I agree, but what I do think would be worth the trouble is to have an admins opinion on whether or not the original thread did involve threadshitting, and if so the implications of a mod condoning it?
Because if that wasn’t threadshitting, I think it will be interesting to see the reaction of the next person accused of it in whatever context.
So I read the original thread and this ATMB debacle, and am somewhat amazed that this turned into another Gynogate meltdown. Honestly, it seemed simple enough to me: Guy starts thread referencing the best billboard ever, I’m assuming many people (like myself) opened it expecting something interesting, and it’s some lady standing on a surfboard. What? Pretty lame. Oh, she’s wearing a bikini, which is what makes it so great. Sounds sort of like an 11 year old boy getting all randy because he caught a glimpse of a pretty girl’s slip in church. Get a grip. So he’s called on that and this turns into an installment of “The new misogyny rules are out of control!” No, it was just someone being called out for creating a lame OP, and no warning being issued because no rule was broken. No one’s oppressing your manly freedom, or whatever. Calm your tits.
Why does this keep evading you? You’ll be hard pressed to find a thread on page 1 of Cafe Society that isn’t about what famous woman is hot, and somehow nobody gives a shit. Feel free to talk about who you fap to; nobody cares. The issue here isn’t someone going into the 10,000,000th iteration of “Let’s Talk About Chicks, Man” and finger-wagging. That would be threadshitting. It’s “Hey, check out this awesome thing” that turns out to be “LOL, butts!” Lame. And accordingly called on it like one would be (gonna use this example again – don’t throw rocks) if someone said “Check out this awesome book” and it turned out to be “LOL, Twighlight.”
You are viewing her post through your own prism of butthurt. I’ll admit I’m making guesses here, but I do not believe Ms. Cherry has an issue with admiring the female form.
I should have included “reinterpreting other posts in bad faith” in my list in the last post. Ellen Cherry explained why she felt the post wasn’t threadshitting earlier. That’s as far as I am going into this particular swamp.
Like Ellen Cherry said upthread, the mods are still discussing this issue.
At this point, you’re the one who is reinterpreting. If you look at the definition of threadshitting, and what she stated, her statement condoned threadshitting. It’s just that simple.
“Exclusionary Males”? Not at all. I did perhaps have an “Exclusionary FinnAgain” bit ready to go, though, based on your posts here. I wouldn’t generalize to “males” in general because I have no reason to do so (especially since male posters have given a variety of positions in this thread).
For the record, I think Diosa did minorly threadshit. Not due to her actual position (about the billboard and the appreciative comments about it), though; it was more because she posted in an inflammatory manner when the discussion hadn’t been heated up until then.
But the reaction to her posts (by you and by other posters) is an even bigger overreaction and borders on absurdity. Feeling she was needlessly inflammatory is one thing, but arguing that posting a dissenting view is just beyond the pale (including claiming discussion is being prevented, referring to “feminist vigilantes” and such)… is ridiculous.
Yeah, I don’t see that, and don’t see anyone claiming to be a victim other than the guys who don’t like being teased about being so excited by a cute butt on a billboard. Who is claiming victimhood in your estimation?
No, but here’s the thing… I can speak to that from a somewhat unique perspective in that I originally read the thread in question **before **it was unambiguously threadshit upon. My thoughts at the time? “Wow, S.C. must be really boring and the OP really bored if he found that billboard notable enough to take a picture of and start a thread on.” I briefly imagined a small town all atwitter and buzzing with the controversy over such a “prurient” public display. I also wondered why the OP would think that this board would even find it interesting, much less one of the “best billboards evar!”
And like I often do when reading certain threads/posts, I briefly considered responding with some of my thoughts, but quickly decided that there was no point. It was really just too lame, and even with the sexism/misogyny kick the board’s been on, I wouldn’t have guessed that anybody would have taken offense at something so lame and tame. I did figure the OP would catch some flack for false thread advertising and get ripped on for even finding it noteworthy, but I didn’t foresee that anyone on the SDMB would react anything like that caricature of a small “hick town” that I imagined. Overestimated, I guess. :rolleyes:
BUT STILL, for people who felt differently than I did, I think there was room in that thread to express their concerns and give their perspective about how they found the billboard and posters’ reactions to it to be sexist. That might have been “threadpooping” a bit, but as long as they tried not to directly and blatantly denigrate other posters, I think it was possible to express dissent without sinking to the level of threadshitting. (Otherwise, doing so in a linked Pit thread, if someone wasn’t capable of such restraint.) Instead, what we got were responses much, MUCH, **MUCH **more personal, insulting, and yes, sexist, than anything that preceded it. And to top off the clusterfuck, such over the top inflammatory responses ultimately garnered not only official mod approval, but encouragement. :smack: (Yeah, that’ll really help raise the level of discourse!)
Besides being an obvious false dichotomy, I would think it obvious that not every discussion on the board can/should/ever will be categorized as “intellectually superior”, particularly those located in the “Mundane, Pointless Stuff I Must Share” forum. Besides, the posts and mod reaction under discussion are *counterproductive *towards resolving any sexism - real, imagined, or intentionally contrived to manufacture drama.
Please show me the complaints about the ad or the thread being “sexist”.
I almost entirely agree with this. Hell, I love me a woman in a bikini, and I was irritated at the bait-and-switch of that OP. Disagreeing with it isn’t threadshitting, it’s just disagreeing with the claim in the OP. Threadshitting in this case would be ridiculing the idea of discussing billboards.
But the point upthread, that Dio was doing a crude masturbation insult at other posters, is a fair point, and the defense that she was only making fun of folks who were actively ejaculating is pretty silly. I understand why she was making that joke, and it’s different from someone who’s making masturbation insults in political threads (because this was, after all, a thread about sexual arousal), but still it’s a borderline thing to do.
After discussing this among the staff, I agree that Diosa’s posts (and here) which prompted my note is threadshitting, and I have revised my moderation in the thread to reflect it.
Thanks to those who provided constructive input.
… what?
Ellen said in her own words that women were “weary” of men expressing sexual admiration (which she characterized pejoratively), and that women should be allowed to voice such weariness. She then went on to clarify that the thread was “sexist” and that many people felt it was a restriction upon women to not restrict men from engaging in “such talk.” She’s the one who said that Diosa’s posts were mocking posters in that thread, not attacking their arguments, and that was okay. I have invented none of this. I have reinterpreted nothing. And have certainly not acted in bad faith
You are also committing an odd fallacy. The example of Diosa’s behavior is clear threadshitting, and Ellen said it was allowed and sure seemed to be saying that she felt it ought to be allowed in other such cases . No, she didn’t say “I am condoning threadshitting”. Duh. What she did say is that she’s condoning something that is, in fact, blatant threadshitting.
Claiming that this is a “bad faith” interpretation of her very clear statements is beyond odd, considering that at least half a dozen other posters in this thread have pointed out exactly what I said. Are we all arguing in bad faith? Really? Even if you believe that Ellen didn’t mean what we’ve all read her to have said, your conclusion should be that she gave an unclear picture of her mind, and not that everybody who read her position as endorsing a particular type of threadshitting are all arguing in bad faith.
There is zero bad faith, just basic reading comprehension.
If I say I support killing with malice aforethought, and you say I am supporting murder in the first degree, you are not reinterpreting anything, let alone doing so in bad faith. If I say I support people driving with a BAC of 1.0, you could say I support drunk driving without it being in bad faith. If I say that people can go into a thread and mock the posters for having whatever discussion they’re have, you could say that I support threadshitting without saying so in bad faith.
This seems obvious.
And honestly, Marley, what’s the confusion and why all the discussion among the mods? It is blatantly obvious that Diosa’s posts were threadshitting, at least by the time she was accusing the OP of ejaculating in his shorts. Threadshitting is against the rules. And mods should not allow prohibited behaviors even if they ideologically agree. What’s the issue?
How is this not cut and dry?
Why is the answer not “Yeah, Ellen fucked up and she’s not going to be allowed to let “weary” women repeat Diosa’s behavior, after all.” What’s the nuance here?
Apologies.
“Reached the point in my…” What? I’m sorry, are you under the impression that you’ve been arguing with me at some point prior to this in the thread? Are women interchangeable to you? There’s nothing for me to concede, as I am not actually having an argument with you; I am telling you how you are coming across in this thread. I didn’t really expect you to de-trench from your position as a result, but you know, hope springs eternal.
Thanks, Ellen.
Regards,
Shodan
Thank you, Ellen, for being willing to listen to differing views and for being willing to alter your own.
Also thanks to the other Mods for even undertaking the discussion and to everyone here who elaborated on my comments in the OP.
In general, I think the Mods here do a fantastic job. And their willingness to hear complaints, along with having the integrity to listen/read with an open mind confirm that.
You realize that you can reach a point in your argument even if you just started, right? You can start at rock bottom, as your post did. Or are you nitpicking that I called your flaming an argument and not a rant?
Do you hate black people?
Interesting bit though, if you can neither address let alone refute my specific statements, accuse me of being a sexist. Nifty.
You finished that sentence early. It should have continued “… to me, subjectively, and perhaps to some others. And you should care about what I think, at all because, well, shut up!”
See, this is where I’m not sure the words that are being typed are reaching the eyes of the people reading them. No matter how many times it has been stated to the contrary, it isn’t about being offended. Even after as many times as it’s been stated, you still are throwing out the idea that this is about being offended. I guess I have to wonder why anyone would want to keep trying to put that label on it when it’s been explained that isn’t it at all.
Like you I saw the thread before Diosa’s comments. I thought it would be a clever billboard and considering this board and the OP’s musings about how they were shocked it was up I figured it was about atheism. At the very least I figured it would be funny. I clicked it and saw the butt. Offended? Not in the slightest. Honestly my first reaction was to laugh and shake my head. The OP was so impressed by a butt he liked that he took a picture of it, uploaded it to the internet, and posted it on a messageboard and proclaimed it the best billboard ever. It’s like the little boys in elementary school getting excited about their dad’s Victoria’s Secret catalog. For me (and only for me) I felt a bit of pity for him but I was not offended. I realize this might bring on the victim cry of our male sensuality warrior (this entire thread has been worth it for THAT lulzmaker), but if the OP of that thread gets to feel excited he drives by a butt every day and his feelings are valid, my feelings of embarrassment and pity for him are just as valid.
Hopefully now that Diosa has received her mod note of threadshittery all can be well again.
Come on, you can’t get Finn’s anger machine all revved up and expect it to just turn off like that. He’s winding down, but it’s gonna take a while.
There’s medication for that. Too bad it doesn’t come in blowdart form.
Yes, Ellen said that women felt restricted that men weren’t being restricted. That’s being “a victim” . And she characterized male sexuality in pejorative terms. That’s “being offended.” This isn’t complicated Merriam-Webster: America's Most Trusted Dictionary
As for the fact of sexism against men, Marley seems to have made that topic off limits. Enjoy your lulz in good health.
Aside from the fact that what I said didn’t necessarily make that specific assertion, that’s a really odd request considering that the post you’re responding to has me quoting ***you ***as saying:
(Emphasis, mine.)