Women-only/men-only threads on ILTMI

Recently the idea of gender-specific threads on ILTMI was raised. What this means is: a thread where only women, or only men, can post, in the case some people want to discuss certain issues only with people who share their gender. Basically, if someone want to start such a thread, I see no problem with that. There's already one thread like this on 1P3, which I think works fine. However, if you want to start a gender-specific thread on ILTMI, you should do the following things:

* Make it clear in the initial post (and preferably in the thread title) that the thread is for women/men only. This is to make it clear to everyone how the thread works, so no one will feel offended if their posts are deleted.

* Email at least one ILTMI mod about the thread (the current mods are me, ENBB, and Roxymuzak) to make sure we'll notice it.

After this, if any men post to a women-only thread, or vice versa, the mods will delete the posts. No exceptions.

This is basically my suggestion how gender-specific threads would work. Roxy and ENBB, how do you feel about this? If it's fine with you, I think we should go for it.

What I don't want to do is start a huge debate about inclusion/exclusion. If some posters want to have a gender-specific thread, that should be a valid enough reason to start one. If people think is a bad idea, then they won't start such threads, or the threads will soon die due to lack of participants. Simple as that. If you want to read some theoretical justifications for this kind of separatism, you can check out the chapter "The role of separatism" in this online book - go to page 63 to start the chapter.

Also, this shouldn't be used as an excuse to start comedy threads. If all of a sudden there's a flood of men-only/women-only threads on totally trivial matters, those will probably be ignored by the mods.

good idea, imo

I'm all for this, but I'm really, really struggling to think of any valid male-only threads.

all sounds reasonable tbh

lj don't start

I'm all for this, but I'm really, really struggling to think of any valid male-only threads.

Most likely, if any gender-specific threads are actually started, the majority of them will be women-only (due to the fact that men dominate most public spaces already). But I think the option should be open for men too.

that's fair

well, the threads will still be readable by the non-participating gender, so, that's worth considering.

What about TG only threads?

Also puppies.

way to cite your sources tboz

Srsly this idea seems perfectly reasonable tho.

well, the threads will still be readable by the non-participating gender, so, that's worth considering.

― goole, Tuesday, September 7, 2010 12:16 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

this. why would people be "more comfortable" posting on single-gender threads that anyone can still read? I mean, whatever, it's just weird to me.

also what if you don't know a poster's gender? Are you going to demand documentation from unknown posters?

this. why would people be "more comfortable" posting on single-gender threads that anyone can still read? I mean, whatever, it's just weird to me.

lol i feel this way about iltmi as a whole, so eh

i guess i dunno why i'm on this thread at all then, but, it's interesting

After this, if any men post to a women-only thread, or vice versa, the mods will delete the posts. No exceptions.

I just realized you can actually ban people from specific threads - so the way ILTMI mods would probably handle this is to thread-ban anyone who tried to post to a thread he's not allowed in. Of course he can still post to rest of ILTMI.

^ sense talker

this. why would people be "more comfortable" posting on single-gender threads that anyone can still read? I mean, whatever, it's just weird to me.

Could be some people feel them safer for a variety of reasons. If no one does, then no one will ever start such a thread. What I'm suggesting is merely an option to do so, it might not lead to any gender-specific threads actually materializing here.

also what if you don't know a poster's gender? Are you going to demand documentation from unknown posters?

I think anyone who's gender we don't know should be given the benefit of the doubt, and be allowed to post to a thread. If such a person then starts trolling the thread, he/she will be banned from it based on that.

hmm still making a troubling link to 'guys on thread' = 'trolling' tuomas, but i mean as a workable idea it all seems good to me.

uh tuomas did not make that "troubling link"

surely if anyone of any gender starts trolling any thread then they should be banned from it, but tbh look yeah whatever- this is a good idea as there are people that want it and there's no harm in it.

merely trolling should never "surely" be a bannable offense.

gender is a social contruct iirc

merely trolling should never "surely" be a bannable offense.

No, but since thread like these are most likely to deal with sensitive subjects, the treshold for a thread-ban should be lower than on regular threads.

sure

tuomas was discussing the very narrow circumstance of a poster whose gender is not generally known to other thread participants getting the benefit of the doubt until it becomes clear they are trying to pull shit.

androgyne anonyme: post post post, here i am posting in a thread, hello ladies

ladies: very interesting, ms. androgyne anonyme

androgyne anonyme: surpise!! u gonna get raped!! lol i am a dude!!

tuomas: you are banned!

No, but since thread like these are most likely to deal with sensitive subjects posters, the treshold for a thread-ban should be lower than on regular threads.

xp ha well ffs who could have a problem with that!

yeah i wasn't talking about tuomas's policy, which is reasonable. i was talking about dmac's comment right above mine.

i think this whole debate is funny because nobody ever really wanted a gender-specific thread on ILTMI, kate didn't want kenan on her thread and that was it.

there's a "no boys" thread that's gone on strong for a long time now

not on ILTMI, though

not that that really means anything

Yeah it's not on ILTMI and it's a joke thread about excluding boys, like a treehouse.

maybe it means that all these threats of thread banning aren't necessary?

ie that thread has been successful without all these rules

but men really are excluded from it/have been banned from it...

what if there was a women's 77?

xp only way to keep kenan in line i'm afraid

maybe it means that all these threats of thread banning aren't necessary?

ie that thread has been successful without all these rules

that thread has had upwards of 50 posts deleted from it

i think this whole idea is weird and ignores the fact that the "issue" seems to stem from comedy interjections, not actual men showing up on the thread. or are you going to ban someone like ian for popping in to say "i support you, ladies?"

what if there was a women's 77?

― goole, Tuesday, September 7, 2010 6:49 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark

it's called the cape of good hope iirc

*high five*

if any men post to a women-only thread, or vice versa, the mods will delete the posts. No exceptions.

Yeah, a board like ILTMI is all about gray areas, and you instituting a black & white ruling about this is counter to the whole purpose at hand. We're adults (well, most of us are adults), not kindergartners. Totalitarianism is overkill.

i think this is a perfectly reasonable set of standards and should be tried out. it might take constant attention from the mods however, if people feel like they don't want to play ball. that's the only downside i see really.

Excluding groups from posting to particular threads is not a feature that solves a problem that actually exists, but sets a pretty gross precedent. trolling is trolling and there are already rules outlining bannable behavior. but as a guy i'm used to being preemptively treated as a predator so what's new ;)

how does it set a gross precedent, it's only on the board that talks about crazy sex stuff, and only if the thread-starter requests those rules be in place

you can always start a parallel "i, a man, wish to comment on this other thread from which i have been barred by the GESTAPO" or whatever, if it's such a huge issue

i mean weve already got a bunch of whites only threads, theyre just called [thread about band that has a stereotypically white fanbase]

U MEAN CLIPSE/MIA/_______

hunh hunh hunh huge issue hunh hunh

thread in question was not about "crazy sex stuff"

ok, so? it was iltmi

there is no "thread in question" by the way, the idea ought to be considered apart from whatever problem has just happened between posters

The thread in question was actually one of the most content-rich threads this board has had in a while and I was a bit upset when it went away (though I missed the posts that were the probable cause of its disappearance).

::shrug:: i just don't think the proposed policy solves the problem

Marc Loi would approve

I think I know the solution to this one

(insert image of vulva puppet)

bookmark it johnny: ladies in their late 30s (or older) come together to talk about how the whole process or experience of dating has changed for us over the years

holy shit, now I find it hilarious that I managed to invoke someone as a sympathetic character within 48 hours of him getting smacked down on that thread.

fwiw, I hadn't had it bookmarked and did not see it go wrong -- I had just read the first 10 or 15 posts before it disappeared.

Can I ask who asked for this? I mean if there are enough women who support the idea then I'd be behind it but I think it's totally unnecessary for several reasons esp what CAD said

i think this whole idea is weird and ignores the fact that the "issue" seems to stem from comedy interjections, not actual men showing up on the thread. or are you going to ban someone like ian for popping in to say "i support you, ladies?"

― call all destroyer, Tuesday, September 7, 2010 1:54 PM (13 minutes ago) [IP: 192.223.136.6] Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

I don't know. It just seems really weird to me and there are other women only spaces online for people to go if they feel the need. Like I said though, if enough people think it's a good idea then OK.

Also the fact that everyone could still read the posts makes it seem especially unnecessary and a women's only 77 type thing seems absurd to me.

For what it's worth, "being able to discuss a topic" and "being able to discuss a topic with a select subset of individuals, who happen to be female" are two different topics. I really get the idea that things have been shut down because the "wrong people" posted different places, not because the "wrong-gendered people" posted.

When you post something in a public forum, you run the risk of derails and sidetracks. IMO ilx is not a bonsai-pruned area for the most part so it's not going to be the best medium for some conversations.

yup

I agree.

theres no real "idea" here is there? tuomas is just outlining guidelines for this, in case someone wants it. it doesnt change the status quo.

Posters gonna posts, mods gonna mod, game stays the same

OK, I was just checking. If there is a lot of female support behind this I'd like to see it.

After this, if any men post to a women-only thread, or vice versa, the mods will delete the posts. No exceptions.

i guess saying this as a blanket statement and not dealing with problems case-by-case is what's weird to me?

well if you dont do that then theres no such thing as a mens only or womens only thread

is there a precedent on ilx for preemptively excluding a group of ppl from posting to a thread?

I know I can't ask this, but I lack an .xls, is Karen an account of Kate's?

yessir

yes

is there a precedent on ilx for preemptively excluding a group of ppl from posting to a thread?

Yes, there's a women-only thread on 1P3 which, as far as I know, works exactly like I outlined it in the first post.

i don't think the 1p3 thread is comparable but ymmv

k, that makes sense, I mean nothing by asking but I was mildly confused when the latter showed up and was referring to it as her thread

Why not?

(x-post)

is there a precedent on ilx for preemptively excluding a group of ppl from posting to a thread?

Yeah but you're not invited to it iirc

xp because it started as a joke thread on 1p3? and yeah it evolved from there and i guess my preference is to let threads evolve and this just seems kinda prescriptive

except that if the thread sucks no one will post on it

if women want it, then ok, fine, but this strikes me as a shift from how ilx generally deals with things, that's all

haha you mean "with rules clearly outlined beforehand and reasoning made clear by mods early on"? yeah

i look forward to the comedy/parody one-gender-only threads, those are going to be a fucking blast

lol yeah that is kind of what i mean

Let's wait and see what other women say, huh?

it seems totally reasonable to me! like max says:

"theres no real "idea" here is there? tuomas is just outlining guidelines for this, in case someone wants it. it doesnt change the status quo."

it's cool to know that if for whatever reason someone wants to start a no-boys-allowed-in-the-thread/no-girls-allowed-in-the-thread iltmi thread that the iltmi mods are prepared for the eventuality! like, i'm not gonna be that threadstarter (because fuck starting a thread), but maybe someone else will at some point, and maybe it'll be good.

(ps i am one of these mysterious 'other women' of which enbb speaks)

Yeah, that was basically why I started this thread. Since there's was already a precedent set with the 1P3 thread, and since "letting threads evolve" into women-only just caused a minor controversy, I thought it would be good to lay out the ground rules if someone wants to start this kind of a thread. I don't really see it as a case of "totalitarianism", since 99,9% of threads are likely to remain as they were before. To me this is more like a having an occasional "girls' night" or a "guys' night" where you can talk girl/guy stuff in a more relaxed way. If you're gf/bf says she/he is going one of those, would you insist that you should come with her/him for equality's sake?

tuomas i think this is a+ modding

i think it's totally bogus that i can't post to the smoke persian thread.

imo a lot of threads could be salvaged by putting a reminder/restriction like that in the title and deleting a couple offending posts. as long as it doesn't turn into revisionist "he said, she said and then deleted her post" antics, it could go ok.

yeah cos that wouldn't happen.

anyway, what threads need 'salvaging' iyo?

eh that sounds like i'm in your face maybe- i'm not, but would be interested to know.

well, one poster got apopletically irate when one thread turned into a discussion about Magic: The Gathering

can we have a protocol for putting [NO MAGIC: THE GATHERING] in the thread title

and i think everyone can agree that there are posts on the excelsior thread that are JUST NOT FUNNY

sarahel, I love you forever for using that thread as an example of this

although in that case, I was too busy laughing at that poster being irate

see i feel these are different issues to what a gender specific thread is meant to solve- the 'control of thread' issues, the 'bonsai' comment upthread was a prett good definition. ilx hasn't ever used mod power to enforce topic direction in a thread, (except once or twice on iltmi iirc).

i learned a lot about squirrels on that thread!

lyfe is an oganic process -_-

ilx hasn't ever used mod power to enforce topic direction in a thread

I'm not going to go digging for examples but strictly speaking, I do not think this is actually true. It has definitely never been true on boards like Aeon Flux.

ilx hasn't ever used mod power to enforce topic direction in a thread,

what? i probably had several dozen posts on various 1p3 threads deleted by roxy as a means of enforcing topic direction!

but i was only mildly annoyed, and mostly it was lol

I think threads have been pruned and branched, afaik

ah, novelty boards are different, kids

well it seems like sub-boards can kinda set their own policy w/r/t the use of mod power to set topic direction. i suppose iltmi is a better place than most for that kind of thing to happen.

and i don't even want to get into the momentous, epic thing that was the locking of the Esmee Denters thread!

I mean, if you really want to get technical about it, the entire reason ILE exists is because people got incredibly fed up with irreverent topic drift on ILM, so at least in the beginning of its life cycle ILX had a threshold for tolerating topic drift that was much, much lower than it is now.

i suppose iltmi is a better place than most for that kind of thing to happen.

nah

i mean the thing about iltmi is that there's a wide spectrum of opinion about how "serious" it is/should be.

well it seems like sub-boards can kinda set their own policy w/r/t the use of mod power to set topic direction.

not like I post here a lot, but I'll probably just start excluding iltmi from my thread listing if this becomes the norm

probably should anyway

waaait, that came out completely wrong, I mean that I'd avoid this place if it becomes over-pruned

I think sub-boards with their own policies is cool, just that I think making exclusive threads is against the entire iltmi ethos

i just think it's a mistake to underestimate how seriously people could take even the silliest of threads on ilx

^^^^

imo the problem is when people are doing SERIOUS TALK and can't ignore/talk around people who are joking in the same thread. it's like... the messageboard concept

Why are you guys acting like this is a set of rules that will apply to every thread started on ILTMI from this point out? No one is talking about enforcing gender exclusion on every single conversation; what is being discussed is how to support threads where the thread starter's intent is to have a conversation that is confined to a single gender.

It is possible that no one actually wants to do this, and that's okay! I don't think it's therefore a bad idea to lay out how that type of scenario would work.

ILX is, by and large, a self-policing community. I think that works well 95% of the time. The 5% of the time when it doesn't work well is awful. I don't think proactively putting together a policy for a specific type of thread to avoid that 5% clusterfuck is automatically a bad idea.

Having said that, this is going to be a lot of work to maintain and I hope, Tuomas, you're prepared for that.

first they came for the creepy guys

(kidding i'm with concept)

well - they left you, didn't they?

Mr. objectifying women

yeah i mean i just wanted to poke @ this idea a little bit but it seems to make sense to most ppl so ok then

I can't imagine there being very many threads of this nature instigated on ilx, but I think Tuomas' outlining of how they would be treated if desired is spot on. Don't see how this is controversial.

reasonbly sore spot sarah tbh.

imo the problem is when people are doing SERIOUS TALK and can't ignore/talk around people who are joking in the same thread. it's like... the messageboard concept

And some of us post both serious talk and joking in a thread.

yeah, a lot of people can manage that just fine!

Why are you guys acting like this is a set of rules that will apply to every thread started on ILTMI from this point out? No one is talking about enforcing gender exclusion on every single conversation; what is being discussed is how to support threads where the thread starter's intent is to have a conversation that is confined to a single gender.

It is possible that no one actually wants to do this, and that's okay! I don't think it's therefore a bad idea to lay out how that type of scenario would work.

This is completely OTM. Like I said, if people generally don't want to have any gender-specific threads, they'll never get started, or they'll die soon after getting started. But if someone wants to start such a thread and others want to participate, I see no harm with that. It would make the forum better for those people who sometimes want to have a gender-specific discussion, and it shouldn't ruin ILTMI, as it's highly unlikely the women/men-only threads will ever be more than a small minority of all threads.

Having said that, this is going to be a lot of work to maintain and I hope, Tuomas, you're prepared for that.

Obviously I couldn't mod these threads 24/7, which is why I asked how ENBB and Roxy feel about the whole idea.

(several x-posts)

hi dere- tuomas

nobody has voiced any objection to this.we're just derailing the thread.

reasonbly sore spot sarah tbh.

ban sarah

I don't see why I should care about this suggestion, I think it's fine and good modding. Dialogue with the other side, whatever the other side is, can't happen w/o both sides in the conversation, so if someone wants to start a thread/space that is specifically protected because they DON'T want a debate on the topic, fine. If it's not sympathetic or interesting to the other people in that sub-set, it'll die off.

tbh, I think it's a great idea to have a place to have exclusive conversations. It's called "chat".

I doubt this will be much of an issue in the future, tbh.

It might be nice if people thought, upon reading a thread that maybe they aren't specifically excluded from but aren't INCLUDED in either, that it was an interesting perspective etc on a sensitive topic, and that since their input clearly wasn't asked for, that maybe they could show some delicacy about taking part if they aren't going to comment insightfully on the actual topic.

Unfortunately if you modded for delicacy, this whole place would be shit.

i see what you're saying laurel, but you're getting close to 'wait for invite' mentality and dunno. hard enough to get ove the lurker mtality first time round tbh.

It's impossible to govern a message board with 365 types of aspie.

xp (interested in this, is all- FTR still think the idea is a good one) (before i become 'that guy' again)

I'm not saying "wait for an invite," I'm saying "wait until I have something of substance to contribute that people might actually want to respond to." Not all spaces are meant for every person, this is why I stay off ILM entirely.

i think there's a major split in posting philosophy there. that would be a stick-dry board imo, and i'm a glad as could be that ilx isn't like tha for the most part. but then y'know i might be headwrecker #1 spoiling ur ilxperience with frivolous posts all day, i dunno how you find the balance

Yeah okay but like 99% of threads aren't "sensitive"!! And for the ones that are, people are mostly totally cool and sympathetic on them!! Like the unemployment threads, or the breaking up ones or the cancer one or w/e. It was not asking THAT MUCH for a thread directed specifically at women age blah blah to remain the province of women aged blah blah, not exclusively but in spirit.

i agree!

it's not like that thread as exactly invaded, though?

i don't get why this is a problem

(also don't really get the idea of secret threads -- they can all be *read* ffs. but im not a big internet person.)

xp No, and I've been wondering for days wtf happened to it -- that whole clusterfuck is beyond me.

Otoh in theory I agree w the idea that not every space is "for" everyone's equal participation, given a very loose definition of "for".

yeah really i don't think anyone has problems with the idea that derailing some threads is more dickish than derailing others

Naw. So the gendered thread thing is, like, if you REALLY REALLY feel that you must by law protect yr thread, feel free. But if it turns out not to be partic "sensitive" at all and/or your concern isn't borne out by the content, you're going to look a teeny bit silly, aren't you?

......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

so is anyone going to actually jump out and say what this is all about, because we all know

and I don't mean just posting a link to that thread

Can female-characterised sockpuppets post on female threads?

xxp But if someone here wants to talk about some aspect of an abusive or coercive or w/e kind of situation, I am sure as hell not to complain if they don't want an open-to-posting-for-lols space for that.

so is anyone going to actually jump out and say what this is all about, because we all know

and I don't mean just posting a link to that thread

Is that actually helpful or germane to the discussion or do you just want to talk about someone?

But if someone here wants to talk about some aspect of an abusive or coercive or w/e kind of situation, I am sure as hell not to complain if they don't want an open-to-posting-for-lols space for that.

― Q: What's small, clumsy, and slow? A: A toddler. (Laurel), Tuesday, September 7, 2010 10:05 PM (30 seconds ago) Bookmark

obviously. i just dunno if a public forum on the internet is the best place to get into it. /practically victorian dude speaking

Hey, you could say that about a thread started a few weeks ago about someone's very specific experience of parenting, too and I srsly doubt anyone is going to complain or run poster down for sharing.

I was trying to get at that with the vulva puppet comment, KBP

Because the honor system is pretty much in place on this stuff anyway

Dan, I apologize for being snippy there, but this kind of feels like Tuomas being helpful by proposing a solution for a problem that may or may not exist. It's not even about not being a dick, it's about whether people *perceive* you as a dick due to past action.

Then again, I have no idea since I guess a lot of commenting was deleted?

sooooo if the problem exists we now have a framework to deal with it
if the problem doesnt exist.... there is now an extra thread on iltmi

^^^^

yeah, sorry guys, it's a fun day to ignore work at the office

I mean, it's one thing when people say "this problem might exist; let's rewrite the board code to address it" but this is a sub board process proposed by a sub board moderator for a specific type of thread that makes total sense given the board's subject matter; I really don't/can't see why this should be controversial or worrying in the slightest.

but, nazis

(or to put it another way, someone volunteering to do more work is always better than someone volunteering someone else to do more work)

xp hahaha

btw Roxy is not an ILTMI mod. I don't remember when or why that changed.

Yeah, I didn't think she was but I wasn't going to say anything in case I was wrong. Pretty sure it's been Tuomas and I for a while now and I think Kate too because I don't think her mod status was ever changed.

I still think that this sort of goes against the whole idea of a message board like ILX and don't think the 1P3 comparison is really fair since that's mainly a joke thread. That said, whether or not I agree with the idea of having these is really besides the point. I don't think there will be tons and will be OK with doing a little extra work should it be necessary and as long as it doesn't get out of hand.

don't think the 1P3 comparison is really fair since that's mainly a joke thread

thread war!

i think E and Tuomas have talked total sense itt

i mean i think it's totally reasonable - whether it will work/happen in practice - i dunno - like history mayne said - everyone can still read it, and that would definitely influence someone's opinion about whether they want to post stuff they're really sensitive about.

but i think ilx can be pretty mature - i mean people aren't regularly trolling the gay thread with "lol fags" or whatever

no, and the site mods would kick that shit out of the ballpark anyway

rip cankles

I'm not saying "wait for an invite," I'm saying "wait until I have something of substance to contribute that people might actually want to respond to." Not all spaces are meant for every person, this is why I stay off ILM entirely.

I tend to stay away from ILM too, and this post is largely OTM, I think. But on the Controversial thread in question, I don't think that what was happening was some massive invasion of 20-year-old image bombers. Mostly we're pretty ok to each other around here, I think.

Also, I never would have continued to post after being banned and unbanned if I hadn't have assumed that Kate was the one who unbanned me. I'm not trying specifically to be a penis about all this, contrary to some versions of the story.

BTW, does anyone remember what thread it was I made that pee joke on? I remember it was a rude joke, but I can't remember the thread or the context for the life of me.

Also, I never would have continued to post after being banned and unbanned if I hadn't have assumed that Kate was the one who unbanned me. I'm not trying specifically to be a penis about all this, contrary to some versions of the story.

BTW, does anyone remember what thread it was I made that pee joke on? I remember it was a rude joke, but I can't remember the thread or the context for the life of me.

Shit. Can we fix THAT problem too, while we're at it?

The thread in question reads to me like it suffered from the rules not being set out at the start, only assumed. The were only made explicit after the dudes had arrived and started to post.

This is the opposite of that -- the rules might not be needed, but if they are at least they're clear and pretty unambiguous -- and so I guess is a good thing.

xp I'd like to know how you manage it, first! They're supposed to be blocked.

I don't know either! If I hit submit at the same moment that either my connection or the server has a hiccup, then hit submit again because the page isn't doing anything, sometimes I get a warning and sometimes I get two posts.

kenan is obviously The One and ur code can't hold him any more stet

single-gender threads other than "no boys allowed in the room" suck imo

any argument that involves "but girls can't freely talk about (x) without guys doing (y)" is some bullshit imo

we should talk more about my opinions in this thread. it would make the world a better place.

that's a weird emoticon for wanking

i think it refers to the wishbone shape of the clitoris?

thought it was chromosomes tbh

You hush. You're not the default gender.

:-)

Ok NOW I'm being a penis.

btw - we're discussing leggings on the Males only thread

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qf3oOQq9KFU

Listen is there any reason this thread needs to stay open? If someone would like to start a gender-specific thread Tuomas has outlined the ways in which they can do so.

apart from LOLs and sniping, no.