# I'm accused of sexism so of course I get a warning. **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [July 30, 2016, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306 "2016-07-30T17:13:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 9:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/21 "2016-07-31T09:21:52Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > Maybe I need to read the thread under discussion (although I kinda doubt it), but the way I read **Hampshire** ’s remark was as a general complaint that the rhetorical deck seems to be stacked against women in the public sphere. I certainly never heard of a guy being called a harpy; and in fact if there is a single pejorative that gets leveled against a male political aspirant that is based primarily on the tone, timbre, and cadence of his speaking style, let’s just say it doesn’t come easily to mind. > > For this reason alone, it’s not surprising for anyone to consider the word “harpy” problematic. I certainly consider it so. Maybe (MAYBE) it would have been appropriate for **Hampshire** to have been mod-noted for allowing the use of the word “harpy” to inspire that complaint in the Elections thread as not germane, but even that would have gotten a bit of a :dubious: from me. > > Good on you, **Saint Cad** , for being non-sexist enough to be annoyed on your wife’s behalf when sexism undermines her status as a responsible adult member of society, and in her career. But if you’re willing to call anyone a harpy for anything OTHER THAN > > then you probably don’t share my distaste for the term (and maybe also **Hampshire** ’s). In such a case, perhaps it’s no surprise that when you see “people,” you’d be inclined to perceive it as a weasel word, deployed to give plausible deniability to someone who wants to accuse you, specifically. > > Doesn’t mean you’re right, though. Maybe you should read the thread, because\*\* Saint Cad\*\* never used the word “harpy”. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 9:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/22 "2016-07-31T09:59:13Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > Maybe I need to read the thread under discussion (although I kinda doubt it), but the way I read **Hampshire** ’s remark was as a general complaint that the rhetorical deck seems to be stacked against women in the public sphere. I certainly never heard of a guy being called a harpy; and in fact if there is a single pejorative that gets leveled against a male political aspirant that is based primarily on the tone, timbre, and cadence of his speaking style, let’s just say it doesn’t come easily to mind. > > For this reason alone, it’s not surprising for anyone to consider the word “harpy” problematic. I certainly consider it so. Maybe (MAYBE) it would have been appropriate for **Hampshire** to have been mod-noted for allowing the use of the word “harpy” to inspire that complaint in the Elections thread as not germane, but even that would have gotten a bit of a :dubious: from me. > > Good on you, **Saint Cad** , for being non-sexist enough to be annoyed on your wife’s behalf when sexism undermines her status as a responsible adult member of society, and in her career. But if you’re willing to call anyone a harpy for anything OTHER THAN > > then you probably don’t share my distaste for the term (and maybe also **Hampshire** ’s). In such a case, perhaps it’s no surprise that when you see “people,” you’d be inclined to perceive it as a weasel word, deployed to give plausible deniability to someone who wants to accuse you, specifically. > > Doesn’t mean you’re right, though. > [@John\_Mace](#): > > Maybe you should read the thread, because\*\* Saint Cad\*\* never used the word “harpy”. Huh. I suppose I was wrong to rely on **Measure for Measure** ’s summary of the post that initiated the unpleasantness, then. But waitaminute, that post was directly quoted! > [@Now that the conventions are over let's discuss Clinton vs. Trump campaigns](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-that-the-conventions-are-over-lets-discuss-clinton-vs-trump-campaigns/761206/1): > > \*It is because of this she has earned the nickname “Queen of the Harpies” Please pardon me for not seeing the distinction between the word “harpy” and the word “harpies.” Particularly when he states that Secretary Clinton _earned_ the nickname of their queen.\* \*anyway, shouldn’t it be _President_ of the Harpies? We’re Americans; we don’t have queens… ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 10:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/23 "2016-07-31T10:44:25Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Maybe you should read the thread, because\*\* Saint Cad\*\* never used the word “harpy”. And now that I have read the thread, I can report tbat you’re mistaken. In addition to “Harpies” in the OP, he uses “harpy” in post 50. Also, I stand by the points I made above. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 10:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/24 "2016-07-31T10:46:17Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > Huh. I suppose I was wrong to rely on **Measure for Measure** ’s summary of the post that initiated the unpleasantness, then. But waitaminute, that post was directly quoted! > > Please pardon me for not seeing the distinction between the word “harpy” and the word “harpies.” Particularly when he states that Secretary Clinton _earned_ the nickname of their queen.\* > > \*anyway, shouldn’t it be _President_ of the Harpies? We’re Americans; we don’t have queens… OK, my bad. I had interpreted that as him quoting other people, but reading it again, I can see that it’s a fair interpretation to claim that he was agreeing with that characterization. In fact, it makes more sense that way. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Bravo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_bravo/32/493_2.png) [@Johnny\_Bravo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Bravo)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 11:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/25 "2016-07-31T11:55:36Z")
The absolute most generous way for this to be interpreted is that you got baited into breaking the rules and then broke the rules. But even then, you still broke the rules. Don’t tell anybody to shove anything up their anywheres unless you’re in the Pit. As a teacher, you understand the need for rules about Big Things to be applied evenhandedly. Here at the Dope, direct insults like that are on the list of Big Things. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/26 "2016-07-31T15:27:39Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > As it happens, I was not aware that Hillary Clinton had that nickname (though SC may have been making a metaphorical prediction). It’s just the Simpsons quote required in every thread as long as I have been here. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/27 "2016-07-31T16:17:09Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > You know, it’s not even that I got a warning - well maybe, I think I should have gotten a note. Your offense was pretty severe and was clearly warnable. > [@](#): > > But the complaint is not so much that I got modded but that someone can twist what I wrote and them make an accusation of sexism and because they used weasel words they don’t get modded and it’s OK. THAT is what I’m pissed about. As for Colibri’s (a mod incidently) post, I have been around long enough that mods used to see through weasel words when accusing people of lying, sexism or racism and the poster would be called out on it. First, while I am not a GD mod (thankfully), this is the first I’ve heard that accusations of sexism were in themselves a reason for modding. Second, I don’t see anything particularly objectionable in **Hampshire’s** post. Third, some feminists in fact do regard “harpy” as sexist. (I am not accusing you of being sexist, but by using the word you do open yourself to that charge. You should probably not use it if you want to avoid being accused of sexism.) [The sexist word hit list](https://outlierbabe.wordpress.com/2014/02/01/the-sexist-word-hit-list/) > [@](#): > > harpy, harridan > Terms that describe extremely unpleasant abrasive women who constantly harrangue others. There are no equivalent insult words for men. As far as I can see your complaint is entirely baseless. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/28 "2016-07-31T16:37:39Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > OK, my bad. I had interpreted that as him quoting other people, but reading it again, I can see that it’s a fair interpretation to claim that he was agreeing with that characterization. In fact, it makes more sense that way. From the OP: > [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > Using my own word “Harpy”, ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/29 "2016-07-31T18:39:12Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > First, while I am not a GD mod (thankfully), this is the first I’ve heard that accusations of sexism were in themselves a reason for modding. Really? Then maybe you should read post #15 in this thread and note who wrote it because that is the standard I thought was used on this board and I believe Hampshire was using weasel words to get around that. Oh and thanks for the “blame the victim” angle of using the term Harpy to refer to her voice means it’s my fault I’m accused of sexism after Hampshire deliberately misinterprets what I wrote. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/30 "2016-07-31T18:47:57Z")
5 minute edit window TL;DR version of the post referred to is that insulting outside the pit is moddable and depending on context calling someone a sexist can be moddable. So an exchange like: I don’t think Clinton will make a good President So women can’t handle power? You’re a sexist. would be moddable if I am reading CKDH’s response correctly. ---
**Author:** ![raventhief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raventhief/32/4_2.png) [@raventhief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raventhief)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/31 "2016-07-31T19:12:27Z")
Here’s a thought experiment. You were angry about your wife getting threatened with a write-up, and being forced to apologize to her subordinates for making her voice heard. I’d be angry too. So tomorrow she comes home from work and says, “Well, I got written up after all. The team under me has decided I am too “shrill” and even called me a harpy.” (I am assuming here you don’t find her shrill) would you then say, “Oh, honey, here I thought you were a victim of sexism. But it turns out you just need to modulate your tone of voice! Let’s find you a voice coach!” Whew, turns out there is no sexism there at all. What a relief. Finding a woman in power to be shrill and harpy-like, well, that’s not sexist. Would you get even more angry at this further evidence of sexism? As I said, you find her voice pleasing. Something else entirely? ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/32 "2016-07-31T19:32:24Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > Really? Then maybe you should read post #15 in this thread and note who wrote it because that is the standard I thought was used on this board and I believe Hampshire was using weasel words to get around that. No one called you a sexist. And as far as I can see, if you had been accused of using sexist language that would have been OK. > [@](#): > > Oh and thanks for the “blame the victim” angle of using the term Harpy to refer to her voice means it’s my fault I’m accused of sexism after Hampshire deliberately misinterprets what I wrote. You’ve made yourself into a victim here by wildly overreacting to what appears to be a legitimate point. The word you used is regarded as sexist by some feminists. If you really aren’t sexist, you should apologize for having used it in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/33 "2016-07-31T19:42:21Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > 5 minute edit window > > TL;DR version of the post referred to is that insulting outside the pit is moddable and depending on context calling someone a sexist can be moddable. So an exchange like: > I don’t think Clinton will make a good President > So women can’t handle power? You’re a sexist. > would be moddable if I am reading CKDH’s response correctly. But that’s nothing like what happened here. (I would also point out that the CKDH’s post was made four years ago, he is no longer on staff, and he wasn’t a GD mod in the first place. The current GD mods would be better guides on what’s acceptable. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/34 "2016-07-31T21:37:34Z")
People act in sexist ways sometimes. They say sexist shit sometimes–like criticizing a woman (incidentally one with a fairly low-pitched voice for a woman) as “shrill” and as a “harpy”–without necessarily realizing what they’re doing. The idea that we’re all too fragile to be challenged when we say something sexist is absurd. If I say something that you sincerely think is sexist, please confront me on it. If you sincerely see it as antisemitic, confront me on it. I might disagree, or I might not–but it’s not the end of the world to face such a challenge. I recognize that “You are a sexist” violates board rules. But “You said something sexist” most certainly doesn’t violate any rule set down. And it certainly should not. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/35 "2016-07-31T22:07:55Z")
In terms of best practice, I think usage of “Harpy” and “Shrill” to refer to a female orator merits discussion. But at the same time I also think Hillary Clinton’s speech patterns merit discussion. It should be permissible to say that she sounded shrill. Personally, I admit that I sometimes (not always) find it grating when Hillary Clinton raises her voiced. I’ve talked it over with friends about whether there’s some sexism in my perceptions. Unlike **LHoD** (if I understand him, which I may not), I don’t think that accusation negates the bulk of my point (it does offset it). But I agree with LHoD that I’d like the matter discussed. I frankly haven’t wrapped my mind around the issue, but I suspect that _part_ of it may involve “Getting over it”. Moderators should provide space for both discussions outside of the Pit. I think they have. There’s some ignorance to be probed, not least of all my own. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/36 "2016-07-31T22:18:56Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > In terms of best practice, I think usage of “Harpy” and “Shrill” to refer to a female orator merits discussion. > > But at the same time I also think Hillary Clinton’s speech patterns merit discussion. It should be permissible to say that she sounded shrill. Personally, I admit that I sometimes (not always) find it grating when Hillary Clinton raises her voiced. I’ve talked it over with friends about whether there’s some sexism in my perceptions. Unlike **LHoD** (if I understand him, which I may not), I don’t think that accusation negates the bulk of my point (it does offset it). But I agree with LHoD that I’d like the matter discussed. I frankly haven’t wrapped my mind around the issue, but I suspect that _part_ of it may involve “Getting over it”. > > Moderators should provide space for both discussions outside of the Pit. I think they have. There’s some ignorance to be probed, not least of all my own. I definitely think it should be permitted to say that she’s shrill, and a harpy. I definitely think it should be permitted to say that such accusations are rooted in sexist double-standards. I definitely think there should be room for a discussion around what criticisms of women’s speaking styles are rooted in sexist double-standards, and what criticisms are reasonable and could apply equally to men. There’s even room for a discussion around whether such double standards are legitimate–someone in another thread suggested (hilariously in my opinion) that Trump’s aggression is working for him, whereas Clinton’s is not. That’s a fine discussion to have. What shouldn’t be allowed, IMO: 1. Moderators tsking at people for using the word “sexist” to describe an argument, if they’re backing up that claim with any sincerely-held reason; and 2. People responding to such charges with “shove it up your ass” or whatever. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/37 "2016-07-31T23:13:07Z")
**Saint Cad** , I’m afraid I found the title of this thread misleading. It strikes me that there is quite a difference between your thread title: **"I’m accused of sexism so of course I get a warning."** compared to what seems to me to accurately reflect what happened: **"I’m accused of sexism so I said to ‘go ahead and shove the accusation of sexism up your ass’ and of course I get a warning."** If you don’t see a difference between those two titles, I’m afraid there’s not much we can do to help you. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/38 "2016-07-31T23:23:46Z")
So let me ask the Board this. Let’s say the conversation goes like this: \ I don’t think Obama has been a good President. \ People that don’t like uppity Negros in position of power say they don’t like Obama as President. Has person B called person A a racist? If so, should person B be modded for calling person A a racist via weasel words? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/39 "2016-07-31T23:38:27Z")
How about something more similar to the actual situation: A: McCain just acts better than Obama, who is so uppity. B: Disagree. I think anytime a black guy has a take-charge attitude people immediately label him as uppity. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2016, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306/40 "2016-07-31T23:42:19Z")
Yes, that would be an unfortunate exchange, and if someone pulled that form of attack in a SDMB forum (other than the Pit) I would report it. Something more valid might go along these lines: \ I don’t think Obama has been a good President. \ Some of the people who think so are racists. In fact, many of the people who think so are racists. It’s unfortunate, because it poisons the debate, but a significant part the attack on Obama’s two terms in office has been, in fact, based on arrant racism. This has the advantage of avoiding saying or even implying anything directly about good sir \ who, at that point, hasn’t actually said anything racist himself. \ enjoys plausible deniability. \ I’m offended by that. \ Why, ever? I said nothing about you. and so on. ETA: Having been leap-frogged, I was responding to **Saint Cad** ’s hypothetical exchange. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-accused-of-sexism-so-of-course-i-get-a-warning/761306.md?page=3)