You might be going too far. Burning it all down and starting fresh might be the solution at that point.
Probably the best April Fool’s prank you could ever pull on this message board would be to announce that Cecil Adams had been replaced by Cecilia Adams to better meet the needs of the 21st Century. I would LOVE to hear the heads asplode. Also Slug Signorino , or whoever draws the cartoons in his style now, is a stupid embarrassment.
Helena330 -
Poster A says X, say a comment in a Ginger v Marianne thread.
Poster B says Poster A’s statement X is motivated by “thinly-veiled sexism and misogyny”
Poster A says “Uh no. You are misinterpreting what I said and meant. Arguing that I find Marianne more attractive because she was a more relatable person and someone I could see spending time with is not motivated by sexism and misogyny.”
You, and a dozen other people can say all you want that you know what the other person was thinking and meant, and a dozen other people can say “huh?” to that interpretation, and the person who said it can testify as to what they meant, and we can argue about which is true and who is patronizing whom. Or we can agree that in regards to board health it does not matter whether or not Poster A was motivated by sexism and misogyny or not because the impact is the same either way and that impact is driven by how it is being received, by how it is perceived, by a significant portion of a demographic cohort, whether that perception is accurate or not. Whatever motivates the posting behavior the behavior seems to be having negative impact on the health of the board and that calls for action.
If you’d rather argue, trying to convince posters that what they have posted reflects their actual misogyny and sexism, than brainstorm on how to change those posters posting behaviors, go at it. But this thread is here because this is the place to brainstorm about possible rule or rule interpretation changes that may be for the best health of this board and ranting about what you are sure motivates those who think they know what they think better than you do is not the point here. There’s a still active Pit thread for that.
Yes heads would explode. BigT and I mods for a day? Heads would go nuclear. Do it Cecil!
On topic, I think the best thing that could happen is what I see beginning to happen now. People are being proactive with requesting moderation for threads they think are inappropriate for the forum and with posts that are inappropriate for the thread. Now, for every action there is a reaction. And unlike Newtonian physics, social physics is far more chaotic.
But DSeid hasn’t devalued your statements. He has not at any point said you are wrong. What he is doing is is telling everyone who is arguing about whether you are right or wrong that it doesn’t matter. He’s trying to forestall a pointless debate over whether the board really is too male centric. Just because he’s using the word “perception” doesn’t mean he’s saying you’re wrong. He’s saying, in effect, “Assume the women are right. What can we do about it?”
And, I’m sorry. But that one decision last week just cannot and will not not fix the entire problem. Sunny Daze’s thread in the Pit was started after that ruling. That thread shows there is a lot more than just that one issue. There is a lot more than just unexpected gratuitous sexually disturbing content. There are bigger problems involved that trigger warnings can fix.
The thing is, DSeid and Lamia are on the same side in this conversation. Both of them want the mods to do something about the same problem. Both have pushed the idea of extending the “Don’t be a Jerk” rule to cover stuff that’s usually been ignored. And yet you act as if one is on your side and the other isn’t.
I have my proposal, too. It boils down to the same thing as theirs, albeit more specific. But I’ll give that in a followup post.
Anyways: my proposal is one I made a long time ago, when I was fairly new. It may seem extreme, but I will explain my reasoning.
That solution is: count all bigotry as breaking the “don’t be a jerk” rule. Not just hate speech, but bigotry in general. The attitude on this board has always been that we should “prove the bigots wrong,” i.e., argue with them, rather than silence them. The result of that will always be that those people keep posting these things, and thus women and minorities feel unwelcome.
I have never seen a welcoming community online that doesn’t have a rule against bigotry to go along with civility rules. And I continue to bring up the real life case of how gaming cons finally realized that forbidding bigotry worked better than trying to be all-inclusive. It’s the tolerance paradox.
Yes, the board prohibits hate speech, which is important. And small inroads have been made on specific issues. But the problem still remains that some posters still shove misogyny or other forms of bigotry into things.
I get that this would be a big change. So my proposal is a little less stark. The problems are said to be in the more casual forums, correct? So let’s enforce that there. If you want to get into a debate about it, you can still go to Great Debates and argue about SJWs and all that crap, or make excuses for people who have committed sexual assault. But keep it out of the more casual forums.
I’m not even proposing a draconian method. Just a soft touch of pushing those threads off to other forums. Let there at least be some forums on this board that women can feel like they can post in without facing this bullshit.
As for exactly what counts as bigotry: Well, we’ll need to brainstorm about that. But there are clearly things that cross the line for the vast majority of Dopers. And, yes, maybe the actual laws will err on the side of being slightly too permissive. But it’s a problem that can be dealt with.
Otherwise, I agree with Lamia. Things may get better for a bit, but they’ll get worse again soon enough.
And, yes, feel free to water down what I said to something more acceptable if it’s still too far. Some progress is better than none.
I fail to see how an anti-bigotry rule could be applied to almost any of the example threads in Sunny Daze’s Pit thread. A Betty v Veronica thread isn’t bigotry. “What do women think about Hooters?” isn’t bigotry.
Men have been the dominant group. But I believe in equal rights. Do you not agree that in making sure women have rights, we should make sure that men have equal rights? That by making sure we do not discriminated against women we do not discriminate against men?
No I am not taking that position. I said exactly what I said, not what you impute.
That’s her personal choice and nothing to do with her being a woman, unless you’re suggesting that women are by nature disinclined to frank and forthright discussion. I don’t think that’s true at all.
Frankly, I have always found the cartoon illustrations of the Dope revolting, from when I first started reading it over 30 years ago in the Reader. Indeed, I passed over the column for quite some time because I found the images so revolting, it was an active turn off. It wasn’t until someone handed me a column that had been cut from the newspaper without the cartoon that I ever actually read it, and that’s when I realized that past the ugly, crappy picture was something worth reading.
So… how many people have been turned off by Slug’s cartoons over the years? Who knows? But if there was one thing I’d happily cut loose it would be those cartoons. I realize, of course, that this is my opinion and I assume someone likes what Slug does, most likely some women are in that group, but hey, that’s my opinion.
That was just as much anon-the-Dope thing.
ETA : That’s talking about what happened here, not off-boards, mods.
How many people are still coming here from the column, vs internet searches that link straight to the board threads? I know I haven’t looked at anything Straight Dope-related besides the SDMB in at least a year, now. And before that, it was very infrequently, usually only when someone does a “Cecil has answered this” threadshit (IMO - if “lmgtfy” is a threadshit, so’s that, nowadays)
Right… they don’t tolerate cyber-bulling, but the posts and threads that make up an incident of cyber-bulling remain for all time. So to someone coming in from outside it might look like it’s tolerated.
And it certainly did occur - not to mention a couple of PM’s that were objectionable, and one recent one that was quite cruel which wound up with the offender banned before I ever saw the PM so I presume I was not the only victim that time. Then there were the demands for video of incidents from 40 years ago, long before ubiquitous video was a thing, accusations that, basically, boiled down to me conducting a 15 year long con (which is weirdly flattering, the notion that I am capable of such long-term planning and execution of such a thing, but still insulting as to my integrity), accusations I was a sock, then, topping it off, one of the offenders demanding copies of my pilot’s license and other personal information that really SHOULD have been shut down immediately by the mods as a board policy violation and attempt at doxxing.
So yes, while the bullying was dealt with to some degree, and has (for now) abated, I think it could have been dealt with more assertively and there could have been some actual clean up of the offending posts or, I dunno, official statement that this has been determined to be an example of cyber-bullying and is not acceptable on this forum.
It’s easy to dismiss bullying, just as it’s easy to dismiss sexism or racism or any other -ism, if you yourself are not the target. For as long as I have been here moderation has been light on this board which means some offensive material slips past the net. This board has been around what, nearly two decades? Two decades of allowing a low level of offense can’t be explained away as a one time incident or just one mod, it’s an on-going pattern that demonstrates that yes, the -isms are tolerated here and you can be targeted as long as the bullies don’t go too far… so you both have people leaving, and people deciding not to join and the board gets slowly more middle-class, more male, and more white over time.
I generally find Slug’s cartoons revolting. I think that’s his goal. It’s a guy thing. Not an admirable guy thing, but there it is but (shrug).
I don’t have much to add, but I want to go on record as another woman who feels this way. If these cartoons frequently featured blacks being portrayed as monkeys, would that be excused as ‘well, it’s part of the SD history’ or ‘that’s just Slug’s style’?
Remember, too, that the old strips are constantly being recycled, so in a real way these “hey, twenty years ago gross sexism was okay” cartoons ARE the current face of the Straight Dope.
I don’t know how these recycled strips are chosen – is the process automated? – but maybe have a human look at the cartoons attached to the strips before they are posted? And ask themselves if the cartoon depicts women in demeaning, hyper-sexualized ways, and if so, is that cartoon an essential part of the column’s point?
Given the decision to reopen the “do women brag about” thread just made, can we have more mods enter this discussion with their opinions about whether or not the declining share of female Dopers is a problem or not. Because dang, given the input we’ve heard from a large representation of for now still active female Dopers … well imagining myself as one of them re-opening that is hard to interpret as anything but a slap in the face. If I was one of the many women who has expressed the concerns that have been expressed, that would be a final straw of disrespect to me.
No wound like a self-inflicted wound.
yeah, I looked at that and said “Way to read the room, guy!”
I think the mods have been fairly consistent in saying that the board is run according to their interpretations of the rule, not majority rule.
Regards,
Shodan
Yeah, no one’s disputing that. We’re saying one mod’s *interpretation *is pants, and that’s not a good look. I’m certainly not under any illusions as to what side has the numbers in this fight.
Of course interpreting and setting the rules is their job and not by majority or minority decisions. One would hope though that they interpret the rules with an eye to the long term health of the board.
The mods’ opinions are requested. This is the place to do that isn’t it?
Is a declining female membership, a more male predominant board, a concern or not?
Do you believe many female Dopers and potential Dopers experience the current version of these fora as unwelcoming and off-putting? Not a question of whether or not you believe they should or what you think motivates the posts that result in their feeling that way.
Should there be some better attempt to do something about the declining number of active female Dopers?
If so what?
In this thread I do think non-participation by mods is making a comment as well.