No, he was purposely misdirecting towards Helena330.
Because the board rules have never been to treat everyone gently. If the new rule is to kneel down to the most sensitive of feminists, then let’s at least hear that or get a sticky at the top of GD. If it is not the new rule, then let’s hear the new fucking rule.
No rule on this board has ever been that we must treat non-posters with absolute respect. Let’s hear the new rule.
How about: Don’t be a creepy perv and keep it in your pants.
Just some friendly advice from a person who typically enjoys your posts - You’re really digging in unnecessarily. I’m hardy a feminist, nor am I ultrasensative. I suggest you take a step back and put yourself in the other person’s shoes. You are pining for a rule pronouncement but none will be forthcoming beyond what has already been offered.
There’s a balance between those who are prone to take offense and those that are prone to be offensive. It’s not a bright line. I don’t want to see mysoginy perpetuated on the board and if it presents itself moderation may step in. In this case, I wouldn’t call your comment mysoginy per se, but it was a bit gross and demeaning. If we were buddies in real life and it was just us, that may be passable. If there was another random person there it would transform the situation to me being embarrassed for you and commenting to cool it. If we didn’t know each other I’d think it a pretty douchey comment and disassociate myself with you. Context.
So in that that thread, demeaning and off topic, so gentle guidance to get back on track seemed appropriate - which is exactly what JC offered.
Seriously? I’m a woman. I never think of another woman as a “hot chick.” Do you think I’m missing something if I don’t? If Ultravires’ intent was to call attention to the dubious practices of TV politics, then here’s the suggestion from my earlier post: “I noticed they replaced a woman in a blue dress with Condi Rice. I don’t recognize the woman and can’t help wondering if she was placed there solely because she’s attractive. It wouldn’t be the first time politicians did something like that.”
Calling her a “hot chick” puts the focus on her in a wink-wink kind of way. There are other ways to word it that put the focus on the practice and avoid the unnecessary wink-wink.
Asked and answered. Again, again, again and again
This is getting to be a bit tedious.
I must confess to a certain amount of annoyance over this issue, as it seems to be yet another case in which women want equality except when they don’t.
For decades now we’ve heard feminists insist that women be treated no differently than men. Men are not supposed to kowtow to women, to hold doors for them or escort them to their cars late at night in darkened parking lots, for example, for this behavior trivializes women, sets them apart from men and leads to discrimination. Or so it’s said.
So we’ve seen women and girls insisting on trying out for spots on male sports teams; touted for combat roles in the military; working on road crews and becoming police officers and MMA fighters. And of course, cursing like sailors, because how can you be equal to men unless you adopt their worst traits. So we’re hard-pressed these days to encounter any woman whose language isn’t peppered with words like “shit,” “fuck,” “asshole,” and, as I heard said by a woman just the other day, “cunt.”
Yet now, in the midst of all this female equality and bad-assery, we’re told not to say things in front of women like “hot chick,” because it’s just too offensive and will drive them away. (This despite the fact that there are multi-billion dollar makeup and clothing companies whose sole purpose is to enable women to look as hot and sexually alluring as possible.)
So what I’m wondering about is why feminist voices don’t tell these women to “man up” and deal with it if they don’t like it, and to stop asking for special treatment because they’re women - for therein lies true equality. Men have to deal with objectionable things women do all the time, and not many men will complain should a woman refer to some “hot dude” she happened to see on t.v.
So what is it, “I Am Woman, Hear Me Roar,” and equal to any man…or “You can’t say that in front of me because feelings”?
I’m not trying to be a jerk here, just trying to add a little perspective. If we’re going to start prohibiting every word some female poster or lurker might decide to take offense at, we’re going to make the board a very tedious place indeed…if for no other reason than how are we going to keep track of them all (and what a silly-looking list it will wind up to be).
I can see justification for putting the brakes on things like “Show us your boobs,” or “Pics or it didn’t happen” should a woman make a positive comment about some aspect of her body. But to prohibit such a relatively benign phrase as “hot chick” seems to me to be taking things a bit too far.
C’mon man, do you really want to hang on THIS cross? Seriously?
Oh yeah, it’s SA…I forgot. 
Would you like to counter or critique anything I actually said, or are you content merely to try to trivialize it without saying why?
Yeah. What you say really speaks to me. Id love to suck your cock.
PM me.
Too embarrassed to talk about your cock tickling my prostate in public?
Your prostate is in your mouth?
I want it all, baby. First one hole, then the other. Mmmmmmm.
Is this still the same movie?
Sort of undermines your strenuous objection concerning “hot chick.”
I’m almost afraid to ask, but want to get in before the mods shut this down - how so? Mocking SA is not the same as being lascivious about a Washington bureaucrat. Unless you think faulkner is actually perving on him, that is.
What’s the so-called offense with “hot chick”? It’s a few people who have embarked on a quest that recently started with Skald’s posts may feel “unwelcome.” Posts like those of snfaulkner do not appear conducive to an atmosphere of universal welcoming. And is ATMB the place for mocking, which is a not welcoming as well, other posters?
Moderator Warning
This is way out of line for ATMB. This is a warning for being a jerk.
Insulting someone by saying you want to have gay sex with them can be seen as homophobic. Insulting someone sexually in a thread about misogyny is especially inappropriate.
Colibri
I think the point you’re missing is that “hot chick” is being moderated because it’s sexist language, not appropriate for a debate forum. It has nothing do with treating non-posters with respect, but with using language that is demeaning to women, in general. You wouldn’t say “Who was that darky who was asking Kvananugh about discussions he may have had with the law firm associated with Trump’s personal lawyer”. It’s in the same category, even if it might not be quite as bad.
Call that person crazy, stupid or a fruitcake. But don’t use sexist language in a debate.