Language in Celeb forum

Good point.

Thanks for the input, peoples. We will aim to have this resolved in the next couple of days and put something in place.

 

Are we all on the same page?

What is the difference between ' this girl is a dirty slut ' and 'this girl is a dirty slut' - it is like saying there is a difference between ' she love the n****rs ' and ' she love the n****rs '

The debate seems to be switching from respectful language towards women and exchanges between members - they are two different things.

 

It seems there is no discussion on this...decisions have already been made.

(I did start with "Also", but maybe I could talk another time about internal communication.)

Time for me to go back to Sunday School.

 

I'd say it's the opposite.. a number of mods have varying views. They'll discuss it and a decision will be made. Even if they go the way of trying to soften the language used I don't believe anything will change. It is simply a mechanism to discourage the hand full of repeat offenders who are probably 15 years old. And if people are discouraged from calling women names, the celebs fans have less to react to which , if implemented, would actually lead to less member on member hate.

 

nice doubles...

 

There is discussion yes, but it seems on a finality.

I will just agree with you gap...its the easiest way. Good luck guys.

 

Here is an example..

http://forum.phun.org/showthread.php?t=969960

It is a discussion about her appearance, guys are saying she aint all that - there is a joke about her being a whale - but its not offensive. anyways, I think I have pontificated enough!!

 

Agreed.

Pisses me off to hear imbeciles on here calling people they don't know all sorts simply because of their imbalanced sexual attitudes towards women. I'm not up for censorship but there's no need to start stating that someone is a slut, all because the poster is horny, wants to fap and has no real idea about how an actual woman would react to being called something like that.

 

I think there is a difference between "I'd love to fuck Jennifer Love Hewitt" and "That slut need my cock in her face. Dirty fucking bitch" or something similar.

I go into celebs because it's a first rate source of images of women I find beautiful and sexy, but I don't want to have to read idiots talking about women as If they are all low rent prostitutes that simply must be whores because they daydream they are..

 

There's fantasy, and context; usage, and intention. The vast majority of comments are of an innocuous nature, or merely double entendres, and/or tongue-in-cheek.

(As for whose tongue, and whose cheek, I leave that up to you.)

I get almost as much enjoyment from some of the comments as I do from the pictures, which is part of Phun's overall appeal, after all, but each to their own.

-----

As for some of the other ones:

1) If you don't like comments, then don't read 'em. No one's forcing you to, are they, folks? Learn to skip, scan, and let the eyes glaze over, text. (Note: for clarification purposes, text is the stuff that ain't pictures)

2) The subject will never read 'em. Seriously, do we really care about curtailing some borderline comments directed at some celebrity's likeness as rendered by digital bits in cyberspace, over that shown by some members on here (i.e. baiting and character attacks) towards another, which does directly impact someone? I would think the latter would be much further up the list of priorities for moderators here. (Outside of the obvious GnR (i.e. 'Good Natured Ribbing') Phun fare, naturally - which is par for the course, here)

If someone's going to be borderline misogynistic or denigrative here, that comes with the territory on any board involved with posting nude or revealing photos of known personages, whether on yours, ours, or anywhere else on the web.

3) Humor is subjective. One person's offensive is another's hysterically funny.

:arrow: Let's say you read the following, after seeing some pic of Tara Reid's ass while (she's) bending over without any panties on...and where she's probably also visibly a little drunk in adjoining pics:

"I'd hit that harder than a retarded red-headed stepchild with Down Syndrome and an absentee mother!"



---

Ok - so, is that 1) offensive, or 2) funny - precisely because it's over the top, and intended to be as Politically Incorrect as possible, to elicit a particular reaction, in part due to the truth that some (step)parents would indeed treat such a child in just that manner, and that the human condition of such acknowledges the inherent humor involved in instances of pain and misfortune, personal or otherwise, which nearly all comedians working today use as part of their Rosetta Stone? One that simply underscores "how 'hard' one would want to 'hit that', as point of reference?

(See George Carlin's 'Rape Can Be Funny' segment, q.v.)


Folks need to lighten up more. Curtail the worst of it, sure, but a light - and deft - touch rules best. Being heavy-handed about some of 'em (i.e. the comments) will most likely backfire on you, and serve to drive more folks away, than they do to keep. :2cent:

Some would say: this is possibly a case of Point #3 - depending on the viewer. Also, see point #2, above. :2cent:

Well if you want, gap ol' buddy, we can get ya one o' those posthole-digger-model Pope Hats and a Thurible, and you can keep swingin' away!



Luv ya, man.

 

I agree with gaps

 

I doubt there's much truth to that. Nitwits and their ignorant comments are a dime a dozen. Driving them off and their inevitable replacements would be a full time job without end in sight. Also inevitable would be the fact that for those who really enjoy the website, peer pressure would cause them to think twice before posting something irritating to the majority of members who don't care for such mysogynistic and mean spirited comments.

 

I can't remember who it was but a member (this year) commented on a girl in celebs forum by saying that he would "rape the shit out of that".

It's the kind of member I don't think we should be happy to have around. An extreme example sure, but still on topic.

 

I'm referring to the 'lighter fare', not the heavier stuff, to be clear. What constitutes which is a judgment call - the criteria of which may vary, depending on who's 'on call' that day - but overall, the staff here seems to use a certain amount of (needed) restraint.

Yes, I would also like to see Tribal Dynamics come into play here and assist in the 'management'...but not everyone will 'get the message' - or cares enough to conform, also. Whe have at least three members here who regularly post 'I'd like to fuck this dumpster cum-slut whore in the ass' type comments.

Innocuous? Perhaps. Distasteful? Probably. Ignorable? Sure, who isn't?

To be encouraged? No.


It's the outliers we need to be concerned about, verily, though. The rest is noise.


-TL

 

http://forum.phun.org/showthread.php?t=972142

one of the reasons why it`s more than good to have a female staff-member.

 

Can't argue with that.

 

The premise of this thread is, essentially, "I don't like it, so let's ban it." While valid enough when agreed upon by a majority, I can't think of an intellectual reason to support the sentiment. Okay, so you're offended by terms like "slut" and "whore." Not to sound crass, but my reply will inevitably be "Why should I care?" What if I disagree? What if I enjoy throwing terms like "slut" and "whore" around in a joking way? Or, for that matter, in a serious way? The OP has admitted that it isn't context they care about--a telling admission, I think--but the words themselves, so why should I give credence to your sensibilities when they seem to have no basis other than the noise made by the forming of the words being unpleasant to you?

This, at least as far as I can see, is why whether or not something is offensive should never be a consideration for its legal status. And likening these words to racial slurs is an exercise is ignorance, in my opinion. "Slut" does not carry the same weight as "******," nor will it ever, so I would recommend against treating the use/abuse of them as equal or similar offenses.

Now, to the point raised by Classyvixenart. While I agree that everyone should consider how their words will appear to others before posting, this point is not germane to this subject, which is of course how to deal officially with the use/abuse of such words and phrases. (Nor do I understand what about this point, as TheRiver suggests above, is validated in the fact that it was made by a female) In other words, what do we do when someone chooses not to concern themselves with how others might take their meaning.

My own suggestion would be to do nothing, with an exception made for times when the "offensive" words in question are directed at another member. (And even then, I'm all for some leeway being given and all cases judged on their merit; In other words, if someone says something fundamentally stupid, the members who respond by letting the poster in question know his comments were those of an idiot should not be infracted.) At the heart of it, anyone can claim to be offended by anything, so banning words because they offend Group A and banning other words because they offend Group D will eventually lead to stifled conversation and a lot of extra work for moderators. For example, I am sincerely creeped out (you might even say offended) by Analeezer's troubling fixation on anal sex, as well as the copy-paste style with which he floods the forum. But I don't complain to the refs about it. I simply shake my head, or make a comment about liking vagina, which can serve as a humorous contrast for those who share my distaste for A's constant and disgusting predilection.

Those are my two cents.