind of hyperbole seriously- and we should all be glad the mods and admins haven't done so thus far.


  • Advertisement


  • pwurple wrote: »
    Maybe it was because I was posting on my phone. :cool:


    I'll quote this though, as it's another good example of something interesting. :)

    For context, this was about vocal minorities. Now, women are not a minority, nor are we vocal ENOUGH. But here, I'm being accused of being TOO vocal it seems.

    I assume you know that being too talkative is another jibe commonly thrown at women to shut us down. In conversations where we are not the largest contributors, we are told to shut up ALL. THE. TIME. Let the men talk. Not told to shut up for rule breaking, just for existing, for speaking up.

    I think i've been told to "stop it" here a couple of times now, including by an admin, and even as OP I've contributed fewer words than most.

    Interesting one eh?

    You are not accused of being too vocal. People disagree with you. You again are seeking to be offended.

    Noone is disagreeing with you 'so the men can talk'. This is just complete fabrication. A nonsense. Some of the 'dissenters' in this thread are women!

    Noone is accusing you of being too talkative, indeed, the only person who has brought up an individuals post number is this thread was you!

    Maybe you should stop viewing things through the lens of sex. Noone cares about your sex. Noone is disagreeing with you simply because you are a women. People aren't shutting you down. They are disagreeing with you. You need to figure out the difference.




  • pwurple wrote: »
    Maybe it was because I was posting on my phone. :cool:


    I'll quote this though, as it's another good example of something interesting. :)

    For context, this was about vocal minorities. Now, women are not a minority, nor are we vocal ENOUGH. But here, I'm being accused of being TOO vocal it seems.

    I assume you know that being too talkative is another jibe commonly thrown at women to shut us down. In conversations where we are not the largest contributors, we are told to shut up ALL. THE. TIME. Let the men talk. Not told to shut up for rule breaking, just for existing, for speaking up.

    I think i've been told to "stop it" here a couple of times now, including by an admin, and even as OP I've contributed fewer words than most.

    Interesting one eh?

    So are you accusing an admin of boards of telling you to shut it because your female??




  • banie01 wrote: »

    But for sake of providing the admin staff a good view of best practice?
    What community forum has a complete and coherent policy that you feel could offer a model for boards?
    What are its highpoints, and how could boards make it better?
    Have you forwarded your preferred policy or made definitive policy suggestions to the admin team on what/where the line is?
    On how those transgressing your proposed lines be actioned?
    Further, can that particular policy be adopted by boards without unduly limiting the level of discourse or placing an onerous burden on mods and staff?
    I know you said you had provided an example of the above earlier in thread, and I don't doubt you have.
    pwurple wrote: »
    I've already done that earlier in the thread. You probably didn't read it. It's been buried in this swamp.


    banie01 wrote: »
    I'll take a read through, and sorry I missed it :)

    But I've read back over the thread and likely thanks to my reading 4 things at once here to get ready for a lecture and some meetings, have managed to completely miss the obvious.
    I can only find a link from you to an article outlining examples of offensive language?

    Where is the example of best practice, e.g a community forum operating with the policy in place?
    Where is the example of your proposed policy?
    Is the policy transferable to Boards without placing onerous burdens on mods and admin staff?
    Where are your outlines on how transgressions of that policy best be addressed?

    Look I know there are a lot of questions there and it may feel targeted.
    It really isn't, I promise.
    It's an attempt on my part to glean a full and complete a picture of possible as to what possible outcome you want from the feedback thread.
    I can go and read your posts and make inferences, I don't want those inferences to be incorrect.

    It would also (speaking out of turn on my part) go a long towards giving the admins and staff a clearer idea of what your ultimate aim is?
    Other than asking for clarification on whether boards have formed a policy as yet.

    There have been mentions of policy, of mission statement but no examples yet that I saw (in my admittedly rushed look).
    I don't mean to be smart, dismissive or blasé about this point, but have you provided examples of those that I've missed?




  • pwurple wrote: »


    Fascinating. You know what though, not everyone is the same. Some people get fed up after a year of seeing a situation deteriorate and say something.

    Yes it is fascinating that not everyone is the same...thank God for that!

    You disagree with me and I disagree with you.

    I don't see a situation deteriorate to be honest. Yes I see problems but I see alot of "good eggs" too, and they out number the bad.

    If anything boards was alot more fun 10-15 years ago, I appreciate I've gotten older so my perception of what's funny will have shifted.




  • pjohnson wrote: »

    You yourself didn't exactly treat women well (look above at Strawberry Milkshake post and how you turned on her)

    Like how you kept claiming no one but you had an issue with the lasagne comment.

    Just for clarity here, there was no turning on Strawberry Milkshake. .

    Read the posts. They are here in their entirety.

    I had an issue with the lasagne comment. She/he didnt.

    I put it to the Mods that those type of comments are sexist/misogynistic and should not be condoned if Boards wants to improve.




  • anewme wrote: »
    Now, at this point, I am officially requesting that you direct further feedback that you have to the Mods.
    Please take your own advice. If you have a problem with a post or poster report and leave moderation to the mods.




  • anewme wrote: »
    Just for clarity here, there was no turning on Strawberry Milkshake. .

    Read the posts. They are here in their entirety.

    I had an issue with the lasagne comment. She/he didnt.

    I put it to the Mods that those type of comments are sexist/misogynistic and should not be condoned if Boards wants to improve.

    And I put it to the mods that the “lasagne” post was not sexist.

    And I’ve read the entirety of your posts many times. One of them actually says...
    It’s not the lasagne person thats the real issue here.

    It's the people who believe lasagne persons post was not sexist.

    They are not chortling away.

    They are deadly serious.

    That's the core issue.

    Personally , I believe highlighting this plus the fat pig type comments clearly demonstrate there is a tolerance towards sexism here., not from Mods, but a small cohort of posters.

    That was directed at me because I didn’t agree with you. You deemed my opinion as a woman to be not as worthy as yours. Who’s the sexist now?




  • And I put it to the mods that the “lasagne” post was not sexist.

    And I’ve read the entirety of your posts many times. One of them actually says...



    That was directed at me because I didn’t agree with you. You deemed my opinion as a woman to be not as worthy as yours. Who’s the sexist now?


    In fairness to anewme I think that quoted comment was directed at me, as I was the one who mentioned the lasagna poster chortling away at the reaction their post had garnered




  • There are many women posting here who disagree that the comment was sexist and misogynistic. However, no one condoned it at all. We also disagree that boards is unwelcoming to women.

    Linking claims of sexism here to a woman who was attacked, and to Graham Dwyer is hysterical. Boards cannot police thoughts, never mind actions in the real world.


  • Advertisement


  • anewme wrote: »
    You are not keeping to the facts at all here.

    I quoted your posts as people were asking who was ok with or condoning the vile post. You said you were ok with the post, so why would you have an issue with your posts confirming that?

    because:

    QUOTE=Strawberry Milkshake;116789018]I see that comment as talking about 2 people who are scamming a system that’s there to help those who have nothing. I don’t see it as a comment against all women.

    QUOTE=Strawberry Milkshake;116792599]Because I am the same sex as those 2 chancers I should feel offended at the insults they received?
    Jog on and find someone else to educate.[/QUOTE]

    You wrote about women like me needing an education

    There is no reference at all to 'women like you" needing an education anywhere.

    There is no insult to you personally either.

    I put it to you then as I do now that the comment was vile and misogynistic and part of the problem on boards.

    Because someone is a 'Chancer' by your terms, there should not be open season to insult them, degrade them in the way that vile comment did referring their genetalia.

    No where was I rude to you, put you down, or call you a troll, perpetually offended or anything in that vein.[/quote]

    You said that people who disagreed about the post needed an education as it was evidence of the problem. So, that did include Strawberry Milkshake along with a lot of us.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement