Misogyny and Moderation, again

[Shodan]

@UltraVires

If a poster says that he saw a single woman, dressed in short shorts, ass cheeks hanging out, and with long beautiful legs, the poster is not directing his comments at women. He is commenting about a single woman that he saw, not all women as a group.

If I saw a black guy rob a convenience store, I am in no way, at least on this side of the looking glass, making a comment about all blacks or that blacks in particular rob stores.

Yes you are. You are saying that all women are sex toys, and all blacks are criminals. Repeat ad infinitum.

Regards,
Shodan

[iiandyiiii]

@Shodan

Yes you are. You are saying that all women are sex toys, and all blacks are criminals. Repeat ad infinitum.

Regards,
Shodan

Ha! What an excellent parody of the Fox News brand of fantasy “liberal” – the liberals that attack Sean Hannity in his dreams, but barely exist in the land of the real.

[kopek]

@CarnalK

You know, whenever there’s an ATMB thread about race, often someone brings up “What about disparaging speech about Republicans?”. Do you want to be that guy in the misogyny thread?

That’s a thread I don’t want to be in at all; or the race threads for that matter since my own racial situation is a little ---- confusing/confused. But you can bet your house that I want to read both and that I hope, within the current framework at least, that some of them happen.

@Czarcasm

have you considered starting a thread about how religion is handled on this board?

Even though it wasn’t directed at me; we’ve had them. Like we’ve had threads like this. And we probably always will.

And at least to me that ain’t a bad thing at all.

[CarnalK]

Don’t you see that hijacking misogyny threads with other things is part of the problem? “Hey ladies, maybe if we are going to address misogyny unless we address every other possible bias at the same time, it’s only fair!”

[RTFirefly]

@kopek

We may disagree over the “occasionally” (I would call it constant but I treat it as a sort of inside joke/running theme here) but ------

is offensive speech only offensive when it is directed at what we could call a recognized protected class such as women?

I’d put it this way:

If posters that I think highly of wander off and no longer post here, I think we lose something when that happens. A certain amount of that is inevitable, of course, because life happens. And as long as it’s all due to incidental and varying reasons, it’s not something to worry about, and there’s nothing to be done anyway.

But if we’re losing a fair number of good posters who all belong to a particular class, and we’re losing them largely for the same reasons, we might should do something about that - not just for them, but for ourselves as well.

We know what we need to do to fix this problem, so we should just do it.

And as far as equity is concerned, are we chasing away Christian posters the way we’re driving away women posters? The very fact that there’s a problem with one group but not the other suggests that something inequitable is going on already, and that’s what we need to fix.

[Triskadecamus]

I left the board for reasons having nothing to do with its content, or management.

I came back, and have already noticed that although I still find it of interest, I no longer enthusiastically recommend it to others. The great debates aren’t all that great. The general questions are seeking validation or agreement more than information or facts. There seems to be some confusion that permitting the expression of ideas implies approval of the content of those ideas.

To my thinking, a post describing, or attributing physical sex attributes of even non specific other persons is marginal at best, could not possibly rise above the level of IMHO, and most probably belongs in the Pit. A desire to “hit that” is information only about the poster, and is denigrating enough to qualify as a personal attack, by the poster against himself. Pseudo intellectual sadomasochistic masturbation is probably not even acceptable for the Pit. The entirely unsupported assertion that “they do it too!” is beneath refutation.

I think a one line, one time warning a kind response from moderators. But again, I take a professional behavioral view of such behavior. No is more likely to repeat actions that evoke no response at all. Aside from the one line warning, leaving the OP’s name associated with a thread that drops into oblivion without another response serves my needs precisely. If similar behavior by the poster becomes evident, their name as original poster is sufficient for me. Signal to noise quality on the Internet is low enough to require stringent standards.

Tris

---

No, it’s because I heard you that I am not listening.

[Shodan]

@CarnalK

Don’t you see that hijacking misogyny threads with other things is part of the problem? “Hey ladies, maybe if we are going to address misogyny unless we address every other possible bias at the same time, it’s only fair!”

A consistent set of rules means we can address all kinds of bias at the same time. I recognize that consistency is not what you value, but I think that’s a mistake.

“Don’t be a jerk” is one thing, and it’s consistent and addresses all kinds of problems at once. “Don’t be a jerk, except…” is something else.

Regards,
Shodan

[CarnalK]

Nope, it’s a distraction. You are letting perfect be the enemy of the good and I have a hard time believing it’s being done for cynical purposes.

[SlackerInc]

Carnal, I think you missed a “not” somewhere. But arguments about consistency of moderation standards are not a hijack.

@Velocity

IANAM (I am not a mod,) but I thought the general rules of the Straight Dope are that people are allowed to say unsavory things, or advocate for unsavory viewpoints, as long as they do so in a way that is not flagrantly abusive or profane.

It’s like the discussion from a few months ago about whether we should permit talk about race that was offensive - should such content be banned because it is *expressed *offensively, or because its very *nature *is offensive?

Precisely. Again, this is not a barbecue or a dinner party. The people are far too different from each other (which is a good thing) and there is no food or music or anything to enjoy. Are there really any successful forums that have people hanging around chatting about pleasantries like at a party, but without refreshments or entertainment?

@galen_ubal

I would also suggest that you show how being mocked for what you choose to believe is the same as being mocked and diminished for something (gender) that is an accident of birth, that you have no choice over?

I agree 100% with this. That is exactly why I should be able to mock or throw shade on Muslims for being Muslim, but it should not ok to do the same about straight white men. I realize this is not what you intended, but it is the clear logical result of using the standard of choice vs. the way you were born.

@MrDibble

But hey, kudos on the gratuitous trans dig you slipped into your post.

Exhibit A for why those of us who lament political correctness see the woke crowd as imagining offenses where none exist.

@Isosleepy

I don’t think it is possible at all to moderate this board to the point where no surviving posts are offensive to anyone. Or at least not without this board losing much of what makes it have value.

Cosigned. I don’t think some of the people advocating for certain strict standards of moderation really comprehend how boring the board would become if they had their way. It would be boring even for them, with no antagonists to joust with.

[thorny_locust]

@Shodan

A consistent set of rules means we can address all kinds of bias at the same time. I recognize that consistency is not what you value, but I think that’s a mistake.

But all kinds of bias are not the same thing.

I’m currently in a discussion with a poster who’s biased againsts wasps. (The insects, not the acronymical humans.) I don’t think a moderator needs to step in and address that particular bias.

@Shodan

“Don’t be a jerk” is one thing, and it’s consistent

Really?

Haven’t we been arguing, for multiple pages and through multiple threads, about what particular behavior consistitues “being a jerk” to the point of being modded?

There certainly isn’t a consistent definition of being a jerk. That doesn’t mean the mods can’t use it as a criteria.

[SlackerInc]

@SlackerInc

That is exactly why I should be able to mock or throw shade on Muslims for being Muslim, but it should not ok to do the same about straight white men.

D’oh, that should read “should not BE ok”. :smack:

[Sherrerd]

@Mean_Mr.Mustard

Serious question. I am a Christian. I am frequently offended by the way Doper atheists belittle and insult my beliefs, often using disparaging language. …

@galen_ubal

I would suggest you bring this up in a separate thread, as it has nothing to do with misogyny, which is the subject of this thread.

Unless, of course, you’re trying to divert the conversation.
If that, I would suggest that you cite specific examples of dehumanizing comments - not simply ones that hurt your feelings, but ones that deny your very personhood.
I would also suggest that you show how being mocked for what you choose to believe is the same as being mocked and diminished for something (gender) that is an accident of birth, that you have no choice over?

Yes, MMM appears to be equating

________ believe stupid things

with

________ are objects for me to use as I please.

The insult to the class of persons in the first blank is not the same as the insult to the class of persons in the second.

[Bone]

For real? How does every thread about misogyny turn into something not about misogyny? It’s not about straight white men. It’s not about religion. It’s not about a bunch of other shit except crappy treatment of women. JFC. Stay on topic, or don’t post in this thread.

[/moderating]

[Atamasama]

@Bone

For real? How does every thread about misogyny turn into something not about misogyny?

It’s simple whataboutism.

And honestly, from an objective standpoint, I think misogyny should trump any other kind of bias/toxicity anyone can think of, simply because of the fact that this is a population of people slightly in the majority that is discriminated against. Based on that alone, it deserves to be addressed before you worry about any other kind of bias.

[Ulfreida]

@alice_in_wonderland

Occasionally I’m overwhelmed by all the change I see in the world. Lots of things shifting, lots to keep up with. It can be a lot.

But not here. Men continue to say disgusting things, women continue to object, other men rush in to explain how the women are wrong, women continue to leave, mods continue to flail around trying to figure out why.

Manda Joe, you are tenacious and I respect that. However, the amount of emotional labour women are expected to do to get men to behave in a non-repulsive way is disheartening.

I seldom come here anymore, which I realize many don’t regard as a loss. However, traditionally I have bought a membership, bought merch, supported other members with actual cash money. But this means nothing in the context of this place. My contribution and discomfort is of less concern than the idea of actually speaking about women in a way that is remotely respectful and not dehumanizing. That’s too much to manage.

In fact, up thread the suggestion is that women should find other boards that are friendlier to women, rather than suggesting that male (some) posters could try to be less piggish.

Ok, good, I’ll do that. Along with at least a dozen other women posters that don’t come here anymore because it’s gross. Oh well, as long as the boys can talk about ‘hitting that, with the ass hanging out’ all is well in SDMB land.

Stay classy folks.

This. I think I too am done. Life’s too short to voluntarily read this crap. I have nothing to add.

[SmartAleq]

Really. Even in a thread you figure would be innocuous and maybe even a little fun it’s like flies on shit as soon as one of the well known usual suspects comes in and starts whirling and shitting you know all the fun is sucked out and ony the shit will remain. This is fun? This is entertaining? This is a place I want to spend time? Not so much.

Manda JO, you’re a trouper with a cast iron constitution to have managed to get this far–not only could I not have done so, I wouldn’t have. Why bother? You shovel your way through the rooms full of shit and there’s never a fuckin’ pony. You can’t even say “Goddammit, I want my fuckin’ pony” without fifteen assholes blaring about how nobody promised you a pony and there are no ponies here’s proof and what about TEH MENZ who NEVER EVER GET PONEEZ, HUH??? HUH??? Ugh. Fuckit.

[SlackerInc]

Kudos for correctly spelling “trouper”.

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

@SlackerInc

Kudos for correctly spelling “trouper”.

Fuck you, dude. You are the problem. You’re 1% as smart as you think you are, and zero percent as interesting. She doesn’t need your kudos. Nobody needs anything you have to contribute to this discussion.

Warning for personal insults outside the pit, I know. Sorry, Bone. I’m out too.

[engineer_comp_geek]

Moderator Action

@Bone

How does every thread about misogyny turn into something not about misogyny?

Mostly because there are certain individuals here who do not want to admit that we have a problem, or don’t want (or are unable) to change.

While this thread has been derailed, let me make one thing perfectly clear. We are absolutely committed to reducing the misogyny on this board. Our path on this regard is not up for debate. Everyone needs to get with the program. Period.

This is closed.