Discussion on sexism

Leg End Reject wrote: »

So basically we all need to be "educated" to change our opinions to suit a minority of posters.

Perhaps the majority aren't wrong?

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Trolls feed off the forever offended, and the forever offended, feed off the trolls. Both are better off being ignored.

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

You can't ignore the forever offended when they push and push and push to have robust debate completely sanitized to their liking though.

Leg End Reject wrote: »

We've also been accused of supporting the now famous post because we didn't find it misogynistic or sexist. So, clearly there are only 2 options - agree with anewme or you're supporting it.

Accusations of dishonesty and misreprenting posts too.

Sweetemotion wrote: »

You can ignore them and if more people did, they can push and push and push all they like.

knucklehead6 wrote: »

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.

Sweetemotion wrote: »

It's a power trip, nothing else.


All they have is isims and wanting to police peoples views and educate them on said isms. Should be ignored and if not ignored, ridiculed.

One of the main concerns raised in the Ladies Lounge thread was that women posting a dissenting opinion are dismissed, gaslighted, rounded on, ridiculed and driven away in a hostile way.

Now, I will ask that the moderators consider what women said in that thread and read the above exchange , which are one after the other, with allegations of trolling, personal comments, power trips, claiming to be victims, perpetually offended, culminating with "they", should be ignored or ridiculed.

Given that this is a feedback thread, it is even more concerning that there should be a drive to openly ridicule posters.

I will ask that this be considered as part of the review.

knucklehead6 wrote: »

I wouldn’t be up for ridiculing them. Then they have the option of reporting for bullying.

Trying to ridicule someone can end up with shooting yourself in the foot like pwurple did earlier on. Attempting to take the high ground but resorting to smart arsed comments, which ended up backfiring on her.

I knew the word redicule, would attract this reply.

How else do you respond to someone, who wants to reeducate and police people's views?

Sweetemotion wrote: »

I knew the word redicule, would attract this reply.

How else do respond to someone, who wants to reeducate and police people's views?

Engage with them. Talk to them. Hope that they can understand your point of view while trying to understand theirs

Anewme and pwurple have raised sexism as being prevalent on the site. I don’t see that. And where it is spotted it is dealt with, as in the thread that spawned this one. 61 reported posts, 40 actioned in one way or another before the thread was deleted.

Where I take issue with them is what I saw as the attempt to define a set of rules and engage in thought policing.

knucklehead6 wrote: »

I wouldn’t be up for ridiculing them. Then they have the option of reporting for bullying.

Trying to ridicule someone can end up with shooting yourself in the foot like pwurple did earlier on. Attempting to take the high ground but resorting to smart arsed comments, which ended up backfiring on her.

You do realise you are discussing your group strategy here?

I am one of the two posters your group is referring to as them.

I see you.

banie01 wrote: »

I don't know why youve directed that comment towards me?
Ironically enough, that point would be just as pertinent if you turned it towards yourself.
I'd also point out, that I've not mentioned majority or its being a justification for abuse.

It was me who mentioned a minority and majority. It was in relation to the views expressed in this thread.

knucklehead6 wrote: »

Is it really to much to ask that a thread that includes those points you mentioned are taken in context? There was a lot of anger at the two women, it was a contentious thread and the type that attracts trouble and troublemakers like moths to a flame.

No one is saying that sexism isn’t present here. But trying to stifle conversation isn’t the way forward. Tokyo even said it him/herself. There were 21 unactioned reported posts all reported by one pissed off poster. That’s not someone engaging in debate. That someone taking offence at the mere thought that someone else disagrees with them.

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.

99nsr125 wrote: »

You're constantly trying to backseat moderate that in itself is sanctionable

There is a certain maturity in accepting that you are wrong nobody likes being wrong but it's part of being an adult

Stop telling me what I'm trying to do.

As regards maturity, what type of adult says that all women are nuts.?

anewme wrote: »

You do realise you are discussing your group strategy here?

I am one of the two posters your group is referring to as them.

I see you.

"Group strategy" "your group"

What?

anewme wrote: »

I didnt "miss" it.

It wasn't there when I was posting my reply.

Your words speak for themselves.

Now, what you actually said was;

I wouldn’t be up for ridiculing them. Then they have the option of reporting for bullying.

So your concern is not that anyone should not be ridiculed.

It's based on the sentence that follows- "Then "they" have the option of reporting for bullying.

Ok, I’ll explain my train of thought here for you.

If someone is disagreeing with you, engage with them. Have a civil conversation. If you ridicule them then you lose whatever moral high ground you think you are on. And it gives them the option of reporting you for bullying, further eroding whatever moral high ground you think you are on.

That’s the way I was thinking when I wrote that post. It was not directed in any way at you, the poster known as anewme. It was not saying “well the only reason I wouldn’t ridicule someone is because they can report me”. Everyone else on here seems to have understood that.

EDIT

look at the replies to pwurple post earlier on when she tried to ridicule me. Anyone who replied was saying how she had not helped her point of view.

END EDIT

knucklehead6 wrote: »

Even if you are making it hard not to ridicule you.

D'ont you even try.

knucklehead6 wrote: »

I wouldn’t. As you’ve been at pains to point out, this is a feedback thread. If I wanted to ridicule you this is neither the time nor the place.

If ...indicates you would be able or qualified.

Previous point applies.

Dont even try.

Any place, any time.

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Oh dear god.

Indeed.

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

'women' posting dissenting opinion. Again seeing everything through the lens of gender. I don't give a bollox that your a women, and if you were a man posting what you are I'd have the same views. This is what I mean by perpetually offended. You are looking for offense, you want to be offended. Noone cares that you are a women. Get over it.

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.

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??

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.

knucklehead6 wrote: »

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??

knucklehead6 wrote: »

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.

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: »

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...

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

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.