What is a female point of view/perspective?

Delirium

drkpower wrote: »

If it was for female perspectives only, why had the past 10ish pages been made up of a discussion between men and women?

because the forum says that men are allowed to post, and the warning in no way contradicts that stance.

No; and i didnt claim that.

But as it happens, my next post after that warning was deleted without any particular explanation, again supporting the contention that the 'blanket 'female perspective' warning was intended to stop men from contributing.

But you're the reason the warning was issued in the first place, so it's quite possible that you continued down the avenue of discussion that the mods were warning not to pursue. Where any other male posters warned or have their posts deleted on the thread?

drkpower

K-9 wrote: »

Mod warning makes more sense because posters would see it and not reply to you.

Yes, but if it is claimed that I was hi-jacking th thread, or any other similar 'offence', the Mod warning should be exactly that.

What happended in my own case, and what i have seen on other occasions, is that rather than actually warn a poster for certain activity, the Mod uses the blanket 'female perspective' rule.

drkpower

koth wrote: »

because the forum says that men are allowed to post, and the warning in no way contradicts that stance.


But you're the reason the warning was issued in the first place, so it's quite possible that you continued down the avenue of discussion that the mods were warning not to pursue. Where any other male posters warned or have their posts deleted on the thread?

The warning wasnt (specifically) aimed at me. It wasnt aimed at anyone in particular. And there other male posters on thread.

And to be clear, the Mods were not warning that the thread was being hijacked or derailed or going down the wrong avenue. Again, if that had been the case, i wouldnt be having this discussion. The Mod simply warned that the discussion was to be had from a female perspective and deleted (without notification) the next male posters posts (and perhaps others - i dont know).

Delirium

drkpower wrote: »

The warning wasnt (specifically) aimed at me. It wasnt aimed at anyone in particular. And there other male posters on thread.

And to be clear, the Mods were not warning that the thread was being hijacked or derailed or going down the wrong avenue. Again, if that had been the case, i wouldnt be having this discussion. The Mod simply warned that the discussion was to be had from a female perspective and deleted (without notification) the next male posters posts (and perhaps others - i dont know).

If the mod had to post that the forum is for discussion from a female perspective, then the mod felt that one or possibly more of the problems you mention had occurred from their point of view.

Did you PM any of the mods to seek clarification as to why your post was deleted?

HellFireClub

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

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

I've researched this, the way they do it in TLL is they make a person applying for access to the private subforum to post a pic of themselves holding up an A4 sheet or something with their username on it, to prove that they are female.

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

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

They don't seem to see anything silly about it in TLL.

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

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.

It's not that at all. It's not being able to discuss opinions that are inherently male in nature, on a forum for men, without having to constantly look over your shoulder to see if you are causing offence to posters who are clearly feminists and who appear to have issues with men in general.

Personally I think the answer is a private area in TGC for men only.

Ickle Magoo

drkpower wrote: »

Yes; that's why i used the word 'exclusively' in the post you quoted.

Primarily =/= exclusively. If there is a discussion being had by a group of female posters on an issue that effects them - the reason the forum was set up in the first place - surely common sense dictates that interjecting with some variation of condescending dismissal of female views and experience in the LADIES LOUNGE is not going to be permitted - whether you class it as educational or vaguely on-topic is irrelevant.

drkpower wrote: »

Then why doesnt the Mod warn the poster for hi-jacking, de-railing or flaming, rather then using a blanket 'female perspective' rule?

It's the same thing. If the hi-jacking, de-railing or flaming is specifically disrespecting the ethos of the forum then it is also not allowing for the fact that the forum is primarily for discussion from a female perspective.

drkpower wrote: »

In the thread you yourself brought up, for example, no such warning of hi-jacking, de-railing or flaming occurred. If it did, i wouldnt be having this discussion.

Do you see the difference?

I have to say I'm dubious we wouldn't be having this discussion...in so far as I acknowledge we wouldn't be having this particular discussion but suspect we would be having another one on the semantics of whatever other phrase was used instead.

drkpower wrote: »

Yes, it is male frustration with the manner in which the forum is moderated, as i have demonstrated, whereby male input is apparently welcomed until such a time as a Moderator decides it is not.

It's male frustration from a handful of posters who barely post in the forum - and nothing negative from the vast majority who are actually regular contributors...how much stock do you think we should put in the repetitive complaints by the same few posters who don't/can't get the forum and generally all have a chip on their shoulder that we dared to moderate them/Boards dared to set aside an area where female posters, their views and experiences aren't going to be allowed to be steam-rolled?

drkpower

koth wrote: »

If the mod had to post that the forum is for discussion from a female perspective, then the mod felt that one or possibly more of the problems you mention had occurred from their point of view.

That may be the case. But if they believed that I (or others) were guilty of that, then issue a warning/PM us to that effect. AsI have said repeatedly, if they did, i wouldnt be having this dicussion.

But what actually happened, and what appears to happen from time to time, is that Mods simply close down male discussion mid-thread without any other stated reason. That leads to frustration and a (possibly justified) suspicion that the Mods will shut out male input merely because that male input isnt pleasing the regulars.

What is irritating is that it is easy to fix. If a male poster is acting the d!ck, warm him for that, and tell him to STFU. Dont hide behing 'female perspective'.

koth wrote: »

Did you PM any of the mods to seek clarification as to why your post was deleted?

No; I only noticed it quite a while afterwards, and initilly thought i might have forgotten to click the submit button!:P But in any case, I wasnt that bothered about it at the time. But as the issue is being talked about in feedback i thought it might be relevant to the discussion.

K-9

HellFireClub wrote: »

It's not being able to discuss opinions that are inherently male in nature, on a forum for men, without having to constantly look over your shoulder to see if you are causing offence to posters who are clearly feminists and who appear to have issues with men in general.

Personally I think the answer is a private area in TGC for men only.

Reverse the gender and I'd say we are getting near the issue on tLL.

I don't see these female posters calling for changes to tGC though strangely enough, it seems to be a subset of posters with gripes against tLL as well doing that.

Wibbs

tbh wrote: »

Well, that's just tough luck isn't it? That's why it's called the ladies lounge. Thats the whole point of it. If you don't like it, don't post there, frankly.

Jayzuz Ted, where are you going with all this logic? Madness. Though Teebs I have to admit to preferring Jazzy's take;

Jazzy wrote: »

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

You really could type /thread right there.

HellFireClub wrote: »

I've researched this, the way they do it in TLL is they make a person applying for access to the private subforum to post a pic of themselves holding up an A4 sheet or something with their username on it, to prove that they are female.

Nope, not quite. Bang goes that research. That might come up if we were really really unsure about a low postcount newbie figured they were a bloke and sought to flush em out. Pain in the botty that it might come up, but you have to account for trolls and saddos.

drkpower

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Primarily =/= exclusively. If there is a discussion being had by a group of female posters on an issue that effects them - the reason the forum was set up in the first place - surely common sense dictates that interjecting with some variation of condescending dismissal of female views and experience in the LADIES LOUNGE is not going to be permitted - whether you class it as educational or vaguely on-topic is irrelevant.

If a male poster interjects with a 'condescending dismissal of female views', warn him for that. Guess what, on the thread on question, I wasnt warned for that.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

It's the same thing. If the hi-jacking, de-railing or flaming is specifically disrespecting the ethos of the forum then it is also not allowing for the fact that the forum is primarily for discussion from a female perspective..

Issuing a 'female perspective' warning is the same thing as a warning for hi-jacking, de-railing or flaming.....?!?:D
Come now, I'm not even going to bother with that one!!:D

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I have to say I'm dubious we wouldn't be having this discussion...in so far as I acknowledge we wouldn't be having this particular discussion but suspect we would be having another one on the semantics of whatever other phrase was used instead..

Your groundless suspicions are irrelevent. And they are entirely groundless - I very rarely get involved in feedback/DRP threads. But feel free to throw out the mud if you think it adds in any way to what you are saying.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

It's male frustration from a handful of posters who barely post in the forum - and nothing negative from the vast majority who are actually regular contributors...how much stock do you think we should put in the repetitive complaints by the same few posters who don't/can't get the forum and generally all have a chip on their shoulder that we dared to moderate them/Boards dared to set aside an area where female posters, their views and experiences aren't going to be allowed to be steam-rolled?

See, this is the attitude that you need to try and control.

My 'complaint' amounts to this. If a male poster is acting the d!ck, warn him and tell him to stop rather than issuing a blanket 'female perspective' rule. It would be cleareer. And it would reduce the frustration of many posters.

Is that so unreasonable...? Yet, you come out with the bolded part above.:rolleyes:

Delirium

drkpower wrote: »

That may be the case. But if they believed that I (or others) were guilty of that, then issue a warning/PM us to that effect. AsI have said repeatedly, if they did, i wouldnt be having this dicussion.

But what actually happened, and what appears to happen from time to time, is that Mods simply close down male discussion mid-thread without any other stated reason. That leads to frustration and a (possibly justified) suspicion that the Mods will shut out male input merely because that male input isnt pleasing the regulars.

What is irritating is that it is easy to fix. If a male poster is acting the d!ck, warm him for that, and tell him to STFU. Dont hide behing 'female perspective'.

But I wouldn't consider it to be 'hiding' behind the rule. It actually is the nature of the forum. The mods are perfectly entitled to use that as justification to issue warnings/bannings.

It seems you're looking for the mods to be clearer in their on thread warnings. no harm in that. But I've yet to see something that looks like "userX banned for being male in a female orientation thread".

donfers

Wibbs wrote: »

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

Mise
FFS. That is all

covers the rest.

Don't see why you would quote your own post here with relish.

Are you proud of that post?

Have the debate or say nothing, we're not in the schoolyard

drkpower

koth wrote: »

It seems you're looking for the mods to be clearer in their on thread warnings. no harm in that. But I've yet to see something that looks like "userX banned for being male in a female orientation thread".

Maybe not banning, but 'female perspective' Mod warnings tend to have the effect of stopping men from participating.

If the male poster has acted the d!ck, then thats fine, warn him, tell him to stop posting, ban him. But instead, no specific warning is given, and a 'female perspective' Mod warning is given instead, leaving the male poster wondering why. And wondering why he was allowed engage in discussion for pages and pages but is now effectively refused access for an unknown (or at least unclear) reason.

HellFireClub

K-9 wrote: »

Reverse the gender and I'd say we are getting near the issue on tLL.

I don't see these female posters calling for changes to tGC though strangely enough, it seems to be a subset of posters with gripes against tLL as well doing that.

That's because they have their own private subforum where they can discuss what they want without having to worry about completely opposite male opinions cutting through every thead. And rightly so, women only want to discuss some topic's amongst other women, this is 100% natural and normal in my opinion. The same is true for men in my opinion, just that it hasn't been accommodated on here yet, hence why we have a problem here.

donfers

Jazzy wrote: »

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

I have no problem, I made some observations, they can be agreed with or disagreed with, isn't that what thiis whole thread is for, isn't that the purpose of feedback or are some forums beyond criticism? I would be more than happy to write thousand word observations/offer feedback on the rugby forum or the soccer forum or the gentlemens club for instance but maybe I'll give it a bit of time first

One wouldn't want to be thought of as a crank;)

donfers

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.

so essentially you are advocating gender bias with regard to moderation, well at least you are admitting to it

Hank Scorpio

serious business

tbh

Personally I think the answer is a private area in TGC for men only.

to reiterate: this is not going to happen while the current mod team are In place. If you want a private forum of your own, request one from the admins or start a private social group. I'm not going to be involved in modding any private forum of the GC.

tbh

donfers wrote: »

so essentially you are advocating gender bias with regard to moderation, well at least you are admitting to it

It's hardly a secret.

Dudess

HellFireClub wrote: »

They don't seem to see anything silly about it in TLL.

I actually don't agree with it myself.

It's not that at all. It's not being able to discuss opinions that are inherently male in nature, on a forum for men, without having to constantly look over your shoulder to see if you are causing offence to posters who are clearly feminists and who appear to have issues with men in general.

The charter in TGC forbids generalisations about women (and any other group). That's not "feminist" (again with the feminism as ONLY meaning angry, anti-men etc), that's just zero tolerance of unfair targetting of groups based on the behaviour of some of its members, and which creates hostility towards that group, and members of that group on Boards being made to feel under attack. I've seen occasional instances of women in TLL making stupid crass comments about men in general, and being rightly reprimanded for it. Is that a "masculist" policy by TLL?
I don't get how some people feel an absolute need to blast an entire group based on the behaviour of some. Even if they don't literally mean every member of that group, it's still so hostile and doesn't at all take into account the fact that plenty of members of the same group don't carry on like their peers in question. "Irish women bla bla" non joking comments - I mean, would you think it was ok for "Irish men bla bla" non joking comments to be made? I know I wouldn't. And then when Irish women voice their objection to it, "Oh, the feminists have arrived..." Seriously, only a "feminist" would take issue with that sh1t? Maybe it's more to do with the fact that she's an Irish woman rather than a "feminist"?
It's absolutely dismaying and baffling that some folks feel their "rights" are being infringed because they can't post the likes of "Irish women are xyz"...

Delirium

drkpower wrote: »

Maybe not banning, but 'female perspective' Mod warnings tend to have the effect of stopping men from participating.

But the charter says the same thing, and yet men still participate. I've no qualms posting in the forum, even with the knowledge that it's a forum for discussion from a female point of view.

If the male poster has acted the d!ck, then thats fine, warn him, tell him to stop posting, ban him. But instead, no specific warning is given, and a 'female perspective' Mod warning is given instead, leaving the male poster wondering why. And wondering why he was allowed engage in discussion for pages and pages but is now effectively refused access for an unknown (or at least unclear) reason.

Already agree with you that clarity with regards to on thread warnings is always a good thing.

HellFireClub

tbh wrote: »

to reiterate: this is not going to happen while the current mod team are In place. If you want a private forum of your own, request one from the admins or start a private social group. I'm not going to be involved in modding any private forum of the GC.

I won't be losing any sleep over it, I can't see how it works fine in TLL but minds in TGC are completely closed to it... What is the logic behind not having this might I ask???

Ickle Magoo

drkpower wrote: »

If a male poster interjects with a 'condescending dismissal of female views', warn him for that. Guess what, on the thread on question, I wasnt warned for that.

If posters are being warned against ignoring the ethos of the forum then that covers a multitude of sins including condescension, derailing, whataboutery, etc, etc, is is a reminder of what the forum was set up to achieve and who/what it's primary focus is. It's a reminder that the poster may wish to re-acquaint themselves with the charter and it's especially useful for posters who have an over-inflated sense of entitlement regarding where they post and how.

drkpower wrote: »

Issuing a 'female perspective' warning is the same thing as a warning for hi-jacking, de-railing or flaming.....?!?:D
Come now, I'm not even going to bother with that one!!:D

Lol, see above.

drkpower wrote: »

Your groundless suspicions are irrelevent. And they are entirely groundless - I very rarely get involved in feedback/DRP threads. But feel free to throw out the mud if you think it adds in any way to what you are saying.

Oh come on now, your entire complaint thus far boil down to getting a slap on the wrist and moaning, and moaning, and moaning, and moaning, and moaning about it. It's the charters fault, the warning wasn't the right wording, the mods are this or that - not once have you stepped back and thought, actually, perhaps that post just wasn't appropriate there and perhaps the posters who have the complaints should think about why they, specifically, are having issues.

drkpower wrote: »

See, this is the attitude that you need to try and control.

My 'complaint' amounts to this. If a male poster is acting the d!ck, warn him and tell him to stop rather than issuing a blanket 'female perspective' rule. It would be cleareer. And it would reduce the frustration of many posters.

Is that so unreasonable...? Yet, you come out with the bolded part above.:rolleyes:

Is you demanding that warnings are given a specific way unreasonable? Yes, I think it is unreasonable. If a mod had posted "drkpower, stop being a dick" I don't believe for a minute we wouldn't be here discussing that or hearing about it at ever.single.thread that complains about tLL. Sorry, I just don't believe you.

The main issue, as I see it, is that a handful of posters that make negligible contribution to the forum and/or their contributions have not been appreciated have now judged that the issue is with the forum. Judging by all these threads and my inbox, there is no issue to speak of that a few posters having a good look at themselves wouldn't solve.

I'm over & out until some of the regular contributors to the forum and those whom the forum is aimed at have something to say that's worth hearing.

tbh

The two forums are two different thing. The one in the LL Is to organise meetups. The one proposed for the GC is to rant about feminists, as far as I can see

We're closed minded ro it because theres No demand for it, and as mods, we just don't want to do it.

Delirium

HellFireClub wrote: »

I won't be losing any sleep over it, I can't see how it works fine in TLL but minds in TGC are completely closed to it... What is the logic behind not having this might I ask???

I thought that the private sub forum was for the women in tLL to organise meetups?

drkpower

koth wrote: »

But the charter says the same thing, and yet men still participate. I've no qualms posting in the forum, even with the knowledge that it's a forum for discussion from a female point of view..

Dont get me wrong, I have absolutely no problem with tLL being for discussion primarily from a 'women's perspective' which welcomes constructive male posters. In fact, I welcome it. The reason I occasionally post (and more often lurk) in tLL is precisely to read what womens' views are.

My only difficulty is when a 'women's perspective' warning is used to exclude men from posting in a thread that they have already been engaged in, without any other reason being made apparent on the thread.

koth wrote: »

Already agree with you that clarity with regards to on thread warnings is always a good thing.

Agreed.

HellFireClub

tbh wrote: »

The two forums are two different thing. The one in the LL Is to organise meetups. The one proposed for the GC is to rant about feminists, as far as I can see

We're closed minded ro it because theres No demand for it, and as mods, we just don't want to do it.

Obviously having not sought access to that forum I haven't a clue what it is specifically for.

But I completely disagree that a private forum for men in a men's forum that does not seem to be able to free itself of feminist opinion formers, would become an anti-feminist forum.

I just think it is natural that men want to discuss men's things free from women's inputs and the exact same is true I imagine for women who would prefer to discuss topics free from the inputs of men.

Delirium

drkpower wrote: »

Dont get me wrong, I have absolutely no problem with tLL being for discussion primarily from a 'women's perspective' which welcomes constructive male posters. In fact, I welcome it. The reason I occasionally post (and more often lurk) in tLL is precisely to read what womens' views are.

My only difficulty is when a 'women's perspective' warning is used to exclude men from posting in a thread that they have already been engaged in, without any other reason being made apparent on the thread.

I guess that comes down to clarity with the warnings again. IMHO, I don't think the female perspective warning is being used as a "No guys allowed" warning for threads.

HellFireClub wrote: »

Obviously having not sought access to that forum I haven't a clue what it is specifically for.

But I completely disagree that a private forum for men in a men's forum that does not seem to be able to free itself of feminist opinion formers, would become an anti-feminist forum.

I just think it is natural that men want to discuss men's things free from women's inputs and the exact same is true I imagine for women who would prefer to discuss topics free from the inputs of men.

Men can have feminist opinions too. So will they also be excluded from the proposed private forum?

tbh

HellFireClub wrote: »

But I completely disagree that a private forum for men in a men's forum that does not seem to be able to free itself of feminist opinion formers, would become an anti-feminist forum.
.

Being honest with you, it's really only you that seems to have this issue with the GC. I think your choice of words there really speaks volumes.

Wibbs

K-9 wrote: »

I don't see these female posters calling for changes to tGC though strangely enough, it seems to be a subset of posters with gripes against tLL as well doing that.

Exactly. But like I said earlier in the thread K-9 my take is that some male posters out there are pissed off at the perception that there's too much "feminist/PC/corporate" restriction creeping into Boards overall, but specifically into places like AH* and tGC. And that tLL is the sideways example they want to push, probe and then complain about, as it's seen as an easy target for accusations of misandry. It would explain why a couple of them have been warned, even banned from the other two forums over bitching about tLL. Bitching about tLL has been an ongoing thing from a small quarter for a while now. The tGC mods have even had to go to the trouble of adding a codicil to their charter spelling this out for benefit of this small group. When those avenues have closed off they've hoved into view in Helpdesk, DRP and Feedback where they hop on even the barest whiff of what they see as misandry.

donfers wrote:

Have the debate or say nothing, we're not in the schoolyard

You could have fooled me. In any event I and others are of the firm opinion that no matter what is said on our end, it won't satisfy some. TBH I will apologise to you for the "FFS" comment as you put effort into your OP. However I won't apologise for the "FFS" comment overall, save to say I should have waited for a few more pages to see it's prescience.



*Hey I'd be right behind ye if it actually happened in AH. Me I don't see the loss of posts like make me a sandwich/bitches be crazy and other such witticisms as well, a loss.