This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
palace_in_frogland In a broken dream 11 Aug 17 4.46pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
A really, really important thing to remember with Banter - is that it has to be consensual. Its not mandatory. For example, if someone posts a serious response to a topic, and you just chip straight in with a sexist joke about their period, then the assumption is that its not banter. If your note sure, drop a smiley face in. But remember if the other person doesn't take it as banter - its on you. If there is some too and fro, or they're regular contributors to General Talk, sure. Well, I wasn't going to post on this thread anymore, because I'm still sulking about you carding me. But seeing as you're using me as an example; cp forever was ranting about sexist attitudes on here in response to a serious harassment issue. My comment, maybe ill-judged in hindsight, was meant to be a deliberately sexist remark , ironically confirming what the poster was accusing. It was not meant to cause offence to anyone, particularly not the poster to whom I was replying. Would it have made a difference if I had stuck a smiley on the end? Probably not, because as others have pointed out, there are people out there who just can't wait to be offended by stuff so they can jump up and down being jolly cross about the injustice of it all. Anyway, I agree that somewhere there is a line where banter becomes abusive, but the position of that line is determined by the perception of each individual; so basically nobody can ever know where it is. Peace.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
jamiemartin721 Reading 11 Aug 17 4.52pm | |
---|---|
Its ok, Yellows are only a warning - Its nothing personal. The thing is that women see a very different side of sexism, as they're on the receiving end of it, often on a daily basis. For us, I think we get it a bit easy in terms of sexism - because for the most part, even that which we experience tends to be more abstract, theoretically sexist rather than the daily reality of being a women in the world. So in short, though its bias, I think women have earned the right to rant. Things are better than they were, definitely, but there is a long way to go. Problem is, when you're a moderator, you do have to make that call. Edited by jamiemartin721 (11 Aug 2017 4.52pm)
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Ouzo Dan Behind you 16 Aug 17 3.42am | |
---|---|
Anyway back on track (kind of), a woman bent over in front of me the other day revealing her boobs and nips, she did it a 2nd time just to make sure I got a good look. Made my day it did. Edited by Ouzo Dan (16 Aug 2017 3.43am)
The mountains are calling & I must go. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Forest Hillbilly in a hidey-hole 16 Aug 17 6.02am | |
---|---|
the guy who got caught was a novice, and deserved to be 'outed'. Modern technology should make the sort of activity he was conducting a piece of cake. As a general rule of principle, if it's on show, then you're free to look (and consign the image to your memory w@nk-bank). I have a few photos taken at airshows and concerts, which are mildy pervy, but did not involve putting a camera into the womens' clothing As for HOL losing perspective on humour, I get the vibe that society in general is a teensy bit cautious about causing offence. Some people roll with it, and others get offended, whatever you say. Mind you, it wasn't that long ago that using the words 'c00n', 'w0g', 'darkies' was primetime comedy on TV, so some changes in attitude can be for the better Edited by Forest Hillbilly (16 Aug 2017 7.07am)
I disengage, I turn the page. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
wordup 16 Aug 17 6.27pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Forest Hillbilly
the guy who got caught was a novice, and deserved to be 'outed'. Modern technology should make the sort of activity he was conducting a piece of cake. As a general rule of principle, if it's on show, then you're free to look (and consign the image to your memory w@nk-bank). I have a few photos taken at airshows and concerts, which are mildy pervy, but did not involve putting a camera into the womens' clothing As for HOL losing perspective on humour, I get the vibe that society in general is a teensy bit cautious about causing offence. Some people roll with it, and others get offended, whatever you say. Mind you, it wasn't that long ago that using the words 'c00n', 'w0g', 'darkies' was primetime comedy on TV, so some changes in attitude can be for the better Edited by Forest Hillbilly (16 Aug 2017 7.07am) Why am I imagining Gareth Thomas reading this post for an upskirt documentary . I'm intrigued by the pervy airshow comment. A woman wing walking and then her bra flies off and you get your camera out?
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Part Time James 16 Aug 17 6.36pm | |
---|---|
If the shoe was on the other foot and a woman took a sneaky look at my naked self I'd be outraged. No wait. Outraged is the wrong word. I meant wahey.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
topcat Holmesdale / Surbiton 17 Aug 17 10.54am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Part Time James
If the shoe was on the other foot and a woman took a sneaky look at my naked self I'd be outraged. No wait. Outraged is the wrong word. I meant wahey. I think surprised is the word you are looking for.
It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark... and we're wearing sunglasses. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Part Time James 17 Aug 17 10.57am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by topcat
I think surprised is the word you are looking for.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Pikester Worthing 17 Aug 17 2.18pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
A really, really important thing to remember with Banter - is that it has to be consensual. Its not mandatory. For example, if someone posts a serious response to a topic, and you just chip straight in with a sexist joke about their period, then the assumption is that its not banter. If your note sure, drop a smiley face in. But remember if the other person doesn't take it as banter - its on you. If there is some too and fro, or they're regular contributors to General Talk, sure. I remember AJ's Shorts posting on here once and it was clearly Rag Week. I managed to slip in one of my favourite gags: What's Angry and rides through the streets of South London? I've always been concerned/suspicious about people who are easily offended - usually Charlie Church types who are offended by everything. Worse still are those offended on others behalf. I'm normally very bantery and usually assume everyone else is.... which sometimes leads to some awkward situations but then again life's a bit too short to worry about over sensitive types.
You fed me, you bred me, I'll remember your name. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Pikester Worthing 17 Aug 17 2.20pm | |
---|---|
For the avoidance of doubt I don't support the taking of upskirt photos - I'm talking about childish puerile remarks only.
You fed me, you bred me, I'll remember your name. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Part Time James 17 Aug 17 2.33pm | |
---|---|
Nail on head for me Pikey old chap. Being offended on someone else's behalf I think is quite a dangerous activity. You can end up causing resentment against a person or group who never wanted to impose restrictions on you in the first place. If I directly offend a person I'm much more likely to apologise than if someone goes "ooo, don't say that about them, that's XXXXist or XXXXphobic"
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.