Support NeoGAF

[cubicle47b]

Don't know if I agree with this. How about that horrible F word that rhymes with "bag it." For a long long time it was (and still is) used to demean men, whether they be gay or not. In fact, most gay slurs, I would argue, directly attack a man's manhood, because of the misguided and ridiculous notion that being gay some how makes you less of a man.

No, that's a "less than a man" insult. It's not trying to equate masculinity with being a bad thing.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

But it only works if you get pissed off about it and let the person know it bothers you.

It's one thing to suggest to an individual "sticks and stones..." as a means of cheering them up -- it seemed to work when we were little kids -- but it's another thing to offer that in a more general discussion. Words have meaning. Suggesting that we give them meaning is a rather meaningless sentiment in a broad discussion.

 

[cubicle47b]

Oh, you found another one! "I would be feminist if you weren't so rude to me."

That one's fair, though. If you're being an asshole in a conversation where the other person is legitimately trying to understand where you're coming from you're just straight up being an asshole and driving people away. Congrats.

 

[Tacitus_]

That is, in fact, the conventional patriarchal conception of femininity, which is exactly why it's a problem.

But when you're calling a man a bitch, are you attempting to emasculate him and make him seem femine, or are you telling him to stop whining?Personally I don't associate calling someone a bitch with trying to make them seem femine since bitching isn't a female thing.

...but since not bitching about something is usually taken as 'manly', is it still stealthily insinuating they're femine? Such a messy subject.

 

[Bladenic]

ITT: Feminist GAF.

 

[Eidan]

Don't know if I agree with this. How about that horrible F word that rhymes with "bag it." For a long long time it was (and still is) used to demean men, whether they be gay or not. In fact, most gay slurs, I would argue, directly attack a man's manhood, because of the misguided and ridiculous notion that being gay some how makes you less of a man.

The f-word and other gay slurs are used against straight men much in the same way slurs against women are used against straight men. They're both meant to make the man seem like "less than a man". It doesn't attack masculinity, it says masculinity isn't there.

 

[LuchaShaq]

My favorite insult/slur that is only offensive because how people have used it is "Jap".

Really the best insult you can come up with is using the first half of their country of origin?

Hey guys fuck all those dirty Cans from Canada, those Mexes, and Brits from Britain.

Fucking absurd that that became a slur.

 

[jorgeton]

The f-word and other gay slurs are used against straight men much in the same way slurs against women are used against straight men. They're both meant to make the man seem like "less than a man". It doesn't attack masculinity, it says masculinity isn't there.

Ah, gotcha. By attack masculinity, you mean an actual term that posits masculinity in a negative light, not one that negates or lessens it.

 

[DanteFox]

Wow this forum's rules are getting a little bit out of hand. I challenge anyone on the moderation team or otherwise to articulate a reason why the word "bitch" should be banned over other insults. I am struggling to think of a reason for singling out such a word.

 

[Bladenic]

Wow this forum's rules are getting a little bit out of hand. I challenge anyone on the moderation team or otherwise to articulate a reason why the word "bitch" should be banned over other insults. I am struggling to think of a reason for singling out such a word.

Good luck with that.

 

[Dead Man]

Um using terms like "faggot" against a man is similar to using "bitch." You're insulting their manhood as lesser.

No, that's a "less than a man" insult. It's not trying to equate masculinity with being a bad thing.

But again, many of the female gendered insults are not trying to make the person less feminine. Calling someone a bitch is not attacking their femininity. You cannot have it both ways. Calling a man a bitch or faggot is to attack his manhood by comparing him to a woman. Fine. I will agree with that. How then is calling a woman a bitch an attack on her femininity? I will agree it is a gendered insult. But so are the things you are dismissing. Faggot is comparing gay behaviour with female behaviour, but before that, it is an attack on the male as not living up to the male ideal.

 

[Devolution]

Wow this forum's rules are getting a little bit out of hand. I challenge anyone on the moderation team or otherwise to articulate a reason why the word "bitch" should be banned over other insults. I am struggling to think of a reason for singling out such a word.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=40258110&postcount=153

But again, many of the female gendered insults are not trying to make the person less feminine. Calling someone a bitch is not attacking their femininity. You cannot have it both ways. Calling a man a bitch or faggot is to attack his manhood by comparing him to a woman. Fine. I will agree with that. How then is calling a woman a bitch an attack on her femininity? I will agree it is a gendered insult. But so are the things you are dismissing. Faggot is comparing gay behaviour with female behaviour, but before that, it is an attack on the male as not living up to the male ideal.

Bitch directed at a woman reminds her that she's acting out of place, same with a man. I don't understand what your confusion is about.

 

[pigeon]

That one's fair, though. If you're being an asshole in a conversation where the other person is legitimately trying to understand where you're coming from you're just straight up being an asshole and driving people away. Congrats.

When somebody says "I'd be interested in feminism/social justice/whatever, but I'm not now, because you were too rude to me," they're saying "I value people being nice to me more than I value equality." It's tough for me to view that person as a reliable ally.

 

[DanteFox]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=40258110&postcount=153

That's not a reason. That just explains the rule, not the justification for the rule.

 

[Divvy]

Would "prick" be the male equivalent of "bitch"?

 

[ThisWreckage]

When somebody says "I'd be interested in feminism/social justice/whatever, but I'm not now, because you were too rude to me," they're saying "I value people being nice to me more than I value equality." It's tough for me to view that person as a reliable ally.

Thank you for this. The smugness is so palpable I can honestly say I'll never value anything you post.

 

[Souther]

It's one thing to suggest to an individual "sticks and stones..." as a means of cheering them up -- it seemed to work when we were little kids -- but it's another thing to offer that in a more general discussion. Words have meaning. Suggesting that we give them meaning is a rather meaningless sentiment in a broad discussion.

I can't speak for everyone, but it just doesn't work on me.

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

When somebody says "I'd be interested in feminism/social justice/whatever, but I'm not now, because you were too rude to me," they're saying "I value people being nice to me more than I value equality." It's tough for me to view that person as a reliable ally.

I think that if you're trying to educate someone about something, being a dick to them is counter productive. They're not going to want to listen to what you have to say.

 

[Zoe]

Would "prick" be the male equivalent of "bitch"?

I use "bastard" as the equivalent.

 

[charlequin]

It feels unnecessary, bordering on white-knighting to me.

The job of the moderation staff is to encourage positive discussion and community contributions while discouraging things that make the community less pleasant, less welcoming, and otherwise less good than it could be.

We don't want GAF to be a community where it's okay to talk shit about people... as long as they're women, or as long as they're fat, or as long as they don't speak English, or as long as they're mentally ill, period. We don't want GAF to be a community where it's okay to try to push the boundaries of how rude and offensive the things you call people are. Just in general, this is not a place where it's okay to be rude and abusive to other people.

It's really not that hard to treat other people right. I really, honestly don't think we're asking too much of people.

 

[sleepykyo]

I'm not following.

No one calls someone a bitch to make them feminine (there are other terms for that). The insult is used when someone the whines. It being a gendered insult is contingent upon considering whining and indecisiveness as feminine traits.

Where as calling someone uses dick or bastard tends to be due to excessive aggression or insensitivity. And as such would be a gendered insult since aggression and insensitivity are considered masculine traits.

 

[Dead Man]

Bitch directed at a woman reminds her that she's acting out of place, same with a man. I don't understand what your confusion is about.

Nor I yours.

 

[Divvy]

I use "bastard" as the equivalent.

Bastard is pretty gender non specific in its origins I think. Prick is pretty masculine, and like bitch I guess it can refer to a cartoonified portrayal of a gender.

 

[Eidan]

But again, many of the female gendered insults are not trying to make the person less feminine. Calling someone a bitch is not attacking their femininity. You cannot have it both ways. Calling a man a bitch or faggot is to attack his manhood by comparing him to a woman. Fine. I will agree with that. How then is calling a woman a bitch an attack on her femininity? I will agree it is a gendered insult. But so are the things you are dismissing. Faggot is comparing gay behaviour with female behaviour, but before that, it is an attack on the male as not living up to the male ideal.

I would personally say you know "bitch" is attacking femininity because when it is used on a man, it is associated with femininity. It's a word made for women, to insult and demoralize women. And to use it on a man is to compare him to a woman. Seems pretty straight forward to me.

 

[Eidan]

No one calls someone a bitch to make them feminine (there are other terms for that). The insult is used when someone the whines. It being a gendered insult is contingent upon considering whining and indecisiveness as feminine traits.

Where as calling someone uses dick or bastard tends to be due to excessive aggression or insensitivity. And as such would be a gendered insult since aggression and insensitivity are considered masculine traits.

I've heard it used to emasculate people all the time. In fact, I'd say I heard it far more in that context than in the "whiny" context.

But I'd agree that whininess and indecisiveness are often labeled as feminine traits...so my point still stands?

 

[EYEL1NER]

I guess I use gendered insults but not to the opposite sex. I will use them in reference to a member of the opposite sex but I don't ever really insult women to their face. But then again, I don't ever really insult men to their face either. Keep in mind, the only people I socialize with are my wife and my one male friend. It's not like I have some huge group I hang out with where I would have the chance to throw insults around.
I try not to use insults online either. I don't really insult people here in GAF (or I try not to; can't remember doing it too much).
So I guess that I use words like 'Bitch' as an insult but not to anyone really. Edit: Not that it is okay to insult people in that manner; I'm not acting like I'm above anyone. Saying "So-and-so is being a fucking bitch" to my buddy or something still isn't okay. But swearing and sometimes saying some mean things is my nature and I don't think I could change it too easily.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

No one calls someone a bitch to make them feminine (there are other terms for that). The insult is used when someone the whines. It being a gendered insult is contingent upon considering whining and indecisiveness as feminine traits.

I know everyone grows up under different circumstances, but from where I'm sitting this is quite a bit different than my historical understanding of the word. Arguably, one might make the case that it's become so pervasive that it's lost it's original meaning. I won't eagerly agree with such an assertion, but I could understand where they would be coming from as far as how it's used in the common vernacular.

But going back as far as I can remember in learning about inappropriate words, "bitch" was undeniably used primarily to refer to a woman. Whether or not it was a gender-specific insult was not really in question at all. The fact that the word -- when not used as a slur -- literally refers to a female dog should help clue us in as to why it would be perceived as targeting women.

 

[Tookay]

Oh, you found another one! "I would be feminist if you weren't so rude to me."

No, it's merely stating that if you want to have a conversation with someone and explain why they are using "fallacies," it's probably not wise to open up by completely insulting them and avoiding an explanation of what it is about them that is fallacious.

When somebody says "I'd be interested in feminism/social justice/whatever, but I'm not now, because you were too rude to me," they're saying "I value people being nice to me more than I value equality." It's tough for me to view that person as a reliable ally.

This a fundamental mischaracterization of my comment, assuming the worst of me before we even begin to discuss anything. That's what makes me wary of you.

The job of the moderation staff is to encourage positive discussion and community contributions while discouraging things that make the community less pleasant, less welcoming, and otherwise less good than it could be.

We don't want GAF to be a community where it's okay to talk shit about people... as long as they're women, or as long as they're fat, or as long as they don't speak English, or as long as they're mentally ill, period. We don't want GAF to be a community where it's okay to try to push the boundaries of how rude and offensive the things you call people are. Just in general, this is not a place where it's okay to be rude and abusive to other people.

It's really not that hard to treat other people right. I really, honestly don't think we're asking too much of people.

That's not the sole issue people are discussing, though.

Personally, it feels inconsistent that these groups need to be actively protected on this board (even though they are readily accepted by the majority of posters here), but then all sorts of mockery seems to accrue to other potential groups of posters, such as Christians and conservatives, who often feel like the real minorities on GAF. And, to be sure, those groups may have crazies that bring it upon themselves and might be well-represented in society at large, but on this site, that isn't quite the case. It strikes me as selective enforcement.

 

[Karsticles]

The job of the moderation staff is to encourage positive discussion and community contributions while discouraging things that make the community less pleasant, less welcoming, and otherwise less good than it could be.

We don't want GAF to be a community where it's okay to talk shit about people... as long as they're women, or as long as they're fat, or as long as they don't speak English, or as long as they're mentally ill, period. We don't want GAF to be a community where it's okay to try to push the boundaries of how rude and offensive the things you call people are. Just in general, this is not a place where it's okay to be rude and abusive to other people.

It's really not that hard to treat other people right. I really, honestly don't think we're asking too much of people.

Does that mean GAF will start banning for blanket generalizations of groups, then? For example, if I post "Typical Republican/Democrat", doesn't that fit your criteria of "talking shit" about someone based on the group? I just ask because pretty much every political thread in the Off-Topic forum has two sides caricaturing an opposing side. How is that different from not wanting people to use "bitch" in an anti-woman way? Sure, it's not easily pinned down into a word all the time, but what does banning words matter if it has no effect on the the actual problem?

 

[Zoe]

Bastard is pretty gender non specific in its origins I think. Prick is pretty masculine, and like bitch I guess it can refer to a cartoonified portrayal of a gender.

I can't really recall ever hearing "prick" unless it's on TV coming out of a 40+ year old woman.

 

[JABEE]

Would "prick" be the male equivalent of "bitch"?

Prick is more in line with another slur. Man-child would be the equivalent, but men aren't a protected class on this message board.

 

[Fritz]

Rarely and never casually. I called girls bitch in cases I was really hurt, but just amongst friends and never to the girl herself. Doesn't make it much better but at least I am not throwing such words around non-chalantly.

 

[PetriP-TNT]

The job of the moderation staff is to encourage positive discussion and community contributions while discouraging things that make the community less pleasant, less welcoming, and otherwise less good than it could be.

We don't want GAF to be a community where it's okay to talk shit about people... as long as they're women, or as long as they're fat, or as long as they don't speak English, or as long as they're mentally ill, period. We don't want GAF to be a community where it's okay to try to push the boundaries of how rude and offensive the things you call people are. Just in general, this is not a place where it's okay to be rude and abusive to other people.

And GAF has never been like a community like that. It's the least offensive forum I frequent BY FAR and has been like that at least since I started lurking here many years ago, much before I even registered. Until now, it seems. Or maybe I haven't just noticed it myself but

Enforcing (albeit old) rules suddenly just makes the forum less welcoming and encourages pushing the boundaries for many. I don't know if you have noticed, but compare usage of the word "Cunt" before and after the Cunt-incident. Quite often the situation is referenced in the OT and boom the thread has gone to shitter. Like I said this is the 50th topic about this topic in a really short while. No one was even questioning if it was offensive to use the bitch about another person in a insulting manner before that. Now people do it even out of spite. It's a catalyst. If something is forbidden, especially when the thin line is very arbitary and in the eye of the judge, it always happens.

People push boundaries and some get too anxious about the bans to actually post anything. If that doesn't make a forum less welcoming I don't know what is.

 

[usea]

It's really not that hard to treat other people right. I really, honestly don't think we're asking too much of people.

That's not what you're asking at all. You're perfectly OK with posters treating each other poorly as long as they don't use words from a list of ones that have been deemed unacceptable.

People on this forum are rarely interested in seeing others' points of view. They don't want to understand each other. And why should they? Why should they even open up with each other in this environment? The rules do not even remotely encourage posters to treat each other with respect. They encourage people to troll and bait each other into stepping on some ridiculous ban booby trap.

I'm afraid to even post my photo in the real photo thread because I'm going to get internet detectives PMing me with info I haven't posted on this site. I'm afraid to speak my mind on subjects in a way that people will be receptive to because people will be rude about it. Threads are largely doomed to be lists of opinions and some minor trolling, trying to trick somebody into revealing something genuine about themselves.

I'm sorry to be so critical when there is no easy solution. I'd love to be able to actually contribute some useful and constructive ideas. But again, that would take a personal investment that is strongly discouraged here.

 

[pigeon]

I think that if you're trying to educate someone about something, being a dick to them is counter productive. They're not going to want to listen to what you have to say.

Don't take this the wrong way, but I don't really post on NeoGAF to educate people. I just want to express my thoughts and opinions, and if people find them convincing (or not), that's great (or lousy), but I'm not going to take responsibility for changing their minds. If people really want to get educated, they'll get educated, and if they don't really want to get educated, then we're both better off not trying.

That said,

This a fundamental mischaracterization of my comment, assuming the worst of me before we even begin to discuss anything. That's what makes me wary of you.

Okay, fair cop. I'm sorry I assumed the worst so quickly. I have specific questions about the points you're trying to make, in my last post but one, so I'd be interested to see some expansion on your arguments.

 

[Deified Data]

Absolutely.

Words have power. When the situation warrants, I'm going to use the best in my arsenal.

 

[cloudwalking]

I can't really recall ever hearing "prick" unless it's on TV coming out of a 40+ year old woman.

yeah i haven't heard someone use prick as an insult in years... last time i heard it, my aunt said it.

what about douchebag? i hear that one allllll the time nowadays. can't really be applied to women, or at least i've never heard a woman called a douchebag.

 

[Divvy]

I can't really recall ever hearing "prick" unless it's on TV coming out of a 40+ year old woman.

Oh I hear it used all the time in my area. Generally means aggressive and arrogant sort of.

 

[kirblar]

If people really want to get educated, they'll get educated, and if they don't really want to get educated, then we're both better off not trying.

This is one of the big issues in this debate- often, when someone expresses a contrary opinion, they're labeled as uneducated/unenlightened. To many posters, it seems like it's simply unfathomable to them that someone could have a different point of view on the situation, and that they must simply not be "educated" on the subject. The various academic code words and such thrown around also are used in a way which seems to seek to exclude "outsiders" from being allowed to participate in the discussion or to de-legitimize their opinions.

 

[Dead Man]

Those bitching about being polite when you post need to try again. I am all for keeping gendered insults in my arsenel when someone has pissed me off, but I feel no need to use them, or any insult really, on GAF.


*mods, do not look up my ban history or point out my old posts where I used some less flattering language*

 

[less laughter]

We don't want GAF to be a community where it's okay to talk shit about people... as long as they're women, or as long as they're fat, or as long as they don't speak English, or as long as they're mentally ill, period. We don't want GAF to be a community where it's okay to try to push the boundaries of how rude and offensive the things you call people are. Just in general, this is not a place where it's okay to be rude and abusive to other people.

It's really not that hard to treat other people right. I really, honestly don't think we're asking too much of people.

The bolded sentences taken together are oxymoronic, since if people can't even treat themselves right, then why should others? Being overweight is a choice, and one with a high price to society to boot. Defending and justifying it is in fact more immoral and unethical than stigmatizing it and encouraging somebody to get healthy. You're not really helping them with anything except ending up in an early grave.

 

[Dead Man]

The bolded sentences taken together are oxymoronic, since if people can't even treat themselves right, then why should others? Being overweight is a choice, and one with a high price to society to boot. Defending and justifying it is in fact more immoral and unethical than stigmatizing it and encouraging somebody to get healthy. You're not really helping them with anything except ending up in an early grave.

You have decided shaming people is the way to get them to lose weight? You are not helping yourself.

 

[Tookay]

The bolded sentences taken together are oxymoronic, since if people can't even treat themselves right, then why should others? Being overweight is a choice, and one with a high price to society to boot. Defending and justifying it is in fact more immoral and unethical than stigmatizing it and encouraging somebody to get healthy. You're not really helping them with anything except ending up in an early grave.

This probably isn't a road you want to go down.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

The bolded sentences taken together are oxymoronic, since if people can't even treat themselves right, then why should others? Being overweight is a choice, and one with a high price to society to boot. Defending and justifying it is in fact more immoral and unethical than stigmatizing it and encouraging somebody to get healthy. You're not really helping them with anything except ending up in an early grave.

This is really a tangent that we need not investigate further, but suffice to say -- though I'm not advocating in favor of no personal responsibility -- I disagree. Further, I think it's rather disingenuous to act as though there's some nobility in making fun of the obese.

But, again, this is neither here nor there. I don't think this was a very opportune time to make this observation.

 

[pigeon]

This is one of the big issues in this debate- often, when someone expresses a contrary opinion, they're labeled as uneducated/unenlightened.

Man, I didn't use the word first. I was responding to somebody. I am comfortable with the idea that there are people who disagree with me whom I cannot make agree with me with any amount of patient, reasoned engagement. That's actually kind of the point I was making.

No one was even questioning if it was offensive to use the bitch about another person in a insulting manner before that. Now people do it even out of spite. It's a catalyst. If something is forbidden, especially when the thin line is very arbitary and in the eye of the judge, it always happens.

Then those people will get banned? Victory for the horde?

The bolded sentences taken together are oxymoronic, since if people can't even treat themselves right, then why should others? Being overweight is a choice, and one with a high price to society to boot. Defending and justifying it is in fact more immoral and unethical than stigmatizing it and encouraging somebody to get healthy. You're not really helping them with anything except ending up in an early grave.

Nice having you.

 

[kirblar]

Man, I didn't use the word first. I was responding to somebody. I am comfortable with the idea that there are people who disagree with me whom I cannot make agree with me with any amount of patient, reasoned engagement. That's actually kind of the point I was making.

Don't worry, I was more using your statement as a launching pad, as the type of behavior I described has been bothering me for a while.

 

[SystemShock2]

For sure. It's not something I use all the time but if there's a girl I really hate I'll refer to as bitch with my friends. The only time I'll call a girl a bitch to her face is if I'm jokin with her though.

 

[usea]

The bolded sentences taken together are oxymoronic, since if people can't even treat themselves right, then why should others? Being overweight is a choice, and one with a high price to society to boot. Defending and justifying it is in fact more immoral and unethical than stigmatizing it and encouraging somebody to get healthy. You're not really helping them with anything except ending up in an early grave.

Fat people are individuals, and it's not fair to assume things about them based on them being fat. Being fat isn't their sole, defining characteristic. It sucks, but there's an immeasurable depth to each person beyond surface things like that.

You're flat out wrong that every person who is fat has chosen to be, or that they can't help themselves. I'm not gonna lie, I have some bias against the overweight, but I recognize it and I catch myself. People are people, not labels like fat or whatever. It's not fair to dismiss them based on one aspect.

 

[Gouty]

Why not ban all insults? If we can't be trusted to exercise a little common sense when and how to use words like bitch then at least have some consistency to show for it.

 

[Fritz]

That's not what you're asking at all. You're perfectly OK with posters treating each other poorly as long as they don't use words from a list of ones that have been deemed unacceptable.

People on this forum are rarely interested in seeing others' points of view. They don't want to understand each other. And why should they? Why should they even open up with each other in this environment? The rules do not even remotely encourage posters to treat each other with respect. They encourage people to troll and bait each other into stepping on some ridiculous ban booby trap.

I'm afraid to even post my photo in the real photo thread because I'm going to get internet detectives PMing me with info I haven't posted on this site. I'm afraid to speak my mind on subjects in a way that people will be receptive to because people will be rude about it. Threads are largely doomed to be lists of opinions and some minor trolling, trying to trick somebody into revealing something genuine about themselves.

I'm sorry to be so critical when there is no easy solution. I'd love to be able to actually contribute some useful and constructive ideas. But again, that would take a personal investment that is strongly discouraged here.

I just felt the need to state that my experience is almost the complete opposite. I had a couple of good discussions and had lots of insight and input on these boards. I am actually amazed how many decent people are on here. Often lots of effort is put into posts, often not, but trolls are frequently called out by the community without mods even having to step in. This is certainly the community that comes closest to reflecting a face-to-face conversation in regards of behavior and conduct of the posters.