Is GAF too strict?

Status
Not open for further replies.
TeethMummy said:
That form of crudeness is rarely tolerated, but male gaffers can and often do "would" pictures of men with zero worry of such consequences. GAF works hard to protect its stance of being a friendly and safe place for the LGBT community, which is extremely admirable and one of the many things that I like about this site. It does allow for a slight double standard, which can at times seem unfair, but in the end, its not worth arguing over and its something we can all live with and adhere to. I tried approaching this topic earlier in this thread, and admittedly did not properly convey my point. Its just the way things have to be I guess. Gender, politics, and race issues are extremely sensitive topics, and sometimes trying to discuss even a slightly differing opinion on these topics (not that I ever have or wish to, but I have seen it in some threads) will cause things to get out of hand, and the opinion that could be deemed offensive to some, even if that opinion is being taken completely the wrong way, will always provoke strong reactions to protect the offended with these issues.

Bottom line: think before you speak, approach every issue with respect, and if you feel you're being misunderstood, best to not let it escalate and keep things civil.
Click to expand...

To be clear, I don't "would" people because it doesn't really work with my personality, but at the same time I don't feel that it's bad enough to hurt anyone because it can work in any direction and the sentiment is not exclusive to any gender or sexuality.

My bottom line is absolute equality. As with affirmative action, special protection might seem like a good idea but it doesn't promote equality.
 
GrizzNKev said:
To be clear, I don't "would" people because it doesn't really work with my personality, but at the same time I don't feel that it's bad enough to hurt anyone because it can work in any direction and the sentiment is not exclusive to any gender or sexuality.

My bottom line is absolute equality. As with affirmative action, special protection might seem like a good idea but it doesn't promote equality.
Click to expand...

lol.. Sorry but that is a stretch and a half..
 
Blackace said:
And without our balls we can't be offensive and sexual harass users...
Click to expand...

Saying that the word "masturbate" was sexual harassment is a stretch and a half.

Blackace said:
You and me both.. And this is not the thread to derail with AA right now
Click to expand...

Yeah, I probably shouldn't have mentioned it but there are some similarities. At the same time I believe that people should have a thicker skin when it comes to this stuff, not just for this issue but for everything. I'm done for now I guess.
 
Blackace said:
Well I don't know what exactly the issue is...

If somebody thinks somebody is "hot" that usually implies they wouldn't sleeping with the person..
Click to expand...

I'm kinda confused myself.

In reality, I don't use 'hot' too often cause it doesn't roll off the tongue right. Feels weird to compliment a girl like that, even with just my buddies. I like using 'gorgeous', 'pretty', 'beautiful', 'sexy', or 'DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMN.'

I think that thread title is one of the few times I've actually used 'hot'.

Wait, why am I explaining myself? I have no idea what I'm doing anymore.
 
GrizzNKev said:
Saying that the word "masturbate" was sexual harassment is a stretch and a half.
Click to expand...

Say it at work in mixed company and tell me how that works out... I understand this isn't work but we have draw a hard line at a point, just like with any rule.

Like the speed limit, who decided 70 was safe, not 80.. Or 75? I am sure you can make case for the safety of 85 but doubt that will help you from getting a ticket
 
If you wouldn't say it to people you barely or don't know in real life then don't say it on here. Unfortunately I say a lot of inappropriate shit to people in real life because their reactions make me laugh so that rule doesn't work that well for me sometimes. So I just keep my posting to a minimum now.
 
Blackace said:
And without our balls we can't be offensive and sexual harass users...
Click to expand...

Sexually harrassing a user is one thing. If a woman posted on GAF and people said "tits or gtfo", then ban away. Projecting meaning on to people's statements and labelling them sexist is another thing. Someone cracking a joke about would'ing a woman is basically a GAF meme. Yet there's this bizarre suggestion that people saying that are actually incapable of seeing women as anything other than sexual objects, when really it's just a joke that a minority manage to convince themselves is offensive. I am completely at a loss as to who in the world is going to be offended by the "masturbate" responses in that thread other than somebody who wants to be offended.
 
charlequin said:
Is it honestly that difficult to understand the difference between a thread where everyone's joking about how the OP should be a creepy sexually-harrassing perv to his sister's friend and a thread about poop? The "frathouse" thing isn't about being how it's not okay to talk about gross stuff or discuss sex and masturbation, it's about how aggro sexual harrassment and projection isn't cool.

The thing where we've cracked down on "would" is really illustrative here. When it's okay to say "would" (or "I'll be in my bunk" or any of the other innumerable variants) it creates a meat-market environment where women can't be discussed without everyone chiming in to comment on the specifics of their physical attractiveness. That's problematic enough with public figures and it creates an actively hostile environment when it comes to other posters.
Click to expand...

On the subject of expressing sexual interest generally, MIMIC actually summed up a rather nice rule of thumb in a similar recent thread:

MIMIC said:
One thing I've since learned: if the thread isn't about the way a particular woman looks, then the thread isn't about the way a particular woman looks.

Never been banned for something like that, but I've seen it happen.
Click to expand...
 
blame space said:
nothing you say matters, they'll just edit your posts to say what they want them to say.

quote this rare post before it's gone.
Click to expand...

We've always been at war with Eastasia.

Holy Wars said:
Sexually harrassing a user is one thing. If a woman posted on GAF and people said "tits or gtfo", then ban away. Projecting meaning on to people's statements and labelling them sexist is another thing. Someone cracking a joke about would'ing a woman is basically a GAF meme. Yet there's this bizarre suggestion that people saying that are actually incapable of seeing women as anything other than sexual objects, when really it's just a joke that a minority manage to convince themselves is offensive. I am completely at a loss as to who in the world is going to be offended by the "masturbate" responses in that thread other than somebody who wants to be offended.
Click to expand...

That's not necessarily true, you have to admit. There are certain situations where it isn't really appropriate at all.
 
blame space said:
nothing you say matters, they'll just edit your posts to say what they want them to say.

quote this rare post before it's gone.
Click to expand...

1. I genuinely love you and don't forget it, you always seem to post in threads when I do. I've even tried to imitate your posting style for comedic effect.
2. I know.

Holy Wars said:
Sexually harrassing a user is one thing. If a woman posted on GAF and people said "tits or gtfo", then ban away. Projecting meaning on to people's statements and labelling them sexist is another thing. Someone cracking a joke about would'ing a woman is basically a GAF meme. Yet there's this bizarre suggestion that people saying that are actually incapable of seeing women as anything other than sexual objects, when really it's just a joke that a minority manage to convince themselves is offensive. I am completely at a loss as to who in the world is going to be offended by the "masturbate" responses in that thread other than somebody who wants to be offended.
Click to expand...

I went through sexual harassment training. It's incredibly obvious that saying "masturbate" in the way it was said in that thread was not sexual harassment.
 
Holy Wars said:
Sexually harrassing a user is one thing. If a woman posted on GAF and people said "tits or gtfo", then ban away. Projecting meaning on to people's statements and labelling them sexist is another thing. Someone cracking a joke about would'ing a woman is basically a GAF meme. Yet there's this bizarre suggestion that people saying that are actually incapable of seeing women as anything other than sexual objects, when really it's just a joke that a minority manage to convince themselves is offensive. I am completely at a loss as to who in the world is going to be offended by the "masturbate" responses in that thread other than somebody who wants to be offended.
Click to expand...

Even if nobody was offended by it, do you feel those posts contribute in any way to said thread?
 
zoukka said:
Even if nobody was offended by it, do you feel those posts contribute in any way to said thread?
Click to expand...

I laughed the first time someone in that thread said it. Doesn't mean I do t respect women. It just means I have a sense of humor. No two people have the same sense of humor, but the reactions to that thread were a bit extreme.
 
GrizzNKev said:
1. I genuinely love you and don't forget it, you always seem to post in threads when I do. I've even tried to imitate your posting style for comedic effect.
2. I know.



I went through sexual harassment training. It's incredibly obvious that saying "masturbate" in the way it was said in that thread was not sexual harassment.
Click to expand...

To be completely honest, I posted that thread as a lark, I knew there would be crude yet hilarious responses, I just didn't think that it was bannable. It was all just about having a joke, you know?

I mean, I am curious, where can we draw the line where we're just having some jokes and obviously not intending to hurt anyone and where there really is some harm done?

That makes sense, right?
 
Holy Wars said:
Sexually harrassing a user is one thing. If a woman posted on GAF and people said "tits or gtfo", then ban away. Projecting meaning on to people's statements and labelling them sexist is another thing. Someone cracking a joke about would'ing a woman is basically a GAF meme. Yet there's this bizarre suggestion that people saying that are actually incapable of seeing women as anything other than sexual objects, when really it's just a joke that a minority manage to convince themselves is offensive. I am completely at a loss as to who in the world is going to be offended by the "masturbate" responses in that thread other than somebody who wants to be offended.
Click to expand...

How many threads have existed for Lindsay Lohan or some other star who has fallen from grace only to be shit on, what if other users fell off the truck and it's sensitive to them? What if Lohan reads gaf?!

If gaf as an administrative whole wants to make a rule saying no more commenting on hot women, that's fine, they can make any rule they want, but it's pretty silly. How many people (men or women) would really get offended by that kind of joke, and if they do, do you really want to protect something so ridiculous?

A girl post about wanting to straddle and be nailed by a stud? I'm not offended, I promise, and if she mentions masturbating (or looking in the window to masturbate as a joke) I won't get angry. It just seems like crossing the line of sensitivity to me.. Nothing is stopping any gender from doing it, just because males might do it more often doesn't mean women don't think it or, that they get offended by it. It's one of those times I wish I was a mod, just so I could see the statistics of how often people complain about X variety of things. Maybe a ton of female users contact mods about the outrage, but it feels hard to believe.
 
So responding to a picture of Angelina Jolie with "would" is sexist or sexual harassment? I've seen Devolution respond to a dude's picture with "would", and I don't think any of the men in that thread were offended.
 
NotTheGuyYouKill said:
To be completely honest, I posted that thread as a lark, I knew there would be crude yet hilarious responses, I just didn't think that it was bannable. It was all just about having a joke, you know?

I mean, I am curious, where can we draw the line where we're just having some jokes and obviously not intending to hurt anyone and where there really is some harm done?

That makes sense, right?
Click to expand...

No. I've posted this on GAF before, and I'll say it again. They will find a way.

Remember

Everyone is offended.

At some point you'll stop worrying about it. I couldn't survive on GAF if I didn't have 4chan as a place to let go of the filters and not give a shit what people think of my opinions. I just have to stay on topic.
 
NotTheGuyYouKill said:
We've always been at war with Eastasia.



That's not necessarily true, you have to admit. There are certain situations where it isn't really appropriate at all.
Click to expand...

In real life, if you were saying it to a woman or about someone's family or something, sure. As a dumb joke on an Internet web site? Who cares? Is someone sitting at their desktop thinking "oh god this is setting back the women's movement 50 years because someone made a jerk off joke"?
 
Trent Strong said:
So responding to a picture of Angelina Jolie with "would" is sexist or sexual harassment? I've seen Devolution respond to a dude's picture with "would", and I don't think any of the men in that thread were offended.
Click to expand...

I think it's more of the turning into most posters coming to a thread just to say they would have sex this female... And since really moderate for amount of posters it makes easier to draw the line..

Again how hard is it to state a woman is pretty rather than "I'd hit it"
 
I can't believe we're discussing if GAF is too strict
The fact I am somehow still here shows the mods are merciful, wise, unbiased gentlemen of strong moral stature and mental fortitude.
 
Blackace said:
I think it's more of the turning into most posters coming to a thread just to say they would have sex this female... And since really moderate for amount of posters it makes easier to draw the line..

Again how hard is it to state a woman is pretty rather than "I'd hit it"
Click to expand...
It certainly feels classier.
 
Blackace said:
I think it's more of the turning into most posters coming to a thread just to say they would have sex this female... And since really moderate for amount of posters it makes easier to draw the line..

Again how hard is it to state a woman is pretty rather than "I'd hit it"
Click to expand...

It's not hard, but it's also not funny at all. The intention I'd assume is usually to be amusing rather than trying to be a proper person in a million dollar party. I suppose the question is, does gaf want to encourage humor and some level of crudeness, or is the ultimate goal to rip out any remaining humor or "grit" the forum may have. You won't find a post by me saying anything of the sort mind you, but that doesn't mean I feel others should be censored for it, it can be funny sometimes.

It makes full sense to not allow someone to target an individual user and basically sexually harass them, but people talk about stars/models/etc all the time among friends. I guess for some, gaf is a place we'd rather imitate being around friends rather than our coworkers and boss, and that may be where some of the conflict is.
 
Blackace said:
I think it's more of the turning into most posters coming to a thread just to say they would have sex this female... And since really moderate for amount of posters it makes easier to draw the line..

Again how hard is it to state a woman is pretty rather than "I'd hit it"
Click to expand...

What difference does it make?

In the post your pictures thread, if a girl posted her photo and someone said "I WOULD FUK U SO HARD" then you be have victim. If you have people saying "would" to a jpg of some celebrity or teacher who has had sex with a student, there's no victim. Saying "she's pretty" or "I'd fuck her" has the exact same end result in people's minds, only one makes you sound like an 8 year old.
 
goldenpp72 said:
It's not hard, but it's also not funny at all. The intention I'd assume is usually to be amusing rather than trying to be a proper person in a million dollar party. I suppose the question is, does gaf want to encourage humor and some level of crudeness, or is the ultimate goal to rip out any remaining humor or "grit" the forum may have. You won't find a post by me saying anything of the sort mind you, but that doesn't mean I feel others should be censored for it, it can be funny sometimes.

It makes full sense to not allow someone to target an individual user and basically sexually harass them, but people talk about stars/models/etc all the time among friends. I guess for some, gaf is a place we'd rather imitate being around friends rather than our coworkers and boss, and that may be where some of the conflict is.
Click to expand...

That's the question I ultimately wanted to ask, but I think I already know the answer.

Is GAF a place for friends or a place for business? That's where the line is drawn. Cross it and you're put on probation or take a leave of absence, too much and you're fired.
 
Trent Strong said:
So responding to a picture of Angelina Jolie with "would" is sexist or sexual harassment? I've seen Devolution respond to a dude's picture with "would", and I don't think any of the men in that thread were offended.
Click to expand...

I think I said it in post your pic or some other thread in which looks were already being discussed. That being said it was pretty gross how every random article that happened to involve a woman got spammed with "would."
 
Holy Wars said:
What difference does it make?

In the post your pictures thread, if a girl posted her photo and someone said "I WOULD FUK U SO HARD" then you be have victim. If you have people saying "would" to a jpg of some celebrity or teacher who has had sex with a student, there's no victim. Saying "she's pretty" or "I'd fuck her" has the exact same end result in people's minds, only one makes you sound like an 8 year old.
Click to expand...

This one?
 
Blackace said:
I think it's more of the turning into most posters coming to a thread just to say they would have sex this female... And since really moderate for amount of posters it makes easier to draw the line..

Again how hard is it to state a woman is pretty rather than "I'd hit it"
Click to expand...

Come to think of it, I have seen a lot of threads where almost the entire first and second page of responses were nothing but "would" or some variation of would, and I guess I can see that being a problem.It does give off a boys club or frat type of vibe. I guess I should just look at GAF as a place for serious discussion and not a place for fun.
 
goldenpp72 said:
It's not hard, but it's also not funny at all. The intention I'd assume is usually to be amusing rather than trying to be a proper person in a million dollar party. I suppose the question is, does gaf want to encourage humor and some level of crudeness, or is the ultimate goal to rip out any remaining humor or "grit" the forum may have. You won't find a post by me saying anything of the sort mind you, but that doesn't mean I feel others should be censored for it, it can be funny sometimes.

It makes full sense to not allow someone to target an individual user and basically sexually harass them, but people talk about stars/models/etc all the time among friends. I guess for some, gaf is a place we'd rather imitate being around friends then our coworkers and boss.
Click to expand...

It's just women like to discuss stars as well and if the entire thread is just would, I'd it so hard.. Then it does create a strange envoriment

Holy Wars said:
What difference does it make?

In the post your pictures thread, if a girl posted her photo and someone said "I WOULD FUK U SO HARD" then you be have victim. If you have people saying "would" to a jpg of some celebrity or teacher who has had sex with a student, there's no victim. Saying "she's pretty" or "I'd fuck her" has the exact same end result in people's minds, only one makes you sound like an 8 year old.
Click to expand...

Some people actually want to discuss the events rather than if a woman is up to a person's standards..
 
goldenpp72 said:
It's not hard, but it's also not funny at all. The intention I'd assume is usually to be amusing rather than trying to be a proper person in a million dollar party. I suppose the question is, does gaf want to encourage humor and some level of crudeness, or is the ultimate goal to rip out any remaining humor or "grit" the forum may have. You won't find a post by me saying anything of the sort mind you, but that doesn't mean I feel others should be censored for it, it can be funny sometimes.
Click to expand...
There are a few ways to be amusing that don't involve acting like a perverted fratboy horndog (and I'm not even sure that one is). It's odd you think the only choices are between that and no humor at all.
 
I just want to tell the admins and mods that this thread is great and thanks for engaging the users of this site as you have. It's really interesting to see the reasoning behind the decisions made. Running a community isn't easy, and GAF is a great community on the whole.

P.S. GAF is the best place for politics!
 
Blackace said:
It's just women like to discuss stars as well and if the entire is just would, I'd it so hard.. Then it does create a strange envoriment



Some people actually want to discuss the events rather than if a woman is up to a person's standards..
Click to expand...

That's not entirely unfair and it's difficult for me to try to defend it having not been part of the topics at hand. Usually my reaction to a woman's beauty (be it I think she's pretty or, i'd fuck her, whatever) is a reaction that happens within my head and not one I spout out loud or on a forum. For others, they may feel the need to contribute to the topic in one way or another, and for some, I guess that's their first reaction.

It's difficult for me to determine every topic this occurs in, but honestly, a lot of times there is nothing really to discuss aside the fact the girl is (or isn't) attractive. I suppose if an article is something like, X star wins an award for being best role at something, and then the entire thread is filled with horny people commenting, I could see it being a bit off putting, but then i'd wonder, how many women (or men) really cared to contribute to the thread and in turn left disgusted by it.

I guess this boils down personally with not being disgusted by ones sexual attraction to another. I do not understand why someone would find it gross that men find many women not only attractive, but sexually appealing. It's not gross to me when people find any level of attraction to another, or lack of it, so I'm just not as uptight about it I suppose. I also don't care if any amount of women see a sexy guy and think the same. I understand sex is a natural, desirable function for most of us, so people talking about it isn't bothersome to me. Sex isn't gross and I definitely would think it odd if someone feels it is to them. I also know I am not everyone, but I do question what users are worth protecting and in the process, is it worth shunning such a large and relatively innocent group of users to achieve a slightly greater piece of mind for a demographic that will probably have more and more to complain about.


faceless007 said:
There are a few ways to be amusing that don't involve acting like a perverted fratboy horndog (and I'm not even sure that one is). It's odd you think the only choices are between that and no humor at all.
Click to expand...

I'm not the one who intended to make it seem black and white, that's you trying to put words in my mouth. Sure, some subtle or different level of humor could be used in almost any context, does that mean everyone should be told that they have to come up with witty funny remarks for everything? That would really kill about half of this forum if an attempt at comedy had to be classy and clever, no offense to anyone, but spamming gifs and one liners that have been done 10000x over isn't really clever, but it can lead to a laugh, even if a cheap one.
 
Trent Strong said:
So responding to a picture of Angelina Jolie with "would" is sexist or sexual harassment? I've seen Devolution respond to a dude's picture with "would", and I don't think any of the men in that thread were offended.
Click to expand...

Yea.. I think context and tone where she said that is important here.
 
GrizzNKev said:
You're generalizing when I'm obviously speaking in the context of that thread. Have you ever said to another person that you'd like to have sex with someone you find attractive while that attractive person wasn't present?
Click to expand...

No. Why the fuck would I do that? That would be creepy. I say people are attractive. Do you really just say to your friends "I would fuck her?" I don't understand your people and their mysterious ways.

And this board is not anybody's group of friends. If it were, I would be responding to a lot more posts with just the word "HEYOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO," because that's how *I* talk to my friends, but trust me, it would get old fast. This board is more like a table full of strangers at a convention. We have some interests in common, and some level of implied familiarity and ice breaking, but nobody is acting like its their house.

Edit: personally I didn't have a problem with that sister hot friend thread, because it seemed obvious that that was going to happen when I read the title. But I also note that nobody copped a very long ban for it, either. In fact I think they're all back. So...no harm, no foul?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Who is your nemesis on GAF?
2 3
112
486
Shifty1897 replied
BeardGaf is my cheek line too low?
32
1K
GeekyDad replied
  • Poll
Is seven tacos too many?
2 3
108
6K
Go_Ly_Dow replied
Healthy Gaf, looking some advice
35
569
The Cockatrice replied
Fuck you Twitter / X | Firefox strict mode users are locked out
18
2K
Avid Reading Horse replied
Top Bottom