Misogyny unchecked in AH 'Try to rape' thread

dr.bollocko

People know that from previous feedback threads I have taken a dim view of mysoginist material on the site. I'm not happy to see it or read it. But as to whether that means there is a call on me to moderate based on this in AH I am still formulating an opinion.

In AH it can be a difficult call. I wasnt around last night to view this as it happened. Like Terry, the last thing I want to see is AH go down the toilet of /b/ and the like.

However I do want to say that this has been taken on board. Please continue to report the posts that you find offensive.
Thaedydal I will never overlook a reported post in AH simply because you or any other random person reported it, so, at least in my case, it does help when you report a post.

Terry

Earthhorse wrote: »

Ban or infract low or no content "jokes" about controversial subjects. Like the one reported on the thread.

Humour is subjective.
If I don't find something funny who is to say that the next person won't?

What new things have you tried in the last (say) 2 years in AH?

Ban catchphrases that have been run into the ground.

Believe me, I have tried time and again to ban "Yore Ma", but it will never work until everyone grows tired of it.

It was at my request that WWM started threads requesting input on how AH should run. (pat on the back for me)

I have suggested it be done once a year and leave it to the users to decide on what they want to read or post there.

Earthhorse

Terry wrote: »

We do take everything into account.

Never said you didn't. I was responding to Kold's question.

Terry wrote: »

Humour is subjective. If I don't find something funny who is to say that the next person won't?

I'm not asking you to rule on humour. I'm asking you to rule on whether the poster has put any effort or content into the post when it's about a controversial topic and they are trying to be humourous (whether they succeed in being humourous or not is irrelevant).

Terry wrote: »

Believe me, I have tried time and again to ban "Yore Ma", but it will never work until everyone grows tired of it.

And thank you for your efforts but you're not the only mod.

Terry

Earthhorse wrote: »

I'm not asking you to rule on humour. I'm asking you to rule on whether the poster has put any effort or content into the post when it's about a controversial topic and they are trying to be humourous (whether they succeed in being humourous or not is irrelevant).

That's nigh on impossible to do.

I can't tell how much effort someone has put into a post.
They may have spent an hour coming up with a joke that everyone else finds really lame.
It's akin to trying to judge the intelligence of a stranger on the street.

Earthhorse

Yet you're willing to tell us that the increase in lame jokes is a result of people fishing for Thanks. How do you know this? You don't. It's a judgement call. It's the same thing.

Terry

Earthhorse wrote: »

Yet you're willing to tell us that the increase in lame jokes is a result of people fishing for Thanks. How do you know this? You don't. It's a judgement call. It's the same thing.

Yes, but I'm not willing to ban someone on a whim because I think they've been too lazy to think up a funny joke and went with the easy option instead.

Some posts do stand out a mile, but I'm not going to start handing out bans because someone may or may not have been thanks whoring.

It's too difficult to call it straight down the line.

Persistent offenders are not hard to spot, but they tend to get themselves banned for something else anyway.

AckwelFoley

Terry wrote: »

What would you suggest we do?

i agree with your stance on the situation in principal, however i strongly feel AH needs about 3 more moderators due to the amount of traffic it has. Chosen by the existing AH staff from the poole of AH users that know where 'the line' is.

sdanseo

Yep keep it, it's the only thanks I get...

*reaches for coat*

MooseJam

Hatred based on race isn't tolerated, neither should hatred based on gender, easy solution

CDfm

In the Ladies Lounge the "16 days Womensaid Campaign Thread" was closed because posters/mods objected to objections to the misandrist (anti-men) content of the (campaign) thread.

While I dont personally consider rape to be a joke.

Surely, common sense should tell you that imposing arbitrary rules will result in double standards such as this.

javaboy

snyper wrote: »

i agree with your stance on the situation in principal, however i strongly feel AH needs about 3 more moderators due to the amount of traffic it has. Chosen by the existing AH staff from the poole of AH users that know where 'the line' is.

6th/Sabotage/Sadotage/Sádotage for mod!

I'm not so sure tbh. While I read Terry's post about mods not being able to read every single post and that is of course true, I don't think the standard of AH has suffered too much due to mods not being around to police the place. I can't think of too many instances where something was blatantly and inexcusably offensive that was let stand for a considerable length of time. The mods are usually on the ball.

They can correct me on this if I'm wrong but I think the turnaround time on reported posts is quite low. If nothing has been done about a post, it's usually because a) nobody has reported it and any mods who have read it don't consider it infractable or b) it was reported but the mods didn't consider it infractable.

Adding more mods may ease the burden but unless it was someone with a significantly different take on where the line should be to the current mods, then that's all it would be: easing the burden.

onewoman

Kold wrote: »

Racism is not the same as misogyny. Like.. at all really.

You say the posts were sick and hateful. I say that they were just poor attempts at humour. This is the internet, welcome. Unfortunately people will have different views to you. Some people are racists, some people are misogynists, some people want drugs to be legalised, some people believe in the death penalty. Now argue your point without the holier than thou "It's wrong!" or gtfo.

You see Kold, that's the problem: the 'beating a woman twice as hard' comment wasn't even a poor attempt at humour. There was not one ounce of wit in there. It was simply an excuse to use abusive language towards women. Substitute the word 'woman' for 'black person' and you might understand why it was offensive.

Thank you so much to those of you who've argued from my perfectly reasonable perspective http://static.boards.ie/vbulletin/images/smilies/smile.gif: I'm not a PC nut, I've a sophisticated sense of humour, and fundamentally I just want to know why misogyny is (misguidedly) regarded as a lesser offence than racism by many boardsies. I think both positions are equally disgusting, yet one is treated more seriously than the other. http://static.boards.ie/vbulletin/images/smilies/confused.gif

CDfm

onewoman wrote: »

You see Kold, that's the problem: the 'beating a woman twice as hard' comment wasn't even a poor attempt at humour. There was not one ounce of wit in there. It was simply an excuse to use abusive language towards women. Substitute the word 'woman' for 'black person' and you might understand why it was offensive.

Thank you so much to those of you who've argued from my perfectly reasonable perspective http://static.boards.ie/vbulletin/images/smilies/smile.gif: I'm not a PC nut, I've a sophisticated sense of humour, and fundamentally I just want to know why misogyny is (misguidedly) regarded as a lesser offence than racism by many boardsies. I think both positions are equally disgusting, yet one is treated more seriously than the other. http://static.boards.ie/vbulletin/images/smilies/confused.gif

I have to agree with Kold because after hours isnt PC.

But add you go for banning misogynist content in AH you would also need to remove the misandrist content from the Ladies Lounge otherwise its" pot and kettle" and you either apply it accross the boards or not at all.

You cant just cherrypick what you want.

AlmightyCushion

onewoman wrote: »

I'm not a PC nut, I've a sophisticated sense of humour, and fundamentally I just want to know why misogyny is (misguidedly) regarded as a lesser offence than racism by many boardsies.

I don't believe any called you a pc nut. Also, if that comment was aimed at a black person, man or any minority in the same context then I wouldn't have removed it or reprimanded the user in question.

Ponster

CDfm wrote: »

I have to agree with Kold because after hours isnt PC.

But add you go for banning misogynist content in AH you would also need to remove the misandrist content from the Ladies Lounge otherwise its" pot and kettle" and you either apply it accross the boards or not at all.

You cant just cherrypick what you want.

Yes you can. There are almost no overall Boads.ie rules. Every forum sets it's own charters and every mod runs their forum as they seem fit.

Nevyn

CDfm wrote: »

I have to agree with Kold because after hours isnt PC.

But add you go for banning misogynist content in AH you would also need to remove the misandrist content from the Ladies Lounge otherwise its" pot and kettle" and you either apply it accross the boards or not at all.

You cant just cherrypick what you want.

This is a thread about AH, if you have an issue about the content of another forum then I suggest you start a new thread and I presume you have been reporting offensive posts in that forum.

CDfm

Thaedydal wrote: »

This is a thread about AH, if you have an issue about the content of another forum then I suggest you start a new thread and I presume you have been reporting offensive posts in that forum.

It is about AH. Its up to the mods to set the standards for the threads they moderate and they have free rein. I mentioned it as a benchmark/comparison issue- nothing else.

Overheal

MooseJam wrote: »

Hatred based on race isn't tolerated, neither should hatred based on gender, easy solution

Or Nationality. *cough*

metrovelvet

Why is there an assumption that if it is funny, or the poster says it's funny, that somehow this removes all offensiveness from it?

CDfm

Humour is subjective. I dont think rape is funny but maybe its there for shock value and appeals to an audience who like that.What offends is subjective too.

Steve

Overheal wrote: »

Or Nationality. *cough*

*cough*

Overheal

SteveC wrote: »

*cough*

I didnt say Racism.

Sam Vimes

Dudess wrote: »

That gem's always coming up. What exactly is it based on? Is it some sort of mathematical, logical conclusion or something? "You joked about football fans, therefore it's not out of bounds for you to joke about children being gang-raped"?
If I find a joke about how many Manchester United fans it takes to change a lightbulb funny, I'm a hypocrite if I don't find a joke about children being gang-raped funny? I don't know... do I force myself to laugh or something in order to avoid being a hypocrite?

That "Either everything can be laughed at or nothing can be laughed at" line is a load of bollocks and I'm sick of people on Boards saying it's unreasonable for people to find some stuff funny and other stuff not funny. It's not "fascist" or humourless for people to not find really sick jokes funny... they simply... eh... don't find them funny.

i didn't say you had to find them funny, i said it should be ok to joke about. there's an awful lot of humour i don't find funny for a variety of reasons but i don't try to stop the other person from speaking because i don't like what they're saying

Sam Vimes

you used the example of children being gang raped which is obviously offensive. but what about if someone had a deep love of manchester united and took offense to your joke about them? what if someone was a devout christian and didn't like their god being mocked? this thread would get you executed in certain countries. who decides what's ok and what's not?
here's a link to rowan atkinson fighting to stop a law banning religious hatred, not because he's a bigot but because he can tell the difference between a joke and sincerity
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4073997.stm

Sam Vimes

Dudess wrote: »

Well ok, I don't find these jokes funny and I also find them nasty and malicious.

well then you didn't get the joke tbh

Silverfish

Sam Vimes wrote: »

you used the example of children being gang raped which is obviously offensive. but what about if someone had a deep love of manchester united and took offense to your joke about them?

Simple.

Physical harm vs non-physical.

Rape = physical harm, assault, violence, physical pain.

Football team = a game.

Its a toughie I know, but you'll puzzle it out I'm sure.

Sam Vimes

Silverfish wrote: »

Simple.

Physical harm vs non-physical.

Rape = physical harm, assault, violence, physical pain.

Football team = a game.

Its a toughie I know, but you'll puzzle it out I'm sure.

who says somebody can't have a fanatical love of a football team? ever hear of football riots?

so is that where the line is btw? we're allowed joke about something as long no physical harm is involved? how about somebody slipping on a banana peel?

edit: what about the old joke: "what do you say to a woman with two black eyes? nothing, you already told her twice".
is that not acceptable because it has violence? what about if it's the woman hitting her husband? is that ok?

Overheal

Silverfish wrote: »

Simple.

Physical harm vs non-physical.

Rape = physical harm, assault, violence, physical pain.

Football team = a game.

Its a toughie I know, but you'll puzzle it out I'm sure.

Because it never lead to a riot or a death. Sorry, im nitpicking.

Sam Vimes

omg!!!
this thread: http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055441967

involves violence against the president. i am offended and appalled. it shouldn't be allowed. rabble rabble rabble

Dyr

So if rape jokes are verboten will we all be getting equally outraged at a murder joke? I (and others) joked that dick roche should have been murdered by gunmen today. Presumably that's worse than joking that the raiders should have raped mary harney (murder being worse than rape) yet to my knowledge no one raise an eyebrow, but then a dead dick roche probably didn't violate any sacred cows.

Funny is funny. Humour cannot be gauged solely by topic.