What is a female point of view/perspective?

Gunsfortoys

Dudess wrote: »

What is your definition of "feminist"? I get the impression it's merely man-hater/woman who thinks women are better than men - in which case, no, there are NOT a lot of feminists on Boards. Extremely few actually. The odd one who posts is usually exposed for the crackpot she is, pretty quickly. Even - shock horror! - on the Ladies' Lounge!
As for objections to speaking ill of feminism? Absolutely - when the definition given of it is "man-hating" and nothing else, and zero accounting for the fact that there are many different types of feminism and many variations of extremity. E.g. a woman, who believes women should have the right to give up work when she becomes a mother, can be a feminist.

When did I say the definition of feminism is "man-hating"?

I refuse to even entertain your snide remarks in that post.

g'em

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

When did I say the definition of feminism is "man-hating"?

In fairness teh term feminists is often used that way. I'm more concerned that according to you feminists are so maligned that they should be relegated to their own subforum should people who believe in eqiality for both sexes not be able to post in the main forums?

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

There are many posters that are feminists on boards. there is no question about it.

I have no problem with it as long as it is within the confines of a feminist sub forum as such.

Ticktactoe

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

Someone get me a piece of chalk...

Thanks, am a lot clearer now :rolleyes:

Think i get the jist of it... and am staying out of it!

OutlawPete

Dudess wrote: »

That "Sexism on the internet" thread was a discussion of a particular phenomenon, and a very prevalent one, which crops up regularly on this site.

Seriously, what in the name of God are you talking about??

The link I posted to that thread, was done so to show how WELL I feel the forum is sometimes modded and CLEARLY used as an example of when I feel a man was moderated in the CORRECT way, based on the ethos of TLL

Dudess wrote: »

It was NOT an attack on men in general, it was frustration vented at the way some men (and probably a few women too - it wouldn't surprise me) behave.

Who here said it was an "attack" on men?

Gunsfortoys

g'em wrote: »

In fairness teh term feminists is often used that way. I'm more concerned that according to you feminists are so maligned that they should be relegated to their own subforum should people who believe in eqiality for both sexes not be able to post in the main forums?

I am more concerned with the fact that you could get banned for a simple "bitches be crazy" joke comment on AH.

Which is why I moan really.

g'em

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

I am more concerned with the fact that you could get banned for a simple "bitches be crazy" joke comment on AH.

No-one got banned for that.

Gunsfortoys

g'em wrote: »

No-one got banned for that.

Do I need to highlight that 'could' word?

A harsh infraction was given, I also complained that if you even mention a bad word about feminism, you receive an infraction or are banned.

I know you may think I am some woman-hating troll or something, but I genuinely believe that you should be able to crack a joke about something without fear of serious reprisal. Well, in AH anyway.

OutlawPete

Banning a first offence user for one week for saying that he finds that women who wear big framed black shades the most "unfriendly" - is a complete and utter joke. On a thread I might add that was discussing "unfriendly women". It beggers belief.

g'em

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

Do I need to highlight that 'could' word?

I saw the word thanks, but the fact that you mentioned that exact phrase would lead me to believe that you were talking about an incident in particular. Or perhaps it's a just Freaky Friday coincidence.

Gunsfortoys wrote:

A harsh infraction was given, I also complained that if you even mention a bad word about feminism, you receive an infraction or are banned.

The infraction was reversed. And you're more than stretching the truth there. I'd love for you to point out some actual instances that back up your point, otherwise you're being a little dramatic (but perhaps on the AH Feedback thread, see below).

Gunsfortoys wrote:

I know you may think I am some woman-hating troll or something, but I genuinely believe that you should be able to crack a joke about something without fear of serious reprisal. Well, in AH anyway.

I think you should too, but there are certain topics where the lines get a bit muddied. This thread is about tLL but there's a feedback thread in AH where this kind of thing can be discussed at length. We've been discussing it amongst ourselves and opinions are very divided. So honestly, discuss it on AH, the Mods are very open to what everyone has to say.

Gunsfortoys

koth wrote: »

The charter of tLL actually states the following regarding that point:



So it's seems reasonable to me that the mods act upon the charter.

Which is fine, do we have a similar rule for The Gentlemen's Club?

I think a stink would inevitably be kicked up if there was.

donfers

Aadhya Howling Girl wrote: »

Jesus, a thousand words. Seems to me that you're really being pedantic if you insist on a charter preferring a "feminine" perspective rather than a "female" perspective.

fair point

I was half asleep when I wrote that op and made my usual nine or ten typo's. I have now edited it, I meant to write feminist rather than feminine.

oh and not surprisingly some posters have completely missed the point in their efforts to be seen to be defending the honour of tll (it isn't in dispute)

i just want to clarify what "female perspective" means so these same arguments don't keep cropping up, that's all

Delirium

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

Which is fine, do we have a similar rule for The Gentlemen's Club?

I think a stink would inevitably be kicked up if there was.

As a regular lurker, and sometimes poster, I answer with the line the mods have taken: tGC is not tLL.

I don't see why it would kick up a stink if tGC got a consensus from the forum to implement the rule.

I'm pretty sure tLL mods implemented the rule after a number of regulars in the forum said they were sick of the "ladies, can I get your opinion?" threads.

Why does tLL have to follow a path taken by tGC or vice versa?

Gunsfortoys

g'em wrote: »

I saw the word thanks, but the fact that you mentioned that exact phrase would lead me to believe that you were talking about an incident in particular. Or perhaps it's a just Freaky Friday coincidence.

Must be a coincidence.

The infraction was reversed. And you're more than stretching the truth there. I'd love for you to point out some actual instances that back up your point, otherwise you're being a little dramatic (but perhaps on the AH Feedback thread, see below).

Irrelevant, the fact that it and a number of similar posts were infracted in the first place is the issue. Posters shouldn't have to worry about having to PM mods back and forth because they offended their ridiculous views.

I think you should too, but there are certain topics where the lines get a bit muddied. This thread is about tLL but there's a feedback thread in AH where this kind of thing can be discussed at length. We've been discussing it amongst ourselves and opinions are very divided. So honestly, discuss it on AH, the Mods are very open to what everyone has to say.

I like how you completely sidestepped the issue at hand but yes, this is to do with TLL.

Also yes, you are right, feedback threads always work in favour of the posters...

Gunsfortoys

koth wrote: »

As a regular lurker, and sometimes poster, I answer with the line the mods have taken: tGC is not tLL.

I don't see why it would kick up a stink if tGC got a consensus from the forum to implement the rule.

I'm pretty sure tLL mods implemented the rule after a number of regulars in the forum said they were sick of the "ladies, can I get your opinion?" threads.

Why does tLL have to follow a path taken by tGC or vice versa?

Equality and all that...

No I meant that the rule is ridiculous in the first place. I honestly don't think it should be implemented, I was just making a point.

OutlawPete

K-9 wrote: »

And here's a recent thread that a tGC mod did act on:

Nobody is suggesting that the TGC doesn't moderate women when they go against the premise of the forum. That's the whole point, they do but when they do it usually for a very good reason and 99% of the time they will have given a woman a good crack of the whip. I'm not saying that men don't complain there about what some women post and recently Liah got some stick about another of her threads but again, the Mods there let her have her say (which I FULLY support) and only moderated her when they felt that she needed to be. That thread is another example of one that would NEVER EVER be allowed in TLL where it the male equivalent and in fact, a user that complained about the thread, made that very point and a TGC Mod replied to it here.

Delirium

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

Equality and all that...

No I meant that the rule is ridiculous in the first place. I honestly don't think it should be implemented, I was just making a point.

Fair enough, but do you not appreciate that the female posters in tLL didn't feel the same and that's why we have the rule?

They must have had a big problem with guys starting a lot of those threads, that it got to the point were mods and posters decided enough is enough.

Gunsfortoys

koth wrote: »

Fair enough, but do you not appreciate that the female posters in tLL didn't feel the same and that's why we have the rule?

They must have had a big problem with guys starting a lot of those threads, that it got to the point were mods and posters decided enough is enough.

Well yes and no.

If it is a genuine question though, do you not think a female opinion would help the OP?

I would understand if it was locked if the OP was trying to flame or troll, but what if it was genuinely looking for opinions?

Delirium

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

Well yes and no.

If it is a genuine question though, do you not think a female opinion would help the OP?

yeah, if they're being genuine then of course it could help.

I would understand if it was locked if the OP was trying to flame or troll, but what if it was genuinely looking for opinions?

I guess my understanding of the rule would be that the female poster took the line that the nature of the forum wasn't to be "ask the ladies".

They wanted to talk about topics that interest them, and not be a forum for guys to quiz women so as to better understand women.

I'm pretty sure they won't lock a thread asking about something purely because it was started by a guy.

donfers

koth wrote: »

The charter of tLL actually states the following regarding that point:


9) The Ladies Lounge is not a place for men to come and start threads requesting opinions on X, Y and Z from women. Women aren't of a single mind or opinion.


So it's seems reasonable to me that the mods act upon the charter.

precisely which is why the whole "woman's point of view" thing is hard to get to grips with

K-9

OutlawPete wrote: »

Nobody is suggesting that the TGC doesn't moderate women when they go against the premise of the forum. That's the whole point, they do but when they do it usually for a very good reason and 99% of the time they will have given a woman a good crack of the whip. I'm not saying that men don't complain there about what some women post and recently Liah got some stick about another of her threads but again, the Mods there let her have her say (which I FULLY support) and only moderated her when they felt that she needed to be. That thread is another example of one that would NEVER EVER be allowed in TLL where it the male equivalent and in fact, a user that complained about the thread, made that very point and a TGC Mod replied to it here.

tGC is different though. tGC had problems with a similar issue when it started, the board was getting over run with men vs. women battle threads so they acted on that with a tough enough line, I think they've changed a bit since and act on posts that might make it a battle of the sexes thread and let threads develop.

I see threads on both boards where OTT gender rights stuff gets torn into shreds but I suppose they get ignored.

Delirium

donfers wrote: »

precisely which is why the whole "woman's point of view" thing is hard to get to grips with

Woman's point of view to me means that it is topics discussed by women. Men are welcome to post, but the forum is there for the women primarily.

Logical Fallacy

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

Well yes and no.

If it is a genuine question though, do you not think a female opinion would help the OP?

I would understand if it was locked if the OP was trying to flame or troll, but what if it was genuinely looking for opinions?

To be honest, i reckon a genuine question would be fine, and would be answered no problem....it really just depends on what the question is about.

The threads i normally see getting locked are people asking "what kind of chance would i have with a woman if...." and "It's my girlfriends birthday, what do i get her".

Just kind of silly stuff.

precisely which is why the whole "woman's point of view" thing is hard to get to grips with

I thanked your post because i understand completely where you are coming from, i kind of got hung up on it myself at one point and found it confusing and felt it was slightly dismissive but to be honest i am completely fine with it now...because it doesn't affect me in any way.

Seriously, all i do is keep the generalisations in check, keep examples specific and debate polite. I honestly feel that rule was simply brought up to help deter and deal with the limited number of posters who would rush a thread and instantly try and derail it by making it a war of the genders scenario.

donfers

koth wrote: »

Woman's point of view to me means that it is topics discussed by women. Men are welcome to post, but the forum is there for the women primarily.

That doesn't really make any sense and I think it causes confusion

Silverfish

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

There are a lot of female posters in The Gentlemen's Club that ask a mans opinions of a variety of subjects. I am more of a lurker in The Gentleman's Club and find the debates interesting. Although I feel the moderation again is a bit heavy handed.

I have seen many a thread started by a man looking for an opinion from women(nothing out of the ordinary) in The Ladies Lounge, the thread was locked and the OP told "this isn't an advice forum" or some such. That is one difference in the flow of the forums.

If The Ladies Lounge welcomes the male point of view (without being obtuse or abusive of course), then they should clarify this if they hand out an infraction or an on thread warning.

Correct, we do not do 'Advice for men' threads.

If he wants to know what to get his girlfriend, he can use Gifts, Festivities and Party Ideas.

If he wants to know why his girlfriend / wife dumped him, that's PI.

If he wanted to know why girl in nightclub would not give him her number, we don't know.

Men do start threads - from the front page as of today alone,

Irish Women in History and some History Threads
Saudi Women Driving
[News] World's worst places to be a woman.

All started by men.


The difference is, one is for discussion, the other is challenging women to explain themselves.

precisely which is why the whole "woman's point of view" thing is hard to get to grips with

I don't see why that's difficult, the forum is for women to discuss things from their point of view, we aren't of the same mind or opinion, so this is the forum for them to discuss these things. From their point of view, as women.

If we implement a 'no men' rule, I can imagine there'd be a hell of a lot more uproar, and we would lose some quality posters. Is it fair to exclude these men because others can't understand what the point of the forum is?

thebullkf

Wibbs wrote: »

FFS. That is all.

a little courtesy would be nice. to dismiss it with FFS is pretty lame.

Dudess wrote: »

That "Sexism on the internet" thread was a discussion of a particular phenomenon, and a very prevalent one, which crops up regularly on this site. It was NOT an attack on men in general, it was frustration vented at the way some men (and probably a few women too - it wouldn't surprise me) behave.

sigh.

Dudess wrote: »

Donfers, if men were being unfairly spoken of in The Ladies' Lounge (the way it constantly happens re women in After Hours, to the point of some folks even imagining a group of man-hating feminazis having a presence there) it would be perfectly reasonable for you to go in there and defend men, but it doesn't happen. And it's assumed too that men who make what's deemed inappropriate comments are reprimanded because they're men, not because of the comments.

AH is a different animal altogether to the LL or TGC...

who said anything about man hating?

who assumes??..... i think you assume:P

Dudess wrote: »

What is your definition of "feminist"? I get the impression it's merely man-hater/woman who thinks women are better than men - in which case, no, there are NOT a lot of feminists on Boards. Extremely few actually. The odd one who posts is usually exposed for the crackpot she is, pretty quickly. Even - shock horror! - on the Ladies' Lounge!
As for objections to speaking ill of feminism? Absolutely - when the definition given of it is "man-hating" and nothing else, and zero accounting for the fact that there are many different types of feminism and many variations of extremity. E.g. a woman, who believes women should have the right to give up work when she becomes a mother, can be a feminist.
On AH though, a feminist can ONLY be a woman who hates anyone that supports women giving up work to raise kids - and it's unfair, and no wonder many of us are ****ing sick of it.
Thread the other day on chivalry was, once again, horrible btw - the implication that, yeah, all these crazy bitches had posted "Chivalry is sexist!!! :mad:" when... eh... NONE had...

more man-hating..

koth wrote: »

Fair enough, but do you not appreciate that the female posters in tLL didn't feel the same and that's why we have the rule?

They must have had a big problem with guys starting a lot of those threads, that it got to the point were mods and posters decided enough is enough.

you're assuming something must of happened for it to be the way it is.... what if your assumption is wrong.

Wibbs

OutlawPete wrote: »

Great contribution.

No? OK here's why...

Banning a first offence user for one week for saying that he finds that women who wear big framed black shades the most "unfriendly" - is a complete and utter joke. On a thread I might add that was discussing "unfriendly women". It beggers belief.

Oh right this thread http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056290742 Oh and what was the title of said thread? You missed that part Ted. "Foreign girls are so much friendlier then Irish girls". Now what kind of thought process occurs to someone who thinks that's what passes for OK in the Ladies Lounge in Ireland? Seriously. Do I need to break out the crayons to explain? Now that OutlawPete is what "beggars belief" that anyone would have to. That's why I wrote "FFS"

Beruthiel wrote: »

I've no interest in the forum, I rarely read or comment in there, it doesn't interest me.
But, if the women of this site, would like a forum to discuss female issues, why the hell not?

And furthmore, in all the complaints I see about that forum, they never come from the women. You know, the women, for whom the forum was set up?

If the women who use that forum are happy with it, then it's working well.
If you don't like how it's run, or what's discussed there, then don't read there.

+1 That's why I wrote "FFS"

I have to ask, if the forum bothers you that much, why do you spend so much time in there?

+2 Not exactly posting much either Ber.
That's why I wrote "FFS"

Personally, I have no great interest in talking about female stuff, hence, I don't go there.
How is it, you can't do the same if it bothers you that much?

This in such a big way. There are a couple of forums I rarely read or post in. Either I don't get much out of the general thread topics, or I don't like the moderation, or in my personal opinion there's more opinion than fact, or the forum subject simply doesn't interest me. Big deal. That's my problem, not the forums in question, or how such forums are run. If the locals want to change or not then cool beans. So long as there's nothing reportable and nothing against the overall vibe of Boards.ie then it's none of my beeswax. I don't get the horn listening to the sound of my own keyboard complaining about it. I simply don't post or lurk. I don't set out to deliberately wind myself up over it.

Now if 50 people were complaining and another 50 were thanking such complaints and PM's were flying about the place and people were asking for change I'd start asking questions, hell I'd be jumping board, but as Ber said above and Silverfish before her have pointed out

Ber wrote:

And furthmore, in all the complaints I see about that forum, they never come from the women. You know, the women, for whom the forum was set up?

I'd add for all this talk about tGC and how they do things, I've yet to see a single woman complain about it. Not even among the number who've been banned or warned. You know what? I'm actually quite the "unreconstructed male", indeed chauvinistic at times in real life, but lately I'm thinking of going out, buying a bra and then burning it.

Imagine a low post newbie Boards user comes on here and complains they don't like the site and how its run and 5 people agreed/thanked their post, or if a low post Christian/Muslim/Jew/whatever started complaining about how the atheist forum was run? I'd put money most of us, mod, user, admin, founder, including the tiny number of male posters on this thread and others would scratch their heads and direct them to the exit.

And that's why I wrote "FFS". It sums it up for me.

donfers wrote:

precisely which is why the whole "woman's point of view" thing is hard to get to grips with

I honestly don't see how it's confusing D. I really really don't. The points of view of women. The points of view of people with internal gonads and breasts. Whatever that point of view or views happens to be. In the same way the cycling forum is for people with two wheeled vertical self propelled vehicles*. I'm sure horse riders and motorists post there, but not about engines and fetlocks. It's like a number of men are really confused or even pissed off at "how dare there be a forum where I can't(for example) suggest Irish women are fat/unfriendly or feminazis and not get banned?". One of your fellow supporters OutlawPete seems to stumble at that particularly obvious hurdle. Honestly D that's where my WTF? came from. I suspect I'm not alone in that.





*fcuk off recumbent and unicyclists.

thebullkf

OutlawPete wrote: »

I addressed that question and similar ones in the HD thread (which I knew you hadn't read all that much by what you posted in it). Your post in that thread (acting as Admin which I requested) addressed none of what I had said and when I replied to your post you never returned to the thread. Thread ended up being locked by a TLL mod who was there in her capacity as moderator of TLL, yet she then took that hat off, stuck an Admin hat on and locked the thread (which I have reported but got no reply on). I suggest you go back and read the thread if you want an answer to your question, maybe then you will realise how ridiculous it is.



Did it ever occur to you that they DO like the forum and the fact that they are complaining is because they are overly restricted in what they can post? A restriction that seems to fly in the face of the charter might I add.



Again, all answered in the HD thread that you were supposed to be acting as Admin on.

so a Ladies Lounge Mod, locked a DRP/Feedback thread about the moderation of said Ladies Lounge....:eek:

to paraphrase another mod

Wibbs wrote: »

FFS. That is all.

OutlawPete

stovelid wrote: »

What's with all the We stuff in relation to the menfolk of boards?

Think it's pretty obvious who the men are I was referring to with "we". When I start using terms such as "all male boardsies," then you'll have an understandable criticism with regards to my choice of words.

metrovelvet

I think the language is misleading. I tend to agree about the female/male perspective, as in what does that mean exactly?

It should read, far less misogyny is tolerated here than the rest of boards.

Dudess

thebullkf wrote: »

so a Ladies Lounge Mod, locked a DRP/Feedback thread about the moderation of said Ladies Lounge....:eek:

to paraphrase another mod

Ah yeah, I mean, don't think for yourself, and take it at face value, gloss over the ins and outs of why that came to pass, don't bother reading the threads in question. Shur what would you need all that for, Ted?