AH & Perceived Sexism

Wibbs

To be fair to Liah, she has highlighted a point which IMHO needed highlighting. There is/was a fair whack of dodgy posts that would be well dodgy if aimed at [insert other group here] The problem is that she's had open support from few enough people and clearly(going by thanks rates) others agree. The second problem is that well worn path of the relative lack of reported posts. So it has a lone voice in the wilderness feeling to it at times.

Feeona

Insect Overlord wrote: »

My biggest problem tonight is the way in which every single comment that poked fun at the issue has been reacted to as if it were serious abuse. The posts that are truly offensive are being lost in the back-ground noise, with obvious jokes being flagged just to prove a point. The After Hours forum is an acquired taste, yes, but its unique comic atmosphere should not be sacrificed.

The tasteless jokes were swiftly deleted in the 'It's good to talk' thread which was about suicide, and rightly so.
Why shouldn't these 'jokes' be deleted in a thread that talks about the air of misogyny that prevades AH? It's a very serious topic, a topic that affects a large percentage of boards users.
Not having a go, but it's not unthinkable to have a serious tone in AH threads if the topic requires it.

Banned Account

liah wrote: »

Mods need to be a little more aware, even without the reporting, and posters need to be aware that there's a line that can be crossed. That's why it exists.

Yes but the whole point is that the location of the line differs according to the individual, the thread and the forum - it cannot be arbitarily decided by one group at the detriment of another without valid discourse which is what is happening here.

I am sorry that you don't view others views as being valid but this is the world in which we live. I choose not to allow my view to be stifled without vocalising my stance on an issue as, obviously, do you.

What would be the next step ban "you've got the ghey?" or "that's what the actress said to the bishop boom boom?"

One persons right to defence is anothers removal of liberty - so there is no clear line to be drawn - it's a case by case analysis and not a blanket issue.

You are entitled to hold your opinion, you are not entitled to state it as fact.

liah

Fitzcaraldo wrote: »

Yes but the whole point is that the location of the line differs according to the individual, the thread and the forum - it cannot be arbitarily decided by one group at the detriment of another without valid discourse which is what is happening here.

I am sorry that you don't view others views as being valid but this is the world in which we live. I choose not to allow my view to be stifled without vocalising my stance on an issue as, obviously, do you.

What would be the next step ban "you've got the ghey?" or "that's what the actress said to the bishop boom boom?"

One persons right to defence is anothers removal of liberty - so there is no clear line to be drawn - it's a case by case analysis and not a blanket issue.

You are entitled to hold your opinion, you are not entitled to state it as fact.

And you are not entitled to tell me what my views and opinions are, thank you very much!

You're still focusing on jokes which I have stated time and time again I don't have much problem with. You're clearly avoiding the actual issue I'm trying to get at for the sake of argument and I'm not sure why.

For what will inevitably not be the last time, but dear god I wish it was:

I want sexism to be taken just as seriously as homophobia, racism, etc. Not MORE SO. Not LESS SO. Just the same.

I have faith that the mods will be able to understand where the line is now that a group of us have discussed our viewpoints on the matter and will come to a conclusion regarding what or what not to do. IMO this thread/the AH thread was necessary for that, as the mods couldn't possibly see it was an issue until we made them aware of it.

It's done a great service in opening a line of communication NOW, though, and a lot of women have said they will be using the report function. It still serves a purpose in allowing women to discuss what they feel the line should be and take onboard how the men feel about it, too, and I think that's very important.

I never once said other people's views were invalid, don't you dare put words in my mouth. I asked for some men posting to try to see it from our point of view. That's it.

Is your view that because YOU don't see a problem, there isn't one? You're in here standing up for your right to say what you want. We're in here standing up for our right to not be belittled. Why is yours right and ours wrong?

My point is: why does it have to be one or the other? Why can we not just compromise? Those men can still have their jokes, but they ease up on directing it at female posters unless the thread lends itself to strictly humour. Is that really such an infringement to you?

Catari Jaguar

Comments from the Should I get a boob job thread. These were aimed at Liah.

"Saucer of milk for the lady"

hush, don't spoil our fun.

Call it like it is.. no need for catty remarks

FFS would ya give over.

You sound bitterly jealous of this girl because she's attractive.

Nobody cares either way...we're here for the b00b

Ladies, play nice, the jelly wrestling pit is only half full!

jaysus liah, you're a ruthless one at times eh?

QUIT SPOILING OUR FUN!!!!!!!!!!

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Seen as jokes I guess because they were let slide. At the time, I found them inappropriate and reported some.

Liah got this from the moderator because she posted on the thread calling BS and disagreeing with the OPs behaviour:

If you have a problem with a post report it, if you have a problem with grammar, keep it to yourself

The comments towards Liah got no warning though. Thread was eventually locked.

Procasinator

In the end, the conclusion seems to be:

• If you don't like a comment, report it or ignore it.
  
• Personal abuse is not tolerated.
  
• Mods decide what action should be made.
  
• This thread is here to highlight that their are problems, in a hope that mods are more aware of it.

Which is really how boards currently operates, even beyond AH.

Some people seem to think that anything that could be construed as sexist, even in a casual joking way, should be stamped out. This doesn't appear to be the majority (not that boards is utilitarian) and would obviously be the choice of higher ups.

I'm not trying to lead the conversation, but what more needs to be discussed? This thread seems to have no direction, and seems to be back and forth arguments not really pertaining to this discussion (which I might also be guilty of).

Logical Fallacy

Does the locking of the thread not indicate the stance the Mods were talking or am i missing something here?

Jazzy

Thaedydal wrote: »

The difference between abuse and sexits remakrs sexist it abuse is that it targets the person to belittle them using thier gender.

Example A

Female poster posts in a thread in ah about the recession.

Male poster responds, ah sure what would you know, your just a ucd student go back to the arts block.

Example B

Female poster posts in a thread in ah about the recession.

Male poster responds, ah sure what woudl you know your just a woman go back into the kitchen.

And then the posts about go back to the ktichen are called out the female poster gets called a feminazi.

Stupid sexist remarks are stupid and people who use them are lazy imho.
I see no reason why such sexist remarks can't be stamped out like Yore Ma was.

so you basically are going against Liah's grain by wanting to rid AH of all that sort of 'humour'?
I think in this thread you have found yourself a platform

Banned Account

liah wrote: »

And you are not entitled to tell me what my views and opinions are, thank you very much!

You're still focusing on jokes which I have stated time and time again I don't have much problem with. You're clearly avoiding the actual issue I'm trying to get at for the sake of argument and I'm not sure why.

For what will inevitably not be the last time, but dear god I wish it was:

I want sexism to be taken just as seriously as homophobia, racism, etc. Not MORE SO. Not LESS SO. Just the same.

I have faith that the mods will be able to understand where the line is now that a group of us have discussed our viewpoints on the matter and will come to a conclusion regarding what or what not to do. IMO this thread/the AH thread was necessary for that, as the mods couldn't possibly see it was an issue until we made them aware of it.

It's done a great service in opening a line of communication NOW, though, and a lot of women have said they will be using the report function. It still serves a purpose in allowing women to discuss what they feel the line should be and take onboard how the men feel about it, too, and I think that's very important.

I never once said other people's views were invalid, don't you dare put words in my mouth. I asked for some men posting to try to see it from our point of view. That's it.

Is your view that because YOU don't see a problem, there isn't one? You're in here standing up for your right to say what you want. We're in here standing up for our right to not be belittled. Why is yours right and ours wrong?

My point is: why does it have to be one or the other? Why can we not just compromise? Those men can still have their jokes, but they ease up on directing it at female posters unless the thread lends itself to strictly humour. Is that really such an infringement to you?

I have never said that either view was right or wrong - it is simply not possible to make this decision - if it were, we would not be having this conversation. What we have here is a conflict of percieved rights - some, myself included, fear that without reasoned and balanced debate, what you are arguing for would amount to a degree of shackling on others freedom of expression.

As I view this freedom as being just as important as you view your right to be protected from comments which may be (rightfully so in many cases) repugnant, I will argue my case just as hard as you argue yours.

The reason why I have taken up this issue with you more so than others is because it only really kicked off when you were pulled up for making swweping statements about "men" - if there hadn't been the ensuing reaction, I doubt very much whether we aould be having this conversation now.

That being the case, logic would seem to dictate that you don't really have an issue with the use of such sweeping generalisations, rather you just have an issue with the fact that some posters chose not to accept it from you. Therfore, the issue does not seem revolve as much around rights as it does around the fact that you got annoyed.

If blanket generalisations were not to be accepted, you wouldn't have made them either right?

_feedback_

cherub rock wrote: »

Seen as jokes I guess because they were let slide. At the time, I found them inappropriate and reported some.

cherub, I think what happened was, you didn't report any. Then all this complaining started, then somebody said you should be reporting posts.

You went back, reported 30 posts (as you said here)

Sure, how can you expect a mod to get through your 30 reports and also keep an eye on threads like you're asking here.

It was an over-reaction to being told what was the right thing to do. Going on a "reporting rampage" is just counter-productive. How is the mod supposed to warn people on the thread if they are sifting through your reports?

Procasinator

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Does the locking of the thread not indicate the stance the Mods were talking or am i missing something here?

The closing post:

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Closed for review.

Does not appear to indicate a stance, and is probably why this thread exists.

liah

Fitzcaraldo wrote: »

I have never said that either view was right or wrong - it is simply not possible to make this decision - if it were, we would not be having this conversation. What we have here is a conflict of percieved rights - some, myself included, fear that without reasoned and balanced debate, what you are arguing for would amount to a degree of shackling on others freedom of expression.

As I view this freedom as being just as important as you view your right to be protected from comments which may be (rightfully so in many cases) repugnant, I will argue my case just as hard as you argue yours.

The reason why I have taken up this issue with you more so than others is because it only really kicked off when you were pulled up for making swweping statements about "men" - if there hadn't been the ensuing reaction, I doubt very much whether we aould be having this conversation now.

That being the case, logic would seem to dictate that you don't really have an issue with the use of such sweeping generalisations, rather you just have an issue with the fact that some posters chose not to accept it from you. Therfore, the issue does not seem revolve as much around rights as it does around the fact that you got annoyed.

If blanket generalisations were not to be accepted, you wouldn't have made them either right?

Okay, what part of what I'm saying are you arguing against, exactly? Because I've said I don't mind jokes, and all I want is more awareness on attacks and for women to feel comfortable enough to report these when they feel uncomfortable. I also STILL don't understand why you're targeting just me when a few others have also been posting in this thread. If you want to argue censorship there's other female posters who wish there to be more legit censorship against jokes and that's where your battle is, not with me.

You're making an awful lot of completely unfounded comments presuming to know more about what I mean than I do. I've rarely given a damn about generalizations UNLESS the topic at hand is decidedly serious. At the stage in which my comment was posted in the reporter thread, the thread was NOT serious, and as I clarified through many posts within that thread it was not meant as it came across which should be indication enough for you that this has nothing to do with that.

The thing that triggered all of this was seeing how Dudess' arguments were met in that thread. I actually factor very little into why I'm ticked off.

LoLth

Mod intervention again:

@nuxxx : "Since when do I need to speak productively about the topic you created." since it was a topic created on the FEEDBACK forum. If the topic is not worthy of discussion, exit the thread and let it float away.

As Wibbs already said Liah has brought up a good point and feedback is appreciated and I am sure the AH mods will take useful comments, attitudes and suggestions on board when they are discussing this themselves.

However, lets try to keep this civilised and avoid personal battles. Try to stick to the TOPIC at hand and not the user that posted it please.

Insect Overlord

Feeona wrote: »

The tasteless jokes were swiftly deleted in the 'It's good to talk' thread which was about suicide, and rightly so.
Why shouldn't these 'jokes' be deleted in a thread that talks about the air of misogyny that prevades AH? It's a very serious topic, a topic that affects a large percentage of boards users.
Not having a go, but it's not unthinkable to have a serious tone in AH threads if the topic requires it.

No offence taken I'm not in this thread to take anything personal/to have a go either. It's the occasional serious thread that really draws me back to After Hours again and again. Hullabaloo's recent thread, as you mentioned, is a perfect example of what great value the forum can offer from that point of view.

I should have clarified my point a little bit more last night. When I called for people to see the funny side of posts in AH, I was talking in general terms. I think that the forum would suffer if humour was frowned upon in every thread. I get tired of seeing jokes about Limerick City, for example, but I usually don't take them seriously. People from Cork, Cavan and Kerry have to put up with various (inaccurate) stereotypes too, and they nearly always manage to do so soundly.
As adult men and women, we should be able to recognise that some people have an immature sense of humour. After Hours is where they tend to express that. TLL, TGC and LGBT are there for more respectful discussion of gender issues, and are modded very well to that effect. Trolls are dealt with swiftly and with extreme prejudice.

Which, as I've said before, is how trolls and bigots should be dealt with elsewhere. I did not mean to give the impression that I condoned the "jokes" in this thread or in the Why Is AH so Misogynistic? thread. These are, like the suicide awareness thread, serious discussions. They should be reserved for people who want to give genuine, constructive feedback that will lead to the forum's improvement for everyone. Wind-up merchants who hind behind the "it's just a joke" defence in serious threads should be punished for thread-spoiling.

I hope that clarifies the point I began making last night.

_feedback_

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Does the locking of the thread not indicate the stance the Mods were talking or am i missing something here?

Yeah you're missing something, because you're not reading the threads fully.

biko wrote: »

The thread in AH has become an excuse for the boys to tell women jokes and generally trying to derail it. It's sad since it was trying for a good discussion.
We might clean it and reopen later.

liah

Insect Overlord wrote: »

No offence taken I'm not in this thread to take anything personal/to have a go either. It's the occasional serious thread that really draws me back to After Hours again and again. Hullabaloo's recent thread, as you mentioned, is a perfect example of what great value the forum can offer from that point of view.

I should have clarified my point a little bit more last night. When I called for people to see the funny side of posts in AH, I was talking in general terms. I think that the forum would suffer if humour was frowned upon in every thread. I get tired of seeing jokes about Limerick City, for example, but I usually don't take them seriously. People from Cork, Cavan and Kerry have to put up with various (inaccurate) stereotypes too, and they nearly always manage to do so soundly.
As adult men and women, we should be able to recognise that some people have an immature sense of humour. After Hours is where they tend to express that. TLL, TGC and LGBT are there for more respectful discussion of gender issues, and are modded very well to that effect. Trolls are dealt with swiftly and with extreme prejudice.

Which, as I've said before, is how trolls and bigots should be dealt with elsewhere. I did not mean to give the impression that I condoned the "jokes" in this thread or in the Why Is AH so Misogynistic? thread. These are, like the suicide awareness thread, serious discussions. They should be reserved for people who want to give genuine, constructive feedback that will lead to the forum's improvement for everyone. Wind-up merchants who hind behind the "it's just a joke" defence in serious threads should be punished for thread-spoiling.

I hope that clarifies the point I began making last night.

Thank you for pretty much summarizing how I feel on the thing way better than I ever could.

I'm not seeing why there's so much argument, most people (who've actually read the two threads, anyway) seem to be on the same page: humour's grand, attacks aren't.

A few people to the extremes on either side but that's to be expected.

Catari Jaguar

I personally think :

"I'd give her one",
"Get back in the kitchen"
"Women, know your place" demotivational pictures
"Make me a sandwich"
"Women driver" jokes
"I left her like a painter's radio" and other sexual comments made in a wrong place/ wrong time way
"Pics/ Tits or GTFO"
"You must be on your period"
"Oooh bitchy, claws out, catty, saucer of milk...."
"You're just jealous because she's hot"
"Feminazi"
"Man hater" are sexist/ misogynistic, out dated, over used and just not funny.

How can that be seen as jokes but you can't joke about other races/ religions/ sexuality etc. What I'm picking up from feedback here is that censorship is fine until it comes to women because it's taking the fun away. AH is obviously only cool and hilarious as a boys club where you can freely degrade women.

This is the kind of stuff I reported because it leads to the misogynistic undertones of AH. When is a joke not a joke? If that's all let slide then it's encouraging this behaviour. And I'm surprised that it's left up to the girls to report this.

I was PMd that "No one else took offence to the posts" therefore I just disagreed with it it and it didn't warrant valid complaint. Was told to think before I report and to only report personal abuse. "Otherwise it prevents us catching the ones they should be dealing with." Excuse given: AH has a different style of posting to any other forum on boards.

Says it all really. This is why girls are put off reporting posts.

The bullying/ ganging up/ dismissing based on gender that Liah is talking about (I've also experienced it and seen it) should be nipped in the bud. For her to have to jusitify it (publically) and ask for some courtesy then to have that for it to be even debated and asked for proof is sick tbh.

Banned Account

Insect Overlord wrote: »

No offence taken I'm not in this thread to take anything personal/to have a go either. It's the occasional serious thread that really draws me back to After Hours again and again. Hullabaloo's recent thread, as you mentioned, is a perfect example of what great value the forum can offer from that point of view.

I should have clarified my point a little bit more last night. When I called for people to see the funny side of posts in AH, I was talking in general terms. I think that the forum would suffer if humour was frowned upon in every thread. I get tired of seeing jokes about Limerick City, for example, but I usually don't take them seriously. People from Cork, Cavan and Kerry have to put up with various (inaccurate) stereotypes too, and they nearly always manage to do so soundly.
As adult men and women, we should be able to recognise that some people have an immature sense of humour. After Hours is where they tend to express that. TLL, TGC and LGBT are there for more respectful discussion of gender issues, and are modded very well to that effect. Trolls are dealt with swiftly and with extreme prejudice.

Which, as I've said before, is how trolls and bigots should be dealt with elsewhere. I did not mean to give the impression that I condoned the "jokes" in this thread or in the Why Is AH so Misogynistic? thread. These are, like the suicide awareness thread, serious discussions. They should be reserved for people who want to give genuine, constructive feedback that will lead to the forum's improvement for everyone. Wind-up merchants who hind behind the "it's just a joke" defence in serious threads should be punished for thread-spoiling.

I hope that clarifies the point I began making last night.

Indeed, it makes a huge amount of sense. The one issue being over looked however is the fact that the thread that kicked all of this off in the first plave is the sexual harassment "REALLY" thread - which was humourous until some posters rather than start a discussion thread decided to bail in and take offence to a AH humour thread.

This runs far too close to eroding freedom of expression in my own mind - don't like the thread - be prepared to take some opposition for saying so or don't post there or report - don't bail in, and then call foul when things turn out in a way which you don't like.

Nevyn

Jazzy wrote: »

so you basically are going against Liah's grain by wanting to rid AH of all that sort of 'humour'?
I think in this thread you have found yourself a platform

Nope, there is once of humour and then there is the derailing of dicusion with repeated not funny sexist remarks be they targeted at one poster or not, but usually as cherb's rocks post they are used to target a poster and have a go.

_feedback_

cherub rock wrote: »

I
I was PMd that "No one else took offence to the posts" therefore I just disagreed with it it and it didn't warrant valid complaint. Was told to think before I report and to only report personal abuse. "Otherwise it prevents us catching the ones they should be dealing with." Excuse given: AH has a different style of posting to any other forum on boards.

Says it all really. This is why girls are put off reporting posts.

This has NOTHING to do with being a girl cherub. It's because you got in a hissy fit and went off reporting 30 posts.

cherub rock wrote: »

"I'd give her one",
"Get back in the kitchen"
"Women, know your place" demotivational pictures
"Make me a sandwich"
"Women driver" jokes
"I left her like a painter's radio" and other sexual comments made in a wrong place/ wrong time way
"Pics/ Tits or GTFO"
"You must be on your period"
"Oooh bitchy, claws out, catty, saucer of milk...."
"You're just jealous because she's hot"

I would have thought these were all the standard AH jokey type comments? And not the type that ye were complaining about? If these type offend you, I personally think AH isn't the place for you.

I am genuinely not getting at you. It's just my opinion.

Feeona

Insect Overlord wrote: »

I should have clarified my point a little bit more last night. When I called for people to see the funny side of posts in AH, I was talking in general terms. I think that the forum would suffer if humour was frowned upon in every thread. I get tired of seeing jokes about Limerick City, for example, but I usually don't take them seriously. People from Cork, Cavan and Kerry have to put up with various (inaccurate) stereotypes too, and they nearly always manage to do so soundly.

I myself would laugh at some of the sexist remarks in AH. Some of it is down to knowing the poster's style, and some of it is down to an 'I take my hat off to you sir' moment because it's true wit.

It's just the cheap-shot humour I find distasteful, and unfortunately it usually happens to be misogynistic and dismissive all at the same time. Leaves no room for discussion. I've often seen threads in AH where a female's view is dismissed because she's a 'feminazi'. In other words 'How dare a woman have a view' or 'What's she harping on about now?'. It's lazy, disrespectful, and worst of all, doesn't contain any evidence that the poster has any sort of wit about them. I love well constructed humour, cries of 'feminazi' to any female view does not strike me as well constructed humour.

EDIT: Was out in Limerick a few times. Had a great time : ). I never believe half assed stereotypical opinions!

Logical Fallacy

elviscostello wrote: »

Yeah you're missing something, because you're not reading the threads fully.

I meant the thread that cherub rock was referencing....the boob job bidness. Damn my lack of quoting.

twinQuins

elviscostello wrote: »

I would have thought these were all the standard AH jokey type comments? And not the type that ye were complaining about? If these type offend you, I personally think AH isn't the place for you.

So is AH just a dumping ground of juvenile humour or is it a bona fide off-topic forum?

If you want that kind of atmosphere, maybe you'd be more at home in somewhere like BGRH.

Jazzy

liah wrote: »

I'm not seeing why there's so much argument, most people (who've actually read the two threads, anyway) seem to be on the same page: humour's grand, attacks aren't.

A few people to the extremes on either side but that's to be expected.

aye, tell that to some supporters

my main problem would be in over-moderation. to 'keep up appearances' the mods now might clamp down on freedoms that have always been there (whether they are smart or not). like, it could devalue some topics as people will be sanitising their posts because they fear they might get banned for it being 'sexist', even if it completely isnt, but the fear is there. I dont think that is healthy.
at the end of the day, you have said how you want to change the attitudes of the people that post in AH... to be frank, that aint gonna happen. if it is in someones nature to be stupid, they are going to be stupid.

g'em

Fitzcaraldo wrote: »

Indeed, it makes a huge amount of sense. The one issue being over looked however is the fact that the thread that kicked all of this off in the first plave is the sexual harassment "REALLY" thread - which was humourous until some posters rather than start a discussion thread decided to bail in and take offence to a AH humour thread.

I think you may have how these things works a bit arse over backwards tbh. That poster - and I'm going to presume you mean the female poster who first raised an issue with the thread - was perfectly entitled to do so, and should feel completely comfortable in doing so. That doesn't mean she's expecting everyone to agree with her, simply that she's afforded the same respect that one would anywhere else on the site. That's a reasonable request don't you think?

But almost immediately she was met with a male poster who not only didn't agree, but made an abusive remark directed at her. That's the issue here, that's what (as I read it) the OP was speaking about. It's not the jokes per se, it's the direct attacks made when posters speak up. In that particular instance, I absolutely agree.

Fitzcaraldo wrote:

This runs far too close to eroding freedom of expression in my own mind - don't like the thread - be prepared to take some opposition for saying so or don't post there or report - don't bail in, and then call foul when things turn out in a way which you don't like.

Things not going your way and things turning into personal attacks are two different things. I believe it was the latter that was what broke the straw and let to this thread.

Procasinator

cherub rock wrote: »

"I'd give her one",
"I left her like a painter's radio" and other sexual comments made in a wrong place/ wrong time way

I've quoted these two sexual comments, because, I only think that sexual harassment thread was created for sexual comments, as the OP from the begggining was one of the people doing it.

To quote the OP:

about blank wrote: »

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4337751/n...ylist_id=87485

OMG what a babe

0:30

1:51


'I mean could they get any tighter'

Now I know we are talking about the general threads AH in this feedback forum, but I refer to this thread a lot as I believe it was the straw that broke the camels back to spark this conversation.

So, for instance, if the OP meant the thread to be about how hot the girl was, are comments like these not allowed?

Should AH not have threads about how good looking or attractive people are?

Gummy Panda

Pics or GTFO is an internet meme that has been used by men and women on AH.

This thread seems to going around in circles.

What was wanted: sexism posts to be taken serious
What was agreed: AH Mods would take this posts very serious.
What was acknowledged: That people who are offended by posts need to report them.

I don't see what the issue is now. It just seems like the thread is being filled up with people who want to get their word in or post outrageous accusations.

BTW I said people. If you're male and are offended by posts directed at either sex as abuse then report them.

I think people need more confidence in the AH Mods.

Catari Jaguar

elviscostello wrote: »

This has NOTHING to do with being a girl cherub. It's because you got in a hissy fit and went off reporting 30 posts.



I would have thought these were all the standard AH jokey type comments? And not the type that ye were complaining about? If these type offend you, I personally think AH isn't the place for you.

I am genuinely not getting at you. It's just my opinion.

Look I'm sick of that maybe

AH isn't the place for you

bull****. Someone equated AH to a pub earlier and said if the same group of wankbags keep harrassing the local women and stirring up **** for fun the security will kick them out. Logic here is that well, maybe the women should leave the pub. **** that!

Where did I mention a girl having anyhting to do with it? The lads on here are spouting that AH isn't misogynistic, prove it blah blah so I listed up a load of comments that are REGULARLY used and let slide. Because only I reported them an found them offensive (and no fellas - sure why would they it's not aimed at them and they said it) it was dismissed as time wasting.

The fact that it was a bombardment happened to be because there's a **** load of anti-woman posts in AH in a short space of time. Proving a point maybe?

It's all "report offensive stuff" and blaming girls for not reporting then it's "you can't post something just because you disagree with it. It has to be abuse"

If I report "get back to the kitchen" I'll be told to gtfo because it's harmless.

Feeona

Procasinator wrote: »

So, for instance, if the OP meant the thread to be about how hot the girl was, are comments like these not allowed?

Should AH not have threads about how good looking or attractive people are?

I think that's the problem. That specific thread was degrading to women, not 'people'. Why not bring it up in BGRH instead? After all, women orientated threads in AH are often met with cries of 'bring it to tLL', as evidenced by the thread about period cramps.

Catari Jaguar

Procasinator wrote: »

Now I know we are talking about the general threads AH in this feedback forum, but I refer to this thread a lot as I believe it was the straw that broke the camels back to spark this conversation.

So, for instance, if the OP meant the thread to be about how hot the girl was, are comments like these not allowed?

Should AH not have threads about how good looking or attractive people are?

That sexual harrassment thread was designed to be PRO sexual harassment and see who could make the best sexually hgarassing comment about that girl.

There should have been a "I don't see this going anywhere productive" lock by the first page.

And as for good looking people, every second thread in AH now is about doable or non doable girls or FAS girl or RTE babes. It gets old.

Anyone remember that "Teacher you fancied" thread? Shocking stuff posted. Just made me feel so so bad for female teachers in a secondary school.