Sexism is:
Actions, statements or beliefs that one gender is inherently superior to another, and deserves entitlements therefore.
Sexism is not:
Something to do with gender that I don’t like.
So does that example fall under the definition where you would feel it appropriate for a moderator to say “Ibanez, take that shit elsewhere, this is not appropriate and you are doing it deliberately to piss people off”?
I do think XT’s definition is suitable and pragmatic. It doesn’t deviate much from the existing rules against trolling or being a jerk, it just heightens awareness to the specific trolling and jerkery (?) being directed specifically at the women on the board.
Honestly, that would probably be on a case by case basis. Humor is in the eyes of the beholder, after all, and sometimes someone will use a ‘joke’ to try and deliberately insult or troll someone else, or score some free points…it’s only a ‘joke’ after all, lighten up, etc etc.
I’m not a mod, nor do I play on on the SDMB, but you need to have some flexibility in the rules, and some room for interpretation and context in what’s being said, how it’s being said, and what the deeper intent MIGHT be. Many times I’ve seen people trying to game the rules here and stay just under the wire…hell, I’ve probably done that myself…while at the same time, baiting another poster or needling them as much as possible.
Here is another good example. Drunky Smurf has been desperately trying to get attention in that thread, begging someone to pay attention to his escalating driveby posts. It’s in the Pit, though, so I wouldn’t report it. But notice how he keeps trying, with pointed specific comments for the express purpose of trying to get a rise out of the women posting.
And most recently, here. Now that thread is just a game for men to say the most offensive, patronizing thing they can string together to make the women angry.
Needless to say, I know these are all in the pit. I’m not asking that they get moderated. But they’re deliberately trolling, and they have a misogynist tone that is impossible to ignore. I hope I’ve provided enough examples at this point.
My baseline here would be to substitute derogatory epithets concerning black people into the paragraph, and then decide whether that would be acceptable even in the Pit. I’d say ‘no’, on this one, though I’d need to see the context of the whole conversation. ETA: Going to take that part out, as it makes me uncomfortable saying it even as an example.
Shrug. I reported it, not because it’s necessarily over the line, but because if we’re going to look at the possibility of hate speech against women, that one probably qualifies. Loath as I am to trot out the “what if he said it about black people?” argument (I think it fails as an analogy too much of the time), I have trouble thinking about other groups he could get away with saying such nasty stuff about, even in the Pit.
It’s a good question, though: at some point, are attempts to be funny by saying sexist things so obnoxious that they shouldn’t be said?
In my opinion, offensiveness-humor easily beats out puns as the lowest form of wit.
And I’m certainly not saying all of those comments should be moderated. The ones outside the Pit? Absolutely. But the ones inside the Pit are just examples that could just as easily have been seen outside. The whole “get the sand out of your vagina” for complaining that asking for boob pics in a thread where a woman was concerned she had a medical condition was gross an out of line. Sure, there’s a lot of it, and most of it is shrugged off, but then when it IS brought up in-thread, the person is then the subject of even further sexist comments. So it’s a nice cycle.
Sounds good to me.
Actual sexists - that is, people who genuinely believe in the “superiority” of one sex over another (usually, but not always, the male) - should be alllowed to make their arguments, as long as they are in fact arguments, in the same way as any other arguments - as long as it doesn’t get obsessive and repetitive (like some or the race-based ones).
I wonder how many people that complained about it in that thread(for good reason, in my opinion) also reported it to the moderators?
According to the ATMB thread, Sleeps With Butterflies did.
I would not want an official RULE that sexism is prohibited on the board.
We should not need one. The board regulars SHOULD be intolerant of anyone who stupidly posts sexist stuff and that SHOULD result in such people being effectively run out of here on a rail.
I will agree that it is regrettably true that sexist attitudes (and resulting comments, opinions, etc) find this board a more fertile soil than do racist or homophobic ones.
I’ve been reading these threads lately, and I’m bothered by a number of things I’ve read. This may not be the best thread for this, nor the most coherent structuring, but I’d like to express some things.
There is certainly more sexism/misogyny on this board than I had previously been aware of (I tend not to read the sorts of threads where those kinds of comments crop up). I definitely understand how that sort of thing is making many posters here feel uncomfortable, disgusted, and/or angry.
I understand that there are a number of posters here who feel that the moderation of this board is unjust or at least lacking in diligence, contributing to the degree that this board has a sexist/misogynist culture. I am not in a position to determine if this is indeed the case, but I’ve seen credible statements made in favor of that argument, and I feel that a reasonable discussion is warranted.
One of the things that is bothering me is that a number of people are talking over one another (I know, but hear me out a second). Some of my favorite people here have threatened to leave, and I can’t blame them for considering it. And yet some of those people have ignored or mischaracterized statements made by mods and admins (not to mention regular posters), which means we may lose out on some valuable contributors here in part because they themselves are not willing to take in information that would give them a better understanding of the mods’ position on this. Of course, the “talking past one another” is happening in all directions, and it’s always going to be a problem on this board, but I’m especially bothered by this aspect of it.
And the last thing I feel the need to address is… jokes!? Really?!
Okay. There is certainly plenty to be disgusted or angry about from some of the posters on this board, and sometimes the people who are spouting that crap also spout some pretty hateful attempts at humor. I’d say, report the hate, and leave the humor alone, but, well, obviously it can be difficult to discern what’s what when we can’t mug for the camera or put on a funny accent, or, in particular, when people are heavily invested in an argument about sexism.
I’m not going to argue that all of the jokes listed so far in this thread are appropriate or are not insensitive, nor that they are funny. But I do want to say that making humor - as the most varied example of all that is confusing and surprising and stressful and painful and joyous of what it is to be human - your target is highly problematic if you want to try to examine what sexism is and how it is hurtful on this board.
Frankly, I’m not reading those jokes the way you (any of you) are. My reading is no more or less valid than yours, at base. When you rest a part of your argument based on your reading of those jokes, your argument collapses for many other readers who may otherwise be very much in line with the points you wish to raise. They say that you are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts… but when a joke is your example, the “fact” that is represented is different for each person involved.
This isn’t to say that humor should be out of bounds for this discussion. I really mean just that it is far more problematic as a base for a leg of any arguments made than most posters discussing it seem to understand.
That’s not the most important aspect to a discussion of sexism, either in general or on this board. But it’s one area that has been bothering me in particular. If I were a more hopeful person, I’d hope that my point would be taken, and future discussions of how humor and sexism interrelate would be more fruitful.
I would say posts that contain material that either favor or condemn a specific gender. That is my definition of sexism without any real arguments like Malthus said.
By your own admission, you are someone who normally does not participate in these kinds of discussions and presumably gives very little thought to the kinds of matters brought up in them. Why, then, should your interpretation of a potentially offensive “joke” be given as much weight as the interpretation of somebody for whom these matters constitute a constant and unavoidable part of their life experience? 
Frankly, I don’t think the line between “jokes” and deliberate offensiveness is anywhere near as thin as some around here proclaim it to be.
I’m moving this to ATMB from GD because it’s about the rules and the interpretation of the rules. And since the other thread is so long and so bitter - and since it refers to extensively to other long and vitriolic threads - I’ll try to keep that the meta-sexist commentary out of this thread in its entirety.
Let the moderators and the majority decide.
But I hope deliberate anti-male sexism and male bashing is moderated as much as sexism directed at women.
Is male bashing harmless humour?
Is this the same thread where the OP started out by calling sizeable groups of men for undesirable “boys and beta males?” Because if so then the well was good and well poisoned for anything relating to sexism from the get go.
I suppose you could easily click back to the OP and figure it out if you were curious. But since you didn’t do that, nothst is not the thread in question.
Actual anti-male sexism? No. But I also think that a lot of the complaints are about a type of casual sexism that isn’t directed at men very often.
The OP said she’s good at attracting “23 year old boys or beta males” that she does not want attention from. I don’t think I agree that that’s anti-male or poisons the well.