It’s not the one I was taught.
Big Beautiful Roses Occupy Your Garden But Violets Grow Wild.
It feels like the original post was dropped in for shock value. Maybe a little context should be required when posting. Y’all don’t want links posted without comment. Why not the same rule about stuff like that that may be offensive?
Considering that he changed the most common version of the mnemonic (Rape) to the less offensive version (Ravish), I think it’s very clear that shock value was not the intent.
.https://www.yourdictionary.com/ravis
To take by force or seize is the literal meaning of the word. It is generally synonymous with rape. Traditionally, an indictment for rape demanded inclusion of the word ravished, which implied use of force and or violence by the man and resistance by the female.
Yeah…that’s not any better.
The intent of the poster might be relevant to whether you think the poster should be sanctioned (and I realize you’re responding to a claim of intent in the OP that may be unfounded). But it doesn’t determine whether something is actually offensive, and whether it’s appropriate to post it.
By analogy, one could imagine a thread about “nursery rhymes of earlier times” in which the variously offensive forms of Ten Little […]s are discussed. Of course it wouldn’t be beyond the pale to discuss them, but presumably we’d require considerable discretion in how that was done. I hope it wouldn’t be acceptable for someone to just post the full text of a rhyme containing racial slurs, it would not be sufficient justification that this was something that was a common nursery rhyme that they were familiar with from school, and no offense was intended.
In this thread, I was a little bemused that the moderation consisted of explicitly drawing attention an even more offensive version, this time highlighted in fluorescent green.
It was offensive and it wasn’t appropriate to post it, much less for a mod to defend and attenuate it. We are supposed to be getting away from misogyny here, especially gratuitous stuff like this. I’m a woman, reading that cast an uncomfortable pall and then later I got to read that it was just ‘boys being boys. Aren’t we cute? We learned it in school so we can get away with it for the rest of our lifetimes without being bothered to change’. It’s great to be privileged.
It was unnecessary to the content. There was a little bit of a sense of glee in getting to put something forth that was cringe-worthy. A mod note saying ‘think things through in the future. We’re trying to do better here.’ was all that was needed. The way it is now hundreds of posters have had it reinforced that it’s ok to be misogynistic and callous as long as they can point to getting it from somewhere else. Being light-hearted about rape should not be repeated as a pedagogic learning tool. Period.
Yeah, “If you think this is offensive, it used to be worse!” doesn’t make the newer version non-offensive, and considering the past history we have had on this board with misogyny you would think that eventually the wrongness of such an argument would be self evident.
The post coulda used some additional explanation with it, and a disclaimer. If presented as a fact of history it is appropriate to post even if offensive. I don’t think we should be whitewashing history as even the milder form of the mnemonic presented does.
So you think it would be appropriate to gratuitously post the full text of Ten Little N[…]s just because it’s a “fact of history”? If not, why does an extremely misogynistic mnemonic get a pass?
I fail to see
(a) what important aspect of history is being documented here;
and
(b) even if there is something worth documenting, why it can’t be done with some degree of sensitivity and discretion.
Sensitivity and discretion is not “whitewashing”.
If it’s gratuitous it’s not being presented as a fact of history.
Facts are facts, they can be addressed. I’m not saying that this one had to be posted or discussed, but simply being offensive in some circumstances does not mean it can’t ever be posted in any circumstance.
Because instead of being modded and posters learning to not be casually misogynistic, it was defended and reinforced and now has been quoted in full and posted again.
So much for ‘we’re trying to be less misogynistic here at STMB*. Which is it? Who should be believed?
There are dozens of other creative mnemonic’s out there for remembering the resistor code. I looked it up! If I were typing it out it would have made me cringe at the imagery of bad/black boys ravishing young girls aka children, but oh that slut violet gives it out freely.
And the sad excuse that over time they stopped using black and rape but guess what the offensiveness still remains and that it was blown off like no big deal really irks me too.
Ok. My previous post was too brief. I just think we should avoid making certain words or phrases ‘illegal’ so they can’t be references in context. I do not think this particular case was done right, it was missing any context and I think would have been modded normally. I’m not going to look at this as some hypothetical, it was posted without an explanation or disclaimer and would usually get some moderator notice.
As far as the misogyny here you refer to, there is way, way less of it than there was just a few years ago. There was a major change in board culture and this is now a somewhat isolated case that looks more like a mistake than some kind of reversion.
I believe you but this is horrifying.
I hope we can all band together and keep working at eliminating even more of it.
That was addressed here, and I agree iff someone makes clear that it is a well known mnemonic and not just some random one made up for shock value. ECG did that with the modnote and I agree with his action.
~Max
Yes, and disagreement with that moderation is the entire point of this thread.
Nobody disputes that the mnemonic is well known, and that it relates to the topic of that thread, in the same way that an old schoolyard rhyme containing racial slurs relates to a thread about nursery rhymes. The question is whether it’s appropriate to post such an offensively misogynistic mnemonic explicitly.
I personally don’t like framing it around offensiveness, as that is subjective. The issue being raised here is that it breaks the “no misogyny” rule. Whether the mnemonic is misogynist would remain the same regardless of whether it was taught in school.
I am fine with the claim that the poster wasn’t posting it to be misogynist. But that would be a reason to give a mod note and not a Warning. It’s not a reason to say that posting such things is okay.
And, note, @Max_S you may not actually find that rule in the official list of rules. I’ve long said we should always update those, but we often don’t.
The way I see it a post that relates to the topic and doesn’t violate any other rule is appropriate for the topic. I don’t think this particular post was a personal insult, I don’t think it was hate speech, I don’t think it was threadshitting, and I don’t think it was trolling.
~Max
lol, I was about to say.
~Max
I find the privileged “ma free speech”, “we should be able to post facts if they are true facts” attitude just breathtaking. Can people really not grasp that posting a color mnemonic that’s about rape is just incredibly offensive and inappropriate?
I mean, refer to it indirectly if you really feel it’s so incredibly important to mention it for the historical record. But show some respect and consideration.