post about women’s only space
150+ comments, 50 downvotes
Close enough. Welcome back reddit
I enjoy that community as a non-participant. A user’s decision to merely interact can reveal much more than they intended to reveal - super interesting to me. Just the existence of the community pits dudes with insecurities against their own lack of self control or social tact, for all to see.
Future me might comment there too quickly after overlooking the community name. I’ll get a warranted Tsk and I’ll see myself out. No big deal. It’s not a kick in the nuts unless I make it one.
I have seen men comment there, get the reminder, and then FLIP THE FUCK OUT. As if every part of the internet should have to put up with them.
A community like that is hard to monitor, and they are pretty chill about people making honest mistakes like coming in from /all. I feel like it’s obvious (or very quickly becomes obvious) which comments are mistakes, and which are butthurt males. They don’t seem to be hostile to the honest mistakes.
When I first started here I had a relevant point for a women’s only community on the front. I asked if my opinion was welcome, told it was not (but fairly respectfully), and the only comment I left was an apology.
Like it’s not hard to be respectful, even if you hold a slightly different opinion. I don’t go to any of the “on grad” posts and let my opinions about Stalin fly(which are largely negative despite me agreeing with a lot of the tenants of communism).
The only exception I make about being respectful is anyone bragging about not voting last election in the US. You all suck and I will not let you live it down peacefully. Ffs vote third party! But don’t brag about being a lazy POS and standing by while fascism takes over!
Needs text alternative.
Images of text break much that text alternatives do not. Losses due to image of text lacking alternative such as link:
- usability
- we can’t quote the text without pointless bullshit like retyping it or OCR
- text search is unavailable
- the system can’t
- reflow text to varied screen sizes
- vary presentation (size, contrast)
- vary modality (audio, braille)
- accessibility
- lacks semantic structure (tags for titles, heading levels, sections, paragraphs, lists, emphasis, code, links, accessibility features, etc)
- some users can’t read this due to lack of alt text
- users can’t adapt the text for dyslexia or vision impairments
- systems can’t read the text to them or send it to braille devices
- web connectivity
- we have to do failure-prone bullshit to find the original source
- we can’t explore wider context of the original message
- authenticity: we don’t know the image hasn’t been tampered
- searchability: the “text” isn’t indexable by search engine in a meaningful way
- fault tolerance: no text fallback if
- image breaks
- image host is geoblocked due to insane regulations.
Contrary to age & humble appearance, text is an advanced technology that provides all these capabilities absent from images.
Nowhere in that discussion did the commenter deny being female so shame on OP for jumping to conclusions.
That’s the only context in which that comment makes sense.
wtf???
- usability
You can tell this guy posted himself wearing a “This is what a feminist looks like” t-shirt on linkedin.
Nobody posted it!?
Oh good. I don’t follow this com, another comment tipped me off.
While I do enjoy a little bit of chaos and schadenfreude, it would be nice to block out user names. Call out the mistake, not the person.
Most people here are lovely, but it only takes one match to start a fire. Might as well address some bullshit in these comments since I’m gonna get trolled by incels anyway…
side note: I’m not a mod there.
-
The women’s com is trans and non-binary inclusive. Anyone who feels at home there (and is respectful) is welcome.
-
It’s not all bitching about men. Looking at the last twenty posts, one was about men and two were related to men. We talk about pads and health and essays and positivity memes and do fun activities on fridays.
-
I support men making their own support groups. Although the internet itself often feels like a menfolk support group(to me,) I’m sure there are plenty of things an easy to find, curated space, could offer men who want to be just a little more vulnerable, knowing they would be supported by the mods if any toxic women came in to devalue their opinions and experience.
While I do enjoy a little bit of chaos and schadenfreude, it would be nice to block out user names. Call out the mistake, not the person.
Showing public information isn’t immoral: we should be able to simply link to online content. Blocking out public information & breaking accessibility to do it, however, is patronizing & wrong.
I support men making their own support groups. Although the internet itself often feels like a menfolk support group(to me,) I’m sure there are plenty of things an easy to find, curated space, could offer men who want to be just a little more vulnerable, knowing they would be supported by the mods if any toxic women came in to devalue their opinions and experience.
They should. the issue with this is they get branded as hate-groups or for ‘losers’. more or less automatically irregalrdless of what kind of community they are.
the bigger issue is that generally people think men are evil by default, and women are good by default. and that’s not a cultural assumption most folks are willing to look past.
A lot of male-only spaces descend into places to hate on women rather than proactively dealing with issues within our own community. It takes active moderation for these support groups to not become hate groups. If it stays focused on healthy self improvement (not hawking supplements and talking about a person being high or low “value”) and providing emotional support for men, it can avoid the “hate group” moniker.
The “loser” thing is actually a symptom of why we need spaces like we’re talking about. There will likely always be people out there who judge people for needing help and emotional support, especially men(thank you toxic masculinity), but the goal should be an overall less toxic society and greater acceptance that everyone needs help at some point.
Your “bigger issue” is not something I think I have experienced, I don’t think I’ve ever had someone assume I’m evil because I’m male. That sounds like an internal belief that you’re projecting on society, something that should be looked at in detail and questioned thoroughly in a therapeutic setting. Looking at other comments you’ve made on similar subjects, you seem to be someone who needs a place where your views can be safely challenged by reality, which is another way of saying we need better support groups for men like you, not just incel groups where you reinforce each other’s toxic beliefs.
I understand that this may come off as insulting, I just want you to know that that’s not my intent. I think you are lacking in self worth and that is leading you to project toxicity into the world. I don’t think you’re hopeless, mostly because I used to be on a similar course as you. I got therapy and learned to better love and value myself and I started seeing a lot more positivity in my interactions with people of all genders. The first step is wanting to change things.
There are support groups for men out there that are not generally charectirized as toxic. Toxic folks may attack men for going to them, but I can tell you before I transitioned I used to go to one, and no one ever verbally attacked me for it.
Don’t make them a hate-group for losers, then? This speaks more about the places you’re hanging out at.
Removed by mod
Wow. That was rude
Calling out shitty people isn’t rude.
You could be more supportive. Men have issues specifically hurting them too, and not dismissing that fact won’t make women’s issues less relevant.
Could we just be more supportive to each other?
Absolutely! I encourage support spaces for everyone. I’m calling out the irony that this user is up and down this thread arguing against the women’s community and spouting female priviledge ideology, while now complaining that men can’t have the same thing… or else people will complain and spout male priviledge ideology.
There are many ways that sexism hurts men, which is why I’m down with support spaces and actively discourage all men bullshit when I see it.
Claiming those spaces doomed from the start, because of people behaving exactly like Tittyfrog here, is bad faith as hell.
because that would be gay. part of the evil homosexual agenda we must stop!
it’s manly/womanly/hetero to beat up on other people and harass them for their issues and problems. or at least, to pretend that their problems are less than those of this more oppressed group. plus it feels really good to call people names rather than acknowledge their humanity and/or their fallibility.
but hey, we all know that billionaires are the most oppressed group on the planet. they are the true victims.
That first sentence is not a good look homie. I say this as a cis-het dude
You’re the only one here harassing people for their issues and problems and pretending they are less than those of a more oppressed group.
oh hey, it’s the person what from the op screen cap. Here doing an encore performance. Everyone clap.
Thank you! I have mental health problems so even negative attention is fulfilling.
AND I don’t think rehashing someone’s minor mistake for public theater is cool without the user names removed. People were shitting all over him when he already got clapped back, so I said something.
I support men making their own support groups.
While women are allowed to keep men out of their groups, it doesn’t work the other way around. Even gay men’s groups have trouble keeping invasive women from changing the nature of their groups.
As you can see, women have trouble keeping men out, too.
I’d like to see your data.
I’d like to see your data.
Just try finding a men’s opinion group that successfully bans women.
So you don’t have data.
Whataboutism is a non-sequitor that disrupts and discourages productive discussion.
-
I blocked this community a while ago so I don’t accidentally view/comment on it
Same. I generally don’t care to read posts in communities that practice inclusivity. Same would go for any “men only” communities.
Same, I responded to a comment and got good feedback and upvoted a good bit followed by being berated by a mod. I blocked the community that day.
Same. I’m definitely guilty of glossing over community names, but fortunately saw that community the one time it took to block.
one of the few communities I have blocked one of the things I value is being able to chip in
So you blocked it? Lol seems strange
I blocked it too. It’s not strange at all. If a community disallows people to contribute based on gender, race, etc… I disallow them to appear in my feed.
That community hits “front page” quite often. It’s easy to miss the community name (and rules) unless you pay attention.
It would be nice if there was a brother community that had the same topic, and a default text in all posts explaining this and redirecting the men to that.
That would be an understandable mistake if the poster hadnt literally quoted the rule they were breaking.
Yes sure. I am speaking in general. Half the time I read that community, I only realize where I am when I see the mods calling other people out in the comments. It happens in every single thread, which is why I think they ought to make it more visible in every single post. It’s a great community and I do read it occasionally, so I don’t want to block it, just because I’m not allowed to comment myself.
not any different than any community that random gets frontpaged and gets flooded by randos.
on reddit i was a part of several smaller subs that would get front paged a couple times a year and things got nutty for a few days. usually a flood of users who just came in harassed everyone and made lots of posts about what losers we were, or posted self-help ‘guides’.
the assumption that people are going to read your sidebar rules and self regulate is just… dumb. that isn’t what people do. provocative posts are going to be a beacon for provocative people who have to ‘educate’ the rest of the community.
I read through that thread, the mods were very patient.
And individual community members of course had their own individual reactions, depending on the content of the post.
I forgot that community existed. Segregation gives me the ick to such an extent I blocked it. I think it’s the only non-german-language community I’ve blocked.
A publicly visible forum isn’t a safe space. I can go to a discord channel for that. I would never think to tell someone to shut up because of physical characteristics. That’s precisely how social poisons like transphobia propagate. Could Elliot Page post there? What about Hunter Schafer? What about enbys? Jack Haven? Do we demand genital inspections like MAGA gestapo? Would you exclude my partner for failing to pass some feminine-enough test?
Segregation of public and publicly visible places is fundamentally and ethically wrong. I will help build the louisettes to dismantle the patriarchy, but I won’t exclude people even their “type” has traditionally held a position of privilege. It’s not right and it makes us the baddies the misogynistic claim we are.
My point is, I don’t like anything about this. ESH. I don’t support or endorse any of this, from the community to the alleged interlopers. It’s all wrong.
The community you’re complaining about actually allows trans and nonbinary people. I believe you can acknowledge the value of single-gender+enby spaces while being critical of single-sex spaces without being a TERF.
Right now women make up 2.5% of the overall Lemmy userbase. They’re more likely to be downvoted and dogpiled by the remaining 97.5% of Lemmy in coed spaces. If we want Lemmy to grow and be open for everyone, for now we need women-only communities so we can create positive associations with the platform where we can express our opinions freely without worry about being brigaded. If womens’ spaces on Lemmy were open to men, it would be majority men commenting on all of those posts, and our voices would get drowned out. Most or all of us would get fed up and leave. The thing is, if you don’t allow protections for women, you still end up with segregation.
So there’s an important crossroads that we need to decide. Do we allow X-exclusive communities in the hopes of building up Lemmy and the Fediverse? Or do we defederate instances with communities that support minority communities, and accept the inevitability that Lemmy will continue to be a male-only space for good?
Maybe the exclusivity can be eased when the gender gap gets closed more. I know it feels unfair on the surface. For now I’ll say if c/menslib’s moderators decided the community would be men-only, I’d support that.
Thank you, I didn’t realize that. My only experience was stumbling into a post some time ago and seeing someone asking a question being told to shut up because they started the question with “As a man…”. Seeing that was genuinely triggering for me.
While knowing it’s trans inclusive does make me feel better, this still reminds me of the ally debate we had in the queer community 20-30 years ago. Queer spaces should be welcoming to allies but allies must be aware that there are certain expectations for them. There is still zero tolerance for anyone that steps out of line. I think that has worked very well and won us a lot of progress and unity and support and love and acceptance, which is what I want.
I’m always torn about these things. I love the idea of having women-centric spaces where we can be ourselves without masking. I want that. But I can’t resolve the ethics of excluding allies, and so it’s not something I can personally justify being involved with. I don’t want people to be treated like that or excluded because of their sex or gender. I’ve lived through that and it’s awful.
That’s interesting, and I do think the ally-welcoming queer spaces are a good idea too. My thought after reading this goes like this: Can spaces that are welcoming to allies coexist with spaces where only people within a group are allowed to contribute? Like, is it an all or nothing thing?
This is key because there are other spaces on lemmy (witchesvspatriarchy) that are both women-centric and open to allies. So Lemmy has both. But c/witchesvspatriarchy is constantly brigaded by male Lemmy users who get defensive. Often the top upvoted comments will be defensive ones from men, and many posts get derailed from their original topics. It can feel really discouraging. So guys on Lemmy regularly can and do step out of line, and Lemmy’s ecosystem rewards them for it because there’s more of them than us.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad witchesvspatriarchy exists. It’s healthy for ally-friendly women-centric spaces to exist. But I’m also glad there’s a community where I don’t have to deal with the constant derailing. And due to the specific circumstances of this platform, it feels like not allowing comments from men is the only to achieve that. At the end of the day, I’m glad that both exist. And I feel like if women-only spaces were taken away from Lemmy, I would just leave.
Edit: There’s another component to this as well, the idea you expressed that you felt excluded either because of your gender or because you’re an ally, and you don’t want anyone to feel like that. I don’t want to presume about your life or identity, but I’m a trans woman and I lived through being excluded because people thought I was a man. It was really awful, honestly. When I was in the closet, I would present as a woman on the internet because it was the one place I didn’t have to reveal my appearance. It was the only time for the entirety of my childhood and adolescence that I felt seen. I guess what I’m saying is that closet trans people aren’t the people being excluded from single-gender spaces on the internet – I certainly wasn’t. I don’t think a “no men” policy in internet forums affected me at all.
I don’t think my experience can or should be directly compared with those of male allies. There are some women-centered spaces where women will gladly welcome mens’ input, but in others, we’re asking for men to respect our right to gather independently, and I don’t think that’s unreasonable to ask. And it’s a boundary men have the right to ask of women too.
If only they had it explicitly laid out who is allowed to comment.
…oh wait, they do. So your “transphobia” strawman is entirely baseless.
We are fully allowed to read it, just don’t post. Reading it is very insightful.
What community is that?
I’m not sure the specific name of it. Something like “women only” but I’m not finding it in search. I browse lemmy by all, so it comes up every now and then for me.
Yeah, that definitely is annoying to have a man invade a space specifically for women, speaking as a man. You certainly ain’t doing any favors by going onto a woman’s space to reply to their posts if you’re a man.
That’s community’s mods are super nice. Probably too nice TBH.
…But yeah. Follow community rules, or post elsewhere. What is so hard about that?
I think it’s hard simply because browsing by /all, or even by communities you follow and then just in your main thread, is not set up to highlight the community or it’s rules. If something hits the front page of /all I’m rarely digging into the communities specific rules or even where it’s coming from to an extent. Only to say, it’s a learned behavior to care about the communities specifically in this site aggregator system.
All of that being said, people of course should respect community rules and learn the behavior of identifying what room they’re in before engaging with that community. I’m just not surprised when these flimsy barriers fail.
Is the best behavior to block any community you don’t or can’t participate in? I personally don’t love that behavior because I like seeing what everyone is discussing in threads, but that’s a reasonable solution. Obviously my current strat is just reading the community before posting (like not commenting negatively about Star Gate getting a new season in the star gate community as an example that happened today lol).
Wandering in, missing the rule sign, getting corrected, and apologizing is fine. I’ve done it; the mods there couldn’t have been nicer about it. It’s not an ideal system, no, but it works well enough; it’s the mods shouldering that burden more than anything.
…The problem is when the guys are corrected, yet keep talking anyway. Which I see happen a lot.
There is no excuse for that.
Is the best behavior to block any community you don’t or can’t participate in? I personally don’t love that behavior because I like seeing what everyone is discussing in threads, but that’s a reasonable solution.
I feel extremely mixed about this, yeah. I feel weird even talking about it.
I personally don’t love that behavior because I like seeing what everyone is discussing in threads, but that’s a reasonable solution.
The women’s space… doesn’t prohibit lurking? On one hand, the community is public, and I’m curious about the perspective in the discussions. I’m interested in understanding them so I can be a more respectful person myself.
I upvote their posts so they get more exposure.
…But I don’t want to violate their privacy either. Blocking is reasonable. Right now, I just upvote them but don’t enter the threads.
Obviously my current strat is just reading the community before posting (like not commenting negatively about Star Gate getting a new season in the star gate community as an example that happened today lol).
Read the room, yeah.
IMO TV fandoms shouldn’t worship their material. Negative discussion is allowed, otherwise the space gets toxic.
In fact, this kinda happened to one of my personal fandom spaces, /r/thelastairbender: among other things, they idolize ATLA (the original series) like a diety, to the point where anything different (including other material like Korra or the Netflix adaption) is demonized. Deeper stuff like the novels, fanfics or speculative lore is not welcome either.
That sucks. It’s all too common; the Star Wars fandom (for instance) is notorious for it. And its why some negativity and ‘outsider perspectives’ should be welcomed in such spaces.
The women’s space is different though. It’s basically a shelter from the shit this group puts up with IRL and online, so being more sensitive makes sense.
I completely agree. I just wish I could systematically prevent myself from making any mistake lol, or like anyone from making the first mistake.
Anyone doing it intentionally is a dick and should be blocked. This is just an interesting problem for the platform we’re on and I’m excited to see how the Internet develops overtime to fix this.
I just wish I could systematically prevent myself from making any mistake lol, or like anyone from making the first mistake.
…I guess we theoretically could, via a Lemmy or Piefed PR, heh.
As an example, we could implement an opt-in feature that pops-up community rules before one is allowed to post. Kinda like Discord, but less obnoxious.
That’s one reason why I like this place. If something about the site’s UX design in problematic, there’s somewhere to go to get it improved. With any corporate social media, your only assurance is that it will get worse with time.
I think that’s a great idea.
how do you measure someone else’s intention behind an internet post? other than your own arbitrary judgement of it?
I mean, I like the other reply to this comment as well, but if a man posts in an all women community twice in quick succession after being warned it’s pretty easy to assume their intentions are bad - right? Like there are things people can say or do that are so engrained in the behavior of bad faith actors that you can kinda spot them.
My point was just to reinforce that I agree with the notion that people can maliciously attempt to ruin a community or discourage individuals/groups from posting and that they should be banned. “No Nazi’s in the bar” kinda thing.
That’s kinda the idea behind moderation.
It’s why it’s best done in small communites, as the narrow context narrows the scope of the arbitrary judgement.
I think it’s hard simply because browsing by /all, or even by communities you follow and then just in your main thread, is not set up to highlight the community or it’s rules. If something hits the front page of /all I’m rarely digging into the communities specific rules or even where it’s coming from to an extent. Only to say, it’s a learned behavior to care about the communities specifically in this site aggregator system.
Bingo. This is the classic ‘read the sidebar’ crap from reddit. most users aren’t reading hte sidebar because the side bar doesn’t exist for them when they click in front the front page.
or the ‘this post is already been made why don’t you search instead of making new posts’. because search is stupid and useless for the most part, and a thread from six months ago is likely not relevant today.
because that isn’t how a public internet site works.
if you go to a public park and hold a women only event, and get upset men are in the park and wander over and are curious what is going on… and get upset about those men then the problem is you and your unrealistic expectations of exclusivity.
if you want a private exclusive type of space… then make it private and exclusive. that way you can control who views and interacts with the event and even hire security to keep the ‘wrong’ people out.
like if the mods want to auto-ban everyone who doesn’t personally verify with them their womanhood, that’s their business. but expecting people to self-police their gender is a dumb expectation.
personally i have a dick but i don’t really identify as being a ‘man’. nor do identify as being a ‘woman’. i’m just a person. so am i therefore allowed to commentate? or is the mods who determine my sex/gender status, regardless of how i perceive myself?
To correct your ‘public park’ analogy, the space is public. Anyone can wander in. But it has clear signs posted at the only entrance saying its a space for women to speak, please be quiet, otherwise.
Missing the sign and apologizing is understandable.
But but if you wander in and knowingly violate that rule by electing to speak up, that is no one’s fault but yours.
personally i have a dick but i don’t really identify as being a ‘man’. nor do identify as being a ‘woman’. i’m just a person. so am i therefore allowed to commentate? or is the mods who determine my sex/gender status, regardless of how i perceive myself?
…A primary reason for that rule is basically “don’t be a dick about this being a women’s only space, please.”
If you feel you qualify as a woman to speak in the space, go for it! That’s the idea. That’s the spirit of the rule. But you specifically say "nor do [I] identify as being a ‘woman’. "
Making an issue out of it is precisely what is unwanted. So is trying to blame the space for your deliberate choice.
I don’t get why this is so hard to grasp. It’s simple.
just because i feel that way doesn’t mean the people in charge feel that way.
it’s just part of life. mods gotta mod. this entire post to me just seems like moral grandstanding/public shaming.
and further, i commented in that thread too. i came from the front page of lemmy.world. there were no rules posted. there was no signage. but i didn’t get called out by the mods because i ‘type like a girl’ and often pass as a woman on the internet.
I’m not trying to grandstand. My issue is with these presumptions:
like if the mods want to auto-ban everyone who doesn’t personally verify with them their womanhood, that’s their business. but expecting people to self-police their gender is a dumb expectation.
They’re not checking you at the door. They aren’t auto banning anyone. They very politely point out the sidebar to a few posters, then request them to stay quiet; that’s the extent of it.
…If you don’t make an issue of that, it’s not an issue.
if you want a private exclusive type of space… then make it private and exclusive. that way you can control who views and interacts with the event and even hire security to keep the ‘wrong’ people out.
But this is unrealistic, as then they wouldn’t get nearly as much participation in the space. It’s a public gathering spot, by choice.
Again, my specific problem is with commenters that are shown the rules by the mods, yet willingly choose to ignore them.
Just because you think rules are unrealistic does not give you a right to ignore them once asked. That’s how every community here works. Yet they seem to get tons of posters carrying that bad attitude, with that same line of argument.
That’s what makes me bristle. Respecting community rules (once known) is basic human civility, and people are perfectly capable of ‘self-policing’ that. I do not like the rejection of that + the policing of others in its place.
The public park is owned by everyone, not just the women. You would be correct to be upset by men being excluded from this public space.
Comms are not public assets. Your use of any comm is entirely at the pleasure of the administrators of that comm, and their designated moderators.
Your opinion on the way they implement and enforce their rules is entirely irrelevant within their comm.
My suggestion would be to do what you would for any other comm whose behavior you do not support and/or whose rules you find reprehensible: block them and move on.
they should make their community private then. that way they can control who virtually walks in the door, so to speak.
as is, there is no door. it’s a public space that anyone can access.
You are entitled to your opinion. They are entitled to theirs. I am entitled to my opinion: what they do with their space and who they allow into it is no concern of yours. Mind your own business, and leave them to mind theirs.
But we are allowed, and encouraged to read it, just not post. It is public.
Lets say you go to a public building and in that public building there is a room marked women only, lets say in that room are some toilets, would you go in that room? Since it’s a public space in the same building as all the other public space, the only difference is that portion of the space is understood to be only for women, or those that identify as women.
You may stumble in accidentally, and you will be gently corrected, but if you keep stumbling in, it’s gonna start to seem weird, and the corrections will get less gentle.
Perhaps this is an exception, but I’ve disregarded that rule to use the building’s only baby changing table a bunch of times.
Yeah, that’s fine, a bit outside the metaphor as there is no analog.
Basically just that socially enforced boundaries are a thing even in public spaces.
a lot of places have rebranded those to ‘family restrooms’. which is great.
yeah i would. esp if the men’s room was locked.
i have gone into plenty of women’s rooms before. i don’t really give a shit about gender/sex rules when it comes to not shitting my pants.
sometimes when i came out a woman got all huffy, but they never did anything about it. because it’s pretty stupid ultimately. everyone has to shit. and most people dont’ care women use the man’s room.
but i don’t live in gender exclusivity/anxiety land like many people do. most gender exclusivity people have identity issues hence they need to police other people’s gender and sex and make massive generalizations about others gender and sex because they lack self-awareness and understanding and confidence.
I saw this play out and there were more than one of these users breaking the rules on that sub. I guess it’s tempting to want to comment on a first page thread, but boundaries exist for a reason. I don’t really see women going into incel spaces, making incels uncomfortable. Still, what it looked like was most of these men knew this wasn’t a community for them, but figured that their comments were so invaluable, how could it exist without their imput. It’s pathetic.
I don’t really see women going into incel spaces, making incels uncomfortable.
Maybe they should, though I’m not sure that would discomfort incels.
Well, the fact that women are existing and don’t want to interact with any of them is already discomforting to them; so I don’t suppose it takes much.
i usually browse by all and have sometimes accidentally have commented on the women’s stuff comm. The first time I did it they left my comment up (I didn’t know it was exclusively a women’s comm I thought it was a focus on women) but gave me a friendly reminder that it is womens stuff. Anyways I’ve also almsot commented in that comm a few times and only noticed it after reading comments
ANYWAYS that was longer than I anticipated but all I can excuse is accidentally commenting, the actual behavior is not especially since they said it they knew it was a women only community. IMO that’s not ok since I’m sure of what OOP was doing was allowed or “as a man…” was allowed, 90% of the comm would be men effectively destroying the women only space
I can understand a mistake, and like I read on the original thread and on here; the mods are really nice. It just really shouldn’t happen more than once imo. I also feel bad for the mods literally trying to keep a space designated for woman safe. When I first saw the group, and the rules- It was confusing but I think it’s understandable. There’s not 100 of these spaces, and the rules should be understandable for anyone who thought of participating.
I agree the mods are lovely. IDR who the mod that replied to me was or even if they were a mod but they essentially said it’s ok mistakes happen just don’t let it happen again
I think they’re really good at differentiating people who accidentally step into the space like me, VS people invading like the person in the screenshot
But yeah if any women’s stuff mods are reading this, yall are great
Exactly, dude is just proving them right that all men are self-important assholes. It’s like a woman going on /r/redpill and telling them they’re just angry, ugly geeks. Not helping. That being said I can’t help but think trying to create a safe space on a public space is never going to really work. I’d see more something like a private matrix space, or even properly authenticated IRC (that’s where I have my safe space about my addiction).
I can agree with that, but I think for privacy you lose some inclusivity. I understand you want to feel comfortable when talking about sensitive topics. On the other hand, is being a woman really such a sensitive topic that we shouldn’t be able to have a space that’s respected? It’s depressing that it’s not just intrinsically understood that these spaces are important, deserve to be public and proud, and really should be more prolific- but here we are.
That’s true. For privacy, you need anonymity, and that safe space I use is truly anonymous but as such it as its downsides. As much as we’d love to meet, or organize ourselves into a job seeking network because boy do many of us need it, or simply game online together… we can’t do any of that.
That’s rough.
I do think that’s the rule of life though, to get something you have to part with something. I bet it would be really nice to be friends in real life with the people on that matrix, but right now at least that group needs anonymity more. It doesn’t always have to be that way, life is odd and there are no concrete outcomes. Though for now, I’m sure you appreciate having somewhere to go to be able to talk about things that maybe most people wouldn’t understand or lay judgement upon. I genuinely wish you and everyone on that matrix the absolute best.
Incel behavior includes using “female” as a noun when talking about women. Using “female” as an adjective is perfectly normal and common. It is fine to write “female coworker” instead of “coworker who is a woman.”
Some people are hypersensitive to wrongspeak.
I don’t think people are bothered by “female coworker”, which is perfectly normal. It’s the reference to a “female-only” community, when the actual com is called WomensStuff and describes itself as “women only” and “a women’s community”.
Maybe it’s just me, but in female-only community, I’m using female as part of a composed adjective. I’d say male-only community too, it just feels more natural. In fact, in an earlier comment I wrote women only, and then writing man only felt SO bad that I changed both to female and male.
Now that I think about it it’s probably because I used man instead of men. I’ll change both back but OOP miiight have followed my logic? Idk
Ok. I somehow missed that. I scanned for other uses of “female” a few times but was blinded to the one right next to coworker.
Incel behavior includes using “female” as a noun when talking about women.
Sure: A -> B != B -> A
You … know that, right?
I have no idea what you’re trying to communicate, but I do understand the logical expression you used.
Probably trying to say that just because incels (allegedly) use the term “female,” it doesn’t mean that a person using that word must then be an incel.
Thanks. I’m not saying the poster is an incel. I’m just saying the objection to misuse of “female” has been primed by incels (and Ferengi). Without incels, there wouldn’t be such a knee jerk revulsion to it.
i really don’t even understand the concept of policing other people’s language use.
it’s like saying people who don’t have perfect grammar are stupid.
It’s not about the grammar. It’s the underlying mindset that might lead to specific word choices. If someone exclusively refers to women as bitches, that may be because they don’t hold much respect for women.
More subtly, if someone always refers to women as girls but rarely to men as boys, it could be telling us that they think of women as immature and less like fully formed adults.
For the word females, it’s more subtle again. It would be normal to refer to animals as male and female. For people we have the gender-specific terms man and woman. If you refer to women as females but not men as males, you may be revealing an underlying dehumanizing attitude. This is corroborated by what seems to be a common trope of incels calling women females.
