Should "the ladies lounge" clarify its position and only allow ladies to post?

Stheno

Wibbs wrote: »

QFT, except for the AH stuff. I fuggin loooove AH. Maybe I love drivel? I do post enough of it so...

I'd consider AH to be better than breakingnews.ie, and ignore the non news stuff lol

How best to see how the world is doing? Check AH!

This. End fúcking thread. And I'd add, don't bitch about it either.

+1 even though it hasn't ended the thread

TheZohanS

Wibbs wrote: »

This. End fúcking thread. And I'd add, don't bitch about it either.

Ah that's cos you want all the wimmens for yourself! The Wibbulator...

K-9

Stheno wrote: »

pm a mod with your proposed reply if you are unsure?

And as well report a post if you see something you think is a generalisation

In fairness others pick up on it anyway, mostly female posters so doff my hat their!

I think if you are civil and respectful you can have a debate so it probably hasn't changed much, just maybe the line between soap boxing and just having an interest in a thread and maybe posting a bit too much in it, needs to be clarified a bit.

I do know a certain few posters do have it in for tLL and that needs to be dealt with, just it might put some posters with a genuine, non biased approach of.

Wibbs

Naw me Wibbulator ran out of batteries years ago. Still good for rustling up omelletes mind.

Morag

Wibbs wrote: »

Naw me Wibbulator ran out of batteries years ago.

I heard it had a hand powered crank... or was that that you are are hand powered crank!


Some blokes just don't get that a woman's experience of the world, this country or even this site is that different then theirs is.

When they are presented with it and it's like it starts some cognitive dissonance cascade and they have to re assert that the world is how they experience it, no matter what or failing that discredit the person who presented that view/take/opinion or derail or drown out the discussion or make the thread so antagonistic that people give up on it.

This happens in a heap of forums and the type of aggressive and acrimonious point scoring debate puts a lot of people of posting and usually most female posters of posting. There is a difference between discussion which is sharing and discussion which is debate but some people to grasp the difference.

drkpower

I am a very occasional (male) poster in tLL. I have had very few problems in there and try to be constructive and engage in honest debate. And i certainly dont have a problem with male posters being warned/infracted where they come on just wanting to engage in pointless argument.

But on one occasion there was a discussion on womens' experience of getting the morning after pill from their GPs. An issue arose as to the type of questioning doctors employed to ascertain the circumstances that led to the woman getting the MAP. Many women were upset at the manner of the questioning. I was trying to put forward a reasonable explanation as to why doctors asked the question and a debate ensued. I certainly thought I was being constructive.

In any case, midway through the discussion, a Mod issued a generic instruction that the thread was for womens' experiences only. And following that, a post of mine was deleted (without me being informed). Again, as far as i recall, it was an entirely constructive post.

That experience certainly goes against the suggestion that male posters who want to engage in respectful constructive discussion are welcomed. It is a minor point but i thought i would add it to the discussion.

(I should point out that some time following Mod warning, the discussion took off again and my posts thereafter were not deleted)

Morag

Sometimes looking at thing from a logical perspective doesn't work when people are sharing experiences and the emotions they evoke.

K-9

One thing I've learned from Boards is one mans* civil post is anothers ad hominem.

If you post reasonably civilly and respectfully you tend to get thrown a lot more rope.

*sorry.

Ickle Magoo

drkpower wrote: »

I am a very occasional (male) poster in tLL. I have had very few problems in there and try to be constructive and engage in honest debate. And i certainly dont have a problem with male posters being warned/infracted where they come on just wanting to engage in pointless argument.

But on one occasion there was a discussion on womens' experience of getting the morning after pill from their GPs. An issue arose as to the type of questioning doctors employed to ascertain the circumstances that led to the woman getting the MAP. Many women were upset at the manner of the questioning. I was trying to put forward a reasonable explanation as to why doctors asked the question and a debate ensued. I certainly thought I was being constructive.

In any case, midway through the discussion, a Mod issued a generic instruction that the thread was for womens' experiences only. And following that, a post of mine was deleted (without me being informed). Again, as far as i recall, it was an entirely constructive post.

That experience certainly goes against the suggestion that male posters who want to engage in respectful constructive discussion are welcomed. It is a minor point but i thought i would add it to the discussion.

(I should point out that some time following Mod warning, the discussion took off again and my posts thereafter were not deleted)

Another way of looking at it is; posters choose to post about issues and experiences in tLL. They have the option to post in Humanities or in Politics or wherever else but if they choose to post in tLL then rather than rushing in with what YOU view as interesting and constructive points, questions, "explanations" that dismiss or make posters feel they have to qualify or defend the points they have made and actually add nothing to the discussion being had in the manner it is being had - sometimes it is worth taking a step back and thinking/reminding yourself why they have chosen to post or share specifically in the Ladies Lounge over the multitude of other available forums.

K-9

Sharrow wrote: »

Sometimes looking at thing from a logical perspective doesn't work when people are sharing experiences and the emotions they evoke.

But it shouldn't be precluded?

Now I didn't see the thread and maybe there was another reason the post was deleted, but in a thread like that a post explaining the other side would be informative and should be welcomed.

Maybe a particular post was deemed inappropriate but the debate was okay? Seems a reasonable summation considering you did post before and after the deleted post. The tone of the post might have derailed a decent discussion?

Morag

As much as I am a fan of playing devil advocate at times to bring about intresting discussion there are times when it's just not appropriate.

drkpower

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Another way of looking at it is; posters choose to post about issues and experiences in tLL. They have the option to post in Humanities or in Politics or wherever else but if they choose to post in tLL then rather than rushing in with what YOU view as interesting and constructive points, questions, "explanations" that dismiss or make posters feel they have to qualify or defend the points they have made and actually add nothing to the discussion being had in the manner it is being had - sometimes it is worth taking a step back and thinking/reminding yourself why they have chosen to post or share specifically in the Ladies Lounge over the multitude of other available forums.

I usually post on topics that are interesting to me. And often they will be more interesting if they come from a specific subset of the population (ie. medics, lawyers, atheists, women, whatever).

But, in any case, your post above presumes that I engaged in 'dismissing' posters, which I certainly dont think I did - and in fairnes, the Mod generic warning didnt suggest i did either. It simply said 'this thread is for womens views only'.

That was my point. If men who post honestly and constructively are welcome, it seems contradictory to impose a contrary standard mid-thread.

drkpower

Sharrow wrote: »

As much as I am a fan of playing devil advocate at times to bring about intresting discussion there are times when it's just not appropriate.

That may or not be a reference to the thread i am talking about. But if it is, i would just point out that i wasnt playing devils advocate, i was honestly posting a plausible explanation for the experiences the women on the thread were upset with. As a (former) doctor, i certainly thought it would be a constructive and valuable addition to the thread.

Dudess

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

(I redirect my query to feedback)

Seems like men get banned from there and get accused of "trolling" for posting the most mundane things. For example, there is a thread about how unfriendly Irish women can be, I expressed the opinion that women who wear those ridiculous big sunglasses can be particularity unfriendly. Banned, that's "trolling" apparently.

That is a valid opinion. I didn't say it to "troll" the ladies lounge. Men get a very raw deal over there. It seems like they want an echo chamber.

Could you clarify your position with this title seeing as men ARE allowed to post there?

Men with an axe to grind - who only want to rile women, e.g. call them "jealous" - are the ones who get reprimanded, ditto any woman who'd carry on like that. And I've seen that too. FFS, more of this male victimhood sh1t apropos nothing. Some people just assume, because of their own preconceived notions, that The Ladies' Lounge is a place where men are torn apart when nothing of the sort happens. It's in the head...

Ickle Magoo

The majority of deleted posts result from adding precisely zip to a discussion, they are usually from posters taking a pop at moderation or making a completely irrelevant points that have the potential to drag the thread completely off topic, add nothing to the discussion already being enjoyed and are not appropriate in-thread. I remember the thread in question and iirc the deleted post would fit all four of those criterion.

Edited to add:

drkpower wrote: »

That was my point. If men who post honestly and constructively are welcome, it seems contradictory to impose a contrary standard mid-thread.

Common sense would dictate to me that a thread in the ladies lounge, with women discussing an issue from a perspective only they could possibly have ie getting the MAP is not the appropriate place to start challenging the experiences being had or wading in with generalised blanket rationale that, as I remember, completely ignored many of the points posters had raised.

Morag

drkpower wrote: »

That may or not be a reference to the thread i am talking about. But if it is, i would just point out that i wasnt playing devils advocate, i was honestly posting a plausible explanation for the experiences the women on the thread were upset with. As a (former) doctor, i certainly thought it would be a constructive and valuable addition to the thread.

From your point of view and experience you can certainly suppose what the dr was trying to achieve and for what reasons but, you weren't there the women relating their experiences were. Often it can be not what is siad/asked but the manner, tone and body language which was used and your supositions then become a way of 'explaining away' what they experienced, making less of it,
which does impinge on those who are sharing and does put off others from doing so. In short logically arguing those suppositions is not respecting those who are sharing their experiences, esp as no one asked you to explain.

Silverfish

drkpower wrote: »

I usually post on topics that are interesting to me. And often they will be more interesting if they come from a specific subset of the population (ie. medics, lawyers, atheists, women, whatever).

But, in any case, your post above presumes that I engaged in 'dismissing' posters, which I certainly dont think I did - and in fairnes, the Mod generic warning didnt suggest i did either. It simply said 'this thread is for womens views only'.

That was my point. If men who post honestly and constructively are welcome, it seems contradictory to impose a contrary standard mid-thread.

In all fairness, if you want to get into specifics, it was a thread of posters sharing personal experiences, and you were posting things such as

That is the position you need to back up, and which you hvae thus far failed to do,

- why you would feel women sharing experiences would need to 'back up their position' to male posters attempting to derail a thread is beyond me...

and then there was an attempt to derail the thread into why women's healthcare gets more attention, which then received a second moderator warning.

Posters described your posts on the thread as 'Pulling posts to shreds' and making the thread 'annoying to read' and as it was a thread on sharing experiences, your posts were not appropriate, and were not in the spirit of the thread, or the forum.

drkpower

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

The majority of deleted posts result from adding precisely zip to a discussion, they are usually from posters taking a pop at moderation or making a completely irrelevant points that have the potential to drag the thread completely off topic, add nothing to the discussion already being enjoyed and are not appropriate in-thread. I remember the thread in question and iirc the deleted post would fit all four of those criterion.

I certainly dont think any of the 4 applied to my post. And in fact, when the discusssion took off again some time later, i posted much the same views (as had been deleted previously) and the post remained, and remains still.

Dudess

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Basically I object to the idea that men in general can be criticised yet its not entirely clear if a man can then argue without breaking the rules.

Could you produce examples of men in general being criticised on The Ladies' Lounge? Because I'm ****ed if I've ever seen them - and would report them.

TLL mods etc defending themselves here are fighting a losing battle though, because the OP and those who share his presumptuous outlook ain't gonna budge - they've made their minds up, despite flimsy support, and despite very sturdy support of the counter arguments.

Er... best of luck, Ickle, Wibbs and co. - you're probably gonna lose a few hairs. :pac:

Ickle Magoo

drkpower wrote: »

I certainly dont think any of the 4 applied to my post. And in fact, when the discusssion took off again some time later, i posted much the same views (as had been deleted previously) and the post remained, and remains still.

Much the same - but not the same...highlighting just how easy it is not to fall into the trap of snotty dismissive posts or inappropriately phrased interjections.

drkpower

Silverfish wrote: »

That is the position you need to back up, and which you hvae thus far failed to do, .

That post, as far as i recall, was not directed at anyone sharing their experiences, per se. It was directed at a poster who made a particular attack against (the motivation of) doctors. I was asking them to support that position, which seemed reasonable, in the circumstances. I wasnt attacking their experiences. Perhaps i could have phrased it better, for sure.

Silverfish wrote: »

Posters described your posts on the thread as 'Pulling posts to shreds' and making the thread 'annoying to read' and as it was a thread on sharing experiences, your posts were not appropriate, and were not in the spirit of the thread, or the forum.

But you did not ask me to stop posting for those reasons; you only did so on the basis that the thread was for womens' experiences
And, when the discussion took off again, i made much the same points which were left in place.

Silverfish

We are most likely thinking of different threads so, or else different styles of posts.

I dont really want to get bogged down in the specifics of every case of every aggrieved poster however.

Dudess

ITT: ignoring of the countless examples of how TLL isn't a man-hating fest and how men actually can post in there.

So they're prohibited from posting stuff like "Irish women are the bitchiest IMO"? And rightly so - can you imagine a woman starting a thread like that about men in TGC...

No doubt those who are so "injured" by TLL are the same peeps who insist "Men and women are different - get over it" (and I agree with them) therefore why the problem with the "Women's point of view" (mainly - men's points of views are welcome too once there's no axe-grinding) ethos?

Overheal

I just figured they talk about boring stuff in tTL, like Ribbons, Unicorns, Oppression and a Hostile Work Environment. I have little interest in what they post there, basically. So what do they need to bar me from entering for? And for that matter how do you determine the gender of the majority of posters? Do you take a peek under their User CP? While we're at it lets make a new forum for Blacks that only they can post in. Not like that would be segregation or anything or even the slightest bit discriminatory..

Dudess

Er Overheal... who suggested men be banned? Jump to conclusions much? The only people who talk of men being banned are those who imagine they are because they get an orgasm from finding discrimination where there isn't any. I'm pretty sure there are some men who'd love it if men got banned from TLL so they can whinge about it. I've seen the occasional thread started all right by women, who seem to have an axe to grind with men, saying men shouldn't post there - only to be opposed at every turn, by plenty of women. So do try to keep up, rather than being snide.

Oh here's an example of a thread started by a male with axe grinding furiously - and he didn't get a reprimand. Probably because his post was torn apart - not because he's a man but because what he posted was totally kneejerk - so he didn't return.

There was a porn thread recently enough - plenty of men defended porn on it, despite many women saying they don't like it, but the men still weren't stopped from having their say, despite this imagined "censure". I just remember some genius who obviously didn't read the thread saying "Haha you're just prudes and make your men's lives hell derp derp" who got, rightly, admonished, but otherwise, no "repression" despite some thinking it's the case... sorry, wanting it to be the case.

Oh yeah, I recently saw a female moderator on TLL give a woman, who has posted some pretty man-hating stuff, a right stern talking-to - and rightly so. But OP and his crew ain't gonna be producing that post...

Overheal

^ "Should "the ladies lounge" clarify its position and only allow ladies to post?"

response to thread title

Dudess

Thought it had been established the thread title is provocative muck, seeing as The Ladies' Lounge doesn't hold the position that men can't post.

Ickle Magoo

Overheal wrote: »

^ "Should "the ladies lounge" clarify its position and only allow ladies to post?"

This thread was posted by a disgruntled poster that was banned from tLL - why are you asking

Overheal wrote:

I have little interest in what they post there, basically. So what do they need to bar me from entering for?

as if you are addressing anyone in tLL?

Presumably you have so little interest you didn't deign to read the thread first?

Overheal

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Presumably you have so little interest you didn't deign to read the thread first?

Sue me. My interest is in how the website as a whole conducts itself. I'm not a big fan of discrimination, or discriminatory practices. So yeah, I would appreciate the opportunity to take a swing at the original question. Cheers. That it has to do with The Ladies Lounge is merely circumstantial. Point being the Ladies Lounge doesn't and won't discriminate against who posts there, I don't care what your agenda is in asking the question (garlic) - If anything Ickle I'm supporting your position I would have thought.

Ickle Magoo

Overheal wrote: »

If anything Ickle I'm supporting your position I would have thought.

It sounded distinctly as if you were addressing the forum and those who mod/use it rather than the random posters who come up with these crazy suggestions - as well as getting in a personal dig, all of which seems rather petty and needless tbh.