What is a female point of view/perspective?

Elmidena

I've posted in there and I'm not a feminist, with the objection of the female car insurance costs going up to make it more equal!

At the risk of a flame war opening up on me, women are a lot more sensitive to men in general (and yes, I appreciate not always the case).

Due to hormones, most women are reactive at certain times of their cycle. I would sincerely doubt everyone is clocked to have them at the exact time for the exact duration. Women also tend to form a gaggle better than men do. There is more group mentality than the average same-peers-statistics group of men. As a result, I would reckon the woman's point of view/perspective means that anything you say is to take into account the above information and to provide your 2c with respect that others might not take it well, and for them not to take it in "TROLLING B*STARD GTFO" approach.

Ie, if you have an opinion that may not be popular, do so in an approach that gets your point across without getting people's backs up. Not necessarily walking on eggshells, but definitely not stamping with no concern for your surrounding environment.

The Left Hand Of God

Dudess wrote: »

But it would be ok by you I'm sure if the thread was only about men (and rightly so) in TGC...

Could this notion of men not being able to post there because they are men be scrapped? Like seriously? And I really don't see how a man would be prevented from posting to an abortion thread because of disagreeing with women... seeing as women disagree with women on such threads also...

... which is in your head.

Maybe mod warnings should be delivered in a softer manner - not in bold and with a smiley? Seriously, a change in tone might help.

"But it would be ok by you I'm sure if the thread was only about men (and rightly so) in TGC..."

How dare you. Honestly.

You don't know me and I don't know you so fuk off making assumptions about me.

I didn't you.

metrovelvet

donfers wrote: »

who are these group of men? evidence please

disagreeing with the groupthink does not equal being a troll/derailing/being disruptive and uncooperative.

Oh and nobody here has questioned the right of the ladies lounge to exist.

Anyway that is not the issue.......


occassionally trolls go into tll like they do in every other forum, yes but that's nothing to do with this discussion

yes some guys quite happily post in the ladies lounge, so what? nothing to with this discussion

what happens in christian forums and golf forums is nothing to do with this discussion

call it blokes having a hissy fit if you like, it's nothing to do with this discussion (there are all sorts of "hissy fits" about all sorts of forums on here, I'd hope that those who seek to demean constructive criticism are at least consistent in doing so and not engaging in some kind of pitiful display of virtual chivalry - the ladies are perfectly capable of speaking for themselves)

ask people who have an issue not to post there anymore, fine nothing to do with the discussion (but a very lazy argument that resolves nothing)

yes it has happened that some male posters will invoke a male equivalent of the something that a female is describing, if so that is only valid I think if the female poster in question is suggesting somehow that females alone suffer that kind of problem, if that is the case then the male poster has the right to suggest otherwise, if he is just entering the thread to eat his own slice of the victim cake and it is irrelevant to the discussion then yes he should be told to take it elsewhere but it's nothing to do with this discussion

it's all a question of perception, one woman's troll/trouble-maker/stirrer is another woman's debater/counter-argument proponent/alternative theorist - of course if you don't like the counter-argument it's very easy to dismiss it as coming from a troll/stirrer/trouble-maker particularly in a forum where this is such a strong and forceful adherence to the central political tenets of "woman's point of view" which is troublesome because it is very vague and at the same time a tremendously sensitive area so problems arise.

A lot of the stuff being posted in defense of TLL is all fine and dandy but it's nothing to do with what I asked.

Others have used analogies rather wildly in this thread so forgive me if I indulge, it's like me saying to my mum, I'm not sure about that ingredient you used in the cake and her reacting by accusing me of hating living in the house and why should she have to remodel the kitchen? err....chill

My question was "what does a woman's point of view/perspective mean" in the context of a discussion forum. Yes I have reached a state of intelligence now where I can deduct that a woman's point of view/persepctive is a point of view/perspective that belongs to a woman. I am aware of that. But in the context of a discussion forum what does that actually mean - I am still awaiting clarification on that, because as far as I can see (unless we are speaking of physiological issues that can solely be experienced by women) there is such a wide variety of differing female opinions on every issue you can think of that it seems almost pointless and nonsensical to encourage perspectives/opinions based on gender grounds because almost every thing a man can think of, every take a man can have on something, a woman can too (except for stuff like what's it like to be preganant). That's what I don't understand, I hope I have explained myself this time so maybe a feminist perspective is a better wording for the charter. What do you think?

The thing is though is that its not a debate forum. It has room for personal experience or anecdotal evidence being valid, room for collaborative discourse. etc.

Humanities is strictly debate, and while doesnt tolerate personal abuse or personalisation, imo has some boundary problems on verbal terrorisation nit picking and invalidating subjective experiences by demoting anecdotal evidence, or personal experience and showing preference for privaledge, removed and abstracted knowledge, because that is what debate is, and has often missed the boat on more subtle degradations, which may officially be ok. So maybe what you want-is Humanties in the Ladies Lounge, which would be a forum called WOMANS STUDIES, a more academic type of thing.

I think woman's point of view is the wrong wording as I have said before.

And Ive been banned from TLL. I cant even remember why. ALso been infracted for making a joke.

Silverfish

donfers wrote: »

fair enough, it's a tough one to word I'll grant you that

I know all this seems pedantic but I think as long as the charter operates as a kind of half-way house (i.e. the vague female point of view thing, the ambiguous "primarily" for women thing then you will run into these problems) between a strong feminist element on the one hand and guys and other views welcome too on the other hand (with the caveat that they can't unsettle the first group too much) then these occassional headfecks will occur.

Still if the mods and tll users are content with that way then so be it but do you not think writing a more unequivocal charter would help? That's all i am asking basically

Well, we kinda hope that the title of the forum, the fact it's in the Soc category with the other SRS BSNS forums, the Charter and all, would maybe give the impression that the forum isn't for men to bitch about women, or for men to come in and demand we explain why Sandra was a cow to him last saturday, or that blazing in full of sweeping generalisations and :rolleyes: <- that guy and sneering dismissive tone is not really acceptable.

It is a bit pedantic I'll grand you, but I appreciate that you're trying to get it clarified and in a way, you're actually trying to help us avoid some of the crap we get.

But to be honest with you, I think the type of person who sees a thread on the main page and decides to come in and 'tell these women what's what' isn't going to back out again to read the charter. Usually though, with an on-thread warning, we get an 'OH right, I see now' pm and they either move on, or settle in and get to posting like a normal person.

The Left Hand Of God

Silverfish wrote: »

Well, we kinda hope that the title of the forum, the fact it's in the Soc category with the other SRS BSNS forums, the Charter and all, would maybe give the impression that the forum isn't for men to bitch about women, or for men to come in and demand we explain why Sandra was a cow to him last saturday, or that blazing in full of sweeping generalisations and :rolleyes: <- that guy and sneering dismissive tone is not really acceptable.

It is a bit pedantic I'll grand you, but I appreciate that you're trying to get it clarified and in a way, you're actually trying to help us avoid some of the crap we get.

But to be honest with you, I think the type of person who sees a thread on the main page and decides to come in and 'tell these women what's what' isn't going to back out again to read the charter. Usually though, with an on-thread warning, we get an 'OH right, I see now' pm and they either move on, or settle in and get to posting like a normal person.

Was it always in the SOC catagory? Was it not in REC?

Stheno

The Left Hand Of God wrote: »

Was it always in the SOC catagory? Was it not in REC?

Yes it got moved some time ago to Soc.

Wolfe Tone

I think mod warnings in general, not just TLL need to be looked at. I think they often aggravate the situation and piss people off.

I'm not gonna bother looking for examples because I'm simply not arsed, but in Tll they seems to be a bit harsher then elsewhere.

You presumably have people reporting posts etc, then a mod shows up, often in the middle of a debate and basically tells someone to stop or stay on topic, or whatever. Then you have a pile of people thanking the mod, often those who took part in the debate/exchange. That, imo, is pretty much "na na na na!" Its nasty imo and unnecessary, especially telling specific people to go read the charter. It creates a nasty atmosphere and the perception that mods are wading in and backing up certain posters.

If anything specific needs to be said to a particular poster then PM them, don't single them out on the thread because you have people "thanking" the mod basically to get digs into that poster who was singled out.

Again thats not a criticism aimed solely at TLL mods but something I have noticed in general, and seen as mention was made of mod warnings I thought I would highlight it.

K-9

Initially it was a kind of female BGRH, well not quiet that but developed into the LL.

Otis Driftwood

Wolfe Tone,the reason posters are warned on thread is to a:stop people reporting posts that have been dealt with and b:it helps show other users who may not be familiar with the forum what is and isnt acceptable.It has nothing to do with thanks whoring.Also,@ The Left Hand Of God,for a new user,you seem to have alot of experience/knowledge of tLL.Funny that.:)

Wolfe Tone

I'm not saying its thankswhoring, I'm just saying it creates a nasty atmosphere when people thank mod warnings like that because the "thanks" are simply to get digs into those who were warned.

K-9

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

I'm not saying its thankswhoring, I'm just saying it creates a nasty atmosphere when people thank mod warnings like that because the "thanks" are simply to get digs into those who were warned.

A poster doesn't know if a post was reported or not though, I'd thank a mod if I think a warning is stopping handbags on a thread.

Otis Driftwood

Or could it be that they agree that the warning or whatever was warranted?You really are nit picking you know,it gets very tiresome very quickly to see the same arguments constantly get trotted out.

metrovelvet

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

I'm not saying its thankswhoring, I'm just saying it creates a nasty atmosphere when people thank mod warnings like that because the "thanks" are simply to get digs into those who were warned.

I hate it too except in very extreme cases. It reminds me of brown nosers in primary school. Even if I agree with their warning or thankful, I still dont do it.

Elmidena

Out of curiosity, could I get a mod's opinion on my previous post? I am new here and wish to avoid causing trouble in the future, so would appreciate knowing if my logic is on the right track

Wibbs

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

I'm not saying its thankswhoring, I'm just saying it creates a nasty atmosphere when people thank mod warnings like that because the "thanks" are simply to get digs into those who were warned.

Actually that can happen WT. You can get people who have "history" thanking in that instance. That said IMHO it would be rare enough. Plus unless you switch off thanks how can you stop it? It can be noted mind. Plus what Otis said

Wolfe Tone

Otis Driftwood wrote: »

Or could it be that they agree that the warning or whatever was warranted?You really are nit picking you know,it gets very tiresome very quickly to see the same arguments constantly get trotted out.

For gods sake, I'm not nit picking, this is feedback, I am giving feedback, as I said its not exclusive to TLL, Dudess mentioned mod warnings earlier and maybe toning them down, I'm just giving my observations.

Silverfish

Sunshine! wrote: »

Out of curiosity, could I get a mod's opinion on my previous post? I am new here and wish to avoid causing trouble in the future, so would appreciate knowing if my logic is on the right track

I honestly thought you were joking.

You think if mods issue warnings or bans on tLL, or if posters report posts or have issues with something, it's down to PMS?

Really?

donfers

Wibbs wrote: »

+1000 Jesus ye in tGC even had to add a codicil to your charter to clamp down on the bitching about other forums. Lets guess which one. *shakes head* Really there's only so many ways you can respond to this stuff.

Like you said it seems pitiful and we've actually banned very few of the main complainants. Donfers requested his banning. Gunsfortoys was banned just the once from tLL IIRC. These are all pretty minimal posters anyway. OutlawPete a good example(BTW never banned from tLL). Since tLL was opened as Silverfish pointed out in the helpdesk thread OutlawPete has posted just 29 posts in the forum, 21 of them in one thread. However she did find around 15 posts by OutlawPete complaining about tLL in AH. Yet in the 6 odd years he's been a member on this site has he actually ever reported a post in tLL? Nope. Not a single one. No doubt similar can be said of the majority of the complainants. This is why I personally chose to largely ignore their input*.

Actually I reckon my very first post on the matter was where I should have left it and been kind to mine and OutlawPete's respective keyboards; "FFS?"





*not all. Wolfe Tone for example and yes donfers at times too. And the pain in the arse of all of this is frustration at some can mean a suspicion of others when not necessarily warranted.

ah the trusty old "report the post" chestnut

I always get a wee bit worried when mods use that line to justify their actions/inactions

Have you ever considered that some people don't report posts because they have a fairly good idea of what kind of response they'll get depending on who is in charge? did that ever cross your mind?

anyway not reporting a post does not equal everything is fine and dandy, some people's default response is not to hit the report button, it's maybe to discuss the problem and I think outlaw pete's mode of resolving disagreements which is having the discussion, is far preferable to hitting the report button at the drop of a hat and being at the mercy of the whim of a mod/cat mod whose first reaction of course is going to be to uphold the groupthink that his/her forum is bound to

I'd love to see statistics for how reports were dealt with based on what side of the argument you were coming from.....in any case i would suggest that the majority of the people who report are those who know that their complaint will find sympathy with those in charge (yes feel free to throw exceptions to that rule at me, it doesn't negate the central truth)

In any case, way off topic now

and please can we stop the framing of language and spinning here?

The dreaded ad hominem argument goes something like this, if one dare's question something about tll like the wording in the charter then that obviously means I am a troll who hates women

If I say something like, in my opinion it would be a good idea for the charter ro use more unequivocal language - feel free to disagree with that

but responses like "you are questioning the right of tll to exist/your goal is the destruction of the forum/you just want to bitch, moan, troll and start flame wars and make the forum unusable/you resent that female posters have their own forum" is the biggest load of inaccurate spiteful insidious reactionary and completely untrue garbage as far as i'm concerned

as ever, this is utterly pointless, I could be an undercover feminist for all you guys know seeking to entrench your views

anyway regardless of the pointlessness of all this, if anything is said with integrity then it is still worth saying so let's all just pat ourselves on the back and carry on as we were

Silverfish

donfers, I did feel I addressed your points in the thread without saying any of the things above to you, so I'm not sure where that came from.

In fact in my last post, I said I appreciated what you were trying to do.

Elmidena

Sunshine! wrote: »

Ie, if you have an opinion that may not be popular, do so in an approach that gets your point across without getting people's backs up. Not necessarily walking on eggshells, but definitely not stamping with no concern for your surrounding environment.

^^Actually no, it was more this bit.

The hormones etc was pointing out the environment in question, that not everyone is set to an automatic reactive system at any given time and if in doubt err on the side of caution. I gave no indication that PMS was the cause for warnings etc, moreso was indicating that sensitivity is an issue more profound in a forum such as this than say, AH, and rightly so.

Silverfish

Sunshine! wrote: »

^^Actually no, it was more this bit.

The hormones etc was pointing out the environment in question, that not everyone is set to an automatic reactive system at any given time and if in doubt err on the side of caution. I gave no indication that PMS was the cause for warnings etc, moreso was indicating that sensitivity is an issue more profound in a forum such as this than say, AH, and rightly so.

So how do you explain the similar reactions from male posters?

Elmidena

Please rephrase the question so I may better understand before I answer. My suggestion on erring on the side of caution and to look before you leap was not gender-specific.

Silverfish

Sunshine! wrote: »

Please rephrase the question so I may better understand before I answer. My suggestion on erring on the side of caution and to look before you leap was not gender-specific.

You are saying that female posters may overreact due to PMS, and that male posters should be cautious when posting in TLL as they may get people's backs up.

I understand you're new here, but I think you'll find similar reactions in lots of forums, and it's not the female posters, or the regular posters, it's the person arriving with no understanding of what the forum is for, but has it in their head what they THINK it should be, and acting accordingly.

To dismiss the issue as "ah sure wimmins and their PMS" is just sexist, imo.

AckwelFoley

Theres and elephant in the room that someone needs to give a peanut to him.

Why can people just not not leave TLL to the Ladies?

Yes, i am certain i can think of dozens of arguments why my opinion as a male should be heard in a debate or topic, but i dont think i need to simply go there...

I would think its similar to a Man City player going into the Stretford end and looking to support his team from there on derby day...

Its one forum, its a place for the Ladies to have a "place to hang out" f the ladies have a problem with the running of it, let the ladies take issue with it..

Seriously -

And for the record Wibb's "FFS" comment / post is essentially the abreviated version of what ive just posted i shall assume

Wibbs

Why am I listening to a couple of men with a history of "taking issue" with the ladies lounge and assuming the worst while they're at it?(I could have run down the list from the opening of this thread). Then bitching about the forum in other forums, some to the point of bannings from said other forums? Donfers, do you reckon that's "preferable"? Do you reckon that's an ad hominem argument pointing this fact out? You reckon that we should listen to suggestions from such a direction from men who barely post there? No one or no forum is perfect, nor have claimed to be, but seriously, if ye have an axe to grind, find another grindstone. Or a hobby. I give up.

donfers

Silverfish wrote: »

donfers, I did feel I addressed your points in the thread without saying any of the things above to you, so I'm not sure where that came from.

In fact in my last post, I said I appreciated what you were trying to do.

apologies if you felt that message was targetted at you, you are at least seeking to discuss the issue about charter....however some of the other responses have gone way off on rant-like tangents that haven't really anything to do with the discussion

oh and yes i appreciate the irony of me complaining about rantlike tangents

and yes some of those rants contain valid points


but you know what I can understand that a lot of people don't appreciate me coming in telling people I am unsure about their charter, it's the ladies lounge and of course you can quite understandably have a negative perception when a guy starts a feedback thread questioning your charter, you can trot out the same old grievances and us "complainants" can do the same from the other side

so the question is

are the few complainants and likely few disturbances you will experience in the future worthy of a reinterpretation of what and who the forum is for and a few edits in the charter?

That's the real question and the answer I predict is more than likely going to be no - fair enough, life goes on, thanks for your time

the argument is worth having and you have every right to reject it

Silverfish

I'll tell you what, we'll look at it.

It might still not be what everyone wants, and I bet you this tenner here that we'll still be wrong, but we'll look at clearing it up, it's clearly an issue for people.

I don't believe for one second it'll deter those who are just looking for a reason to be offended by TLL though.

Wibbs

Sunshine! wrote: »

Please rephrase the question so I may better understand before I answer. My suggestion on erring on the side of caution and to look before you leap was not gender-specific.

I get you're being genuine S. I do. And I get where you're coming from in a few ways, but c'mon suggesting women may be more sensitive cos they're in their flowers is not exactly wise Ted. Jayzuz! :eek: If you have a girlfriend at the minute may I suggest a solid steel codpiece cos you're gonna need it sooner or later if you voice such an opinion. This free advice from me to you works with other women, mates, sisters, co workers etc

Elmidena

Silverfish wrote: »

You are saying that female posters may overreact due to PMS, and that male posters should be cautious when posting in TLL as they may get people's backs up.

I understand you're new here, but I think you'll find similar reactions in lots of forums, and it's not the female posters, or the regular posters, it's the person arriving with no understanding of what the forum is for, but has it in their head what they THINK it should be, and acting accordingly.

To dismiss the issue as "ah sure wimmins and their PMS" is just sexist, imo.

Again, I said no such thing regarding PMS. I pointed out:

1. Women flock together more than men tend to on a like-for-like basis. There is generally a sense of "connection" with women that is not prevailant in a group of men.

2. Women are more sensitive in nature. This is not a flaw, it's a fact for the most part. Women express feelings and thoughts more readily than their male counterparts for the most part.

3. If you are going to infuriate one person, odds are it will infuriate more than one person. This holds true in any scenario, and not just women gathering to bítch while they're on the blob.

4. If you are making a point, be aware it may rub others the wrong way. Don't necessarily overly censor your freedom of speech, but be appreciative of the reactions it may incur.

5. I distinctly used the word "respect".

6. If you do have a less-than-welcoming suggestion to impart, do so in a way that is not incendiary by nature.


I believe respecting your surroundings and posting with the other users in mind is fundamental across all forums. Obviously the women-specific comments in my list of numbers there is with tLL in question given that is why I responded to this thread.

AckwelFoley

Acid test: Next time you are having an arguemt with a woman, tell her that she is over reacting due to PMS. If you can blink faster than the length of time it takes her to give you a boot in the balls, you will be lucky

My point being - you wouldnt dare say that to a woman in person, why use it on the internet?

Elmidena

Wibbs wrote: »

I get you're being genuine S. I do. And I get where you're coming from in a few ways, but c'mon suggesting women may be more sensitive cos they're in their flowers is not exactly wise Ted. Jayzuz! :eek: If you have a girlfriend at the minute may I suggest a solid steel codpiece cos you're gonna need it sooner or later if you voice such an opinion. This free advice from me to you works with other women, mates, sisters, co workers etc

I'm in a long-term relationship with a man.







And I am a girl :eek:

Wibbs

Silverfish wrote: »

I don't believe for one second it'll deter those who are just looking for a reason to be offended by TLL though.

This D.

Sunshine! wrote:

I'm in a long-term relationship with a man.







And I am a girl

colour me red faced.

Stheno

Sunshine,

In your last but one post you said:

Sunshine! wrote: »

Again, I said no such thing regarding PMS.

In your original post you said:

Sunshine! wrote: »

Due to hormones, most women are reactive at certain times of their cycle.

What did you mean by your original post if not PMS if you don't mind me asking? Certainly PMS could be considered a stage when women are prone to be affected and reactive due to hormones in a woman's cycle.

Wibbs

Sunshine! wrote: »

1. Women flock together more than men tend to on a like-for-like basis. There is generally a sense of "connection" with women that is not prevailant in a group of men.

2. Women are more sensitive in nature. This is not a flaw, it's a fact for the most part. Women express feelings and thoughts more readily than their male counterparts for the most part.

3. If you are going to infuriate one person, odds are it will infuriate more than one person. This holds true in any scenario, and not just women gathering to bítch while they're on the blob.

4. If you are making a point, be aware it may rub others the wrong way. Don't necessarily overly censor your freedom of speech, but be appreciative of the reactions it may incur.

5. I distinctly used the word "respect".

6. If you do have a less-than-welcoming suggestion to impart, do so in a way that is not incendiary by nature.

Funny enough S I'd say most forums and posters would be better off if they took most of the above on board. *notes number 4*

K-9

I do think Sunshine's point is right though, men posting in tLL need to be aware of where they are posting. It's like me posting in a Liverpool thread about United, I can get away with more slagging and criticism of them therE, when I'm posting in the United thread I've to be more aware of the thread I'm in.

There are posters who have a problem with tLL and tGC, that tGC isn't an exact mirror of it. A men's rights board was proposed last year in the forums request board but it didn't raise much support there. I'd say a few posters would be better putting their energies into getting support for that than constantly criticising tLL and tGC.

HellFireClub

Is a solution to this ongoing issue, not to have private sub forums available for men in TGC and women in TLL (they already have this in place), where only men can access their private forum in TGC and women can access their private forum in TLL. That way we can all post and share our opinions freely, in relation to subjects that are probably considered to be gender adverse, without the risk of causing any offence to the opposite sex.

I'm personally sick of having to stand aside for what are blatently feminist views in a forum for men.

Stheno

HellFireClub wrote: »

I'm personally sick of having to stand aside for what are blatently feminist views in a forum for men.

You could start a feedback thread related to it? tGC charter does clearly call out it's stance on discussion.

Ref your other point, how would you prove who was male or female?

metrovelvet

Wibbs wrote: »

I get you're being genuine S. I do. And I get where you're coming from in a few ways, but c'mon suggesting women may be more sensitive cos they're in their flowers is not exactly wise Ted. Jayzuz! :eek: If you have a girlfriend at the minute may I suggest a solid steel codpiece cos you're gonna need it sooner or later if you voice such an opinion. This free advice from me to you works with other women, mates, sisters, co workers etc

Em. In their flowers. I never heard that one before. Ha.

Yeah big taboo on that one alright. Wall Street Journal published something that said wall street men act like women who have their periods, more aggressive risk taking behavior.

Wolfe Tone

HellFireClub wrote: »

Is a solution to this ongoing issue, not to have private sub forums available for men in TGC and women in TLL (they already have this in place), where only men can access their private forum in TGC and women can access their private forum in TLL. That way we can all post and share our opinions freely, in relation to subjects that are probably considered to be gender adverse, without the risk of causing any offence to the opposite sex.

I'm personally sick of having to stand aside for what are blatently feminist views in a forum for men.

Thats actually a pretty good idea imo.

Logical Fallacy

HellFireClub wrote: »

Is a solution to this ongoing issue, not to have private sub forums available for men in TGC and women in TLL (they already have this in place), where only men can access their private forum in TGC and women can access their private forum in TLL. That way we can all post and share our opinions freely, in relation to subjects that are probably considered to be gender adverse, without the risk of causing any offence to the opposite sex.

I'm personally sick of having to stand aside for what are blatently feminist views in a forum for men.

And how do you decide if someone is a man or a woman?

Silly idea, people just need to not post in forums they don't agree with.

This whole "If you want me out, build a wall to keep me out thing" is silly.

This isn't about people feeling offended, it's about people not being able to stay off that grass....a simple instruction that is going over folks head.

A tiny handful of people have an issue here and it's gonna take sub forums to solve it?

Jokes.

Edit : Also, blokes can be feminist, if you don't like a point debate it, if you feel it's not suitable for a forum report it.

Stheno

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Thats actually a pretty good idea imo.

It is a good idea in theory but firstly you've got the problem of verifying gender, and secondly you've got the problem that people may wish to start threads, not be aware of the private forum, start them in the main forum and find them moved when they don't have access, particularly if the main forum is busy and there is a lot of moderation action required.

Verification of gender is the biggest issue imo.

tbh

The private forum HFC mentions was something we talked about via PM. I've no problem with it in theory, but not as a sub-forum of the GC. it's got nothing to do with the GC, and shouldn't be thought of, IMO (I'm pretty sure Sam and Otis would agree), as being a part of the GC ethos.

What does the female perspective thing mean? It means that if there's a 50-50 mod call to be made involving a male poster on one side and a female poster on the other, the mods are going to call it for the female, because it's the ladies lounge, just like we'd call it for the males on the GC.

Wolfe Tone

HFC why not set it up as a social group and see how it goes?

Wibbs

tbh wrote: »

It means that if there's a 50-50 mod call to be made involving a male poster on one side and a female poster on the other, the mods are going to call it for the female, because it's the ladies lounge, just like we'd call it for the males on the GC.

And like you over there we don't have to call it very often at all, though sadly more than you do.

Look IMHO this whole thread boils down to this;

Logical Fallacy wrote:

people just need to not post in forums they don't agree with.

and if that really simple entreaty still doesn't register with some? Then

Mise wrote:

FFS. That is all.

covers the rest.

K-9

tbh wrote: »

The private forum HFC mentions was something we talked about via PM. I've no problem with it in theory, but not as a sub-forum of the GC. it's got nothing to do with the GC, and shouldn't be thought of, IMO (I'm pretty sure Sam and Otis would agree), as being a part of the GC ethos.

What does the female perspective thing mean? It means that if there's a 50-50 mod call to be made involving a male poster on one side and a female poster on the other, the mods are going to call it for the female, because it's the ladies lounge, just like we'd call it for the males on the GC.

I think tGC had this issue a year or so ago.

A vociferous minority were tending to take over the forum and a lot of threads were descending into male vs. female rights threads.

I don't think tGC is the right board for that as it is also an alternative to AH, that is a Gentleman's club, it caters for a certain section of men too.

tGC has a nice balance atm, men's rights subjects can be debated as long as it's done civilly and respectfully and posters don't resent female posters and constantly go on the attack, it's also welcome to female opinions, would be pointless otherwise. If a female poster shows signs of "what about women" they get warned because a gender war will ensue.

I think a private group is the best idea for now with a view to having its' own forum eventually.

Jazzy

donfers wrote:

2. change female perspective to feminist perspective (two completely different things by the way)

really?
its that big a deal?
seriously why the f**k bother with the intricacies of the ladies lounge. i seriously dont get why the hell any person gives sh*t about what the ladies lounge is or isnt. its a forum on boards thats there for ladies to talk and crap on the internet. apparantly theres a gentlemens club too for the same thing. i dunno how you turned that into a thousand word problem.
yup, just had a think about it for a full minute and i dunno how you've done it. the only conclusion i could come to is that you just dont get why the ladies lounge is there at all

Handsome Bob

Jaysus, what a fuss.

Lads, as long as you make a reasonable point, and are respectful towards other posters, then you really shouldn't be getting punished. I'd be shocked if someone could give me an example from TLL that contradicts this.

Ickle Magoo

Yet again, no rush of female posters complaining - yet again, the same handful of male posters who are incapable of staying the right side of basic boards posting rules now claiming it's the fault of one forums charter.

Every time some male poster who clearly has an axe to grind about tLL tries to gain a bit of publicity for their pet peeve here, on helpdesk, etc I've rolled my eyes but good grief, it's becoming less about the forum and more about an unhealthy obsession by people who add little to nothing in the way of constructive and worthwhile posting in a forum enraged that one tiny part of boards is resolutely refusing to bow to their demands.

What is a female perspective? You seriously don't know? Can't make an educated guess what that might entail? Okay - well, lets take an example like abortion. A female perspective would be the female posters on that thread discussing their views, their experiences, their thoughts on the topic as only they can. What is not a female perspective? Arguing that men should have more rights, that women get too much say in it, a male poster interjecting to say that any women who gets an abortion is X, Y or Z - etc, etc. For some reason there are a whole heap of male posters who "get" this - and minute handful who don't. Not sure why we are having to constantly hand-hold the minority tbh.

There are standard site-wide rules on boards not to be a dick, not to flame and not to drag threads off-topic but for some reason in tLL the vast majority of issues are caused by male posters interjecting to do all of the above...that they earn themselves bans or infractions is surely no big surprise. That they still can't see why the forum exists in the manner it does, that they have an issue with the forum/women/boards and can't see why their posts are deemed inappropriate is really, an issue they have to sort out with themselves - not the tLL charter, or the tLL forum.

Otis Driftwood

HellFireClub wrote: »

Is a solution to this ongoing issue, not to have private sub forums available for men in TGC and women in TLL (they already have this in place), where only men can access their private forum in TGC and women can access their private forum in TLL. That way we can all post and share our opinions freely, in relation to subjects that are probably considered to be gender adverse, without the risk of causing any offence to the opposite sex.

I'm personally sick of having to stand aside for what are blatently feminist views in a forum for men.

What the fúck are you on about?

You think that because a forum has the word men in it that you can say whatever you want about whomever you want or something?

There is no ongoing issue aside from a tiny amount of blokes that get pissy.

There will be no sub forum of tGC as long as I have anything to do with it.

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Thats actually a pretty good idea imo.

If you want to have free reign to say whatever you want may I suggest 4chan.

Why do you think there is some god given right to say what ye want on boards?

Wolfe Tone

Otis Driftwood wrote: »

What the fúck are you on about?

You think that because a forum has the word men in it that you can say whatever you want about whomever you want or something?

There is no ongoing issue aside from a tiny amount of blokes that get pissy.

There will be no sub forum of tGC as long as I have anything to do with it.



If you want to have free reign to say whatever you want may I suggest 4chan.

Why do you think there is some god given right to say what ye want on boards?

Well done on missing the entire point.