Boards unfettered sexism (See Mod Note in first post)

anewme

Faith wrote: »

Women, feminists, trans people, travellers, refugees, asylum seekers, black and ethnic minority people, and people of colour.

And men, lets not forget there are some great people on this site.

Grolschevik

Invidious wrote: »

I gave a couple of examples earlier. Threads on whether male-bodied trans individuals should be allowed to compete against natal women in sports would be banned for being "transphobic." Threads on the abominable treatment of girls and women in the Travelling community would be banned for being "racist."



Saying that people should post only content that doesn't make anyone feel bad sets an impossible standard. If I post about getting a great new job, I risk making unemployed people feel worthless. If I post about going for a walk, I risk making disabled people feel miserable. If I post about losing 10 lbs and getting in shape, I risk making overweight people feel insecure. And so on.

I don't think anyone is saying these things can't be discussed, or going as far as the hyperbole in your latter paragraph.

But there's a difference between arguing a point respectfully, and making an argument in a hostile and disrespectful manner.

For myself, I don't wish to see the respectful discussion of any topic 'banned', merely that more thought can be put into how that discussion is conducted. Like if you were having that conversation in person.

And sometimes we all fail to do that, and that's ok, as long as it's not part of a deliberate pattern of deliberate attempts to insult and denigrate.

Invidious

Invidious wrote: »

Boards has many forums, with different charters and standards of moderation, meaning that what is acceptable in one forum may not be acceptable in another.

The OP linked to a thread in After Hours, which has a completely different set of posting standards from, say, The Ladies' Lounge or Fashion & Appearance.

In the latter two forums, it would be perfectly possible to have a respectful, informative discussion of women's fashion without people discussing the kinds of things that upset you.

On the other hand, AH is frequently irreverent, flippant and off-color. Most Boards members know what to expect when they go there ... and it's not a serious discussion of women's fashion trends. There are other forums on the site that can facilitate that.



After you've deleted all the content and banned all the posters who might offend women, feminists, trans people, travellers, refugees, asylum seekers, black and ethnic minority people, and people of colour, what and who will remain?

Given the financially precarious position of Boards, the adage "go woke and go broke" comes to mind. The degree of censorship required to produce the kind of sanitized, politically correct Boards.ie that some here envision would drive all non-woke progressives off the site and likely result in its immediate collapse.

The thing is more often than not, the posters are going out of their way to offend rather than doing something minor that somebody took offense to.

Invidious

anewme wrote: »

It began as that, because that is such an obvious example - staring at people straight in the face. There could be no denying that thread was abusive and downright nasty - but then other people came forward with their own examples of what they have experienced and in some cases why they left and it has demonstrated that their is a wider issue at play in respect of what is tolerated on the site.

You have outlined the dynamic well there yourself. Start with some gratuitously offensive examples, but keep going until the proposal is essentially to outlaw everything that could hurt anyone's feelings.

If you applied the Charter "dont be a dick" to many of the posters in the leggings thread, there would not be many left standing.

Exactly, thus illustrating the scale of the banning spree that the mods/admins would have to embark upon to enforce this new set of standards. How many posters will be "left standing" at the end of this purge? I'm betting not enough to make the continued existence of Boards financially viable ... which means the loss of these communities for everyone who uses them.

Invidious

Grolschevik wrote: »

But there's a difference between arguing a point respectfully, and making an argument in a hostile and disrespectful manner.

Is there, ultimately? J. K. Rowling has always articulated her views on gender identity in a highly respectful manner — and yet she has been subjected to torrents of online abuse, escalating to rape and death threats, just because she holds the "wrong" opinions on the issue.

And that's ultimately where it always winds up — there's a contingent of posters who don't want respectful, civil discussion about contentious issues. They just want to force everyone to think like them and police that groupthink by attaching derogatory labels (racist, sexist, homophobe, transphobe, etc.) to anyone who disagrees, no matter how civilly or rationally.

The most recent posts by Gruffalux are interesting in that regard. Someone who has made every effort to have debates on a valid topic in a civilized manner, but who has been branded a bigot regardless.

anewme

Invidious wrote: »

You have outlined the dynamic well there yourself. Start with some gratuitously offensive examples, but keep going until the proposal is essentially to outlaw everything that could hurt anyone's feelings.



Exactly, thus illustrating the scale of the banning spree that the mods/admins would have to embark upon to enforce this new set of standards. How many posters will be "left standing" at the end of this purge? I'm betting not enough to make the continued existence of Boards financially viable ... which means the loss of these communities for everyone who uses them.

But what you don't know is how many people have left/closed their accounts because of they can't deal with the nastyness. I said earlier I was shocked by the number of people who have come forward here, there are many more who have just left and said nothing and put Boards.ie behind them like a bad memory. I have certainly witnessed new posters, coming in all enthusiastic and being rounded on and driven away. Some only lasting a couple of days.

It's currently like a race to the bottom and it does not have to be that way.

Do you believe that posters with views such as fat women are pigs hurting their eyesight would encourage anyone to a site? Unless it is the same type who wallow in that kind of language and engagement. Would an advertiser want to be associated with a site with reputation for that kind of discourse?

So, it is one for wider Boards I suppose, as to what strategic direction they want to go in.

sullivlo

Mod note

The thread is moving wildly off topic.

Time to move on. Last warning as cards will be dealt.

Gruffalux

The repeated attempts to make some kind of an equivalence between those who would say ''fat women in leggings are pigs'' and all other politically-unacceptable opinion on boards is seriously disingenuous. One must now think of the former (ie fat pigs) whenever thinking of the latter by virtue of this repeated association in this thread. It is a deliberate tactic called creating a false analogy which is destructive to reasoned debate.

It would only be the absolute bottom feeders who think it is in anyway okay to say ''fat women in leggings are pigs''. Anyone sane knows that. Deal swiftly with such problems. But do not create false analogies to set up a defense of emotively contrived censorship where people can try to prevent all opinions that may be contrary to their own beliefs.

anewme

Gruffalux wrote: »

It would only be the absolute bottom feeders who think it is in anyway okay to say ''fat women in leggings are pigs''. Anyone sane knows that. Deal swiftly with such problems.

The problem is way wider than you are making out to be honest.

I've complained before about the number of women bashing threads....why do women...why are women....why do fat women...usually followed by some gross generalisation and an excuse to women bash.

It is only when a thread goes down the road of being so BLATENTLY mysognist that there can be NO defence that it is acknowledged that the quality of posting is an issue. And even then, you have people defending that thread and saying it is just their opinion. There were many nasty comments on that thread, only one or two of them were actually on about about fashion. But the thread was not started to be about fashion. And what happened, the comments got worse and worse and worse, egged on by each other.

Some other content from the "fashion" thread. Different poster than the fat pig comment one. Note this comment mentions teenage girls. Seriously, what type of discussion or debate could this comment encourage?

I would consider borderline obese and morbidly obese Irish teenage girls and women's infatuation with wearing leggings and yoga pants that are WAY too tight for them more egregious and peculiar, but hey, that's just me. Nobody asks for them to literally have their genitalia and bare asshole with/without unhygienic thong stuffed up their (I'm presuming unbleached) butthole proudly on display even though they've never even looked at a gym in their entire lives and exist on a diet of copious amounts of takeaways and sweets.

At least don't wear the leggings up to your nips/cover arse with a jacket or jumper.

People have come on this thread and been brutally honest about their experiences on Boards and why they have left. I would not like to belittle their honesty and wrap it up as being this one thread.

We all know it is far from it.

The thread may be the catalyst, but its just the surface.

Gruffalux

anewme wrote: »

. There were many nasty comments on that thread, only one or two of them were actually on about about fashion. But the thread was not started to be about fashion. And what happened, the comments got worse and worse and worse, egged on by each other.

Some other content from the "fashion" thread. Different poster than the fat pig comment one. Note this comment mentions teenage girls. Seriously, what type of discussion or debate could this comment encourage?

I would consider borderline obese and morbidly obese Irish teenage girls and women's infatuation with wearing leggings and yoga pants that are WAY too tight for them more egregious and peculiar, but hey, that's just me. Nobody asks for them to literally have their genitalia and bare asshole with/without unhygienic thong stuffed up their (I'm presuming unbleached) butthole proudly on display even though they've never even looked at a gym in their entire lives and exist on a diet of copious amounts of takeaways and sweets.

At least don't wear the leggings up to your nips/cover arse with a jacket or jumper.
.

In fairness I thought you beheaded them rather poetically by calling them ''salivating knickers searchers''...one sharpens one's rapier on the pointy heads of arseholes.

This shyte is deeply unpleasant. But nothing new. At least here it could be deleted. I had my teenage years made a misery by a gang of school girls who mocked me publicly from one end of the day to another for the crime of being clever and skinny. That's girl on girl viciousness. At least I can look back on those years with a clean conscience, but they can never change having been bitches. Such is life. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Makes you stronger. Campaign to have the posts/thread deleted.

eeeee

There is a difference between debate and discrimination and hate, and crossing it has become the norm on boards. This is the problem. The standards of fairness should be uniform across the site - if it's not ok to say a think in TLL then it's not ok in AH. It drives way, way more people away than it brings, it only makes the place comfortable and enjoyable for a very narrow, very privileged demographic, and it will be the end of the site. it will atrophy, and indeed has done and continues to do as this discriminatory, style of posting is allowed to flourish.

Invidious

eeeee wrote: »

The standards of fairness should be uniform across the site - if it's not ok to say a think in TLL then it's not ok in AH.

I think it's entirely unrealistic to enforce one standard across the entire site, especially since most of the tightly moderated forums on Boards are now deader than a doornail in terms of traffic. In the Ladies' Lounge, only a handful of new threads have been started in 2021 so far, and most of them have fewer than 20 posts. If AH were moderated to the same stringent standards, it would die off too ... and that would be the end of one of the site's biggest forums, and presumably Boards.ie itself.

It drives way, way more people away than it brings...

How do you know this? As Exhibit A, we're told that a female Boards.ie Admin "left Boards" (even though she's still listed as an active Admin) because she couldn't stand all the "hate." And yet she's posting away over on Twitter, which British MP Glyn Davies has correctly called a "cesspit of vile speech." It doesn't stand to reason that someone would leave a social platform because of all the "hate," but happily keep posting on another social platform that, by all accounts, can be far more hateful.

it will atrophy, and indeed has done and continues to do as this discriminatory, style of posting is allowed to flourish.

Has there ever been a time when off-colour comments about overweight women wearing tight leggings wouldn't have been found on Boards? Or threads criticizing Travellers, asylum seekers, and the like? Such threads have found on the site for the 20+ years the site has been around — indeed, much more leeway was allowed at one time — and yet people were able to post away on other forums while ignoring AH-style threads they might have found offensive.

Boards has gone into a probably terminal decline for numerous reasons — it has a 90's bulletin board look and feel that doesn't appeal to younger people, it doesn't have the cash or the employees to upgrade the site significantly, and it now has to compete with the likes of Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, Instagram, etc., that younger people find more to their taste. But the actual content can hardly be blamed for the decline. Go look at Twitter, YouTube comments, Reddit threads, etc., and you'll find far more to get offended about over there — and yet those platforms are thriving.

eeeee

Invidious wrote: »

I think it's entirely unrealistic to enforce one standard across the entire site, especially since most of the tightly moderated forums on Boards are now deader than a doornail in terms of traffic. In the Ladies' Lounge, only a handful of new threads have been started in 2021 so far, and most of them have fewer than 20 posts. If AH were moderated to the same stringent standards, it would die off too ... and that would be the end of one of the site's biggest forums, and presumably Boards.ie itself.



How do you know this? As Exhibit A, we're told that a female Boards.ie Admin "left Boards" (even though she's still listed as an active Admin) because she couldn't stand all the "hate." And yet she's posting away over on Twitter, which British MP Glyn Davies has correctly called a "cesspit of vile speech." It doesn't stand to reason that someone would leave a social platform because of all the "hate," but happily keep posting on another social platform that, by all accounts, can be far more hateful.



Has there ever been a time when off-colour comments about overweight women wearing tight leggings wouldn't have been found on Boards? Or threads criticizing Travellers, asylum seekers, and the like? Such threads have found on the site for the 20+ years the site has been around — indeed, much more leeway was allowed at one time — and yet people were able to post away on other forums while ignoring AH-style threads they might have found offensive.

Boards has gone into a probably terminal decline for numerous reasons — it has a 90's bulletin board look and feel that doesn't appeal to younger people, it doesn't have the cash or the employees to upgrade the site significantly, and it now has to compete with the likes of Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, Instagram, etc., that younger people find more to their taste. But the actual content can hardly be blamed for the decline. Go look at Twitter, YouTube comments, Reddit threads, etc., and you'll find far more to get offended about over there — and yet those platforms are thriving.

Cycling is one of the busiest forums on Boards. As is Motors. Both well moderated from a discriminatory POV.



Making a community message board a place for one, narrow demographic of people is a sure fire way to kill it. It's happening, numbers are dwindling year on year (Covid bump aside), and it will continue to do so as long as it excludes more groups of people than it includes.



It is possible to have discussion, debate, humour and a good sense of community on a forum without being discriminatory. I know this because it happens in Cycling. It can be done. The will and support must be there, but it absolutely can be done.

Wibbs

+1 Invidious. Whatever about the merits of discussing moderation around sexism and other aspects of the site(and there certainly are merits) the decline seems to have pretty much nothing to do with it. When I was a mod of this forum waaaay back in the day the exact same thing came up and was about the main reason why the private subforum was set up. General sexism in other forums, but more locally a bunch of blokes who would be guaranteed to wade in on threads here with their tuppence worth. Many bannings occurred. Threads in Feedback debating it, a tightening up by mods and the community in After Hours etc. All this when Boards.ie was on the up and throughout the very peak of popularity, with communities online and off. Before poster comeback on mod actions, before GDRP, before the ability to close accounts and when examples of various isms were a lot easier to find. If people were leaving then because of a perception or reality of a toxic environment the numbers weren't showing that at all.

Invidious

eeeee wrote: »

Making a community message board a place for one, narrow demographic of people is a sure fire way to kill it.

In my view, many of the proposals in this thread would indeed turn Boards into an echo chamber for one narrow demographic — i.e., the progressive "woke" left, which itself is disproportionately white, female, middle-class, urban, and university-educated.

One valuable service that Boards.ie offers in Irish life is to create space for opinions that wouldn't be allowed on RTE or in the Irish Times, but are valid and legitimate nonetheless, even if some find them offensive. I for one would like to see that space preserved.

Neyite

I thought that the private forum was set up so that women could discuss and arrange real life meetups safely without it being attended by male posters from other parts of the site?

I'm hazy on it but I thought the forum arose out of a male poster from elsewhere either threatening to turn up at a TLL meetup or that he actually did.

Wibbs

Neyite wrote: »

I thought that the private forum was set up so that women could discuss and arrange real life meetups safely without it being attended by male posters from other parts of the site?

I'm hazy on it but I thought the forum arose out of a male poster from elsewhere either threatening to turn up at a TLL meetup or that he actually did.

Oh god yeah N, don't remind me. That was a big part of it too alright. For a time it was a chatty place with it.

Wibbs

Invidious wrote: »

In my view, many of the proposals in this thread would indeed turn Boards into an echo chamber for one narrow demographic — i.e., the progressive "woke" left, which itself is disproportionately white, female, middle-class, urban, and university-educated.

One valuable service that Boards.ie offers in Irish life is to create space for opinions that wouldn't be allowed on RTE or in the Irish Times, but are valid and legitimate nonetheless, even if some find them offensive. I for one would like to see that space preserved.

+1, however things could be tidied up and made less... well, nasty for the want of a better word in some quarters. So said opinions can still be held and discussed because of some of the reasons you give and I agree they are valid reasons. Indeed we might get better discussions minus the back and forth rancour that can descend.

People need to report posts. Unless a mod reads every post in every thread - and nobody has time for that - stuff will get missed. There is absolutely zero point having a complaint about whatever you read that you feel is over the line and not bringing it to the attention of the moderators in question. It becomes an impotent complaint of no actual value if you want to see actual change.

Faith

Mod note: I'm starting to feel like this thread is going around in circles with no new discussion happening, just an increase in divisive language and people complaining it's an unreasonable expectation to require civility and respect in posts.

If anyone else feels they have something significant to add to this thread, please do so. Otherwise, I'll lock it as it has run its course, and the thread has achieved its aim of attracting attention to an ongoing issue, with work going on behind the scenes to try and find a resolution.

AndrewJRenko

The sexism noted here is part of an overall trend on boards towards what might broadly be called far-right views.

This recent post sums it up broadly. It has become clear to me over recent years that boards.ie is the forum of choice for the far right in Ireland. It was interesting to see Peter Casey getting double in the boards Presential poll than he got in real life.

I'm not suggesting that most boards posters are far right. But I am suggesting that there is a trend towards more and more far right views on boards, sexism, racism, anti-traveller views, anti trans views and more. It's also interesting to note the relatively sudden and relatively narrow concerns for issues like safety of women - huge concerns voices for the safety of women in women's toilets from the terrible transvestite men or transgender women, but relative silence on much more prevalent issues of violence against women by men. There are huge concerns voiced about the integrity of women's sports from transgender women, but relative silence on the much more significant issues for women's sport of teenage girls' body image, representations in media, funding and more. It's really hard to see many of these concerns as good faith.

It also seems to be concerted to a degree. On that same thread, when things started getting heated, three seperate posters referred untruthfully to previous comments of mine on an 18 month old thread, a thread that none of the three had actually participated in at the time. This isn't coincidental - this is planned and organised. Or else, it's the same two lads in their ma's spare room running multiple accounts here.

This isn't about free speech or censorship. It's about whether boards wants to be the Fox News of Irish discussion boards or not.

Personally, I don't think it's a smart move commercially or on any basis really.

Gruffalux

Man, the ''far right'' is the modern equivalent of the bogey man.
They are everywhere, it seems. :rolleyes:

AndrewJRenko

Gruffalux wrote: »

Man, the ''far right'' is the modern equivalent of the bogey man.
They are everywhere, it seems. :rolleyes:

Probably not helpful to revisit everything on that thread, but it worth remembering Baudelaire's maxim that “the devil’s best trick is to persuade you that he does not exist.”

Gruffalux

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Probably not helpful to revisit everything on that thread, but it worth remembering Baudelaire's maxim that “the devil’s best trick is to persuade you that he does not exist.”

If you could just point to one publicly elected representative or local official in Ireland who is ''far right'', and maybe one journal or newspaper or magazine that has any distribution worth paying attention to that is far right, that would be great, thanks. The devil exists in people's heads alright, but has jumped religion.

AndrewJRenko

Gruffalux wrote: »

If you could just point to one publicly elected representative or local official in Ireland who is ''far right'', and maybe one journal or newspaper or magazine that has any distribution worth paying attention to that is far right, that would be great, thanks. The devil exists in people's heads alright, but has jumped religion.

My point, as clearly detailed above, was about boards.ie - not about elected officials or media - just about boards.ie.

Faith

Gruffalux wrote: »

If you could just point to one publicly elected representative or local official in Ireland who is ''far right'', and maybe one journal or newspaper or magazine that has any distribution worth paying attention to that is far right, that would be great, thanks. The devil exists in people's heads alright, but has jumped religion.

Mod Note: Gruffalux, there have been several on-thread warnings about pulling this thread off topic. Widening the scope of the discussion from boards.ie to elected representatives is an example of that. If you can't keep on topic, then don't post on this thread again.

Gruffalux

Faith wrote: »

Mod Note: Gruffalux, there have been several on-thread warnings about pulling this thread off topic. Widening the scope of the discussion from boards.ie to elected representatives is an example of that. If you can't keep on topic, then don't post on this thread again.

I was responding legitimately to AndrewJRenko who brought up the ''far right'' in a long post above which is a false analogy. He said - ridiculously

It has become clear to me over recent years that boards.ie is the forum of choice for the far right in Ireland.

and

I am suggesting that there is a trend towards more and more far right views on boards, sexism, racism, anti-traveller views, anti trans views and more. It's also interesting to note the relatively sudden and relatively narrow concerns for issues like safety of women - huge concerns voices for the safety of women in women's toilets from the terrible transvestite men or transgender women, but relative silence on much more prevalent issues of violence against women by men. There are huge concerns voiced about the integrity of women's sports from transgender women, but relative silence on the much more significant issues for women's sport of teenage girls' body image, representations in media, funding and more.

None of which is related to the thread but rather is grandstanding.
And he left links to 2 threads not remotely connected to the discussion. So I don't understand why I get named as pulling the thread off topic and not him.

I won't post here again. No worries.

RandRuns

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Probably not helpful to revisit everything on that thread, but it worth remembering Baudelaire's maxim that “the devil’s best trick is to persuade you that he does not exist.”

Do you post this in every single thread on here?

Faith

Mod Note: Okay, thanks everyone for your input on this topic. I think we've exhausted it for now, but it hasn't been ignored.