And…scene.
Seriously, you couldn’t end this thread on a more perfect note if you tried.
I’ll drop by later.
Zoning out? 
I agree. 100% couldn’t have been said any better.
So, wait. asahi says that younger, non-white, and female posters aren’t signing up the SDMB because they’re not signing up to message boards at all, and the response is “why don’t men do something about that?”
What do you want me to do, go around and force youngsters to post on message boards?
That depends-Do you care about keeping the few we’ve got?
I don’t think our concern in this thread is how we attract people to the boards who aren’t interested in message boards in the first place. Asahi’s offered solution to the actual problem, a “bro culture”, was for more women to be interested in becoming members. That’s a tautological solution at best, and a “women need to change” solution at worst.
I don’t think he has any ill intent in mind. Based on his other posts, I think he recognizes the issue and genuinely wants to do something about it. But I felt this particular comment reflected the unconscious male bias we all have. I should have been less antagonistic in calling it out.
So you’re saying that if I go around and force youngsters to post on message boards, then that’ll help us keep the few younger, non-white, and female posters we’ve got?
I suppose that makes sense - if they have more likeminded peers then they would probably find the environment more welcoming. Presuming the new members don’t spend too much of their time complaining about how they’re chained to their desks and being compelled to post via the application of cattle prods, anyway.
Right - the (presumed?) shortage of potential new members isn’t something we can do anything about. Improving the “bro culture” is something that we can do something about. Well, theoretically at least. I thought I was already doing my best not to be toxic, and I see my ability to stem toxic behavior by others to be pretty limited.
(Looking at the words I posted just a few minutes ago)Nope-that is not what I said. Are you perhaps looking at some other post in some other thread?
Nope! I was just riffing on the fact you responded to:
“What do you want me to do, go around and force youngsters to post on message boards?”
with
“That depends-Do you care about keeping the few we’ve got?”
Considering that your answer would be presumed to be talking about whether I should be doing the single action I discussed doing…
It’s limited, but not nonexistent.
There are some posters who will never get it, who will dig their heels in at any perceived threat to their position. We’re not going to be able to stem their toxic behavior unless it crosses the line into being a jerk or some other rule violation.
But there are plenty of others who simply were unaware of the problem. We’ve seen posters in this thread who said as much, and said they will change their behavior based on this new understanding. I didn’t participate in the “girl A or girl B” threads, but I didn’t see any problem with them. I now get why the volume of them contribute to the problem.
By calling out instances of unconscious bias, we can influence posters who are willing to consider a perspective other than their own. I’ll leave guesses of the ratio of the first group to the second to your own optimism/pessimism.
I’m pretty damn pessimistic by nature, so that’s not too encouraging…
The distasteful part of this is that to actually implement such an approach, I’m going to have to start stomping around where angels fear to tread. I too avoided the “girl A or girl B” threads, because just from reading the titles I concluded that I didn’t have an opinion on the subject. (It didn’t even cross my mind to rate the characters on fuckability.) To be the narstiness police I’d have to go around opening all sorts of uninteresting threads because if I don’t read it, I can’t call it out.
Eh, no need to be the board nanny and seek it out. That would get annoying for everyone quick. If you’re already participating in a thread and see something, then say something. And put all your liquids in a 1-qt plastic bag.
This is exactly how it goes. And it is really annoying, and makes you guys look unutterably stupid for not realizing you keep bragging on how you’re so great for ‘beating’ someone who isn’t interested in fighting you.
Coincidentally, I’ve very recently seen this behavior in a video game. Buncha PvP trolls bragging about how they had been playing PvE for months to reduce the influence of a certain large PvE group and claiming victory. Except the vast majority of the PvE group doesn’t give a shit.
Does Straight Dope have a bro culture? I’ve never noticed it. This place is more of a nerd/geek culture than bro culture.
Creating an environment where people can’t express opinions outside of a narrow box also discourages people from joining and voicing their opinions. Several Trump supporters here have mentioned keeping their politics secret to avoid verbal abuse.
There’s a pretty significant overlap between the two, speaking as someone who has been classified as a nerd/geek since the 1970’s.
Creating an environment with no limits also discourages people from joining and voicing their opinions. Perhaps we are seeking some sort of … if not “happy”… how about “contented” medium.
On a board about fighting ignorance Trump supporters are pretty much doomed to encounter opposition.
Women, on the other hand, shouldn’t experience that kind of opposition.
As to how ‘bro’ this place is, I’m a man (and a pretty blatantly uncultured one), so I don’t really sense it as much as I should, but even I notice now and again a perspective being aired that would be unappealing to women (and also men with taste). Now I mostly stomp around in GD and the Pit where we’re all pretty much argumentive and/or assholes anyway, but women being treated as sex objects is not as nonexistent as it should be.
Yes, women are socially programmed* to just back out. But that’s the patriarchy talking. (Yes, the patriarchy can also take the form of men being violent and intimidating women.) One of the biggest things in feminism was to tell women that they can be strong enough to stand up and fight. Yes, you may not be able to win a physical altercation, but you can very well win an ideological one. This is even more true when you are anonymous online and thus the threat of violence is extremely reduced.
You lose 100% of the battles you don’t take. And I don’t mean that in a male-centric “winning” aspect. Winning simply means (mostly) achieving your goals, and losing simply means (mostly) not achieving your goals. It’s simply another way of saying “if you don’t try, you will fail 100% of the time.”
That said, you guys are completely misunderstanding the suggestion (from me, at least, and I believe from others), because you are assuming our suggestion is about attacking people. When I say you should make more threads about men, it’s because that is a solution to the stated problem of there being too many threads about women. It has nothing at all to do with attacking people.
The stated issue was not “these threads are wrong because they objectify women.” It was “the proportion of these threads shows a male-centered bias.” And thus a valid solution is to make more male threads, and change that proportion.
I actually would argue that most of these threads aren’t started in a sexually objectifying way. There are some people who respond in those ways, but that’s not what they are about. It’s about which character you like the most. Yes, attraction can play a part in that, but they are not being reduced to mere objects. I picked Mary Anne over Ginger because Ginger is a pompous jerk, for instance.
Yes, some people in those threads do respond in objectifying ways. What I’m not sure is whether calling them out will be productive. Sure, if they did it accidentally, it can help. But the actual sexists will likely double down. Unless we can get the mods to enforce that as “being a jerk,” I don’t see that as being fixed.
And let me repeat that I am on your side in this issue. Yes, there was a previous issue where I wasn’t, but that was resolved to my satisfaction. As far as the Dope being unwelcoming to women, I am all for trying to change that.
But I also am fully aware that fan forums constantly include women judging male characters in the same way that men are judging women. I’m also very much into sex-positive feminism. Hell, I’ve fought my own brain so that I am (mostly) no longer squicked out by women talking about men as attractive, because I knew that I was being biased.
That is why I suggest what I suggest. Not because I want to get back at the people who objectify women. I may have been socially programmed to think that way, but I’m also aware that such would only fail.
*Not a sexist thing. Men are socially programmed, too. I would hope that was obvious (especially given my final sentence) but you never know in these types of threads.