Joline
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Ok that was quite an amount of text I had to read to get here..
A problem I am signaling here is that when the OP signals a problem and she tries to keep it general, there are a lot of people that start to react to her personally instead of to the problem signalled.
She is trying to keep it general (though sometimes gets a bit heated) and there are a lot of people responding to the general statement. But there are also a lot of people who take this way more personal. As far as I would interpret the posts so far, the OP has now been called oversensitive, a crybaby, making up stuff, having a political agenda, a whiner, not having a sense of humour, too serious and even a second class woman wow (as in the 'even women can' quote).
And that's just a random sample of the things I came across. It's no wonder that a) she's not reacting to this thread any more and b) other women will thing twice (or even twenty times) about raising these kinds of concerns.

Nobody has to feel attacked here and nobody has to feel silenced here, that's not what the actual question should be. It should be that people should be civil. And if someone signals that they see something as offending that people evaluate and either agree and counter the offense (explain/apologize/support/make someone feel welcome) or otherwise don't agree, but be civil about that (discuss it/don't attack on a personal level).
It's just a question of awareness being raised.
23 
 Thumb up
0.12
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Miller
United States
Rock Hill
South Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
mebririth wrote:
Ok that was quite an amount of text I had to read to get here..
A problem I am signaling here is that when the OP signals a problem and she tries to keep it general, there are a lot of people that start to react to her personally instead of to the problem signalled.
She is trying to keep it general (though sometimes gets a bit heated) and there are a lot of people responding to the general statement. But there are also a lot of people who take this way more personal. As far as I would interpret the posts so far, the OP has now been called oversensitive, a crybaby, making up stuff, having a political agenda, a whiner, not having a sense of humour, too serious and even a second class woman wow (as in the 'even women can' quote).
And that's just a random sample of the things I came across. It's no wonder that a) she's not reacting to this thread any more and b) other women will thing twice (or even twenty times) about raising these kinds of concerns.

Nobody has to feel attacked here and nobody has to feel silenced here, that's not what the actual question should be. It should be that people should be civil. And if someone signals that they see something as offending that people evaluate and either agree and counter the offense (explain/apologize/support/make someone feel welcome) or otherwise don't agree, but be civil about that (discuss it/don't attack on a personal level).
It's just a question of awareness being raised.


I disagree with that assessment of what the OP did and is doing. She made claims of sexism and gay bashing within a certain group of this membership. When asked for specific examples of what she meant, she ignored those requests. When that forum thread wasn't going how she wanted, she abandoned it and started another one. When the exact same sequence played out in that thread, she did the exact same and abandoned that discussion also.

I agree with your thought that everyone should be civil and not resort to personal attacks. I'll take that a level further. Let's completely leave out items of discussion that don't belong. This is a forum about games and people that play them; we don't need discussion of a member's nationality, race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, or similar topics. It has NO bearing on a person's ability to play a game or be an enjoyable part of a gaming group.

I've been a gamer for over 25 years, and in that time I've played with many many groups, both public and private. I'm currently a part of a half dozen regularly meeting groups, again some private and some public. Over all those gaming sessions I would guess that I've gamed with just about every combination of nationality, race, sexual orientation, and religious belief. I can't list how many of these combination I've played with because I never knew or cared these things about these people. I'm not trying to have sex with, start a religion with, or run for political office with any of these people, I'm playing games. Leave all the other stuff out of the conversation completely.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Willows
United States
Woburn
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Meerkat wrote:
They deep down still think there is something wrong with a woman being sexually assertive and free, that isn't as wrong for a man to be. And this is what they revert back too if you just put them under even a tiny bit of unexpected stress. Like my exe did as soon as my sexuality made him uncomfortable rather than thrilled. I mean seriously men make passes at exes all the time. HE HIMSELF told me about having exe sex in the past for months before getting a new girlfriend, which he always initiated. But somehow a woman doing the exact same thing he (a man) had done in the past was somehow really wrong and worthy of derision. It isn't even like I insisted or didn't take no for an answer. That I tried to seduce him when he was trying not to want to sleep with me was all it took to cast me into the despised "slut" in all seriousness category. Who he could then diss to other people.

That is why I think the efforts to recast the word into a positive one are doomed. Slut is always going to be a loaded word. And as long as it is used in any context, it is also going to help reinforce the idea that there really is some reason women are "flawed" if they really really are as passionate about sex as men.


When I read crap like this, it makes me want to apologize on behalf of the entire human race!

I have always spoken out against this double standard. It is foolish.

And with good intent notwithstanding, the concept further damages itself in the following way;

PARENTS, not women alone, have a choice to make if they want to be parents. Does having a good family atmosphere require ONLY "good girls"?

This can be so damaging to the sexual health of women! Because not only do you get situations like Lyn's, but sometimes women also begin to feel badly about something that they seemed to enjoy but are now turning it bad in their heads.

It's a block. It's nasty. Even if I understand the underlying, but misguided, "reason" for it.

It doesn't even seem like we're trying to evolve from this mess!

It's very deep rooted. You talk about a battle royale with regards to the human condition; this is it.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Willows
United States
Woburn
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
calandale wrote:
Probably true. I'm no psychologist, but I know this - the harm that comes from using certain words is a LOT less than the harm that
comes from stifling speech. Sometimes the easiest solution
ain't the best.


To bolster my point - silencing people is the mark of tyranny,
whilst great advances have been made during periods of intolerant
speech.


Actually, having manners in NO WAY limits or curtails ideas!

As we do not say you are wrong or bad for having an idea by suggesting that rules of decorum be observed.

It only means that there is a time and place for everything.

We don't want the wargames forums to have that caveat emptor feel of RSP do we?
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kurt Weihs
United States
Tacoma
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
A problem I am signaling here is that when the OP signals a problem and she tries to keep it general, there are a lot of people that start to react to her personally instead of to the problem signalled.
She is trying to keep it general (though sometimes gets a bit heated) and there are a lot of people responding to the general statement. But there are also a lot of people who take this way more personal. As far as I would interpret the posts so far, the OP has now been called oversensitive, a crybaby, making up stuff, having a political agenda, a whiner,


Um no. Not so much. The OP in responding to an offstage slight made a blanket accusation (ie. she responded to a gross over-generalization with one of her own). Keeping it general is the primary problem with her complaint. The lack of specifics undermined her point and weakened her position.

Look, accusing others of bigotry or sexist behavior these days is pretty serious stuff. You can't just throw an accusation of that caliber out there without expecting people to want something substantial backing it up. Unfortunately, when you accuse a whole group of behaving a certain way every member of that group is entitled to feel that they are personally being accused. I find the accusation that I behave a certain way from someone who knows nothing about me ridiculous. She knows absolutely nothing about me and if she bases her attack on the grounds that I am male and just don't get it then she is guilty of the very same behavior she finds so abhorrent. Jude made a poor choice in how she pursued her complaint. The fact that she didn't garner much support is testament to that. I think it's quite possible that she had/has a valid complaint (especially given a few of the responses to her accusations), but she undermined her argument. I think it's reasonable for us to expect her to present her allegations in a reasonable fashion.

If Jude wants things to change she needs to find another way to do this. If all she wanted to do was stir up a shit storm she did a fine job.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Willows
United States
Woburn
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Sturmkraehe wrote:
Um no. Not so much. The OP in responding to an offstage slight made a blanket accusation (ie. she responded to a gross over-generalization with one of her own). Keeping it general is the primary problem with her complaint. The lack of specifics undermined her point and weakened her position.


Actually, over the course of the discussion, many potential offenses have been pointed out including women other than Jude pointing out uncomfortable comments. That includes links to some of these offenses such as inappropriate comments with regards to a picture of an attractive woman that was posted for whatever reason.

Even so, doesn't the fact that many women have chimed in with support and agreement with Jude mean anything by itself?

However, the way this topic has defined sexism makes me wonder if I'm sexist simply because I choose to have sex ONLY with women.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
TS S. Fulk
Sweden
Örebro
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Sturmkraehe wrote:


If Jude wants things to change she needs to find another way to do this. If all she wanted to do was stir up a shit storm she did a fine job.


And maybe that's is what she wanted consciously or subconsciously. What ever the case, this thread has gotten the forum thinking about and discussing the issue, which is a good thing. Good discussion, even if you say you totally disagree, will give the other side of the argument a little more weight in the back of your head than before the discussion took place.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kurt Weihs
United States
Tacoma
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Actually, over the course of the discussion, many potential offenses have been pointed out including women other than Jude pointing out uncomfortable comments. That includes links to some of these offenses such as inappropriate comments with regards to a picture of an attractive woman that was posted for whatever reason.



Oh, I don't deny that her complaint has any validity. The quality of some of the responses here is testament that there are some people out there who love to fan the flames with poor behavior. Some might have good intentions and valid concerns that the cure of censorship is a more vile solution than the original problem that caused the censorship. However, their tact in dealing with the question undermines their own position as well.

Jude threw her complaint into the court of public opinion with no evidence. Not only that, her accusation was first against the wargames dubdomain, not against the specific individuals who offended her. Some quotes were thrown out later that I don't believe came from the wargame subdomain but by then the door was being closed after the horses got out. With this thread the scope of her complaint has broadened to "...at BGG."

I don't think it's wrong for her to ask for better behavior. Most of the people I know in the wargames subdomain are intelligent, reasonable people. There are a few who are contentious and they make me uncomfortable too. Not because they are sexist but because they lack civility and seem to like to argue for argument's sake. I just think she could have chosen a better way to approach the situation. But what do I know. I am just a man, eh?
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boots
Australia
Petersham
New South Wales
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
MillertimeRC wrote:
I disagree with that assessment of what the OP did and is doing. She made claims of sexism and gay bashing within a certain group of this membership. When asked for specific examples of what she meant, she ignored those requests. When that forum thread wasn't going how she wanted, she abandoned it and started another one. When the exact same sequence played out in that thread, she did the exact same and abandoned that discussion also.


Sturmkraehe wrote:
Um no. Not so much. The OP in responding to an offstage slight made a blanket accusation (ie. she responded to a gross over-generalization with one of her own). Keeping it general is the primary problem with her complaint. The lack of specifics undermined her point and weakened her position.

Look, accusing others of bigotry or sexist behavior these days is pretty serious stuff. You can't just throw an accusation of that caliber out there without expecting people to want something substantial backing it up. Unfortunately, when you accuse a whole group of behaving a certain way every member of that group is entitled to feel that they are personally being accused. I find the accusation that I behave a certain way from someone who knows nothing about me ridiculous. She knows absolutely nothing about me and if she bases her attack on the grounds that I am male and just don't get it then she is guilty of the very same behavior she finds so abhorrent. Jude made a poor choice in how she pursued her complaint. The fact that she didn't garner much support is testament to that. I think it's quite possible that she had/has a valid complaint (especially given a few of the responses to her accusations), but she undermined her argument. I think it's reasonable for us to expect her to present her allegations in a reasonable fashion.

If Jude wants things to change she needs to find another way to do this. If all she wanted to do was stir up a shit storm she did a fine job.


You two are right back to the beginning of this argument, claiming no specific examples existed. Several have been posted, and summarily dismissed.

See for example:
http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/786212/poll-why-do-you-buy
http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/597826/dust-tactics-the-knoc...
http://boardgamegeek.com/article/8709876#8709876

You're also behaving in exactly the way Jude and others predicted men would respond to these criticisms:

Quote:
The most common responses I've seen over the years (not just here, but nearly everywhere that men hang out together) are:
rationalizations of why it is okay to post offensive remarks and vulgar terms towards/about women, usually with the claim that they weren't being sexist;
protests about how women are being unfair to men by protesting the sexism, and that the protester is either a bigot towards men or is just trying to get attention for some stupid reason;
that it is common and normal for men to act that way, so women should just get used to it, or at best: private messages to keep protesting but be polite and don't offend the men posting the sexist remarks and it will get better--but with no public support given with this advice;
that women are being over-sensitive (basically that the men don't care if they hurt women);
that women are in the minority (in whatever forum or organization) and that the "community" is fine as it is and they should leave if they don't like it, followed by: there aren't any women here, anyway, so it doesn't matter.


I am also reminded by your posts of what another poster in support of Jude said in the other thread (which you clearly also dismissed):

Quote:
I appreciate that no one wants to be called 'sexist', 'racist', or a 'bigot'. The very fact that these words have come to be so negatively perceived is progress! But the fact is, EVERY time someone brings up even the *possibility* that an 'ism' like this might exist in geek male dominated spaces like this one, they end up being shouted down. If they provide specific examples, the examples are generally excused or dismissed as being isolated cases or misunderstandings. If they refuse to provide specific examples, they are accused of making things up, or overreacting, or just being loud to get attention, or worse. If they are civil they are ignored or mocked, and are often accused of being 'loud' and 'rude' when they've been no such thing. If they *are* loud and rude, they're dismissed out of hand.


You're just repeating the pattern!

How many examples do you need? My guess is - more than could be provided. Which is why, as I argued several pages ago and others have argued before and since, you need to come at this from a different angle if you want to understand it. I argue that the only example you need is Jude's expression of frustration. Stop trying to dismiss, belittle and marginalise her and try to listen to what she's saying. I really don't think you are.

I think, in short, you guys had better think long and hard about exactly what it would take for you to listen to Jude and the other women posting here, because right now it seems to me that you would prefer it if they just shut up and went away - hardly an enlightened attitude.

And one more thing:

MillertimeRC wrote:
I've been a gamer for over 25 years, and in that time I've played with many many groups, both public and private. I'm currently a part of a half dozen regularly meeting groups, again some private and some public. Over all those gaming sessions I would guess that I've gamed with just about every combination of nationality, race, sexual orientation, and religious belief. I can't list how many of these combination I've played with because I never knew or cared these things about these people. I'm not trying to have sex with, start a religion with, or run for political office with any of these people, I'm playing games. Leave all the other stuff out of the conversation completely.


Colourblindness and genderblindness in white men is not the same as racial and gender equality. What you are doing by pretending that these differences do not exist - by "leaving them out of the conversation entirely" - is at best failing to acknowledge a fundamentally different experience to your own that includes marginalisation and harassment, or at worst, assuming the experience of non-men and non-white people is the same as the experience of white men. These are both fallacious positions.

You need to recognise that women don't experience the world the same way as men do! It's not enough to pat yourself on the back for being aware of your privilege or "not being a misogynist". It's your job as a man who claims he is not a misogynist to really think about what that experiential difference means - think about the fact that women get shouted down more often than men (like in this thread), get called "irrational" or told they are "over-reacting" more often than men (like in this thread), get sexualised and objectified in a way men never do (like in other threads). Think about how women's experience of these forums might be different to your own and listen to them when they tell you about those differences. Don't reject her because of your own bruised ego. It's really, really not about you.



22 
 Thumb up
1.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Italian Seismologist
United Kingdom
norwich
Norfolk
flag msg tools
[The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was not convincing people he didn't exist, but convincing them that he was God.
mbmbmbmbmb
personally i have only managed to skip through this thread as it is quite large.. but the run down i gather is as follows.

1) thread is started claiming that BGG wargame forum is sexist/homophobic and that the admins dont do anything about it.

2) heated discussion starts with multiple posters asking for specifics.

3) OP refuses to give specifics.

4) OP gets annoyed because noone is on her side because she refuses to give specifics, even though the other side has conceeded that it may happen but they need specifics.

5) OP starts new thread claiming that BGG is sexist and that the admins are not taking her seriously

6) OP again asked for specifics

7) OP again refuses to give specifics
7.2) EDIT apparently she did give specifics that have been bought to light. the first one on the list however she turns out to be the one that started throwing sexist comments about if anything.

8) OP again leaves thread because people are not on her side because she refuses to give specifics.

9) other people claim that the thread is ganging up on her and noone is taking her seriously

10) those posters then get aggravated because noone is taking them seriously

11) still noone has given any specific instances other than in the threads in question themselves which have only become 'noone is taking me seriously' be cause no specifics have been givem

12) spills over to people venting on the 'womens chat' page.


is that an accurate rundown of it? from what i garner from events one side has become increasingly frustrated at the other over an accusation that has been made but not backed up, and the other side is becoming frustrated at the first side because they have become frustrated at a accusation of sexism that without any sort of specifics and as a rash generalisation could be seen as sexist itself..


my personal view is that whilst i agree that there must be some sexist comments somewhere (a forum this large is bound to), it is itself wrong to make sweeping generalisations about a group of people without actually giving any specifics to back that up...
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kurt Weihs
United States
Tacoma
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
tssfulk wrote:
Sturmkraehe wrote:


If Jude wants things to change she needs to find another way to do this. If all she wanted to do was stir up a shit storm she did a fine job.


And maybe that's is what she wanted consciously or subconsciously. What ever the case, this thread has gotten the forum thinking about and discussing the issue, which is a good thing. Good discussion, even if you say you totally disagree, will give the other side of the argument a little more weight in the back of your head than before the discussion took place.


I definitely agree. As uncomfortable as the whole mess has been I think it's a good discussion for us to have. It has certainly raised my awareness. I applaud the admins for allowing this conversation to stay in general instead of moving it to RSP where it should probably have its home. I wouldn't have seen it otherwise.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boots
Australia
Petersham
New South Wales
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
wow... way to misinterpret the discussion pretty conclusively.

femgoth wrote:
1) thread is started claiming that BGG wargame forum is sexist/homophobic and that the admins dont do anything about it.

2) heated discussion starts with multiple posters asking for specifics.

3) OP refuses to give specifics.


Right so far, but there were good reasons she refused, which have been exhaustively covered by herself and other posters.

femgoth wrote:
4) OP gets annoyed because noone is on her side


Actually I could point out between 5 and 10 posters who came out on her side, I'm pretty amazed you haven't noticed their posts.

femgoth wrote:
because she refuses to give specifics, even though the other side has conceeded that it may happen but they need specifics.

5) OP starts new thread claiming that BGG is sexist and that the admins are not taking her seriously

6) OP again asked for specifics

7) OP again refuses to give specifics

7.2) EDIT apparently she did give specifics that have been bought to light. the first one on the list however she turns out to be the one that started throwing sexist comments about if anything.

8) OP again leaves thread because people are not on her side because she refuses to give specifics.


Once again, plenty of people on her side - the same 5-10, in fact. Mostly women, but a few men.

femgoth wrote:
9) other people claim that the thread is ganging up on her and noone is taking her seriously

10) those posters then get aggravated because noone is taking them seriously


"listening to them" is perhaps a better way of phrasing it than "taking them seriously". my impression has actually been that the same five to ten people have stayed here, patiently answering almost identical posts from men who wander in, give what they think is an original insight but is in fact an almost verbatim repeat of previous posts, then quit the thread in a huff because they feel like women are being unfair to them.

femgoth wrote:
11) still noone has given any specific instances other than in the threads in question themselves which have only become 'noone is taking me seriously' be cause no specifics have been given


Seriously? I gave three myself, two posts ago.

I've snipped the rest of your post because issues of "specifics" have been exhaustively covered. Nobody accepts specifics when they are offered, dismissing them or outright ignoring them.
19 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
Bitter Acerbic Harridan
mbmbmbmbmb
femgoth wrote:


is that an accurate rundown of it?


Not really, you left out the parts:

where some posters stated that the OP was merely referring to one specific thread and blowing it out of proportion

where others pointed out that she indicated she was bothered by a perceived pattern

where various posters pointed out specific instances on BGG in general of things that bugged them and that some language is loaded language for a woman

where it was stated that there was nothing of the sort anywhere on BGG, or that because they personally didn't engage in it, that it could not possibly exist

where it was stated that this is the internet and women should ignore everything and grow a thicker skin and stop being so sensitive (as one poster put it, because even a woman should be able to that)

and that's just a small sampling.
16 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Italian Seismologist
United Kingdom
norwich
Norfolk
flag msg tools
[The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was not convincing people he didn't exist, but convincing them that he was God.
mbmbmbmbmb
Boots01 wrote:
wow... way to misinterpret the discussion pretty conclusively.

femgoth wrote:
1) thread is started claiming that BGG wargame forum is sexist/homophobic and that the admins dont do anything about it.

2) heated discussion starts with multiple posters asking for specifics.

3) OP refuses to give specifics.


Right so far, but there were good reasons she refused, which have been exhaustively covered by herself and other posters.

femgoth wrote:
4) OP gets annoyed because noone is on her side


Actually I could point out between 5 and 10 posters who came out on her side, I'm pretty amazed you haven't noticed their posts.

femgoth wrote:
because she refuses to give specifics, even though the other side has conceeded that it may happen but they need specifics.

5) OP starts new thread claiming that BGG is sexist and that the admins are not taking her seriously

6) OP again asked for specifics

7) OP again refuses to give specifics

7.2) EDIT apparently she did give specifics that have been bought to light. the first one on the list however she turns out to be the one that started throwing sexist comments about if anything.

8) OP again leaves thread because people are not on her side because she refuses to give specifics.


Once again, plenty of people on her side - the same 5-10, in fact. Mostly women, but a few men.

femgoth wrote:
9) other people claim that the thread is ganging up on her and noone is taking her seriously

10) those posters then get aggravated because noone is taking them seriously


"listening to them" is perhaps a better way of phrasing it than "taking them seriously". my impression has actually been that the same five to ten people have stayed here, patiently answering almost identical posts from men who wander in, give what they think is an original insight but is in fact an almost verbatim repeat of previous posts, then quit the thread in a huff because they feel like women are being unfair to them.

femgoth wrote:
11) still noone has given any specific instances other than in the threads in question themselves which have only become 'noone is taking me seriously' be cause no specifics have been given


Seriously? I gave three myself, two posts ago.

I've snipped the rest of your post because issues of "specifics" have been exhaustively covered. Nobody accepts specifics when they are offered, dismissing them or outright ignoring them.


sorry, i did not mean that noone was on her side, i meant that she left because she though that noone was on her side. even from my quick skim though the thread i noticed that people were agreeing that sometimes it is there and that it should be stamped out etc etc.

perhaps some people take the specifics that you listed the wrong way, given that to some people (including both my wife and the two women reading this over my shoulder in the office) jude was the one being 'offensively sexist'. i put that in quotes as i dont believe that a man saying "you know us men, all we are interested in is sex and guns" is itself sexist. following that up with the post that jude did seems to me (somewhat ironically) sexist..

i agree that the third one you posted seemed a little inappropriate given what i have been pulled up for in the past, but from a scan down it i personally do not find it sexist. perhaps that is what jude was on about, that we just see things differently perhaps.

and seriously? 3 threads (one of which she was the offender in) is not indicative of the wargames forum being sexist by any margin.


EDIT: as i said, i did a quick run down summing up what i thought was being said given that quick skimming. i am not saying that i support either side in the matter..
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joline
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Sturmkraehe wrote:


Oh, I don't deny that her complaint has any validity. .....

I just think she could have chosen a better way to approach the situation. But what do I know. I am just a man, eh?


Wow that's a pity! I liked your post a lot, right up to those last two sentences. You are thinking about what has been said, you are evaluating (also emphatizing how something might affect others) and you are coming up with your own idea of how you would like this to be handled. That's all that can be asked for. It doesn't matter whether you're a man or a woman. If everyone would do this there would be a lot less unintentional misunderstanding/miscommunication. That would help a lot in making the environment friendly to all.

Whoops edited because quote went wrong..
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
bruinrefugee
United States
Laguna Niguel
California
flag msg tools
I think the actual events are more telling...

Among the thousands of war-game posts in what was BGG's most active forum -- before the stupid ghettoizing decision to subdivide the forum, but I digress -- you have an occasional post in questionable or even bad taste.

No cleavage spreads -- the running joke is a towel-clad Brezhnev. No johnson references. But an arguable translation or mistranslation of a Frederick the Great quote by a German that was immediately questioned, and the guy even explained himself to the OP's ramp down -- but not before going ballistic.

Or a guy making a reference/analogy to the reported wandering eye of male buyers that equates the susceptibility to box art to other wandering habits that is just ignored for 20 posts that focus on the kind of geeky things you'd expect from history nerds who play games about war before the OP just explodes on him and the forum in general.

With a number of people broadly supporting the general point about civility, but much quibbling of details, effectiveness, and the broader statements made.

Concede the offensiveness of each individual post and you still don't have a systemic problem in that area. What you do have are a broad range of people who will disagree about the bounds of civil discourse and where the line of acceptable humor is drawn.

I'll draw the line in one place, others will disagree. But absent a consistent push/theme, most of it is just the friction you might expect from throwing a mish-mash of nationalities, experiences, and sexes together. If one wants to generalize off a very thin basis, go right ahead. Personally, the examples and initial responses linked to in the wargame forum don't seem to support the overheated responses or blanket denunciations. But your mileage may vary -- which, fwiw, I think is demonstrated daily in RSP on a whole host of topics.


6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pedro Silva
Portugal
Matosinhos
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Scrogdog wrote:
However, the way this topic has defined sexism makes me wonder if I'm sexist simply because I choose to have sex ONLY with women.


The funniest thing (other than the catastrophic derailment of a train wreck from the start) I've been noticing is that some of the women supporting the OP do wear sexist microbadges under their avatar...

Things like:

"I fight like a girl" - Implying that women aren't capable of fighting or somehow fight differently than men. I for one believe that women are as good fighters, be it in sports or the military, as men if they so desire.

or

"Razor Sharp - BGG's Women's Forum participant" - Displaying a kitchen knife because, well, that's where women belong, right? In the kitchen...


2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boots
Australia
Petersham
New South Wales
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
You know, it's really occurred to me that there is no single unified definition of sexism operating in this thread. To give you a sense of what I'm talking about, I'm going to link to the one I like to use.

Sexism = prejudice + power

Another example talking about very similar ideas

For those of you who won't read these:

Quote:
That ‘+ power’ portion of the equation is one of the most important parts. This is not to say that the disenfranchised cannot be prejudiced, because many of them are, but without power, they are not actually working within the systematic framework of advantage created by the majority to privilege themselves. Thus it is only “racism” if the person is capable of using that framework; otherwise, it is prejudice.


and:

Quote:
When feminists say that women can’t be sexist towards men, they aren’t saying that women being prejudiced against men is a good thing, or something that should be accepted. Prejudice is bad and should not be accepted.


and also:

Quote:
Men are undoubtedly affected by sexism, but because of their privilege they don’t experience it the same way that women do; this difference in experience is acknowledged through the distinction of sexism versus gender-based prejudice. For more discussion on this topic, please refer to the links under A deeper look at how sexism affects men.


So there that is. I think when a lot of the men (and some of the women) are looking at this thread they are mistaking a recognition of privilege for an expression of prejudice. That is, when they think that Jude is calling all men sexist (a claim she NEVER made), they read that claim as sexist against men.

Had Jude made that claim, then yes, it would have been a prejudiced, but not sexist claim. However, I don't read her post the way you do. She said:

Quote:
a thread is derailed by some guy having to talk about how his dick affects everything he does and thinks, while using vulgar language and commentary to make women reading the thread feel uncomfortable and excluded.


And frankly, that was exactly what had just happened. I'll agree she was angry, but I maintain she had a perfectly legitimate reason to be angry. I support her position and defend her expression of anger. I think anger is the right way to respond to marginalisation.

Moreover, she never claimed that it was all men who thought that way. In fact, I read her comments as expressions not of pre-judging men but of post-judging them. She and another woman in the other thread both predicted exactly how these threads would go, and a combination of almost 20 pages later and they're both being proved right. to me that doesn't look like they are making assumptions about men based on gender, but based on experience. All the more so because they are happy to acknowledge, time and time again, that thee are a variety of behavious exhibited by men in these threads.
13 
 Thumb up
1.30
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Melissa Rohs
United States
Saint Paul
Minnesota
flag msg tools
mb
Boots01 wrote:
You know, it's really occurred to me that there is no single unified definition of sexism operating in this thread. To give you a sense of what I'm talking about, I'm going to link to the one I like to use.

Sexism = prejudice + power

Another example talking about very similar ideas

For those of you who won't read these:

Quote:
That ‘+ power’ portion of the equation is one of the most important parts. This is not to say that the disenfranchised cannot be prejudiced, because many of them are, but without power, they are not actually working within the systematic framework of advantage created by the majority to privilege themselves. Thus it is only “racism” if the person is capable of using that framework; otherwise, it is prejudice.


and:

Quote:
When feminists say that women can’t be sexist towards men, they aren’t saying that women being prejudiced against men is a good thing, or something that should be accepted. Prejudice is bad and should not be accepted.


and also:

Quote:
Men are undoubtedly affected by sexism, but because of their privilege they don’t experience it the same way that women do; this difference in experience is acknowledged through the distinction of sexism versus gender-based prejudice. For more discussion on this topic, please refer to the links under A deeper look at how sexism affects men.


So there that is. I think when a lot of the men (and some of the women) are looking at this thread they are mistaking a recognition of privilege for an expression of prejudice. That is, when they think that Jude is calling all men sexist (a claim she NEVER made), they read that claim as sexist against men.

Had Jude made that claim, then yes, it would have been a prejudiced, but not sexist claim. However, I don't read her post the way you do. She said:

Quote:
a thread is derailed by some guy having to talk about how his dick affects everything he does and thinks, while using vulgar language and commentary to make women reading the thread feel uncomfortable and excluded.


And frankly, that was exactly what had just happened. I'll agree she was angry, but I maintain she had a perfectly legitimate reason to be angry. I support her position and defend her expression of anger. I think anger is the right way to respond to marginalisation.

Moreover, she never claimed that it was all men who thought that way. In fact, I read her comments as expressions not of pre-judging men but of post-judging them. She and another woman in the other thread both predicted exactly how these threads would go, and a combination of almost 20 pages later and they're both being proved right. to me that doesn't look like they are making assumptions about men based on gender, but based on experience. All the more so because they are happy to acknowledge, time and time again, that thee are a variety of behavious exhibited by men in these threads.


If only all men were like you.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Willows
United States
Woburn
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Mallgur wrote:
Scrogdog wrote:
However, the way this topic has defined sexism makes me wonder if I'm sexist simply because I choose to have sex ONLY with women.


The funniest thing (other than the catastrophic derailment of a train wreck from the start) I've been noticing is that some of the women supporting the OP do wear sexist microbadges under their avatar...

Things like:

"I fight like a girl" - Implying that women aren't capable of fighting or somehow fight differently than men. I for one believe that women are as good fighters, be it in sports or the military, as men if they so desire.

or

"Razor Sharp - BGG's Women's Forum participant" - Displaying a kitchen knife because, well, that's where women belong, right? In the kitchen...




A bit of context because, interestingly, the creation of that micrbadge sort of showcases issues we are describing here.

A man made a comment to the effect that "women aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer" or some such. Trust me, I saw it with my own eyes but am too lazy to go looking for it.

To their credit, the ladies turned it in to an in-joke, and that badge.

You can find a topic about it in the womens forums.

Like they say, perception is everything. For some even that context won't make it palatable.

EDIT: Spelling!
4 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sue Hemberger

Washington
Dist of Columbia
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
tssfulk wrote:
And if someone does take offense, why is it so hard to say, "I'm sorry"?


Yup, that's the part I don't get!
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
Bitter Acerbic Harridan
mbmbmbmbmb
Mallgur wrote:
Scrogdog wrote:
However, the way this topic has defined sexism makes me wonder if I'm sexist simply because I choose to have sex ONLY with women.


The funniest thing (other than the catastrophic derailment of a train wreck from the start) I've been noticing is that some of the women supporting the OP do wear sexist microbadges under their avatar...

Things like:

"I fight like a girl" - Implying that women aren't capable of fighting or somehow fight differently than men. I for one believe that women are as good fighters, be it in sports or the military, as men if they so desire.

or

"Razor Sharp - BGG's Women's Forum participant" - Displaying a kitchen knife because, well, that's where women belong, right? In the kitchen...




Lol, yup I have both of them. You are reading your skewed view of the world into the first one. Why does fight like a girl mean that we are not good fighters?

As for the second, that is a reference to a thread about why the women's subforum exists. One of the posters apparently held a grudge over it for a few months and then called her and the forum out in the TS forum. He called us a bunch of dull blades in a box (or something like that). We had this badge made in response.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joline
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Oh and about the razor sharp badge: It's a joke. I guess the explanation would take way too long and just get us into another one of these discussions.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sue Hemberger

Washington
Dist of Columbia
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
aiabx wrote:
Slut, where I come from, is a pejorative word that refers to promiscuous women. If I call myself a game slut, the connotation is this; I'm indiscriminate in my choice of games just like a promiscuous woman. Ho ho. Any idea why some people might find that offensive? Do you think another word could have conveyed the notion without the unspoken insult?


Yes, somehow "I'm like a slut" is never the image that comes to mind when I'm overwhelmed by indiscriminate desire. *I'm* like a kid in a candy store.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Willows
United States
Woburn
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Just as a follow up to the post I made about the knife microbadge...

You know what I love doing? Attending culture festivals. Say, a Greek festival.

I'm not Greek but guess what? I like their food and drink! I like their music and dance! I liked the celebration of who they are! Proudly grouping together and sharing culture is awesome!

Sometimes I might display a Boston sports logo. I am proudly a Red Sox fan! Though I might not wear my hat to Yankee Stadium.

Celebrating who you are is not sexist. It's cool to the extreme!

Groups are only bad when they exist to look down on other groups.
5 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
[1]  Prev «  12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16  Next »  [22] | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.