Sexism on L&D

Post Reply New Topic

So there's a movement in a different forum to get Alex to change the rules we have about sexist opinions and the members who express them. There's been a lot of back and forth arguing, about why he should, and why he shouldn't; but there aren't any actual votes that I've noticed. Seeing how this petition campaign is meant to have an impact on the L&D forum, I think this is the place to take the poll.

I personally think that if someone has a sexist point of view, then finding out what others think about it is better than hiding it.

In that case, I think we should let the racists be allowed to discuss why they think black people are evil and how to manage them. Also, we should discuss why we hate gay people and what can be done about their wicked ways. We should also let people discuss how evil they think Jews are and how they should be put in their place.

We should let people discuss how to control these people instead of confronting their own issues about them. Because hey, every single guy on here I've seen who is misogynistic, once taught, hasn't continued to constantly post about how much he hates women, how evil they are, and how to control them.

We should let everyone get a hearing. After all, it's free speech, meaning people every right to bully others into submission. Wait...

I think smudge states the case against not allowing misogynistic comments eloquently. It's odd how people would never dare support racist, anti-Semitic, or slander against gays, still feel it's OK to make disparaging, generalized comments about the opposite sex.

I could go for not allowing 'Misogynistic' speech, which is if I understand correctly hate of women. But I think the term 'Sexist' is too broad and includes minor things that should not be prohibited talking about.

For example, in each generation social mores change. In mine, at least in the beginning certain polite gestures were still encouraged involving women, like opening doors, preparing seats, letting them go first, etc. There were also protective behaviors. Some of these might be considered sexist now, yet it seems ridiculus not to be able to talk about it.

But there is a problem, in that Alex allows anti-speech against things, institutions and groups, but not specific individuals.

I would be for a general modification of that to not allow any form of hate speech. Criticism yes, hate no.

The thing that concerns me the most is that some women who are lurkers have come out and said that they don't post because they feel uncomfortable with the sexist environment on WP.

That is not a good thing. We want everyone to feel like they can participate here.

So the violent, "take away their rights" type of rhetoric is what we want off the board?

What about the "they always do this, and it sucks for guys like me"
That's a lot more common in these forums, is that something that should be banned?

Well, ask yourself if you were talking about Jews, gays or blacks would you say: "they always do this..." would that be allowed?

Why should we be allowed to say "men always do this..." or "women always do this."

Is it ever correct to say a whole group always does x,y or z? Groups are made up of individuals, so it can never be true to say they always do something.

It would be nice if the back-channel folks who want the change would post some of the examples of sexism that they've been sending to Alix. I've seen broad comments about women, but I've also seen female members make broad comments about men. And so far the only one that condoned violence was an angry reply by a female member (cannotthinkoff) that was directed at men.

How is this any different from Republican efforts to ban alleged voter fraud? Their claim is that the moderation on WP isn't sufficient as it is, but it's been pointed out that threads critical of women in the last few months have been locked as fast or faster than those critical of men. And moderators have even (understandably) erred on the safe side in locking threads that seemed suspicious.

We've also had plenty of blanket statements about religious groups recently, and both sides seemed able to disagree bitterly without shutting down the debate.

ok.. a little unrelated to dating, but let's try this out for sexism (if it is sexism).

I noticed that the majority of people I know that Salt and Vinegar is the favourite flavour of potato chips. I find guys are more likely to have BBQ or Doritos. But women are consistently picking Salt and Vinegar as their favourite. I dont know why, but my exes liked that flavour, and so did my mom and my current gf.

Is that sexist? Or is that simply observation?

That's just crazy talk !
Salt and vinegar crisps are naaasty.
Everybody knows that chicks dig Cheese and Onion crisps, right ?

No, to really make that sexist, you'd have to say, "These days, the only chips women eat are those nasty salt & vinegar flavored ones! What is this world coming to? I will never date a female who has no taste in snacks -- EVER! I'd rather die alone!"

That is exactly what I thought the answer would be and was hoping for... No it isn't. I know it seems these days that people change the meaning of things to suit themseleves.

I am always opposed to the prohibition, restriction or even regulation of what would otherwise be free speech. While the decision in this private venue remains that of its owner, I would hope strongly that Alex not adopt such a policy. I have seen too many other forums do the same and end up becoming either a miniature politically correct police state which forcibly edits or deletes comments deemed to be violative of the policy, or users become so cautious in their opinions that many of them leave en masse from sheer boredom. Either way, the forums end up disappearing.

As with our U.S. state and federal laws, there IS a reasonable balance, and most other forums have survived years when their users accommodate policies which reflect that balance. For example, libel (the act of publishing a false statement that causes people to have a bad opinion of a person) and ad hominem attacks (an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made) could and should be prohibited. But, expressed comments or ideas which aren't libelous or critical of other users should be welcomed and encouraged. Yes, that means that some comments might occasionally be crude, rude or seem hostile about a particular opinion or "fact" which has been expressed by others, but that is a small price to pay for the honest exchange of ideas while protecting the rights of all to speak freely.

I encourage Alex strongly to resist changing the rules to prohibit certain kinds of speech at Wrong Planet.

Accidental duplicate of previous message.