the poster clearly asked for a female response February 4, 2005 9:00 AM Subscribe
We've been over this already.
Was he talking to me about my douching comment? I don't even get it. Whatev.
posted by tristeza at 9:02 AM on February 4, 2005
posted by tristeza at 9:02 AM on February 4, 2005
Sounds like he was talking about the poster.
Either way, it's kind of a fucked up contribution to the thread.
posted by dhoyt at 9:07 AM on February 4, 2005
Either way, it's kind of a fucked up contribution to the thread.
posted by dhoyt at 9:07 AM on February 4, 2005
What exactly has been gone over, Quartermass?
I'm stretching a bit, but It's a valid question. There is a fetish market for such a thing out there, and not personally knowing eas98, who knows if he's using the green to get his jollies?
In future, can we make it a rule that anyone attempting a call-out has to explain exactly what has got his/her pants in a knot? It would greatly reduce the ambiguity, and would make mocking the call-out a lot easier.
posted by cheaily at 9:07 AM on February 4, 2005
I'm stretching a bit, but It's a valid question. There is a fetish market for such a thing out there, and not personally knowing eas98, who knows if he's using the green to get his jollies?
In future, can we make it a rule that anyone attempting a call-out has to explain exactly what has got his/her pants in a knot? It would greatly reduce the ambiguity, and would make mocking the call-out a lot easier.
posted by cheaily at 9:07 AM on February 4, 2005
no, I wasn't. It was directed towards the original thread starter.
Yeah, it was a little over the top. Apologies.
posted by angry modem at 9:07 AM on February 4, 2005
Yeah, it was a little over the top. Apologies.
posted by angry modem at 9:07 AM on February 4, 2005
(forgot to hit post!)
The question clearly asked for a female response, and this is the kind of "boyzone" shit that I just don't think flies here anymore.
posted by Quartermass at 9:07 AM on February 4, 2005
The question clearly asked for a female response, and this is the kind of "boyzone" shit that I just don't think flies here anymore.
posted by Quartermass at 9:07 AM on February 4, 2005
In future, can we make it a rule that anyone attempting a call-out has to explain exactly what has got his/her pants in a knot?
Agreed!
(/snark)
posted by Quartermass at 9:09 AM on February 4, 2005
Agreed!
(/snark)
posted by Quartermass at 9:09 AM on February 4, 2005
He asked for information from males, too.
posted by angry modem at 9:09 AM on February 4, 2005
posted by angry modem at 9:09 AM on February 4, 2005
"the kind of 'boyzone' shit that I just don't think flies here anymore
What makes you think that?
posted by mischief at 9:09 AM on February 4, 2005
What makes you think that?
posted by mischief at 9:09 AM on February 4, 2005
how is angry's post "boyzone-ish"?
women aren't allowed to comment about fetishes?
angry made an over the top comment and apologized. i don't see how this comment further enhances the boyzone aspect of metafilter.
posted by Stynxno at 9:13 AM on February 4, 2005
women aren't allowed to comment about fetishes?
angry made an over the top comment and apologized. i don't see how this comment further enhances the boyzone aspect of metafilter.
posted by Stynxno at 9:13 AM on February 4, 2005
I did kind of wonder about the poster possibly using ask to get his jollies off, but eh, it probably isn't the first time, and if he does, more power to him.
posted by angry modem at 9:14 AM on February 4, 2005
posted by angry modem at 9:14 AM on February 4, 2005
"Boyzone" shit flies regardless of your thoughts on the matter, sonny jim.
I'd hardly call this "Boyzone" crap. There was no "WOOO SPERM LOLOLOL" or "ICKY GIRL STUFF" going on. The poster also welcomed input from guys. Without giving any explanation as to WHY he wanted the info, you can't righfully claim that angry modem's response was invalid.
Yeah, it might not have been a fantastic response, but... shit. Roll your eyes and get on with it.
posted by cheaily at 9:14 AM on February 4, 2005
I'd hardly call this "Boyzone" crap. There was no "WOOO SPERM LOLOLOL" or "ICKY GIRL STUFF" going on. The poster also welcomed input from guys. Without giving any explanation as to WHY he wanted the info, you can't righfully claim that angry modem's response was invalid.
Yeah, it might not have been a fantastic response, but... shit. Roll your eyes and get on with it.
posted by cheaily at 9:14 AM on February 4, 2005
After everything this site has been through in the last few days, I think it is pretty clear that most people here are tired of the way that this site treats women, women's issues etc.
The comment wasn't appropriate in that thread (either way), angry modem apologized, and in my rush of annoyance and anger, I assumed that eas98 was female. Which in fact, he is not, so a bit of egg on my own face.
posted by Quartermass at 9:16 AM on February 4, 2005
The comment wasn't appropriate in that thread (either way), angry modem apologized, and in my rush of annoyance and anger, I assumed that eas98 was female. Which in fact, he is not, so a bit of egg on my own face.
posted by Quartermass at 9:16 AM on February 4, 2005
You have to admit that AM's response is a lot worse if it was a female poster's question...
(sorry!)
posted by Quartermass at 9:18 AM on February 4, 2005
(sorry!)
posted by Quartermass at 9:18 AM on February 4, 2005
I don't see it either. I think this "boyzone" stuff is in danger of becoming like Godwin's Law. So misused it can't be taken seriously even when it might be a valid comparison or accusation.
posted by idest at 9:18 AM on February 4, 2005
posted by idest at 9:18 AM on February 4, 2005
Quartermass, no offense and all, you'd be in a place to argue about how Metafilter treats women if you actually were one.
posted by angry modem at 9:19 AM on February 4, 2005
posted by angry modem at 9:19 AM on February 4, 2005
I did kind of wonder about the poster possibly using ask to get his jollies off
I asked a guy dropping off some bark mulch last week if it's normal for 5% of the bark to stay behind, stuck inside the truck bed. I don't think that means I have a splinter fetish, it was just a curious question.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:19 AM on February 4, 2005
I asked a guy dropping off some bark mulch last week if it's normal for 5% of the bark to stay behind, stuck inside the truck bed. I don't think that means I have a splinter fetish, it was just a curious question.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:19 AM on February 4, 2005
you'd be in a place to argue about how Metafilter treats women if you actually were one.
Which is to say that I can't see how this site treats women as a man?
posted by Quartermass at 9:21 AM on February 4, 2005
Which is to say that I can't see how this site treats women as a man?
posted by Quartermass at 9:21 AM on February 4, 2005
I thought both of am's posts were snarky and annoying but answered/addressed the question in their own weird ways.
posted by jessamyn at 9:22 AM on February 4, 2005
posted by jessamyn at 9:22 AM on February 4, 2005
Dude, chill on the hyperbole, okay? You sound like you're confusing the the concept of boyzone with misogyny.
Women of MetaFilter: are you really horribly mis-treated here? Or is it more a case of most people here being loud-mouthed, socially inept oafs?
Matt: hey, stranger things have happened. I've seen enough weird junk on the 'net in my time to figure out that there is no bottom to what people will resort to to get off.
Also, I feel like defending angrymodem on this. I thought it was a bad call-out.
posted by cheaily at 9:25 AM on February 4, 2005
Women of MetaFilter: are you really horribly mis-treated here? Or is it more a case of most people here being loud-mouthed, socially inept oafs?
Matt: hey, stranger things have happened. I've seen enough weird junk on the 'net in my time to figure out that there is no bottom to what people will resort to to get off.
Also, I feel like defending angrymodem on this. I thought it was a bad call-out.
posted by cheaily at 9:25 AM on February 4, 2005
Which is to say that I can't see how this site treats women as a man?
I've always felt it was disrespectful towards the party in question when one tries to defend their plight, not having any idea what it's like to be in that position.
posted by angry modem at 9:25 AM on February 4, 2005
I've always felt it was disrespectful towards the party in question when one tries to defend their plight, not having any idea what it's like to be in that position.
posted by angry modem at 9:25 AM on February 4, 2005
After everything this site has been through in the last few days, I think it is pretty clear that most people here are tired of the way that this site treats women, women's issues etc.
The comment wasn't appropriate in that thread (either way), angry modem apologized, and in my rush of annoyance and anger, I assumed that eas98 was female. Which in fact, he is not, so a bit of egg on my own face.
You have to admit that AM's response is a lot worse if it was a female poster's question...
that's a cop-out and i didn't even know that the original poster was male until after this callout was made. and even if the poster was female, i still don't think angry's comment degrades women / women issues, etc.
i'm with idest. this whole "boyzone" stuff is starting to get out of hand and i think the real problem is that everyone defines it differently. what's the solution to this problem? i'm not sure. maybe the community is still in the process of defining what it is and we're going to get a lot of iffy posts before a happy medium is reached.
posted by Stynxno at 9:31 AM on February 4, 2005
The comment wasn't appropriate in that thread (either way), angry modem apologized, and in my rush of annoyance and anger, I assumed that eas98 was female. Which in fact, he is not, so a bit of egg on my own face.
You have to admit that AM's response is a lot worse if it was a female poster's question...
that's a cop-out and i didn't even know that the original poster was male until after this callout was made. and even if the poster was female, i still don't think angry's comment degrades women / women issues, etc.
i'm with idest. this whole "boyzone" stuff is starting to get out of hand and i think the real problem is that everyone defines it differently. what's the solution to this problem? i'm not sure. maybe the community is still in the process of defining what it is and we're going to get a lot of iffy posts before a happy medium is reached.
posted by Stynxno at 9:31 AM on February 4, 2005
LarryC for the win! This post is going nowhere, and I'm not helping.
(on preview) and Stynxno with the save! This could be a long one, folks.
For what it's worth, I vote that "MetaFilter::Boyzone" be termed as the tendency for the humour and topics around here to be boorish and male-centric, with a side-condition that sometimes those same boorish men don't know when to say nothing.
I do not believe that women are inherently oppressed here. I, however, might be wrong. Someone please show me, either way.
posted by cheaily at 9:35 AM on February 4, 2005
(on preview) and Stynxno with the save! This could be a long one, folks.
For what it's worth, I vote that "MetaFilter::Boyzone" be termed as the tendency for the humour and topics around here to be boorish and male-centric, with a side-condition that sometimes those same boorish men don't know when to say nothing.
I do not believe that women are inherently oppressed here. I, however, might be wrong. Someone please show me, either way.
posted by cheaily at 9:35 AM on February 4, 2005
It was a bad call-out. A knee-jerk reaction to a perceived transgression. I brought this pile-on myself, and will take my lumps.
I don't think it is a cop-out to say that am's response changes with the gender of the poster. Asking a woman "you don't by chance have a highly charged sexual interest in how long semen retains a presence in a woman's love hole, do you?" is to me offensive (in line with orange clock's comments in the SG thread). But it turns out that the poster was male, so I believe that the context changes. It is still an over the top response that doesn't answer the question at hand.
I do think that Metafilter, for how great it is, tends to be dominated by male discourse, which is what I feel "boyzone" is referring to Cheely is correct: "the humor and topics around here to be boorish and male-centric, with a side-condition that sometimes those same boorish men don't know when to say nothing."
I don't think it is a stretch to say Metafilter is, for the most part, a "boyzone." I think it is a lot better than other online communities of our size, but I also think we could do better.
So - bad call-out? Yes! Boyzone? I think so.
Why then is there always such an vigorous attempt to say otherwise? If it is, and we can agree that it is something that we, as a community, want to change, what is wrong with that?
posted by Quartermass at 9:45 AM on February 4, 2005
I don't think it is a cop-out to say that am's response changes with the gender of the poster. Asking a woman "you don't by chance have a highly charged sexual interest in how long semen retains a presence in a woman's love hole, do you?" is to me offensive (in line with orange clock's comments in the SG thread). But it turns out that the poster was male, so I believe that the context changes. It is still an over the top response that doesn't answer the question at hand.
I do think that Metafilter, for how great it is, tends to be dominated by male discourse, which is what I feel "boyzone" is referring to Cheely is correct: "the humor and topics around here to be boorish and male-centric, with a side-condition that sometimes those same boorish men don't know when to say nothing."
I don't think it is a stretch to say Metafilter is, for the most part, a "boyzone." I think it is a lot better than other online communities of our size, but I also think we could do better.
So - bad call-out? Yes! Boyzone? I think so.
Why then is there always such an vigorous attempt to say otherwise? If it is, and we can agree that it is something that we, as a community, want to change, what is wrong with that?
posted by Quartermass at 9:45 AM on February 4, 2005
I asked a guy dropping off some bark mulch last week if it's normal for 5% of the bark to stay behind, stuck inside the truck bed.
Now you've got my curiousity, Matt. Is it normal?
posted by SteveInMaine at 9:51 AM on February 4, 2005
Now you've got my curiousity, Matt. Is it normal?
posted by SteveInMaine at 9:51 AM on February 4, 2005
yeah, I'm curious too now -- is it normal? and what exactly does one do with bark mulch exactly?
/cityboy
posted by matteo at 10:02 AM on February 4, 2005
/cityboy
posted by matteo at 10:02 AM on February 4, 2005
Quartermass: There's nothing wrong with wanting to fix a problem that everyone agrees exists. I think it's more a case that nobody on MetaFilter can agree on shit.
Example: you yourself have changed your opinion on what constitues "boyzone" in this thread.
I think it is pretty clear that most people here are tired of the way that this site treats women, women's issues etc.
is a far cry from
the humor and topics around here to be boorish and male-centric, with a side-condition that sometimes those same boorish men don't know when to say nothing.
Nobody knows what "boyzone" is, and some of those people know that they're pretty sure they don't like it.
And it just seems that the posting majority of those people seem to be guys who are probably thinking that they're doing the right, pro-girl thing and sticking up for women and decrying the boyzone, whatever it is.
Which is why such vigorous responses are elicited from the rest of the guys who feel that they're not really doing anything wrong, besides being playful little scamps.
Yeah, this place would really start to suck if we let blatant misogyny go un-curbed. But what angrymodem did wasn't that, in any way imaginable.
But this place would REALLY start to suck if we forgot how to just get over the little flecks of dust left around the place. Nowhere is perfect, and people here seem way too concerned with calling out everyone else instead of just getting on with the topic. It's almost a race to see who can call something out first.
(Yes, the irony is not lost on me.)
Cut off the hands of the women haters, yes. But can't we ignore the giggling idiot in the corner, just for once?
posted by cheaily at 10:03 AM on February 4, 2005
Example: you yourself have changed your opinion on what constitues "boyzone" in this thread.
I think it is pretty clear that most people here are tired of the way that this site treats women, women's issues etc.
is a far cry from
the humor and topics around here to be boorish and male-centric, with a side-condition that sometimes those same boorish men don't know when to say nothing.
Nobody knows what "boyzone" is, and some of those people know that they're pretty sure they don't like it.
And it just seems that the posting majority of those people seem to be guys who are probably thinking that they're doing the right, pro-girl thing and sticking up for women and decrying the boyzone, whatever it is.
Which is why such vigorous responses are elicited from the rest of the guys who feel that they're not really doing anything wrong, besides being playful little scamps.
Yeah, this place would really start to suck if we let blatant misogyny go un-curbed. But what angrymodem did wasn't that, in any way imaginable.
But this place would REALLY start to suck if we forgot how to just get over the little flecks of dust left around the place. Nowhere is perfect, and people here seem way too concerned with calling out everyone else instead of just getting on with the topic. It's almost a race to see who can call something out first.
(Yes, the irony is not lost on me.)
Cut off the hands of the women haters, yes. But can't we ignore the giggling idiot in the corner, just for once?
posted by cheaily at 10:03 AM on February 4, 2005
Question: is it inherently bad if Metafilter users are predominantly male?
(noting that crude, anti-women remarks serve no purpose, but that's different than simply having many more male than female members)
How about soap operas or People magazine? Daytime t.v. and celebrity/entertainment magazines appeal to both genders but clearly have a primarily female audience. Is that so bad?
posted by mcgraw at 10:03 AM on February 4, 2005
(noting that crude, anti-women remarks serve no purpose, but that's different than simply having many more male than female members)
How about soap operas or People magazine? Daytime t.v. and celebrity/entertainment magazines appeal to both genders but clearly have a primarily female audience. Is that so bad?
posted by mcgraw at 10:03 AM on February 4, 2005
cheaily, first off, I appreciate your level headedness on this. This is how things should be debated around here.
I guess I just don't think that when I said that I think it is pretty clear that most people here are tired of the way that this site treats women, women's issues etc. is a far cry from when I agreed with you that the humor and topics around here to be boorish and male-centric, with a side-condition that sometimes those same boorish men don't know when to say nothing.
It is all part and parcel. The male-centric, anti-female humor that pops up occasionally is, in my opinion, part of the poor way we treat female mefites.
The whole thing, for a variety of reasons, bothers me as a male, which is why I bring it up. I would argue that "boyzone" is harmful to both males and females (though obviously more to one than another). I think Metafilter - as a whole - becomes a better community if we get rid of the boyzone attitudes. Sure, we can ignore the giggling idiot in the corner, but why would we want to?
To answer mcgraw: it is not inherently wrong that Metafilter is inherently male - but the key is that it isn't exclusively male.
posted by Quartermass at 10:19 AM on February 4, 2005
I guess I just don't think that when I said that I think it is pretty clear that most people here are tired of the way that this site treats women, women's issues etc. is a far cry from when I agreed with you that the humor and topics around here to be boorish and male-centric, with a side-condition that sometimes those same boorish men don't know when to say nothing.
It is all part and parcel. The male-centric, anti-female humor that pops up occasionally is, in my opinion, part of the poor way we treat female mefites.
The whole thing, for a variety of reasons, bothers me as a male, which is why I bring it up. I would argue that "boyzone" is harmful to both males and females (though obviously more to one than another). I think Metafilter - as a whole - becomes a better community if we get rid of the boyzone attitudes. Sure, we can ignore the giggling idiot in the corner, but why would we want to?
To answer mcgraw: it is not inherently wrong that Metafilter is inherently male - but the key is that it isn't exclusively male.
posted by Quartermass at 10:19 AM on February 4, 2005
Translation and summary: Quartermass thought the poster was female and so thought that angry modem's response was sexist and not merely obnoxious. This post was worded badly and some of the commenters here think that the askme post is being called-out, not angry modem. We don't know exactly what "boyzone" is, but we don't like it. We're also afraid that anti-boyzone sentiments may be exagerated.
We don't know that matthowie has a splinter fetish, but he might.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 10:31 AM on February 4, 2005
We don't know that matthowie has a splinter fetish, but he might.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 10:31 AM on February 4, 2005
Matt! Kill it! Please!
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 10:33 AM on February 4, 2005
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 10:33 AM on February 4, 2005
I think the question has weird implications no matter who's asking. I also got the impression that angry's remark assumed the poster was a man - it certainly seemed crystal clear to me that the poster was a man.
Women of MetaFilter: are you really horribly mis-treated here? Or is it more a case of most people here being loud-mouthed, socially inept oafs?
Women on MetaFilter are treated about like women elsewhere. Subject to "socially inept oafery," criticized for defending themselves, talked over and ignored, and openly discussed as sex objects or decoration (including - perhaps even most often - "in inappropriate contexts"). The world is a boyzone, but I think it's especially grating in MeFi, because so many guys here love to congratulate themselves on their englightenment. It's like the dad in a family where both parents work who barely lifts and finger at home and then wants a medal when he actually does the dishes.
Matt: I too am curious about how much bark normally stays in the truck bed - and whether the truckload you purchase is adjusted up to reflect that "shrinkage" or whether buying a truckload just means getting 95% of the quantity you thought you were paying for.
posted by caitlinb at 10:34 AM on February 4, 2005
Women of MetaFilter: are you really horribly mis-treated here? Or is it more a case of most people here being loud-mouthed, socially inept oafs?
Women on MetaFilter are treated about like women elsewhere. Subject to "socially inept oafery," criticized for defending themselves, talked over and ignored, and openly discussed as sex objects or decoration (including - perhaps even most often - "in inappropriate contexts"). The world is a boyzone, but I think it's especially grating in MeFi, because so many guys here love to congratulate themselves on their englightenment. It's like the dad in a family where both parents work who barely lifts and finger at home and then wants a medal when he actually does the dishes.
Matt: I too am curious about how much bark normally stays in the truck bed - and whether the truckload you purchase is adjusted up to reflect that "shrinkage" or whether buying a truckload just means getting 95% of the quantity you thought you were paying for.
posted by caitlinb at 10:34 AM on February 4, 2005
[by which I mean, "Haughey" and "this MeTa thread" and not, for instance, "Damon" and "your friend Ben"]
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 10:35 AM on February 4, 2005
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 10:35 AM on February 4, 2005
caitlinb said what I was going to say, Metafilter ain't much different from the 'real' world really, both the good and the bad.
posted by dabitch at 10:42 AM on February 4, 2005
posted by dabitch at 10:42 AM on February 4, 2005
Matt: I too am curious about how much bark normally stays in the truck bed - and whether the truckload you purchase is adjusted up to reflect that "shrinkage" or whether buying a truckload just means getting 95% of the quantity you thought you were paying for.
it would also depend on the bed of the truck, the quality of the material, and also whether your delivery guy is honest or not. in the past, i've seen guys get a broom and brush out as much as they can from the bed. i've also seen guys dump only the stuff that's not clogged and leave something like 10-20% of the material in the bed.
back on-topic:
Women on MetaFilter are treated about like women elsewhere. Subject to "socially inept oafery," criticized for defending themselves, talked over and ignored, and openly discussed as sex objects or decoration (including - perhaps even most often - "in inappropriate contexts"). The world is a boyzone, but I think it's especially grating in MeFi, because so many guys here love to congratulate themselves on their englightenment. It's like the dad in a family where both parents work who barely lifts and finger at home and then wants a medal when he actually does the dishes.
nice summation of the situation caitlinb.
posted by Stynxno at 10:45 AM on February 4, 2005
it would also depend on the bed of the truck, the quality of the material, and also whether your delivery guy is honest or not. in the past, i've seen guys get a broom and brush out as much as they can from the bed. i've also seen guys dump only the stuff that's not clogged and leave something like 10-20% of the material in the bed.
back on-topic:
Women on MetaFilter are treated about like women elsewhere. Subject to "socially inept oafery," criticized for defending themselves, talked over and ignored, and openly discussed as sex objects or decoration (including - perhaps even most often - "in inappropriate contexts"). The world is a boyzone, but I think it's especially grating in MeFi, because so many guys here love to congratulate themselves on their englightenment. It's like the dad in a family where both parents work who barely lifts and finger at home and then wants a medal when he actually does the dishes.
nice summation of the situation caitlinb.
posted by Stynxno at 10:45 AM on February 4, 2005
I do think that MeFi can be a bit rough on women from time to time but I also get a little tired of the "we must protect the women folk!" attitude that pops up whenever someone says something rude to someone female (or someone who is assumed to be female in this case). angry modem's comment would have been rude whether the OP was female or not so if you have to call it out why not just call it out for being rude, period?
That's not to say that truly misogynistic or "boyzone" crap shouldn't be called out (some of it IS pretty bad and doesn't belong here) but I don't want female MeFites to get a reputation for being weaklings who have to be protected from rough talk.
I feel bad for a lot of the guys here because I'm sure it sometimes seems that you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. But honestly, 99% of these problems would be solved if people just took five minutes to think before they hit 'post'.
posted by LeeJay at 10:55 AM on February 4, 2005
That's not to say that truly misogynistic or "boyzone" crap shouldn't be called out (some of it IS pretty bad and doesn't belong here) but I don't want female MeFites to get a reputation for being weaklings who have to be protected from rough talk.
I feel bad for a lot of the guys here because I'm sure it sometimes seems that you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. But honestly, 99% of these problems would be solved if people just took five minutes to think before they hit 'post'.
posted by LeeJay at 10:55 AM on February 4, 2005
Why don't we just give up on having anything sex-related at all, it's a very small percentage of the overall topics that come up, but about 80% of the whining.
No questions about sex, no posts about sex, nothing. Then no one can cite us as the dreaded "boyzone", because we simply don't do sex at all. I think it would be a worthwhile tradeoff. It's not like there isn't a thousand different sites for sex postings or sex questions.
Make the place PG-Rated and just be done with this crap.
posted by milovoo at 11:08 AM on February 4, 2005
No questions about sex, no posts about sex, nothing. Then no one can cite us as the dreaded "boyzone", because we simply don't do sex at all. I think it would be a worthwhile tradeoff. It's not like there isn't a thousand different sites for sex postings or sex questions.
Make the place PG-Rated and just be done with this crap.
posted by milovoo at 11:08 AM on February 4, 2005
Well, as the original poster, I guess I'll chime in here. My question was out of genuine interest and curiosity. I saw AM's response and thought it was a ridiculous contribution to the thread that might have even scared off other people from contributing to it.
Either way, I thought we were trying to keep the AskMe comments to be answers only, in which case, regardless of taste, there was no point in having the comment there.
Anyway, I'm glad it was deleted.
posted by eas98 at 11:09 AM on February 4, 2005
Either way, I thought we were trying to keep the AskMe comments to be answers only, in which case, regardless of taste, there was no point in having the comment there.
Anyway, I'm glad it was deleted.
posted by eas98 at 11:09 AM on February 4, 2005
It has been amazing to me over the course of the past few days to watch the pains associated w/ the various issues that have sprung up here and I'm amazed at myself for even feeling the right to comment (newbie, but longtime lurker). What strikes me here is that these issues, varying from individual behavior to content to comment deletion, is being dealt with in a very organic way, not unlike a school board meeting. It can be painful to be on one side or the other, winning then losing when the majority of voices begin to win. However, the issue that I'm concerned most w/, is the level of sensitivity that seems to be developing. Of course, there needs to be call-outs, but lately, it seems that the details are now a sort of meta-call-out. It seems to me that so many of these personal issues should be addressed within the thread, in the context, instead of hovering to take it to trial.
posted by Heatwole at 11:17 AM on February 4, 2005
posted by Heatwole at 11:17 AM on February 4, 2005
I didn't appreciate some of the boyzone comments, and I'm a guy. I was genuinely interested in this topic because I'm dating someone who is sexually inexperienced (I'm sexually experienced, but have a hard time answering questions that have to do with the girly bits) and when we eventually do start having unprotected sex, I want to be able to discuss it from both sides.
Thank you very much to the posters that offered good information, and fuck you very much to posters like John Kenneth Fisher that read more into the question than was presented and suggested condoms or other barrier methods instead of just answering the question.
posted by SpecialK at 11:54 AM on February 4, 2005
Thank you very much to the posters that offered good information, and fuck you very much to posters like John Kenneth Fisher that read more into the question than was presented and suggested condoms or other barrier methods instead of just answering the question.
posted by SpecialK at 11:54 AM on February 4, 2005
because so many guys here love to congratulate themselves on their englightenment.
I only see this "self-congratulatory" we-are-so-sensitive crap in the dreaded Boyzone threads. Which leads me to the conclusion that if this behavior is undesirable, we should have fewer Boyzone threads and save them for the most egregious violations.
I also think it's unrealistic to have drastically different expectations of "MeFi men" and "rest of the world men" in terms of "gender sensitivity." There was no enlightenment litmus test for gender issues we had to pass before signing up for an account (or at least I missed it). I don't consider myself any more (or less) "sensitive" on these issues than the average joe you'd meet out on the street--and I fail to see why I'd be expected to. Personally I think women have as much influence (or as little if you're a cynic) in changing the gender dynamics in MeFi as in meatspace, except I see a lot more energy expended on the storm and the fury here in the gray.
Lastly, I've found that misogynistic incidents often increase disproportionately with population increase. I've watched a couple of different (predominately male) photography community slowly become less hospital to women as it grew larger, despite no observable change in gender ratios. Who knows why that is, but I think it's part-and-parcel with general decline-of-civility issues.
posted by DaShiv at 12:03 PM on February 4, 2005
I only see this "self-congratulatory" we-are-so-sensitive crap in the dreaded Boyzone threads. Which leads me to the conclusion that if this behavior is undesirable, we should have fewer Boyzone threads and save them for the most egregious violations.
I also think it's unrealistic to have drastically different expectations of "MeFi men" and "rest of the world men" in terms of "gender sensitivity." There was no enlightenment litmus test for gender issues we had to pass before signing up for an account (or at least I missed it). I don't consider myself any more (or less) "sensitive" on these issues than the average joe you'd meet out on the street--and I fail to see why I'd be expected to. Personally I think women have as much influence (or as little if you're a cynic) in changing the gender dynamics in MeFi as in meatspace, except I see a lot more energy expended on the storm and the fury here in the gray.
Lastly, I've found that misogynistic incidents often increase disproportionately with population increase. I've watched a couple of different (predominately male) photography community slowly become less hospital to women as it grew larger, despite no observable change in gender ratios. Who knows why that is, but I think it's part-and-parcel with general decline-of-civility issues.
posted by DaShiv at 12:03 PM on February 4, 2005
Id like to just add: And guys, if you have something to add, please feel free to do so.
Over & over & over & over & over with regards to the site being self policed...quit being a rent-a-cop, use some better judgment.
posted by thomcatspike at 12:10 PM on February 4, 2005
Over & over & over & over & over with regards to the site being self policed...quit being a rent-a-cop, use some better judgment.
posted by thomcatspike at 12:10 PM on February 4, 2005
Well, I don't think I did this call out (and started this discussion) out of any need to "protect the ladies" / and I don't think I have ever been self congratulatory about anything here, ever. This is how I think, is what I have said in other threads, and will probably say again.
I did what I did because in the context that I thought the comment was in, I was offended. Obviously, it was a bad callout, but the sentiment stands.
The essentialist notion that I, as a male, can have no insight into the "plight" of women, is dead wrong. I mean, as a Canadian, I felt sick to my stomach for my Democratic comrades south of the boarder. I am not an American, but I was offended by the outcome anyway.
Or if someone started posting pro Holocaust FPP's, would there not be an outcry? I am not Jewish, but I would be offended anyway, and would be the first in line to call such a thing out.
I will reiterate what I said above - Quartermass, as a male, doesn't like the boyzone attitudes that are exhibited on Metafilter from time to time. Again - I feel that it isharmful to the community at large - boys and girls.
I am embarrassed that this thing came this far. Lesson learned, status quo maintained.
posted by Quartermass at 12:21 PM on February 4, 2005
I did what I did because in the context that I thought the comment was in, I was offended. Obviously, it was a bad callout, but the sentiment stands.
The essentialist notion that I, as a male, can have no insight into the "plight" of women, is dead wrong. I mean, as a Canadian, I felt sick to my stomach for my Democratic comrades south of the boarder. I am not an American, but I was offended by the outcome anyway.
Or if someone started posting pro Holocaust FPP's, would there not be an outcry? I am not Jewish, but I would be offended anyway, and would be the first in line to call such a thing out.
I will reiterate what I said above - Quartermass, as a male, doesn't like the boyzone attitudes that are exhibited on Metafilter from time to time. Again - I feel that it isharmful to the community at large - boys and girls.
I am embarrassed that this thing came this far. Lesson learned, status quo maintained.
posted by Quartermass at 12:21 PM on February 4, 2005
Quartermass, no offense and all, you'd be in a place to argue about how Metafilter treats women if you actually were one.
That's stupid.
I did kind of wonder about the poster possibly using ask to get his jollies off, but eh, it probably isn't the first time, and if he does, more power to him.
That's stupid.
I've always felt it was disrespectful towards the party in question when one tries to defend their plight, not having any idea what it's like to be in that position.
That's stupid.
posted by The God Complex at 12:54 PM on February 4, 2005
That's stupid.
I did kind of wonder about the poster possibly using ask to get his jollies off, but eh, it probably isn't the first time, and if he does, more power to him.
That's stupid.
I've always felt it was disrespectful towards the party in question when one tries to defend their plight, not having any idea what it's like to be in that position.
That's stupid.
posted by The God Complex at 12:54 PM on February 4, 2005
Thank you very much to the posters that offered good information, and fuck you very much to posters like John Kenneth Fisher that read more into the question than was presented and suggested condoms or other barrier methods instead of just answering the question.
o....kay. What I did was make a guess as to your reason for asking, answered that reason, and gave it an "IF you are concerned about such and such" preface in case I was wrong.
Jeez. If we were all mindreaders, we wouldn't need AskMe at all.
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 2:57 PM on February 4, 2005
o....kay. What I did was make a guess as to your reason for asking, answered that reason, and gave it an "IF you are concerned about such and such" preface in case I was wrong.
Jeez. If we were all mindreaders, we wouldn't need AskMe at all.
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 2:57 PM on February 4, 2005
to tack onto my last comment, I now notice that it wasn't even your question... which makes this even odder. Several people were speculating that that was the reason for asking, and eas92 clarified that he wasn't looking for that kind of reply AFTER I made it, at which point I dropped out because at that point it was clear he was asking something outside my knowledge. So, seriously,
WHAT.
THE.
FUCK.
SPECIALK?
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 3:01 PM on February 4, 2005
WHAT.
THE.
FUCK.
SPECIALK?
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 3:01 PM on February 4, 2005
Sigh. I just wish people would answer the fucking question or GTFO.
posted by majick at 3:15 PM on February 4, 2005
posted by majick at 3:15 PM on February 4, 2005
JKF: What majick said. No, I didn't ask the question, but I was interested in the response because I could imagine myself needing to know the tidbit of information, and I did not know the tidbit of information.
You did not add anything to the discussion or help guide it, you just gave one line of advice that had NOTHING to do with the original poster's question! That's -not- what AskMe is for. You didn't even bother to learn the gender of the original poster, which is what made me go WTF initally (eas91 is male, in case you hadn't already noticed.) Your way of providing the advice to 'use a condom' as a question was smarmy and came off as sarcastic and generally the type of crap that people here are oversensitive to after the last dozen boyzone-about-girly-bits clusterfucks. Maybe thinking about how worthy your contribution might be to a discussion before clicking the post button would be worth it, no?
posted by SpecialK at 3:32 PM on February 4, 2005
You did not add anything to the discussion or help guide it, you just gave one line of advice that had NOTHING to do with the original poster's question! That's -not- what AskMe is for. You didn't even bother to learn the gender of the original poster, which is what made me go WTF initally (eas91 is male, in case you hadn't already noticed.) Your way of providing the advice to 'use a condom' as a question was smarmy and came off as sarcastic and generally the type of crap that people here are oversensitive to after the last dozen boyzone-about-girly-bits clusterfucks. Maybe thinking about how worthy your contribution might be to a discussion before clicking the post button would be worth it, no?
posted by SpecialK at 3:32 PM on February 4, 2005
Well, I have to admit the first thing that came into my head upon reading the question was "Someone has a cream pie fetish", but I'm a total perv.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 3:50 PM on February 4, 2005
posted by mr_crash_davis at 3:50 PM on February 4, 2005
You did not add anything to the discussion or help guide it, you just gave one line of advice that had NOTHING to do with the original poster's question! That's -not- what AskMe is for.
Well, several posters prior to me were answering in a "in case you want it out" mode, and even Jessamyn touched on the rhythm method, so apparently what was being asked at that point WAS NOT CLEAR. Which is, again, why I prefaced it with an "IF you're seriously concerned about such and such" clause. I'm sorry that, in retrospect, the "mitigation" group of answers were not what was being looked for, but that doesn't make myself, Miko, Tristeza, etc. wrong for answering based on what we had to go on at that point in the thread.
You didn't even bother to learn the gender of the original poster, which is what made me go WTF initally (eas91 is male, in case you hadn't already noticed.)
Awkward phrasing aside, my advice was gender neutral.
Your way of providing the advice to 'use a condom' as a question was smarmy and came off as sarcastic and generally the type of crap that people here are oversensitive to after the last dozen boyzone-about-girly-bits clusterfucks.
If, in fact, that had been his concern, it would have been good advice. It was not smarmy, it was not sarcastic, it was based on a great deal of personal experience in my life that tells me that in that situation, in my opinion, the best solution is condom use, and suggesting it was the responsible thing to do. If you thought it was sarcasm, that is unfortunate and it was unintended, but again, at that point several people were unsure of the background of the question, and if it was, as a few speculated, a birth control concern, then it was a good, solid answer. How that is a boyzone attitude, I do not understand.
Maybe thinking about how worthy your contribution might be to a discussion before clicking the post button would be worth it, no?
I did. That is why I posted it. I thought it was the responsible, adult, thing to suggest, based on my own life experience. To reiterate what I said above: My answer turned out not to address the question being asked, as it was later clarified, but that doesn't make me wrong for answering based on what I had to go on at that point in the thread.
My email is in my profile, and as I think we have both made our respective stances known here, you are more than welcome to email me if you wish to continue.
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 3:59 PM on February 4, 2005
Well, several posters prior to me were answering in a "in case you want it out" mode, and even Jessamyn touched on the rhythm method, so apparently what was being asked at that point WAS NOT CLEAR. Which is, again, why I prefaced it with an "IF you're seriously concerned about such and such" clause. I'm sorry that, in retrospect, the "mitigation" group of answers were not what was being looked for, but that doesn't make myself, Miko, Tristeza, etc. wrong for answering based on what we had to go on at that point in the thread.
You didn't even bother to learn the gender of the original poster, which is what made me go WTF initally (eas91 is male, in case you hadn't already noticed.)
Awkward phrasing aside, my advice was gender neutral.
Your way of providing the advice to 'use a condom' as a question was smarmy and came off as sarcastic and generally the type of crap that people here are oversensitive to after the last dozen boyzone-about-girly-bits clusterfucks.
If, in fact, that had been his concern, it would have been good advice. It was not smarmy, it was not sarcastic, it was based on a great deal of personal experience in my life that tells me that in that situation, in my opinion, the best solution is condom use, and suggesting it was the responsible thing to do. If you thought it was sarcasm, that is unfortunate and it was unintended, but again, at that point several people were unsure of the background of the question, and if it was, as a few speculated, a birth control concern, then it was a good, solid answer. How that is a boyzone attitude, I do not understand.
Maybe thinking about how worthy your contribution might be to a discussion before clicking the post button would be worth it, no?
I did. That is why I posted it. I thought it was the responsible, adult, thing to suggest, based on my own life experience. To reiterate what I said above: My answer turned out not to address the question being asked, as it was later clarified, but that doesn't make me wrong for answering based on what I had to go on at that point in the thread.
My email is in my profile, and as I think we have both made our respective stances known here, you are more than welcome to email me if you wish to continue.
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 3:59 PM on February 4, 2005
fuck you very much to posters like John Kenneth Fisher that read more into the question than was presented and suggested condoms or other barrier methods instead of just answering the question.
posted by SpecialK at 11:54 AM PST on February 4
I saw the AskMe question, read it, and was so confused as to the purpose that I gave it a pass. Squeamishness about having sperm inside? Jealous husband troubles? Trying to/ trying not to get pregnant? It helps a great deal to answer the question if we the readers/responders are clear on your reason for asking.
In this case a simple "I'm male but it is something I have always been curious about." would have made it much easier to answer, and would have prevented this call out.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:07 PM on February 4, 2005
posted by SpecialK at 11:54 AM PST on February 4
I saw the AskMe question, read it, and was so confused as to the purpose that I gave it a pass. Squeamishness about having sperm inside? Jealous husband troubles? Trying to/ trying not to get pregnant? It helps a great deal to answer the question if we the readers/responders are clear on your reason for asking.
In this case a simple "I'm male but it is something I have always been curious about." would have made it much easier to answer, and would have prevented this call out.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:07 PM on February 4, 2005
I didn't think it was that unclear -- I got it, but it seems others didn't.
JKF: We're entering the 'fighting on the internet == retarded' realm here, so I'm just going to say: I don't care, but in the future, watch how you comment and don't just spew a comment when you aren't adding a significant amount of value.
posted by SpecialK at 6:39 PM on February 4, 2005
JKF: We're entering the 'fighting on the internet == retarded' realm here, so I'm just going to say: I don't care, but in the future, watch how you comment and don't just spew a comment when you aren't adding a significant amount of value.
posted by SpecialK at 6:39 PM on February 4, 2005
Kudos to you, quartermass, for owning up to a goof-up.
No questions about sex, no posts about sex, nothing. Then no one can cite us as the dreaded "boyzone", because we simply don't do sex at all.
Interesting suggestion, milovoo, but banning sex posts would lead to a plague of MeTa callouts bickering over whether an FPP on handmade humidors was really an attempt to violate the ban by forcing everyone to think of cigars, because we all know that most of the time, a cigar is not just a cigar. Which would lead to an edict against posts referencing cigars, sausages, or trains, prompting an outcry demanding that posts related to purses, cats, or train tunnels also be abolished. And so on, and so on, until eventually the site implodes into a small and infinitely dense concentration of smegma.
Also, I suspect that much of the worst boyzone fug results from the fact that the commenters already "don't do sex at all."
posted by vetiver at 6:51 PM on February 4, 2005
No questions about sex, no posts about sex, nothing. Then no one can cite us as the dreaded "boyzone", because we simply don't do sex at all.
Interesting suggestion, milovoo, but banning sex posts would lead to a plague of MeTa callouts bickering over whether an FPP on handmade humidors was really an attempt to violate the ban by forcing everyone to think of cigars, because we all know that most of the time, a cigar is not just a cigar. Which would lead to an edict against posts referencing cigars, sausages, or trains, prompting an outcry demanding that posts related to purses, cats, or train tunnels also be abolished. And so on, and so on, until eventually the site implodes into a small and infinitely dense concentration of smegma.
Also, I suspect that much of the worst boyzone fug results from the fact that the commenters already "don't do sex at all."
posted by vetiver at 6:51 PM on February 4, 2005
SpecialK, As I said previously, My email is in my profile, and as I think we have both made our respective stances known here, you are more than welcome to email me if you wish to continue.
Thank you.
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 7:24 PM on February 4, 2005
Thank you.
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 7:24 PM on February 4, 2005
John K. F., I thought your comment(s) in that thread were perfectly legitimate, both in tone and in content.
posted by orange swan at 7:39 PM on February 4, 2005
posted by orange swan at 7:39 PM on February 4, 2005
watch how you comment and don't just spew a comment when you aren't adding a significant amount of value.
SpecialK, should this only apply to John? If it applies to everyone, I think the amount of comments (and fun) here will be greatly reduced.... (nevermind the loss we'll take at not having John's comments)
Also, what would you consider a "significant" amount of value? If I answered someone's question, would a guess be significant enough? Or would I need to back it with scientific evidence? Could it be from any source, or would it have to be a peer-reviewed article? If the poster asks multiple questions, how many would I have to answer for it to be considered significant?
posted by Lt. Bunny Wigglesworth at 11:16 PM on February 4, 2005
SpecialK, should this only apply to John? If it applies to everyone, I think the amount of comments (and fun) here will be greatly reduced.... (nevermind the loss we'll take at not having John's comments)
Also, what would you consider a "significant" amount of value? If I answered someone's question, would a guess be significant enough? Or would I need to back it with scientific evidence? Could it be from any source, or would it have to be a peer-reviewed article? If the poster asks multiple questions, how many would I have to answer for it to be considered significant?
posted by Lt. Bunny Wigglesworth at 11:16 PM on February 4, 2005
How about soap operas or People magazine? Daytime t.v. and celebrity/entertainment magazines appeal to both genders but clearly have a primarily female audience. Is that so bad?
I think the general idea is that the gender neutral stuff is usually the best... what's that sci fi story with the hypermales, hyperfemales and then the androgynes, who are the smart ones? Painting toenails and burp contests are both pretty weak forms of interchange, and in a mixed environment, why push for either (not saying never, don't get all "what's wrong with..." etc)?
Anyway, I agree with mr_c_d that the question came off as a little pervy to me. It did not even occur to me that it might be posted by a woman or because of utilitarian concerns; it came off as a "I like to think about my cream up her hoohoo - tell me more". IMHO.
posted by mdn at 6:29 AM on February 5, 2005
I think the general idea is that the gender neutral stuff is usually the best... what's that sci fi story with the hypermales, hyperfemales and then the androgynes, who are the smart ones? Painting toenails and burp contests are both pretty weak forms of interchange, and in a mixed environment, why push for either (not saying never, don't get all "what's wrong with..." etc)?
Anyway, I agree with mr_c_d that the question came off as a little pervy to me. It did not even occur to me that it might be posted by a woman or because of utilitarian concerns; it came off as a "I like to think about my cream up her hoohoo - tell me more". IMHO.
posted by mdn at 6:29 AM on February 5, 2005
I thought the poster was a guy who was looking for ways to figure out if his wife/girlfriend had been unfaithful, or a girl who had been unfaithful and was looking to fool said guy.
posted by bingo at 10:30 AM on February 5, 2005
posted by bingo at 10:30 AM on February 5, 2005
bingo, you live up to your name so delightfully! That was my thought exactly.
posted by taz at 12:08 PM on February 5, 2005
posted by taz at 12:08 PM on February 5, 2005
It doesn't help one's argument to call offense against a group to which one does not belong, albeit finding the comment in question offensive oneself.
By which I mean to say: I rankle at perceived gay slurs, but I wouldn't start a MeTa thread about one, as there are plenty of people of the queer persuasion in this community I can count on to start one if they feel it's warranted. Although I might share their opinion, I just really don't get a vote on the subject, not having the gay myself.
It just seems presumptuous & condescending to make callouts on behalf of the women of MeFi, when we're sitting right here. Regardless of one's good intentions, it weakens one's argument straight out of the gate. It seems only reasonable to let someone resembling the offense present the initial argument. Express your support then. /$.02
posted by obloquy at 4:29 PM on February 5, 2005
By which I mean to say: I rankle at perceived gay slurs, but I wouldn't start a MeTa thread about one, as there are plenty of people of the queer persuasion in this community I can count on to start one if they feel it's warranted. Although I might share their opinion, I just really don't get a vote on the subject, not having the gay myself.
It just seems presumptuous & condescending to make callouts on behalf of the women of MeFi, when we're sitting right here. Regardless of one's good intentions, it weakens one's argument straight out of the gate. It seems only reasonable to let someone resembling the offense present the initial argument. Express your support then. /$.02
posted by obloquy at 4:29 PM on February 5, 2005
It seems only reasonable to let someone resembling the offense present the initial argument. Express your support then.
See, I really don't know about that. When my coworker makes remarks about the "sneaky Hispanics" who are always "trying to cheat Americans", do I really have to wait for a hispanic person launch an argument before being able to say, "Dude, what the hell?!" Personally, if a few friends and I were having dinner and someone made a comment about those drunken, baby-making Irish people, I'd get offended if one of my friends didn't step up for me. If they'd waited for me to speak before speaking, I'd wonder why, and reconsider the friendship.
Besides, a man's more likely to take an accusation of sexism or misconduct seriously when it comes from another man than from a woman. If he's already making sexist remarks (and not aware of them being sexist or discriminatory), he'll probably just chalk a woman's complaint up to her PMSing.
posted by Lt. Bunny Wigglesworth at 10:29 PM on February 5, 2005
See, I really don't know about that. When my coworker makes remarks about the "sneaky Hispanics" who are always "trying to cheat Americans", do I really have to wait for a hispanic person launch an argument before being able to say, "Dude, what the hell?!" Personally, if a few friends and I were having dinner and someone made a comment about those drunken, baby-making Irish people, I'd get offended if one of my friends didn't step up for me. If they'd waited for me to speak before speaking, I'd wonder why, and reconsider the friendship.
Besides, a man's more likely to take an accusation of sexism or misconduct seriously when it comes from another man than from a woman. If he's already making sexist remarks (and not aware of them being sexist or discriminatory), he'll probably just chalk a woman's complaint up to her PMSing.
posted by Lt. Bunny Wigglesworth at 10:29 PM on February 5, 2005
Bunny, it is quite a different thing to defend those absent or otherwise unrepresented in person than those present and online. And there is also a difference between a friend having your back, and picking a fight on your behalf without asking.
Besides, a man's more likely to take an accusation of sexism or misconduct seriously when it comes from another man than from a woman. If he's already making sexist remarks (and not aware of them being sexist or discriminatory), he'll probably just chalk a woman's complaint up to her PMSing.
This I can't address, as it may cause me to start bleeding out of my eyes.
posted by obloquy at 11:39 PM on February 5, 2005
Besides, a man's more likely to take an accusation of sexism or misconduct seriously when it comes from another man than from a woman. If he's already making sexist remarks (and not aware of them being sexist or discriminatory), he'll probably just chalk a woman's complaint up to her PMSing.
This I can't address, as it may cause me to start bleeding out of my eyes.
posted by obloquy at 11:39 PM on February 5, 2005
Bunny, it is quite a different thing to defend those absent or otherwise unrepresented in person than those present and online. And there is also a difference between a friend having your back, and picking a fight on your behalf without asking.
Roger that. Next time my coworker makes racist remarks in front of a person I don't know, I will stay quiet, despite the fact that this would look like I was agreeing with her. Because it would.
If a man makes a sexist (or offensive based on gender) remark, and no one steps up to say, "hey, cut it out," I'd assume everyone else in the room agreed with him. As for letting women decide when the offense has been made, hell, even that varies with women. What some women see as perfectly okay others would find horribly offensive. And who's to say he's not offended in his own right, that people are acting like this?
This I can't address, as it may cause me to start bleeding out of my eyes.
Arg! Poor form to talk about bleeding in regards to PMS! But seriously. Dick, Jane, and Jim are standing around a water cooler. Dick, a horribly misogynist, makes a sexist joke. Jane tells him to cut it out. Honestly, if he's making the remarks in the first place, is he really going to listen to her? Now, if Jim told him to cut it out, that would be different.
Like it or not, when an injustice is done to a particular group, that group can try to initiate change, but it's ultimately sympathizers in the group in power that really bring about the change (unless we go into all out war, and decimate the opposing party.) Women did not earn the right to vote by themselves, they were helped by men who thought they should have the right to vote. It sucks - a lot, but a man shouldn't be called out for identifying a sexist or poor-form remark. If there's no slight taken by you, a woman, feel free to tell him that, but we shouldn't tell each other when and when not to fight for injustice (when to: when it's your friend or the offended party is present, when not to: when offended party is present, but a stranger to you?)
posted by Lt. Bunny Wigglesworth at 12:31 PM on February 6, 2005
Roger that. Next time my coworker makes racist remarks in front of a person I don't know, I will stay quiet, despite the fact that this would look like I was agreeing with her. Because it would.
If a man makes a sexist (or offensive based on gender) remark, and no one steps up to say, "hey, cut it out," I'd assume everyone else in the room agreed with him. As for letting women decide when the offense has been made, hell, even that varies with women. What some women see as perfectly okay others would find horribly offensive. And who's to say he's not offended in his own right, that people are acting like this?
This I can't address, as it may cause me to start bleeding out of my eyes.
Arg! Poor form to talk about bleeding in regards to PMS! But seriously. Dick, Jane, and Jim are standing around a water cooler. Dick, a horribly misogynist, makes a sexist joke. Jane tells him to cut it out. Honestly, if he's making the remarks in the first place, is he really going to listen to her? Now, if Jim told him to cut it out, that would be different.
Like it or not, when an injustice is done to a particular group, that group can try to initiate change, but it's ultimately sympathizers in the group in power that really bring about the change (unless we go into all out war, and decimate the opposing party.) Women did not earn the right to vote by themselves, they were helped by men who thought they should have the right to vote. It sucks - a lot, but a man shouldn't be called out for identifying a sexist or poor-form remark. If there's no slight taken by you, a woman, feel free to tell him that, but we shouldn't tell each other when and when not to fight for injustice (when to: when it's your friend or the offended party is present, when not to: when offended party is present, but a stranger to you?)
posted by Lt. Bunny Wigglesworth at 12:31 PM on February 6, 2005
« Older Is it time for Ask Metafilter to be promoted? | WARNING - this link will take you to another page! Newer »
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by angry modem at 8:50 AM PST on February 4
posted by Quartermass at 9:00 AM on February 4, 2005