The amount of misogyny on boards these days is frightening.Mod instruction in OP

08-11-2014 10:26AM

It's funny to see the number of "evidence please" posts on this after all the posts from people making up all sorts of sh1t about the single mother in that other thread

Grayson · 08-11-2014 10:30AM

beks101 wrote: »

I've dated some awful gobshytes in my time too. Some awful liars, cheats and selfish pricks in there. Does that give me leeway to direct bile at every man who crosses my path from now until the end of time? Or should I accept the fact that I picked a few bad eggs and sh1t happens?

No, but it would be understandable for you're a bit wary.

I've gone out with some women who were obsessively needy and selfish. I don't think all women are, but when I'm dating I am on the look out to make sure i don't miss the signs.

Sometimes a bad experience can have a worse effect. When I was in my mid twenties I knew a guy who had every single girlfriend up to that point cheat on him. He was a nice bloke i think he just chose or was drawn to the wrong type of girl. He just swore off women for a few years. Just wouldn't date anyone because he couldn't trust them. He had female friends, he just wouldn't get to a point where he cared about a woman so much that she could hurt him. He eventually met a nice girl and good relationship (they broke up eventually but only because it didn't work out). But it's completely understandable how a person, male or female, could reach the point where they don't trust the opposite sex. It's probably a staple plot line of romcoms at this point.

08-11-2014 10:33AM

DeadHand wrote: »

Undeniable misogynistic undertones present in a lot of the recent threads on AH.

Seems like there's a large cohort of angry young men out there using AH to vent their frustrations regarding women.

In particular, women's experiences of harrassment seem to be dismissed out of hand by certain male posters- "he was just being nice", "you were rude", "girls always do this", "you're too sensitive".... She was there, god damn it, not you.

Yeah, threads where someone posts about being sexually assaulted and either it's her own fault or "he's just an awkward guy trying to be nice get over it" is a bit mental

08-11-2014 10:39AM

Wellll that's my weekend ruined >.<

Just going off to read through the thread and action RPs and it's easier to do that when there aren't more posts and RPs coming through while I'm doing that.

BRB.

08-11-2014 12:08PM

Sorry about that

I'll add my opinion shortly!

hatrickpatrick · 08-11-2014 12:12PM

dark crystal wrote: »

Just one'll do.

Again, let's see the evidence that boards feminists have said anywhere that male circumcision is the way to go.

I can't think of any at the moment, I'll have a search in a bit, but you're deliberately ignoring the issue I'm bringing up, which is that just as the term "violence against women" is inherently discriminatory, so is the term "female genital mutilation". All children should have an automatic right to full genital integrity barring medical emergency denoting otherwise, and in my view anyone who qualifies that by focusing on one gender or the other is being automatically sexist and exclusionist about it.

In other words, nobody has to have said "male circumcision is good" to be sexist, they just have to have said "female mutilation is wrong" without also saying "male mutilation is wrong". The argument should be "genital mutilation is wrong" or "babies have the right to genital integrity".

volchitsa · 08-11-2014 12:15PM

Macavity. wrote: »

Haven't noticed it in AH, maybe in tGC a bit. Life goes on.

Probably stupid of me, (I won't make the predictable blond joke!) but what is tGC please?

Shrap · 08-11-2014 12:18PM

volchitsa wrote: »

Probably stupid of me, (I won't make the predictable blond joke!) but what is tGC please?

The Gentlemen's Club

hatrickpatrick · 08-11-2014 12:21PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Has that spiked in the last while? I can't say it has. There's always been an element of it on AH, with the "make me a sandwich" type posts that turn up, meant to be a "roll your eyes and read on" kind of thing.

This in my view is the crux of it. As harsh as I know this sounds and as much as I know I'll be bashed for it, the internet should be avoided by people who can't hack trolling, and reading things they find offensive. If random comments from random strangers piss you off that much, then the world in general is probably not an ideal place to be living in...

volchitsa · 08-11-2014 12:24PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I can't think of any at the moment, I'll have a search in a bit, but you're deliberately ignoring the issue I'm bringing up, which is that just as the term "violence against women" is inherently discriminatory, so is the term "female genital mutilation". All children should have an automatic right to full genital integrity barring medical emergency denoting otherwise, and in my view anyone who qualifies that by focusing on one gender or the other is being automatically sexist and exclusionist about it.

In other words, nobody has to have said "male circumcision is good" to be sexist, they just have to have said "female mutilation is wrong" without also saying "male mutilation is wrong". The argument should be "genital mutilation is wrong" or "babies have the right to genital integrity".

I'm personally convinced that circumcision of little boys probably is a form of mutilation, but it is still a false parallel. How many little girls have ever had this operation done for medical reasons? None. It is a purely mutilating act, specifically to impede sexual pleasure. Many men who have been circumcised claim that they experience as much sexual pleasure as non circumcised men.

The worst that one can say about male circumcision for religious reasons is that like any surgery it entails a risk for the child, and that it may possibly, in some cases, reduce sexual pleasure to some degree.

That is very different from FGM, so insisting that they are equivalent is, quite frankly, absurd.

tritium · 08-11-2014 12:24PM

dark crystal wrote: »

I don't have any man hating campaigns at all. I think you may be a tad confused.

As per this thread, any examples of female posters who espouse the downfall of men? Any at all?

We certainly have at least one (id suggest a couple more also) poster who routinely derails almost any thread that mentions men's rights (or criticises feminism). Off hand I can think of a couple if posters who've been picked up on it in TGC too.

Do we have mysogony in AH. Sure. We also have racism, misandry, traveller bashing and whatever else. Tbh the mods do a pretty good job of managing it and anything beyond a low level undercurrent is usually dealt with. Is it getting worse, I don't think so (quite amazing though the number of posters with 150 odd posts who feel it is worse than in the past).

For what its worth, any group or movement gets some of that in AH, I've kind of assumed it goes with the territory. You might not get anti men jibes and jokes, but you'll get plenty of the men can't be victims/ men are predators/ a little woman could never hurt a man stuff. If I was being picky I'd say that mods in general are far slower to pick up on this stuff, though given the amount they have to wade through in AH...

PopePalpatine · 08-11-2014 12:33PM

dark crystal wrote: »

143 servicewomen have died in combat too. Many others are left to bring up children alone at home.

War is shitty for everyone involved. Your point?

Don't forget war rape. IIRC up to a million women were raped in the Soviet advance on Nazi-occupied eastern Europe, and gods only know how many the Nazis themselves raped.

TheBeardedLady · 08-11-2014 12:33PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

This in my view is the crux of it. As harsh as I know this sounds and as much as I know I'll be bashed for it, the internet should be avoided by people who can't hack trolling, and reading things they find offensive. If random comments from random strangers piss you off that much, then the world in general is probably not an ideal place to be living in...

So do you suggest we cease existing? All the people on here who are bothered by the comments should just close their accounts and leave?

I find it funny that people who've thanked similar to the above on this thread can be seen getting their knickers in a twist about other issues elsewhere.

Making us out to be sensitive types who can't handle the real world is a way of silencing us. I've been through some **** in my life, am well able for this world and I can definitely handle myself but it doesn't change the fact that misogyny bugs the **** out of me. I'm not losing any sleep over it and I'm not punching holes in the walls of my flat but when I read some of the **** on here, it annoys me. The annoyance passes and I get on with my day but it doesn't stop it being an unpleasant place to post right now for many of us.

Anyway, define trolling. I believe a lot of the misogyny is NOT trolling and are the genuine opinions of some men on here.

It's funny, I only ever see the kinds of posts above when it comes to this issue on Boards. I wonder why that is...

P. Breathnach · 08-11-2014 12:35PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

This in my view is the crux of it. As harsh as I know this sounds and as much as I know I'll be bashed for it, the internet should be avoided by people who can't hack trolling, and reading things they find offensive. If random comments from random strangers piss you off that much, then the world in general is probably not an ideal place to be living in...

That's little more than claiming all the space for people who behave like dicks. This is a moderated forum, where the mods try to stop trolls and people who are intentionally or recklessly offensive in the way they express opinions, and where personal attacks are a no-no.

[Thanks, mods.]

hatrickpatrick · 08-11-2014 12:36PM

volchitsa wrote: »

I'm personally convinced that circumcision of little boys probably is a form of mutilation, but it is still a false parallel. How many little girls have ever had this operation done for medical reasons? None. It is a purely mutilating act, specifically to impede sexual pleasure. Many men who have been circumcised claim that they experience as much sexual pleasure as non circumcised men.

In my opinion it's irrelevant. Someone genitalia, arguably one of the most psychologically significant organs, was altered surgically without their consent and in the absence of medical necessity. This is in my view the only relevant issue.

The worst that one can say about male circumcision for religious reasons is that like any surgery it entails a risk for the child, and that it may possibly, in some cases, reduce sexual pleasure to some degree.

And that it's a violation, as it's done without consent, to an extremely important organ and psychologically significant, and in the absence of any medical necessity. Same as for girls, essentially, although to a different degree.

That is very different from FGM, so insisting that they are equivalent is, quite frankly, absurd.

They share the common aspect that both involve surgical alteration of the genitals without consent and without medical necessity. Ergo both are wrong, both should be illegal. Stop looking at it from the point of view of the procedure and think about it instead from the bodily integrity point of view - all babies should have the right to full genital integrity unless medical emergency dictates otherwise. There's no need to further qualify that, as anyone stepping over that line would automatically be criminalized. Problem solved, for everyone.

tritium · 08-11-2014 12:42PM

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Don't forget war rape. IIRC up to a million women were raped in the Soviet advance on Nazi-occupied eastern Europe, and gods only know how many the Nazis themselves raped.

I remember one statistic that so many Russian men died that the gender ratio didn't recover till the nineties.

Men are also massively victims of war rape BTW,-I'll look for a particularly shockink link on this later

The point is of course that for Hillary to tell us women are the real victims while men do the vast majority of the dying and limb losing is populist twattery and whataboutery of the highest order

Btw what are the comparable male statistics for the 140 odd women who died?

Soft Falling Rain · 08-11-2014 12:43PM

I have no time for misogyny, maybe I'm sensitive but I even get uncomfortable with the typical lad talk that happens amongst my friends.

But honestly, while I know it's an issue that has been raised on boards on numerous occasions, I've never really noticed it on here on a reoccurring basis. Maybe I'm just missing it (if I see a thread with 10+ pages I tend not to open it).

I think boards has its problems with trolling on certain issues but I honestly don't think misogyny is one of those issues.

hatrickpatrick · 08-11-2014 12:47PM

TheBeardedLady wrote: »

So do you suggest we cease existing? All the people on here who are bothered by the comments should just close their accounts and leave?

Not at all, just, as the other poster I was quoting said, move on to the next post.

I find it funny that people who've thanked similar to the above on this thread can be seen getting their knickers in a twist about other issues elsewhere.

Getting one's knickers in a twist is fine, it's not the same as suggesting that some random anonymous internet post has annoyed you enough to force you to leave. Read another thread.

Making us out to be sensitive types who can't handle the real world is a way of silencing us.

The way you're trying to silence others, you mean?

I've been through some **** in my life, am well able for this world and I can definitely handle myself but it doesn't change the fact that misogyny bugs the **** out of me.

A lot of things bug the **** out of me as well, but I respect people's right to air opinions which are the opposite of mine. The only time I'll report a post on Boards is if I see double standards being applied in moderation, TBH.

I'm not losing any sleep over it and I'm not punching holes in the walls of my flat but when I read some of the **** on here, it annoys me. The annoyance passes and I get on with my day

As do I, regularly

but it doesn't stop it being an unpleasant place to post right now for many of us.

This is where you lose me, I'm afraid. Some threads are full of trolling but that IMO is not enough to tar the entire place with one brush and suggest that it's impossible to use it - if, as you say, the annoyance passes, then why not simply move on to the next thread? I do this here on a daily basis - believe me, I read enough ignorant guff on AH that makes my blood boil, but it's not going to stop me posting here because at the end of the day it's the internet. It doesn't matter that much.

Anyway, define trolling. I believe a lot of the misogyny is NOT trolling and are the genuine opinions of some men on here.

So genuine opinions should be censored?

It's funny, I only ever see the kinds of posts above when it comes to this issue on Boards. I wonder why that is...

Because there aren't a lot of other issues in which people call for mass censorship on Boards.

hatrickpatrick · 08-11-2014 12:49PM

P. Breathnach wrote: »

That's little more than claiming all the space for people who behave like dicks. This is a moderated forum, where the mods try to stop trolls and people who are intentionally or recklessly offensive in the way they express opinions, and where personal attacks are a no-no.

[Thanks, mods.]

I agree about personal attacks, of course. But I'm well known for holding the opinion that threads that are "getting out of hand" shouldn't be locked in the way that they are. Just my opinion - it's an internet forum, it doesn't matter.

Wibbs · 08-11-2014 12:59PM

Sand wrote: »

Welcome to the male experience where you are not a special or unique snowflake. If you are a poster with a propensity for expressing you opinion, you are going to bump into other posters with a propensity for expressing theirs and criticising yours. All of the stuff you reference that you paint in terms of being gender specific are fairly standard Internet ROE. Also the last bit, underlined - genuine laughter. Yup, being male has meant the internet is full of sunshine, rainbows and people who thank me for expressing my opinions and value my input. No need for sarcasm tags I hope.

I know the above comes across as harsh, and might be filed under your definition of criticism of being female and expressing an opinion. Its not. Its your opinion being criticised. I do genuinely believe its tougher for a female to engage in online gaming (for example) due to the immaturity of a significant minority of that community. I have noticed that successfully "integrated" female gamers tend to be gamer laddettes - I haven't quite made up my mind if thats down to females conforming to male dominated gamer culture, or my own biases.

I do recall reading a book called "This Love is not for cowards". It was an Americans account of his decision to live in Juarez, Mexico to support the local soccer team that against all odds had made it to the Mexican football top flight. During his time in Juarez, the nature of the book changed - it stopped being about simply supporting a team, and became about supporting Juarez and living in a city with a drug fuelled murder rate that rivalled a warzone. How people coped with that. For example, he recalls how tortured bodies of murder victims were found on his jogging path one morning, and he jogged there again the next day convincing himself that it wouldn't touch him. One of the angriest chapters in the book is where the author confronts an American writer who tries to portray the murders and chaos in Juarez as being a misogynist issue - that women in the city were the victims of a male driven violence. As if the problems of the city could be explained in gender terms. The author correctly pointed out that *all* the people of Juarez, male and female, were the victims of a cartel fuelled violence and that women were actually minority victims of murder and violence. He was very angry that the true tragedy was being appropriated and repackaged as a gender issue/first world problem for safe, white America.

Obviously, the scale is different but people being rude and aggressive to you on the internet is how the internet works, male or female.

BTW, the OPs post is ridiculous. There is misogyny online, plenty of it. But you need to be able to cite an example, not merely complain about something you wont actually point to. The OP is perfect catnip for a gender based mess, with the female assigned role of wanting to passive-aggressively complain about a problem in general without solving it, while males try to pin down specifics so the problem can be identified and solved and both frustrate the other for 30+ pages.

If I could thank this post twice I would, especially the first and last paragraphs.

Yes of course there is misogyny online and it pops up on Boards too, but all too often the accusation is leveled because someone is disagreed with/is losing the debate.

I have some insight into this from an odd angle. For quite the while a lot of people thought I was a woman on here. Did the attitudes differ depending on that perception? Generally no, or I didn't notice it so much. Where I did notice it was a low level expectation that I'd be more accommodating, less combative in a thread. I'd get more :eek: if I came back with a "you're talking poo and here's why". I actually got PM's from men and women on that score. I also got support PM's where again women and a couple of men reckoned I was being viewed in a sexist manner, because other posters disagreed with me, which I thought interesting and daft in equal measure. As Sand put it "If you are a poster with a propensity for expressing your opinion, you are going to bump into other posters with a propensity for expressing theirs and criticising yours. All of the stuff you reference that you paint in terms of being gender specific are fairly standard Internet ROE". Now I wouldn't quite agree with Sand where he says "all of the stuff", but it's a helluva lot of it.

As for the notion where apparently it's logical to conclude that asking questions rather than just blindly accepting a vague premise makes you out to be a sexist/misogynist. That's just daft. Blindly accept my premise because I say so. Eh. No. Thanks and all, but no.

volchitsa wrote: »

I'm personally convinced that circumcision of little boys probably is a form of mutilation, but it is still a false parallel. How many little girls have ever had this operation done for medical reasons? None. It is a purely mutilating act, specifically to impede sexual pleasure. Many men who have been circumcised claim that they experience as much sexual pleasure as non circumcised men.

OK break it down this way; if the exact same tissues were removed in FGM as are removed in male circumcision would that be OK? I doubt it. Therefore from this position male bodily integrity is less respected than female. Oh and the least invasive form of FGM does pretty much this.

Uncle Ruckus · 08-11-2014 01:09PM

I'm a humanist, so I don't agree with the feminist nor the masculinist manifestos. I will say that I have noticed a lot of anger in many threads. Of course one can assent to an unpopular opinion while being somewhat intellectually detached but often it seems that on controversial threads people often display a lot of strong and negative emotions-to the point of catharsis. Perhaps rather than saying 'down with this sort of thing' we should examine and try to comphehend the origin of all the venom.

P. Breathnach · 08-11-2014 01:13PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

... I'm well known for holding the opinion that threads that are "getting out of hand" shouldn't be locked in the way that they are....

I have more posts on Boards than you have, but I don't expect my views to be well-known to the extent that participants in any particular thread know my views outside what I have posted in that thread.

And if you disagree with Boards' moderation policy and practice, why the hell are you still here?

enfant terrible · 08-11-2014 01:15PM

beks101 wrote: »

Actually this is quite a common one too.
'Oh woe is me....did someone just use the phrase 'invalidate my feelings'?...are we on Oprah....blah blah blah'

So expecting to be entitled to express an opinion which will not be faced with a barrage of assumptions, aggressiveness, intimidation, personal attacks, undermining and belittling and sexism about 'Princess Syndrome', 'will someone please think about the men'...is unreasonable because 'that's just the internet'?

People disagree with me every day of the week and it leads to all kinds of insightful and enlightening discussions - one of the main reasons I'm on boards in the first place. I like being challenged on my views and I like a heated debate.

Being told that my feelings about something are bullsh1t or my experience with a social issue is 'downright wrong' because men deal with stuff too and who am I to expect special treatment, or because I've simply misread the intention, or 'some people are assholes, get over it'. And picking apart my opinions down to the word and going to town on the pedantics of a sentence or a semi-colon to make the point that I AM WRONG because my experience is not your own...and doing this stuff persistently, relentlessly, maybe even re-regging to do it again to get the full impact...NO. THAT'S NOT OK.

Is it right that many women won't engage with this forum, this thread or even this website because of these over-reactions? Is it right that that fear of typing something less than reasonable (out of anger perhaps) and then receiving a backlash disproportionate to the actual intellectual crime means that some women will stay away, out of threads about issues that interest them, away from a discourse that greets them with an undertone of hostility from the get-go?

Does that not apply to both sexes though?

I experienced all you posted and I'm a man.

Yarf Yarf · 08-11-2014 01:15PM

Most of the posts in this thread could be summed up with: "la la la la la! Not listening!" *fingers in ears*

tomwaterford · 08-11-2014 01:16PM

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

I have no time for misogyny, maybe I'm sensitive but I even get uncomfortable with the typical lad talk that happens amongst my friends.
.

I know this feeling...ive a couple of sisters and some young wans who are very good friends of mine who would beat the crap outta me if I said half what m friends say:o

eviltwin · 08-11-2014 01:16PM

After Hours just seems to attract a certain type of poster. I'd say the age profile here is under 30 and it shows. Maybe its as much an age thing as anything. The quality of the discussions here are often ruined by idiots who don't have anything other than cliches and insults to throw out. The same topics often show up elsewhere on Boards but you can pretty much guarantee there will be a better class of debate. Because other forums tend to have smaller, more regular, posters the mods are quicker to act too. There was a good discussion here yesterday on PUA's that had to be closed because so many "new" members joined to derail the thread, that kind of thing is frustrating. Its a pity repeat offenders can't just be blocked for posting in AH altogether.

beks101 · 08-11-2014 01:18PM

Grayson wrote: »

Sometimes a bad experience can have a worse effect. When I was in my mid twenties I knew a guy who had every single girlfriend up to that point cheat on him. He was a nice bloke i think he just chose or was drawn to the wrong type of girl. He just swore off women for a few years. Just wouldn't date anyone because he couldn't trust them. He had female friends, he just wouldn't get to a point where he cared about a woman so much that she could hurt him. He eventually met a nice girl and good relationship (they broke up eventually but only because it didn't work out). But it's completely understandable how a person, male or female, could reach the point where they don't trust the opposite sex. It's probably a staple plot line of romcoms at this point.

Yes completely normal, human behaviour. You might take a dating sabbatical, look for the red flags before jumping into a relationship next time, be a little more guarded in your dating life.

That's not what this thread is about though. This thread is about blatant or subtle streaks of misogyny that speckle an increasing number of threads in this forum and put female posters extremely ill at ease, to say the least.

Most of us have been through a bad breakup. Anyone who has dated has met a giant aRsehole of the opposite sex who treated them like sh1t and left them with anything from a bad taste in their mouth to earth-shattering heartache.

Is that an excuse for developing and demonstrating an acute dislike or hatred for every woman or every man everywhere? Absolutely fcuking not. If it is, invest in a shrink because you have some definite personal issues.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

A lot of things bug the **** out of me as well, but I respect people's right to air opinions which are the opposite of mine.

So your way of 'respecting people's right to air opinions which are the opposite of mine' in this case is to tell those people to read another thread, move on with their lives and quit taking things so personally, clearly the interwebz - and the world - doesn't suit them? So basically, 'your opinion doesn't matter to me and get over it'? Very courteous.

Wibbs · 08-11-2014 01:20PM

Uncle Ruckus wrote: »

Perhaps rather than saying 'down with this sort of thing' we should examine and try to comphehend the origin of all the venom.

+1. Just my take here UR, but for me its down to the influence of the very polarised "gender war" BS coming from and informed by a current meme in US culture and especially expressed online. If you look at even measured discussions on this here on Boards you'll note a large amount of source material is American in nature. The "third wave" feminist guff, especially the extreme leftist rape culture trigger warning stuff is almost entirely sourced from America. The PUA and MGTOW all women are bitches to be ridden/avoided guff is also almost entirely sourced from America and both sides of this gender war ballsology originated in the US. This stuff is huge over there, or appears to be from what you'd think reading the interwebs.

This exaggerated e-meme is infecting the rest of the online world, particularly the Anglosphere and what venom exists on boards is coming from that IMHO. Little enough of it is local in nature. It's a set of well dodgy influences too and it is clearly influential.

hatrickpatrick · 08-11-2014 01:22PM

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I have more posts on Boards than you have, but I don't expect my views to be well-known to the extent that participants in any particular thread know my views outside what I have posted in that thread.

They're probably well enough known in threads like this, seeing as we seem to have debates on feminism on a bi-weekly basis around here

And if you disagree with Boards' moderation policy and practice, why the hell are you still here?

This is exactly the point I'm making, I disagree with them but what the hell? It's not going to stop me posting, because as the end of the day it's just not that important. There are threads I wish would be left alone but aren't, but one simply moves on and posts somewhere else. My point is, I apply the same to threads which offend me deeply - I don't call for people to be banned or for discussion to be stifled. I personally feel that there is a lot of evidence that this is becoming a central aspect of modern feminism however - shutting down discussion which is "offensive". Which ironically is the main reason I so strongly object to it.

Annasopra · 08-11-2014 01:25PM

The Backwards Man wrote: »

I've noticed a few trolls that seem to be a bit smarter than the average one, staying with the rules themselves but making the balls for others to fire. That's a huge problem imo.

Couldnt you report this and say I suspect this poster is trolling could mods please watch

The amount of misogyny on boards these days is frightening.*Mod instruction in OP*

Comments

The amount of misogyny on boards these days is frightening.Mod instruction in OP