I acknowledge that and this thread is based on that acknowledgement, istm. But I don’t understand why you would be disinterested on whether the problem is getting worse, better or neither.
Sentiment endorsed. Generally speaking, negativity at that message board goes unchallenged.
Generally speaking, anything posted on this message board will be challenged. (Hyperbole provided free of charge. Translation: don’t post views here if you’re not prepared to be challenged on them. Especially if your assertions lack substantiation. I perceive this tradition as a good one, though not something that is acceptable in most places outside of this message board. Properly.)
This board is not for everyone, or even for most people. Discussion about on board sexism still legit though.
Moderator Note
Let’s have no more mention of giraffeboard. We are discussing how we operate our board here, not what they do with theirs.
If you want to make a comment about how they run their board, do it on their board.
But when someone like DrDeth makes accusations of cyberbullying, harassment, and stalking on part of GB’s members, shouldn’t we be able to respond to that? Those are pretty serious accusations.
Yes, we are a challenging bunch. “Cite!” is very commonly heard.
Yes, I agree. I dont think this board is sexist, however, but yes, sexists do post here.
Yikes, moving on now.
Question for the female members.
We’re here to fight ignorance. From time to time, that will involve some off-putting thread titles and thread topics. Mostly with women and minorities at the short end of the stick, due to the power structure in our society. Hey, I don’t make the rules. (Yes, there will also be off-putting thread titles that have diddly squat to do with fighting ignorance.) Anyway, there’s a trade-off between this board’s mission and the civility involved in polite spaces where uncomfortable topics are evaded.
I see much less trade-off with framing offensive or off-putting questions in an apologetic manner. (Speaking personally and sharing my bias, I’d frankly be embarrassed from presenting such material in anything but an apologetic manner. But that’s me.) I mean the poster could at least acknowledge that he’s dinging half of humanity when he asks not-so-innocent questions about -oh I don’t know- cinematic depictions of the anatomically improbable. Is that too much to ask of the Doper Bros?
How much would that help? I’m discussing best practices by stand-up posters here, not reasons for mod intervention. I’d expect hypothetically apologetic inquirers to be subject to some ridicule - but that’s ok! There’s a proper time and place for ridiculous questions, just as there’s a proper time and place for mockery.
Personally, I’ve never found the male/female ratio of the Dope to be a problem - I work in tech, all my spaces have always been way more male than female, and it just doesn’t bug me at all. I had a look at some of the misogynistic-threads-examples in the other discussion, and generally my reaction was - yes, I can understand how people could find that annoying. But speaking for myself, I don’t. My buttons are just installed in the wrong places to be pressed by any of that stuff.
[ETA - sorry, just saw the mod note and had to delete most of this]
How Board Culture Should Be is one of those debates that I usually don’t get into too deeply - after all, the only posting style I’m actually in control of is mine, and telling people how they should behave in order to make me feel comfortable isn’t usually a thing that goes particularly well for me in real life. But even if it turns out that 95% of the women on the board feel a different way and I’m one of the weird 5% … well, I guess I’m one of the weird 5%.
N/m most of post got deleted.
OK, just thinking how much of my big long post is salvageable … lets just say this. All people are concerned about In Groups and Out Groups. There are definitely some Out Groups on the Dope - you could probably say conservatives are, for instance. That doesn’t bother me much - IANAC.
I’ve never felt Out Grouped on the grounds of being female, and I don’t feel more in danger of being Out Grouped here for *other *reasons than anywhere else on the Internet, and a lot less than in some places. So you’re golden.
Sorry for whatever error I made.
Here are the older ones:
And the newer ones:
https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=830200
https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=856217
They should work fine.
You of course feel the same thing about polling done for the elections and the census. You weren’t polled so maybe not so reliable?
If polls were reliable, Hillary would be President.
Your polls werent randomly selected, they were self identified.
I think you misunderstand what I said completely.
It may be that there is more “thinly-veiled sexism and misogyny” than there had been in the past or not. Whether or not it has increased, whether or not we agree or disagree as to what is or is not “thinly-veiled sexism and misogyny” the problem still exists and unaddressed will likely lead to further reduction in female regulars over time. Agreeing as to whether or not it has increased or not or even as to what is in fact sexist or misogynistic is not required to agreeing that something needs to be done about it. The intent of this thread here is not to debate the perception but to brainstrom as to what the board can do about it, given that whatever the reality the result is real.
The polls actually were quite good and I think you know that.
To cover the very basic that I would think almost all here should not need explained: these polls are self selected samples and thus subject to a bias but the self-selection bias and its impact on the results was the same for all of them. The fact that each set of two polls from similar time periods gave similar results is very telling. In the statistics perspective they may not be perfectly valid (they may all miss the true bullseye of the true state, not be accurate) but they are reliable (reproducible between tests). Excellent for tracking purposes, not so good for saying what the actual share of genders is.
Not actually quite what the op was about. I am specifically avoiding having to have this thread debate whether or not there is in fact so much sexism and bias here. There is a perception of so much of it that it is resulting in fewer female posters. Whether or not that perception is accurate does not matter to the importance of addressing it for the good of this board, assuming one feels that the board is best served by having a fair representation of both (?all?) genders. The perception is real.
I’ve been posting here a long time, and have seen the board culture become more hostile towards women. Sometimes it’s better for a while, but in general it’s gotten worse over time. Based on specific threads I remember and searched down this evening, I’d say the problem started around 2009. Interestingly, a Longform essay about online harassment of women I saw last night points to 2010 as the year when things started to get much worse for women on the Internet as a whole. I think it’s likely that the SDMB has been affected by a rising tide of misogyny on the Internet.
The really sad thing is, we have long-standing rules about not being a jerk, not hijacking threads, etc. These rules could have helped to protect our little island from the flood, had they been properly enforced. I trust that the Mods mean well and don’t want the SDMB to become some sort of He-Man Woman-Hater forum, but it seems that many of them have a huge blind spot when it comes to this sort of thing.
I hesitate to provide examples since I’ve seen how well that worked out for Sunny Daze in the current Pit thread, but here’s a fairly recent one. A few months ago in a thread called Formerly active lurkers: Why don’t you post any more? I posted this:
A Mod quickly replied saying he was concerned to hear that this had become such a problem and encouraged me to report such threadshitting whenever I saw it.
I am of course kidding. A Mod quickly replied to reiterate his previous reply to a different poster about how liberals harass women too (for context, the entire exchange begins with post #28 of the thread):
Thanks for reminding me how seriously the Mods take women’s concerns here, Loach.
As I mentioned in the Pit thread, I’ve been here so long that I don’t expect I’ll ever completely abandon the SDMB. However, I am going to be taking a break from posting for a while. It probably won’t be for too long and I don’t expect I’ll be much missed even if it is, but if anyone wonders why there’s one less woman around then they can look back at this post for my reason. There are too many sexist jerks here, and the Mods don’t do enough about it.
Thank you for actually engaging in some brainstorming.
But then you have stuff like this, “When a beautiful woman …” shit. If that aint trolling it is minimally pretty jerkish to post. But not under how we currently apply don’t be a jerk and we all know that and it was modded in that interpretation. I am proposing that the jerk line includes stuff like that thread at least.
Best practices are fine for the well intended … but the most offensive is not coming from them.
Yes. Very true.
I claim though that attempts at best practices by a small minority can change the atmosphere somewhat. How much is somewhat? Not sure.
We used to have a small number of conciliatory posters here. We still do. I miss those that have gone. I think their relative numbers and influence have declined. Abrasive speech has its place, but it’s too much fun frankly and tends to drive out higher quality speech.
I narrowly agree though: I can’t really claim total solvency from my recommendation, only hypothesize discernible improvement.
Lamia, I’ll notice, and I’ll miss you.
DSeid, how can you see woman after woman posting that this is how she feels, and you dismiss us patronizingly by saying we have the wrong perception? It’s NOT perception, it’s a real feeling. We’ve also told you what can be done about it, and to which we came to a conclusion last week, but you don’t like it so you keep trying to hammer away in the interest of finding different ones. We found one. It’s to enforce the DON’T BE A JERK rule. We agreed that when we see instances of ANYONE being a jerk, we agreed we’d report it rather than resorting to quietly hitting the back button.
Why is this so difficult? When a kid comes to you with an earache, do you x-ray their leg? No, you believe what they’re telling you.
With regards to new female members, I think one major contributor is probably the cartoons on the main page. I’m sorry, I know it’s history, and they’ve been around long before me, etc. I get that I’m mentioning the sacred cow here. But if Madison Avenue is to be believed at all, cover art matters. It may be necessary for Slug to evolve a bit in the #metoo era.
Let’s face it, no opportunity is ever passed up to include a pair of naked cartoon dugs . And I use that word purposefully because the women are always drawn in an ugly and oversexed fashion. Even those who are clothed are always looking clueless or downright crazy.
It’s an aesthetic that not too many women will find appealing. It’s exactly the sort of humor that appeals to obnoxious 13-19 year old* trolls-in-training.
I have noticed that it hasn’t been quite as raw lately, so maybe there’s already been a change, or maybe not. I can say that there have definitely been days when I opened the page and was truly disgusted by them. Of course, I can’t find any of the really super bad examples at the moment. :smack:
*Mental age, that is.