AH & Perceived Sexism

Jazzy

liah wrote: »

Yet OutlawPete is allowed to use my own history (my posts from ages ago) for his own slandering purposes?

Does that mean I'm allowed to report them?

think you've blown your cover there. over the top dramatisation because you (and thats the keyword here, because its you who doesnt know how to deal with the issue normally and you who started this crusade.. of course, various others came out in support, but as we have seen one has personal beef with it anyway) felt slighted by evidence that was right there for all to see. You felt slighted that you might look a bit of a hypocrite so instead you have decided to call it slandering in a vain effort to discredit another posters facts.
i dunno, take your licks or something at this stage

liah

Overheal wrote: »

Define ages ago?

We just dragged up a 2 year old thread about this, which involved me, my stupidity (And the Sexism debate), and was followed up by a lot of snide remarks that I still look at people differently for saying toward me. Things that even in light of said stupidity, were still unnecessarily abusive.

If thats fair comment to drag back up (and frankly, it is) why is your post history sacrosanct? Go back to the 2008 feedback thread, I recall DeV saying some very astute points about owning your words. I said it then and I'll say it again now you are always more than welcome to look at my posting history and conclude for yourself who I am. If you regret something you said then you'll just have to live to regret it. Stop taking it out on OutlawPete for simply playing the record back to you; it's farcical.

Just because others think it's alright doesn't make it so. I'm not the kind of person to judge a person on what they've posted years ago when I don't understand the circumstances or what they think now. I see it as unfair. Very unfair.

Jazzy wrote: »

think you've blown your cover there. over the top dramatisation because you (and thats the keyword here, because its you who doesnt know how to deal with the issue normally and you who started this crusade.. of course, various others came out in support, but as we have seen one has personal beef with it anyway) felt slighted by evidence that was right there for all to see. You felt slighted that you might look a bit of a hypocrite so instead you have decided to call it slandering in a vain effort to discredit another posters facts.
i dunno, take your licks or something at this stage

Oh give it up. I was far from the first to start this "crusade," I just continued it to feedback upon the suggestions of others. If I'm not mistaken it was Dudess who started it when she (rightly, imo) responded to the attacks on her. At least get it right before mouthing off.

Adam

liah wrote: »

Just because others think it's alright doesn't make it so. I'm not the kind of person to judge a person on what they've posted years ago when I don't understand the circumstances or what they think now. I see it as unfair. Very unfair.



Oh give it up. I was far from the first to start this "crusade," I just continued it to feedback upon the suggestions of others. If I'm not mistaken it was Dudess who started it when she (rightly, imo) responded to the attacks on her. At least get it right before mouthing off.

so you took on someone else's fight and now you've realised you're not going to win?

Jazzy

liah wrote: »

Just because others think it's alright doesn't make it so. I'm not the kind of person to judge a person on what they've posted years ago when I don't understand the circumstances or what they think now. I see it as unfair. Very unfair.



Oh give it up. I was far from the first to start this "crusade," I just continued it to feedback upon the suggestions of others. If I'm not mistaken it was Dudess who started it when she (rightly, imo) responded to the attacks on her. At least get it right before mouthing off.

but you are the most vocal and most active in it arent you? or have you just ignored that fact? and maybe the fact that you started this thread.... but we can ignore that just like we can ignore posting history and hey, speaking of mouthing off - im not the one accusing another poster of slandering you just because you might look like a giant hypocrite who's arguement doesnt really have much legs to stand on when presented with overwhelming reasons why you might be wrong.


oh, and yeah it is alright to look back on your posts and what you say like that. unfair? how is it unfair? oh your a different person to 2 years ago cos you got in a stink about mysogomy on after hours? bollocks

Dudess

She didn't take on someone else's fight in fairness - it's a general concern, the insults on that thread were part of a bigger issue. That ugly thread led to DrZeus, a guy, starting a thread about misogyny on AH, then Liah took it to here as this is considered the appropriate forum.

Overheal

liah wrote: »

Just because others think it's alright doesn't make it so. I'm not the kind of person to judge a person on what they've posted years ago when I don't understand the circumstances or what they think now. I see it as unfair. Very unfair.

In your opinion. I have it from the horses mouth that this website operates on the idea that you own your words. Forever and ever. We don't just reserve that treatment for Politicians, as I have said.

In fact you have me a little concerned; as if to say you will say what you want to suit the moment with no thought of the possibility that it will come back to haunt you in weeks or years from now. You don't want to be held responsible for your actions? Really?

Oh give it up. I was far from the first to start this "crusade," I just continued it to feedback upon the suggestions of others. If I'm not mistaken it was Dudess who started it when she (rightly, imo) responded to the attacks on her. At least get it right before mouthing off.

Yeah, I was going to ask this last night but what exactly is up with all of the "We"-Bombs you've been dropping on this thread? "We feel that" "We're offending by" "Our feelings". What happened to me myself and I? Have people authorized you to speak on their collective behalf? Whats going on there? I frankly do not feel that people are being bullied or silenced in this discussion: if anyone is offended by the situation they can speak about it for themselves. They don't need a Champion that assumes their voice for them.

Funny enough it's as if you're again, a politician, claiming to be the voice of the people. And as a politician...

ibarelycare

the tag on this thread :D

GAAman

Ok i am going to put my 2c in here.

Liah you had me understanding your point at the start but as time has gone on you have gone on a ranting rampage which only serves to take away from your point. I remembered the rape thread you started and remember at the time being disgusted at the idea you painted that a female victim of rape would suffer more then a male one. Having done a number of years voluntary work with abuse survivors i can tell you that there may well never be a point you will be more wrong on.

I had forgotten you had started the thread until it was linked in this one. I note then that instead of you holding your hand up and admitting the hypocrisy you jump on outlawpete claiming "slander" when all he did was raise the point of the hypocrisy in your argument. You claim it was "months ago" and your viewpoint may not necessarily be the same, yet you have not made an effort to change the viewpoint and therefore the hypocrisy. (However i am open to correction on this)

I also want to go back to something biko said. Biko pointed out that there were certain private boards so any "perceived" sexism would be avoided, this was biko saying (if biko does not mind my observation) that they do this in order to just ignore it. This was by no means being told to stay out of AH as cherubrocks took out of it.

On another note cherubrocks made a really ridiculous point in that there are women who are oppressed. This is a really silly point to make in this instance as what in the hell does that have to do with this? Do you think these women in shackles will feel better about their situation because some mods on boards.ie are going to come down harder on "perceived " sexism.

You might have noticed that every time i use the word perceived it has been in quotes, the simple reason is one which has echoed throughout this entire thread, it is YOUR perception which is the matter at hand. I was offended (at the time, seeing as you have a real issue with time and context it seems) at your insinuation that male victims suffer less then female ones, did i report it? Did i get high and mighty about it? Did i insult you? Did i attempt to belittle what you said based on the fact you have a vagina and therefore might naturally be more sympathetic to a female survivor of rape? The answer is no on all counts. I just carried on with my day.

It all boils down to there are certain thought patterns which will never leave us, which will come out in humour or out and out attacks. When a mod thinks it is humour it will be allowed, conversely when it is viewed as an attack it will be dealt with. I have said numerous times to numerous females in my life to "get back in the kitchen" etc but i have NEVER been in any aspect serious and at the end of the day why do you care what some randomer on the internet says to you?

As a side note i thought it was way out of line that someone called dudess ugly and the only reason i did not report it myself was i figured numerous people would have at that point.

Micky Dolenz

I have looked over the reporter thread and infracted and banned when the charter was breached.

The people banned where all done so for trolling, obvious troll in in deed obvious. How they got away unreported surprised me and how they had the ability to rise people who normally wouldn't react to trolling, surprised me even more.

In that thread, people disagreed but it was done in a mostly respectful way. This is too be expected.

While I appreciate that the reporter thread may have been the straw that broke the camels back I don't believe that hard core sexism is rift in AH.

There are three things here:


1 Funny jokes and unfunny jokes (you know who you are), they will always be here.

2 Personal Abuse, it will get posters banned/infracted

3 Funny personal Abuse, it will get posters banned/infracted, even if it gets a giggle..

The key is, as a community we work together to decide what is appropriate behaviour and what is not. The way to do this is to report posts. If you wish to do more or question a post, PM a Mod. I will always respond to a PM.

To echo dr.bollocko's comments, as a Mod team we are very grateful of the feedback. I too would have preferred this had stayed in AH. From the start of this whole thing we have shown a willingness to listen and enforce the rules already in place. AH can only become a better place for it but every poster needs to play their part.

OutlawPete

Dudess wrote: »

Who's "they"?

Women who post misandric comments in After Hours.

liah

Overheal wrote: »

In your opinion. I have it from the horses mouth that this website operates on the idea that you own your words. Forever and ever. We don't just reserve that treatment for Politicians, as I have said.

In fact you have me a little concerned; as if to say you will say what you want to suit the moment with no thought of the possibility that it will come back to haunt you in weeks or years from now. You don't want to be held responsible for your actions? Really?

Yeah, I was going to ask this last night but what exactly is up with all of the "We"-Bombs you've been dropping on this thread? "We feel that" "We're offending by" "Our feelings". What happened to me myself and I? Have people authorized you to speak on their collective behalf? Whats going on there? I frankly do not feel that people are being bullied or silenced in this discussion: if anyone is offended by the situation they can speak about it for themselves. They don't need a Champion that assumes their voice for them.

Funny enough it's as if you're again, a politician, claiming to be the voice of the people. And as a politician...

That's ridiculous. Any time I used "we" it was because I had seen multiple women posting the same things as what I was following the "we" with. If me, plus other people, are talking about one thing, effectively, "we" are talking about one thing. You're nitpicking now.

I've made my point time and time again: my old posts, nor ANYONE'S old posts, should be dredged up to use as mud in a slinging match. Discussions are meant to stay on topic. A mod has stated in this very thread that things like usernames, sexualities, political opinions, religious opinions, etc. can't be brought up on a poster as that's about the poster and not the post. The comments I made were in an entirely different context in an entirely different thread in an entirely different year and later, in the very same thread, were accounted for.

If they were accounted for in the original thread Pete quoted (which they were, if you look), what exactly are you arguing for other than the sheer sake of arguing and the wonderful thrill of ganging up on one person?

I was not the one to start the misogyny thread in AH. I was not the one to start the arguments against misogyny in the sexual harrassment thread. I was the one to start this thread, but only did so upon the suggestion of Ivy_Slayer (I think that was the poster's name).

You have no argument, unless you consider trying to belittle me and beat me into submission an "argument." I've already stated my argument. The thread has gone wildly off topic and quite frankly should've been locked ages ago.

We both know it's going nowhere, and neither party is going to budge.

Dudess

OutlawPete wrote: »

Women who post misandric comments in After Hours.

Could have made it clearer - can't say it's something I've seen much on AH though. I've seen it a tiny bit on tLL all right (and I've always reported it).

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

1 Funny jokes and unfunny jokes (you know who you are), they will always be here.

2 Personal Abuse, it will get posters banned/infracted

3 Funny personal Abuse, it will get posters banned/infracted, even if it gets a giggle..

Cool. And also, MD, in my opinion "Irish women this, Irish women that", "Most women are gold-diggers" etc type comments - should at least get a "Back yourself up" warning... in the same way that "Muslims are xyz" comments would.

Wibbs

Dudess wrote: »

She didn't take on someone else's fight in fairness - it's a general concern, the insults on that thread were part of a bigger issue. That ugly thread led to DrZeus, a guy, starting a thread about misogyny on AH, then Liah took it to here as this is considered the appropriate forum.

+1. Do I think there is some issue with sexist stuff being used in a hectoring way that needed to be aired? Yes. Do I think AH should be sterilised to the point of banality? No. Do I think the AH mods do a good job corralling the place? Yes.

However I do feel uncomfortable when a poster, in this case Liah is rounded on for sticking her head above the parapet. Ditto for the other posters who were in support of her. Do I agree with all of them or all of their points? Nope, but I do understand the frustration that led to this behemoth thread and getting OTT on all sides.

IMHO another large aspect to these subjects that come up from time to time on Boards is the very human need to just vent steam over an issue they feel strongly about. Too often we can have a tendency to just see the steam and get personal about it(I have), or people get increasingly frustrated and the issue gets lost.

Like the Surgical Scrotum said, the subject needed an airing as it will make AH better and their task easier when things are trashed out. I have no doubt they will be. The subject has been brought out into the open and that's always a good thing.

liah

Dudess wrote: »

And also, MD, in my opinion "Irish women this, Irish women that", "Most women are gold-diggers" etc type comments - should at least get a "Back yourself up" warning... in the same way that "Muslims are xyz" comments would.

This, tbh.

These threads about irish women and/or foreign women or irish women vs. foreign women are really unnecessary and I rarely see it end in any way other than a few irish women getting defensive and a bunch of men taking the opportunity to have a bit of a go. It just never ends well.

Dudess

Wibbs wrote: »

However I do feel uncomfortable when a poster, in this case Liah is rounded on for sticking her head above the parapet. Ditto for the other posters who were in support of her. Do I agree with all of them or all of their points? Nope, but I do understand the frustration that led to this behemoth thread and getting OTT on all sides.

IMHO another large aspect to these subjects that come up from time to time on Boards is the very human need to just vent steam over an issue they feel strongly about. Too often we can have a tendency to just see the steam and get personal about it(I have), or people get increasingly frustrated and the issue gets lost.

Yep, I don't like the bullying direction this thread has taken. It's a load of people versus two, maybe just one at this stage, and even if you disagree with them to the point of disliking them, it's possible to do so even in an indignant, firm fashion, without resorting to belittling and jeering.
It's now got to the point of two people pinned to the wall, with no escape, by the pitchfork brandishing mob.
And btw, I'm not saying that because I agree with Liah and Cherub Rock (I don't agree with all their points here anyway and I've had run-ins with both in the past), I would say that in relation to anyone who is making an effort to get their point across with a lot of thought put into it.

Plus, people CAN totally change in two years.

Wolfe Tone

liah wrote: »

This, tbh.

These threads about irish women and/or foreign women or irish women vs. foreign women are really unnecessary and I rarely see it end in any way other than a few irish women getting defensive and a bunch of men taking the opportunity to have a bit of a go. It just never ends well.

Well dont post in them then? If I see a topic that I will get pissed off about I generally dont post.

You could apply your logic to any topic which may result in a defensive minority. Abortion,immigration, etc etc




This is the internet you know, dont take it too seriously.

Dudess

A person has a right to read a thread that interests them.

Wolfe Tone

Dudess wrote: »

A person has a right to read a thread that interests them.

Have I said otherwise?



She said she found them unnecessary did she not?

Dudess

liah wrote: »

This, tbh.

These threads about irish women and/or foreign women or irish women vs. foreign women are really unnecessary and I rarely see it end in any way other than a few irish women getting defensive and a bunch of men taking the opportunity to have a bit of a go. It just never ends well.

Also, re the insults thrown on the sports reporter thread: it wasn't so much the insults in and of themselves (they were about as shocking and unpredictable as night following day) but the "Oh look, woman say something disagreeing with something, woman bitter man-hater and deserve insults" attitude without the posts actually being read - that and its support is what I found the most disappointing.

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Have I said otherwise?



She said she found them unnecessary did she not?

Well if you were, say, someone from Ballymun and there was a thread about Ballymun, you'd be interested in reading it. So then, if some gimp comes along and starts going on about how people from Ballymun are scumbags, would it be reasonable to be expected to just not read the thread? Or would it not be more fair that gimp-head be reported and told not to post stuff like that again?

OutlawPete

Wibbs wrote: »

However I do feel uncomfortable when a poster, in this case Liah is rounded on for sticking her head above the parapet.

Liah was not "rounded on".

She complained that misogynistic and sexist comments were overlooked by the moderators on After Hours and I quoted one of her threads to make that point that men also have to put up with sexist rubbish.

liah wrote: »

These threads about irish women and/or foreign women or irish women vs. foreign women are really unnecessary and I rarely see it end in any way other than a few irish women getting defensive and a bunch of men taking the opportunity to have a bit of a go. It just never ends well.

The same crap happens to men on AH, maybe you missed these threads:

'Irish Men Are Ugly'
'Are Irish Men Arseholes'
'Do All Men Cheat?'
'Why Do Irish Men Not Know How To Treat A Lady Right?
'Crazy Standards Of Irish Men'

I realize that you think how things effect women should be dealt with as a separate issue, but I really do feel that you need to have a long hard think about how men might be effected by society's unfair attitudes to them also.

Sexism effects us all, each and every day and I can assure you that is just as frustrating for a man to be dismissed for just being a man who's brains are in his trousers, as it is for to be shrugged off for just being a woman who should be in the kitchen.

Overheal

liah wrote: »

That's ridiculous. Any time I used "we" it was because I had seen multiple women posting the same things as what I was following the "we" with. If me, plus other people, are talking about one thing, effectively, "we" are talking about one thing. You're nitpicking now.

Call me crazy but I just think that it's generally not in good form to speak for others. As I kind of half-did back when there was a bit of church bashing going on a few months ago. There is no need to attempt to validate your argument by attempting to speak on behalf of others; your argument, as it originated Liah, was perfectly valid already. That's all I'm saying.

I've made my point time and time again: my old posts, nor ANYONE'S old posts, should be dredged up to use as mud in a slinging match. Discussions are meant to stay on topic. A mod has stated in this very thread that things like usernames, sexualities, political opinions, religious opinions, etc. can't be brought up on a poster as that's about the poster and not the post. The comments I made were in an entirely different context in an entirely different thread in an entirely different year and later, in the very same thread, were accounted for.

As another example though, a user was arguing there was nothing wrong with the state of US health care. So another user pulled up a post of his from 3 months back where the same user told us how he cheated the emergency room policy to get free medical care. Would that not be fair comment, to highlight such a hypocrisy?

Another user claimed he is and always has been tolerant of muslims, so another user pulled up a year old post where the user told us how he deliberately insulted muslims when he was on the bus (by showing them the sole of his shoe) to get a rise out of them. In his own words. Is it not fair comment to point out that the user was directly lying about his history of tolerance?

I think you're confusing Mud-Slinging with something else.

If they were accounted for in the original thread Pete quoted (which they were, if you look), what exactly are you arguing for other than the sheer sake of arguing and the wonderful thrill of ganging up on one person?

Do I strike you as a cyber bully?

I was not the one to start the misogyny thread in AH. I was not the one to start the arguments against misogyny in the sexual harrassment thread. I was the one to start this thread, but only did so upon the suggestion of Ivy_Slayer (I think that was the poster's name).

You have no argument, unless you consider trying to belittle me and beat me into submission an "argument." I've already stated my argument. The thread has gone wildly off topic and quite frankly should've been locked ages ago.

We both know it's going nowhere, and neither party is going to budge.

I have no "Argument" only to say that I am interested in the topic and the topic is being clouded in many directions. So I have called you on some points that I take disagreement with, as part of iteration, to probably find out where this thread will go. In doing so myself and others are scratching our heads trying to ascertain what's really the problem here. Because (imo) if this was about personal abuse this thread would have been wrapped up long ago. I suspect it's much more to do with societal attitudes about gender that people are taking offense to.

OutlawPete

Dudess wrote: »

Yep, I don't like the bullying direction this thread has taken.

I see no evidence that Liah was the victim of any "bullying" on this thread, none whatsoever.

I ask you to name the users that you feel bullied her and quote the posts in which they did so, otherwise withdraw that remark.

Dudess

OutlawPete wrote: »

Liah was not "rounded on".

She complained that misogynistic and sexist comments were overlooked by the moderators on After Hours and I quoted one of her threads to make that point that men also have to put up with sexist rubbish.



The same crap happens to men on AH, maybe you missed these threads:

'Irish Men Are Ugly'
'Are Irish Men Arseholes'
'Do All Men Cheat?'
'Why Do Irish Men Not Know How To Treat A Lady Right?
'Crazy Standards Of Irish Men'

I realize that you think how things effect women should be dealt with as a separate issue, but I really do feel that you need to have a long hard think about how men might be effected by society's unfair attitudes to them also.

Sexism effects us all, each and every day and I can assure you that is just as frustrating for a man to be dismissed for just being a man who's brains are in his trousers, as it is for to be shrugged off for just being a woman who should be in the kitchen.

I genuinely don't see that many women saying such idiotic stuff though here - maybe it's because there are less female members on Boards and I'm not suggesting there aren't women who have an appalling attitude to men. Where I'd see it most (and subtly) is The Ladies' Lounge, not AH.
I think too there is a disappointing attitude regarding issues affecting men from some... men (this isn't a dig, just what I've observed). High fives among lads when some boy in his early teens is statutorily raped by a woman (never supported by women unless in the form of a joke), the way the comments on that sports reporter thread which, in a nut-shell, were "Some men can't help but lose control and dignity and reduce themselves to hyenas when a woman wears sexy clothes". Instead of the perpetuation of misandry being viewed as something ensured by women, have a look at certain men - in the same way that misogyny isn't always purveyed by men...

AckwelFoley

I think people need to step back a little and cool down


I dont think Liah is being picked on, i think Liah you have as previously stated by one poster started off well and then perhaps in the heat of the argurment backed yourself into a corner.

The phrase everyone versus 2 has been used, i dont think its because people are trying to be nasty (maybe some are) and single you out, i think its some of the points you make arent very fair and in many cases not true

Liah, i am on your side in principal, i think your opening post summed it up nicely and i do feel there is an issue and i have good faith the AH mods will better the situation, infact to be fair to Mick D in particular, he has been keeping very active in this discussion and gone out of his way to make a point that they are dealing with it. Liah this is a positive thing, something you should feel proud of.

I suspect you are like my fiance, somewhat paranoid and only one opinion counts.

I think as i said, we should step back, look at the progress of the proposed new rule dubbed "liah's law" :)

(i dont think there should be an "s" in liah's law)

liah

Overheal wrote: »

Call me crazy but I just think that it's generally not in good form to speak for others. As I kind of half-did back when there was a bit of church bashing going on a few months ago. There is no need to attempt to validate your argument by attempting to speak on behalf of others; your argument, as it originated Liah, was perfectly valid already. That's all I'm saying.
As another example though, a user was arguing there was nothing wrong with the state of US health care. So another user pulled up a post of his from 3 months back where the same user told us how he cheated the emergency room policy to get free medical care. Would that not be fair comment, to highlight such a hypocrisy?

Another user claimed he is and always has been tolerant of muslims, so another user pulled up a year old post where the user told us how he deliberately insulted muslims when he was on the bus (by showing them the sole of his shoe) to get a rise out of them. In his own words. Is it not fair comment to point out that the user was directly lying about his history of tolerance?

I think you're confusing Mud-Slinging with something else.
Do I strike you as a cyber bully?

I have no "Argument" only to say that I am interested in the topic and the topic is being clouded in many directions. So I have called you on some points that I take disagreement with, as part of iteration, to probably find out where this thread will go. In doing so myself and others are scratching our heads trying to ascertain what's really the problem here. Because (imo) if this was about personal abuse this thread would have been wrapped up long ago. I suspect it's much more to do with societal attitudes about gender that people are taking offense to.

Thank you for actually answering my post fully, fairly and maturely (genuinely mean that, not being snide.)

Fine on your first point, I'll be more aware of it in the future, but I don't write formally unless I'm writing an essay. I'm sure that if I had spoken out loud the same thing it would not have been taken up as "speaking for" anyone but merely as an indicator that I was not the only one who had expressed the sentiment.

Look, I get the point you're trying to make. I really do. But it just seems like some of the men were getting a bee in their bonnet about the women speaking out against what they had seen and used my posts as a way of throwing it back on us and in effect diminishing an awful lot of what the women were saying by going "oh well you do it too!"-- that we do it too wasn't the point. It was a hijack and I really don't see that as fair.

When I said I'd like to keep the thread on focused on how the women of boards feel (as since this is a male-dominated board, it's really nice to hear women's points of view for once, and the purposes of the thread were outlined in the OP, as well as the fact that I didn't want it to be hijacked), I was accused of hypocrisy. Was it really that unfair to ask to keep the thread on the original topic? Was it really necessary for me to be condescended by many posters? I explained that if they felt they were facing issues they were free to start their own thread just like this one. I don't see that as being unreasonable. I just didn't want it to end up like it has.

I've already explained in full many times about why I disagree with the quotes in this context. I'm never going to budge on that one as I wouldn't if it had happened to anyone else. We're just going to have to agree to disagree. I don't think it's fair to call people up on what they have said a long time in the past (a week, fine, but a year? come on) as you never know what has changed with a person since then. But in general regardless of the circumstances I'm the kind of person to give the benefit of the doubt anyway, so again, agree to disagree.

I don't know what the argument is. All I know that I started this thread as a place for women to express their opinions on perceived sexism in AH and it got hijacked and turned into a witchhunt. Which is why I'm done with it.

This'll be my final statement on it as I'm positive I've covered absolutely everything at this stage and amn't going to be budging. If anyone wants to continue discussion about how horrible I am, PM me instead as it is wholly irrelevant to the point of the thread.

Wolfe Tone

If anyone wants to continue discussion about how horrible I am, PM me instead as it is wholly irrelevant to the point of the thread.

:rolleyes:


Where has that happened?

Jazzy

im about 99% positive that if liah was a bloke that 'bullying' wouldnt be mentioned at all in this thread.
that lad spiritoftheseventies who used to post here took 50 times more flak before anyone mentioned bullying, and there is a good few posters here who posted on his (frankly insane) threads. there is a lot of hypocrisy in this thread. fair and even means fair and even, not 'when it suits'.

Overheal

liah wrote: »

Thank you for actually answering my post fully, fairly and maturely (genuinely mean that, not being snide.)

Fine on your first point, I'll be more aware of it in the future, but I don't write formally unless I'm writing an essay. I'm sure that if I had spoken out loud the same thing it would not have been taken up as "speaking for" anyone but merely as an indicator that I was not the only one who had expressed the sentiment.

Look, I get the point you're trying to make. I really do. But it just seems like some of the men were getting a bee in their bonnet about the women speaking out against what they had seen and used my posts as a way of throwing it back on us and in effect diminishing an awful lot of what the women were saying by going "oh well you do it too!"-- that we do it too wasn't the point. It was a hijack and I really don't see that as fair.

Fair. In hindsight though I think it could have been pre-empted in your OP by acknowledging it: that women like to joke around as much as men and even have strong views one way or the other, but that lately AH has gotten a bit too contentious. An error in tactics to ignore that; the OP was all Yin with no Yang

When I said I'd like to keep the thread on focused on how the women of boards feel (as since this is a male-dominated board, it's really nice to hear women's points of view for once, and the purposes of the thread were outlined in the OP, as well as the fact that I didn't want it to be hijacked), I was accused of hypocrisy. Was it really that unfair to ask to keep the thread on the original topic? Was it really necessary for me to be condescended by many posters? I explained that if they felt they were facing issues they were free to start their own thread just like this one. I don't see that as being unreasonable. I just didn't want it to end up like it has.

I've already explained in full many times about why I disagree with the quotes in this context. I'm never going to budge on that one as I wouldn't if it had happened to anyone else. We're just going to have to agree to disagree. I don't think it's fair to call people up on what they have said a long time in the past (a week, fine, but a year? come on) as you never know what has changed with a person since then. But in general regardless of the circumstances I'm the kind of person to give the benefit of the doubt anyway, so again, agree to disagree.

I don't know what the argument is. All I know that I started this thread as a place for women to express their opinions on perceived sexism in AH and it got hijacked and turned into a witchhunt. Which is why I'm done with it.

This'll be my final statement on it as I'm positive I've covered absolutely everything at this stage and amn't going to be budging. If anyone wants to continue discussion about how horrible I am, PM me instead as it is wholly irrelevant to the point of the thread.

I don't think you're horrible and I don't perceive that anyone else does. I think there were just a few that have been familiar with you (which is not a bad thing) and as OutlawPete did, brought up what he felt was a disingenuous nature about your thread because like I put it, there was Yin with no Yang. I think he was just illustrating (and I think its necessary to illustrate, for want of a balanced discussion) that the boat rocks both ways. Because you can't; you can't find resolution without looking at all the angles, and the thread started in a unilateral direction.

To really look at Gender Issues in AH we need to acknowledge theres enough to go around. And its not really fair to have one feedback thread for offended women and another for offended men. I think, personally, all the cards need to be in the same deck.

In my opinion - which is blunt - you can not equate a man to a woman because they are two inherently different things. As such I think it's fair to say male victims of rape experience trauma differently (though in no way necessarily more or less; just differently) and so on and so forth. Thats not a reflection on equal status equal pay or anything, which is another story that falls under the same headings of employment as race and creed and sexuality.

As far as AH is concerned I only have a problem when gender crops up when it's not the real issue. A prime example is during an Abortion debate when someone will say "Oh well you're a xyz so your opinion is really not relevant" sort of way. If that's the kind of scenario we are trying to address in here, please, let's continue.

OutlawPete

liah wrote: »

I've already explained in full many times about why I disagree with the quotes in this context.

You know Liah, you paid more attention to the fact that I quoted you than anybody else.

It was quickly moved on from, but you kept bringing it back up saying that I had discredited you and researched your posts.

I did nothing of the sort, I remembered the thread and quoted you to show that sexism on AH is something both sexes deal with, nothing more and nothing less.

You want to know why I really think this thread has taken a nose dive for you, other than the fact that I think you don't really have a genuine complaint of moderators ignoring sexist abuse I mean?

I think it has taken a nosedive because there were many users on that AH that seemed to be backing you up and then deserted you when you needed them.

If it is such an big and genuine issue and problem that your proclaim it to be, then where are all these users that are regularly the victims of the misogynistic abuse on After Hours?

I have now deleted any reference to you or that thread from my earlier post by the way.

Not because I feel it wasn't relevant, but in an effort to stop you and others from continuing to make a massive deal of it and stop the accusations of bullying and slandering.

I'm not sure why you would think people think you are horrible.

I quite like your posts on AH and maybe you never noticed, but I have thanked your posts quite a bit over the past year or so.

On this one issue, we disagree - that is all.

Dr. Zeus

[QUOTE=GAAman;68060417] I have said numerous times to numerous females in my life to "get back in the kitchen" etc but i have NEVER been in any aspect serious
Don't mean to drag this off topic further but I am just wondering why you have said "get back to the kitchen" numerous times to the women in your life?

This is the bit I am having a sense of humour by pass with. Is it that you feel it is a really funny and witty thing to say to women and get a great laugh about it or do the woman in your life roll on the floor when you say it?