What is a female point of view/perspective?

HellFireClub

Dudess wrote: »

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"...

You and I have had this out recently. But the effect of what you are saying is that a guy cannot post his genuinely held view on a forum (ok the particular forum, it wasn't TGC as it happens), without causing offence to you. But if I posted those same opinions that you are referring to, the same outcome would have happened.

I don't post in TTL as I don't agree with 99.9999999% of what is posted there, so I steer clear and leave you to it, it's not for me to try to convince people who believe in what they genuinely believe in.

Sometimes I wonder why women can't take the same attitude to a discussion that is based around a subject that effects men???

drkpower

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

If posters are being warned against ignoring the ethos of the forum .

I wasnt warned about anything. A general warning was given explaining that the thread was to hear views from a womens' perspective. It wasnt directed at me. No Mod mentioned me. No Mod Pm'd me.

This is my entire point. Have you been following any of this?

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

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. .

Seriously, listen to yourself.

When the thread on tLL occurred, and the Mod warning was given, I did not complain on thread. I did not complain to the Mod. I did not complain via feedback. I did not complain via DRP. I said nothing and wandered off.

When I entered this feedback thread to give some feedback, I didnt mention the thread in tLL I was involved in. You brought up the thread in tLL. I suggested that there was little point discussing it. You continued to discuss it. Yet, I am the one complaining and I am the one moaning and moaning and moaning and moaning and moaning ...!!:rolleyes:

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

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. .

:DOh, well then, yes, of course I am lying all along. Really, Ickle, you need to step back on ease up on the defensiveness. You have portrayed those who wish to comment on some issues with tLL as wanting the forum not to exist and worse. And now you are basically accusing me of moaning and lying (and in essence, trolling) because I have one minor complaint about the moderation of the forum.

Ickle Magoo

HellFireClub wrote: »

Sometimes I wonder why women can't take the same attitude to a discussion that is based around a subject that effects men???

Neither forum allows lazy generalisations. Nobody knows all men, all women, all irish people, all whatever - so to make claims about them based on a clearly limited view and thus out of ignorance is just flaming - and Boards has a site-wide policy on flaming, again, it isn't limited to one or two forums.

dkpower wrote:

You have portrayed those who wish to comment on some issues with tLL as wanting the forum not to exist and worse.

I think those who continuously complain about a forum that is really not aimed at them and they seldom post in are giving their own portrayal - in technicolour.

HellFireClub

tbh wrote: »

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.

Well I've PM's from other site users who ran into issue recently with mods when discussing male orientated topics that we shut down/locked/bannings issued, asking what in all seriousness is going on, so I don't agree on that basis that I'm the only person with this issue...

tbh

HellFireClub wrote: »

Well I've PM's from other site users who ran into issue recently with mods when discussing male orientated topics that we shut down/locked/bannings issued, asking what in all seriousness is going on, so I don't agree on that basis that I'm the only person with this issue...

Ok well I'll take you at your word on that. Anyway, like I said to you already, there's no reason why you couldn't have your own private forum, and you can discuss whatever you like in there.

drkpower

koth wrote: »

IMHO, I don't think the female perspective warning is being used as a "No guys allowed" warning for threads.

I appreciate that but i think there are at least a couple of clear examples of situations where it has, in essence, been just that, a direction that guys are not welcome to post in future.

I have posted in only a handful of threads in tLL; one on the MAP which has been discussed here where the female perspective warning amounted to a "No guys allowed" warning. Another on gender quotas where I had to have a debate on and off thread to be allowed to continue to post follllowing a similar warning.

Wibbs

HellFireClub wrote:

Sometimes I wonder why women can't take the same attitude to a discussion that is based around a subject that effects men???

This is the undercurrent I was referring to in my previous post. This I'm convinced is the background noise to all of this excessive, nay relentless stuff from this quarter aimed at tLL, but it's as much about how "The wimmin are stopping us men talking about our rights and/or saying what we like in other forums, so we'll have a go at them in their forum for hypocrisy".

tbh wrote: »

It's hardly a secret.

It's not? :eek: The titles of the respective forums aren't very clear at all about this. At all at all. There's bias all over the site. It's terrible. Weally, weally it is. Those pesky footballists are biased against GAA and they both love playing with their balls. The Hunting forum is baised against PETA bed wetters and they both love animals, just the former prefer them on a plate or on the wall. And don't get me started on the religious nutters. Some of them think outsiders are burning in the fiery pits of hell and are happy to tell you this. Or worse those godless Atheists. Immoral chaps and chapesses all. Why, at this very moment they busy themselves being biased agin Muslims and Christians and Scientoligists. In plain sight! It's a veritable bloodbath of bias. The horror, the horror.

HellFireClub

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Neither forum allows lazy generalisations. Nobody knows all men, all women, all irish people, all whatever - so to make claims about them based on a clearly limited view and thus out of ignorance is just flaming - and Boards has a site-wide policy on flaming, again, it isn't limited to one or two forums.

This is rediculous. French people are known for their arrogance, Irish people are known as seriously heavy drinkers, American's are well known for being gullible. Human's constantly generalise.

K-9

Wibbs wrote: »

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.

This is getting to the nub of it. tGC was seen by a minority of male posters as some type of male tLL, it isn't and wasn't supposed to be.

That minority of posters still want a men's rights type board. If they got that private board or group they could agree on what they are for there and be constructive rather than being anti tGC and tLL in whatever thread comes up.

Bit of an over reaction to the odd "feminista" thread or post on tLL and tGC but there you are. Some peoples are more about what they are against, rather than what they are for.

Ickle Magoo

HellFireClub wrote: »

This is rediculous. French people are known for their arrogance, Irish people are known as seriously heavy drinkers, American's are well known for being gullible. Human's constantly generalise.

And there are plenty of sites that you can generalise, flame, insult or spout whatever ignorance &/or extremism that you wish to your hearts content...

Delirium

drkpower wrote: »

I appreciate that but i think there are at least a couple of clear examples of situations where it has, in essence, been just that, a direction that guys are not welcome to post in future.

I have posted in only a handful of threads in tLL; one on the MAP which has been discussed here where the female perspective warning amounted to a "No guys allowed" warning. Another on gender quotas where I had to have a debate on and off thread to be allowed to continue to post follllowing a similar warning.

I personally don't know what exactly a guy could contribute to a MAP discussion other than medical related stuff. I'd imagine a MAP discussion would be about personal experience using it, which I would have thought no man would have.

I don't see why a guy shouldn't be allowed to post on a gender quota thread though.

drkpower

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I think those who continuously complain about a forum that is really not aimed at them and they seldom post in are giving their own portrayal - in technicolour.

Perhaps this a reference to others, but your attempts to suggst that I am continuously complaining is hilarious given my actual response to the actual tLL thread you have raised.

As a reminder, my response to that thread was.... eh...nothing.:cool:

But on the wider point, if tLL welcomes men, and if one is allowed to lurk far more than one posts, are men not entitled to give feedback if they have a concern about moderation.

Again, my issue is limited to the effects of the use of and reliance on the female perspective warnngs rather than providing clear on-thread warnings where it is claimed male posters are derailing, or flamimg, or acting otherwise inappropriately.

Dudess

HellFireClub wrote: »

the effect of what you are saying is that a guy cannot post his genuinely held view on a forum (ok the particular forum, it wasn't TGC as it happens), without causing offence to you.

That's bull. I'm not talking about the view, or how it affects only me personally, I'm talking about the hostile generalisations (which piss off lots of people). If it's genuinely your experience that such and such a thing is prevalent among Irish women, fair enough - can't argue when it's a person's experience. But all you have to do is word it in a less inflammatory way.

I don't post in TTL as I don't agree with 99.9999999% of what is posted there, so I steer clear and leave you to it

I don't understand why you disagree with so much that's said in TLL - it's a discussion forum with varying opinions, not a "Only have this point of view" forum. Vehemently negative attitudes towards TLL always smack to me of "I don't go in there, but I assume it's anti men since it's a woman's forum". I apologise if I'm wrong, but seeing as it's ultimately just a discussion forum with debates and exchanges of various views, like anywhere else, I can't understand how it's possible to disagree with such a high percentage of its content.

Sometimes I wonder why women can't take the same attitude to a discussion that is based around a subject that effects men???

If you're referring to the policy on the Ladies' Lounge of not allowing posters to wade in there with "What about when it happens to men?" statements, it looks like a challenge, it looks hostile, and it's a forum for women's issues, not men's ones. It doesn't mean the women there disagree that it can happen to men.
On other forums, the only times I see women objecting on threads re issues affecting men is when they get turned into "Men have it crap when it comes to xyz - let's blame women" threads. I'd be all for threads regarding fathers' rights, domestic abuse experienced by men, sexual abuse experienced by men - I think these warrant more discussion, but sans "Women have it so easy", "Imagine if it happened to women, the feminists would bla bla bla" comments. It's hostile and aggressive and adds nothing.

HellFireClub

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

And there are plenty of sites that you can generalise, flame, insult or spout whatever ignorance &/or extremism that you wish to your hearts content...

Only in your opinion is a generalisation equal to a flame, an insult, a spout, an expression of ignorance or an expression of extremism. This is the kind of extreme subjectivity that I believe is at the heart of the wider issue under discussion here.

There is plenty of generalisations going on in TLL. I don't agree with those generalisations, so I don't post there. So therefore no problem. Pity the same couldn't happen in TGC.

drkpower

koth wrote: »

I personally don't know what exactly a guy could contribute to a MAP discussion other than medical related stuff. I'd imagine a MAP discussion would be about personal experience using it, which I would have thought no man would have..

Sure, and my participation on that thread was an attempt to give a doctor/GPs perspective. It wasnt even to give a male perspective:pac:.

K-9

HellFireClub wrote: »

I don't post in TTL as I don't agree with 99.9999999% of what is posted there, so I steer clear and leave you to it, it's not for me to try to convince people who believe in what they genuinely believe in.

:eek:

I only post in the odd thread that catches my eye in tLL. 99.99% are trivial nonsense to me.*

Tbh you think it's some type of feminist club and the private club full of feminazis?

*exaggeration.

Ickle Magoo

koth wrote: »

I personally don't know what exactly a guy could contribute to a MAP discussion other than medical related stuff. I'd imagine a MAP discussion would be about personal experience using it, which I would have thought no man would have.

I don't see why a guy shouldn't be allowed to post on a gender quota thread though.

Iirc there was a gender quota thread on at least three other forums and despite that, there were some posters disrupting the discussion that female posters were having on it in tLL. I appreciate that some people have very strong views on such things but a bit of common sense regarding having to have their say everywhere and anywhere wouldn't go amiss. :cool:

Delirium

drkpower wrote: »

Sure, and my participation on that thread was an attempt to give a doctor/GPs perspective. It wasnt even to give a male perspective:pac:.

okay, but I don't think that was what the thread was intended to be about. I think it was a personal experience of MAP thread. Open to correction though.

donfers

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

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.

most of the points in this post have been made by others already and have been debunked already so if you have time to read the thread the go ahead because the rinse/repeat of same old strawmanning grievances and wild unfounded ad hominems is getting tired at this stage

as for your example used to describe a female perspective, it's telling that you use the abortion example, if you care to read my posts when I was asking about the female perspective issue, you will see I said that for issues relating to phsyiological issues that can solely be experienced by women then male posters should not intervene i.e. being pregnant so I don't know why you used that example

Oh and just as there are some male posters who happily use tll, there are also some female posters who have issues with it so I think we should be (including myself here) be careful with the use of MALE and FEMALE labels.

Do you think there is a definitive female perspective on global warming or traffic or Summer holidays or going to a gig or whatever and if so, how do you define what it is and how do you differentiate it from a male perspective/point of view?

I could argue that the appointment of overzealous mods who are at the more extreme side of the genderpolitiking stuff and who have a quite one-eyed analysis is part of the problem - the word mod after all is from the stem moderate, I could argue that the tipping point for these type of mods to intervene in the discussion is far too early and they create a walking on eggshells type environment where consent to the groupthink rather than discussion is the order of the day. I could argue that these type of interventions are ironically quite insulting to the female posters as it suggests they aren't capable of holding their own in the discussion. I could use the trusty old smearing tactic and say they must have a problem with male posters voicing an opinion and can't see why their interventions are deemed inflammatory, an issue they have to sort out for themselves etc etc etc

I could say all that but to be honest I don't know how true it is, however the point is anybody can rant and no matter how convinced you are of your interpretation of the "truth" there is always an alternative view and ranting only ever exacerbates the divide between the sides and entrenches views - which is fair enough if that is the goal but will only lead to the debate cropping up again and again and again

On the basis of this thread (according the the mods of the forum) I understand that there is no great appetite for tll to modify their charter. I think the wording is unclear, that is my observation. Silverfish makes the point that if trolls want to troll then a few edits to the charter won't make a blind bit of difference to their antics and she is right. But to be honest if you guys could point to something black and white in the charter when someone crossed the line (instead of the female perspective thing) then I think you'd have a lot less of these type of discussions in the future.

I am aware of how it may be perceived when a guy or group of guys come in here questioning the ladies lounge and many have quite happily of course taken the populist bait and made some quite leaping assumptions. But this is the feedback thread and these are just observations. Apologies if it feels like tll is being picked on, as I said previously I have plenty of feedback for other forums too but this gender issue is a biggie and does kind of contain us all and I have to commend tll for its low tolerance approach to offensive generalisations. I do sympathise to an extent with the "it's none of your business" angle but these are mere observations and it is after all what the feedback thread is for. Ultimately you guys (mods and regular users) will decide how things go in there and if you want to change anything so I don't see why there is such ire aimed at those of us who offer feedback on your forum. The most commonly held piece of advice here is "if you don't approve of tll, the ignore it" - well why not follow that same advice with regard to this feedback if you think things are fine and dandy. It's your decision, you have every right to reject these arguments but i'd prefer if we didn't personalise the discussion so much.

Wibbs

tbh wrote: »

Ok well I'll take you at your word on that. Anyway, like I said to you already, there's no reason why you couldn't have your own private forum, and you can discuss whatever you like in there.

And guess what? And hold onto your hats folks, I'd like an arena to discuss mens rights specifically and without whataboutery from the feminist slant(both male and female feminists*). I think that mens rights, especially over reproductive rights and end of relationship rights is well in need of a shakeup, in both law and culture. In some areas I think women can hold all the cards, that the pendulum that desperately needed a good shove has swung too far in some areas and it's a crock of shíte. You can release your hats now.

K-9 wrote:

That minority of posters still want a men's rights type board. If they got that private board or group they could agree on what they are for there and be constructive rather than being anti tGC and tLL in whatever thread comes up.

And again I'd not personally be agin that Indeed would support such a forum(tho doubt would get an invite:D). Like tbh said earlier, try and garner enough support for such a forum, private probably the best bet. Better bet again like tbh said IIRC kick off a Users Group for just that kind of debate. You may well have more than a minority of support for it. Build it and they may come.

But I'll say it again and will keep saying it as one of the mods of The Ladies Lounge, The Ladies Lounge ain't the place for it, nor is it the place to complain about it, nor is it the place to be seen as a lightning rod for frustration at the lack of such an arena. The clue as ever is in the title of the forum.






*its a small word with a broad base of opinion. I speak more of the feminists with a capital "F". There are plenty of self described feminist women who would agree with me on the matter of mens rights. Have actually put their money where their mouth is over it.

HellFireClub

Dudess wrote: »

I don't understand why you disagree with so much that's said in TLL - it's a discussion forum with varying opinions, not a "Only have this point of view" forum. Vehemently negative attitudes towards TLL always smack to me of "I don't go in there, but I assume it's anti men since it's a woman's forum". I apologise if I'm wrong, but seeing as it's ultimately just a discussion forum with debates and exchanges of various views, like anywhere else, I can't understand how it's possible to disagree with such a high percentage of its content.

I don't "assume" things to be a certain way, I examine them and if they appear a certain way to me subsequent to examination, then I decide on what I think of the set up then and I do or do not do something accordingly, in this case I decide to participate or not participate.

Anyhow, this thread is proceeding along in a civil enough manner and I'm not going to detract from that.

drkpower

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Iirc there was a gender quota thread on at least three other forums and despite that, there were some posters disrupting the discussion that female posters were having on it in tLL. I appreciate that some people have very strong views on such things but a bit of common sense regarding having to have their say everywhere and anywhere wouldn't go amiss. :cool:

Again, is this another childish sideswipe at myself?

First, I didnt participate in any other threads on gender quotas so i wasnt giving my views everywhere and anywhere.
Second, I specifically said on thread that I wanted to discuss it on tLL to hear the female perspective
Third, I dont think anyone accused me of disrupting the discussion.

Is there a reason that you continually insist in engaging in this confrontational and abrasive manner?

Ickle Magoo

HellFireClub wrote: »

Only in your opinion is a generalisation equal to a flame, an insult, a spout, an expression of ignorance or an expression of extremism. This is the kind of extreme subjectivity that I believe is at the heart of the wider issue under discussion here.

There is plenty of generalisations going on in TLL. I don't agree with those generalisations, so I don't post there. So therefore no problem. Pity the same couldn't happen in TGC.

Well no, if I claim all men are X, it's a lazy generalisation by virtue of the fact it cannot possibly be true. It's a flame by virtue of the fact that it cannot possibly be true yet I'm claiming it as fact knowing that others who know it doesn't apply to them will react.

There is not plenty of generalisations going on in tLL, perhaps if you knew the forum at all you would also know that. Moderators in ALL forums clamp down on lazy generalisations or anecdotes that are going to disrupt the thread or offend the posters there from both sexes - there is no right to post whatever you like and to hell with the rest of the poster-ship anywhere on Boards.

Dudess

HellFireClub wrote: »

There is plenty of generalisations going on in TLL.

There really, really aren't. Do you actually go in there?

drkpower

koth wrote: »

okay, but I don't think that was what the thread was intended to be about. I think it was a personal experience of MAP thread. Open to correction though.

Yes, and as I explained on-thread, the negative female perspectives may have been explained (or at least contextualised) by an understanding of why a GP might ask certain questions and in certain ways.

Do you think that is a relevent and potentially valuable addition to such a thread?

Wibbs

Well thought out post D and I agree with some of it and disagree with some, but I do think you're 100% right on this point;

donfers wrote: »

The most commonly held piece of advice here is "if you don't approve of tll, the ignore it" - well why not follow that same advice with regard to this feedback if you think things are fine and dandy.

I'm out. If someone could let me know if an actual woman user posts on thread, I'd be grateful. Tnx

Delirium

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Iirc there was a gender quota thread on at least three other forums and despite that, there were some posters disrupting the discussion that female posters were having on it in tLL. I appreciate that some people have very strong views on such things but a bit of common sense regarding having to have their say everywhere and anywhere wouldn't go amiss. :cool:

ok. can I just ask then if you don't mind, was it a case that men weren't allowed to post on the thread. Or was it a case that the mods had a certain box/focus for the thread and some male posters where trying to divert it to a different type of discussion. Or was it some other problem?

Delirium

drkpower wrote: »

Yes, and as I explained on-thread, the negative female perspectives may have been explained (or at least contextualised) by an understanding of why a GP might ask certain questions and in certain ways.

Do you think that is a relevent and potentially valuable addition to such a thread?

It could be, but unfortunately that wasn't the nature of the thread. So it's possible that the posts were seen as derailing.

HellFireClub

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Well no, if I claim all men are X, it's a lazy generalisation by virtue of the fact it cannot possibly be true. It's a flame by virtue of the fact that it cannot possibly be true yet I'm claiming it as fact knowing that others who know it doesn't apply to them will react.

If I say, "in my experiece, I've found Irish women to be x, y or z", that is not a lazy generalisation. That is my genuinely held experience, converted into words. Now you mightn't like that, but it doesn't change my view, no more so if I spent a weekend in Dublin City and subsequently reported that I found a lot of Irish people to be drunk all the time, again, this is my view based on what I have observed, it is anything but a lazy generalisation.

The problem here, is that you only appear to take offence to the former analysis but not the latter.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

There is not plenty of generalisations going on in tLL, perhaps if you knew the forum at all you would also know that. Moderators in ALL forums clamp down on lazy generalisations or anecdotes that are going to disrupt the thread or offend the posters there from both sexes - there is no right to post whatever you like and to hell with the rest of the poster-ship anywhere on Boards.

Again, it appears to me that you are deliberately mis-using the English language by trying to put your own particular construction upon the term "generalisation" that the true and widely accepted meaning of the word cannot possibly sustain.

HellFireClub

Dudess wrote: »

There really, really aren't. Do you actually go in there?

I obviously disagree, yes I've "gone in there" and I've actually been taken aback at the content that I've seen there, in terms of the highly insulated opinions that I can see there.

Again, I don't agree with the opinions I've seen there, so I ignore it as a forum.