OVARIT SUCKS

submitted by akkordeonplayer from self.GenderCritical

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]akkordeonplayer[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Most of the categories overlap... and I know one poster mentioned in the thread I had started that her post on "women" was moved for being in the "wrong circle"--- this was after someone told her it was the "miscellaneous" circle.

It's ridiculous to have to ask permission from every mod in every possible circle to inquire as to which "circle" your post is allowed to be in. I think my post could have been applicable to GC, as the tactics used on the women mentioned are almost identical to some of the "scenarios" the gender extremists love to dream up about what they want to do to "terfs".

I wasn't a "new" poster, either. Many women, I'm sure, just move on to different sites and/or don't bother posting anything new after getting their threads deleted.

[–]alttrawl 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

It's ridiculous to have to ask permission from every mod in every possible circle to inquire as to which "circle" your post is allowed to be in.

Of course, read the sidebar first. If your post still gets removed for being in the wrong category, isn't it better figure out why?

Most of the categories overlap...I think my post could have been applicable to GC, as the tactics used on the women mentioned are almost identical to some of the "scenarios" the gender extremists love to dream up about what they want to do to "terfs".

That's like saying it's a feminism board so you can post in any of the feminism circles. It's more important to ask what properties does this circle have that the other doesn't. Process of elimination questions I'd ask myself before posting on gender critical vs. women's liberation are

1) Is this unequivocally GC? i.e. ACLU declares TWAW

2) Does this specifically mention gender critical content in a larger context? i.e. censorship article mentioning gender critical or someone who has expressed gc views is now being attacked

3) GC discussions

All other feminism goes in women's liberation. I don't know what your post was, but perhaps if you framed it as a discussion where you pointed out why this was GC related rather than posting an article where the connection is stronger to another circle it would have passed. If it's too tangentially related to GC, i.e. a TRA appears in an article but it's not about gc, I would post it as discussion instead of the article.

[–]MarkTwainiac 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

In my view, the slicing and dicing of categories based on what some might consider minutiae or at least ill-defined criteria that you're doing and arguing for in this particular post only illustrates the problem with the categories you are championing. Again, that's just in my view.

But then I am from an older generation when all feminism was, and was assumed to be, inherently critical of what today is known as gender ideology or just plain gender - and when criticism and dismantling of sex stereotypes (aka "gender") was seen as essential to women's liberation.

Moreover, again in my view and only in my view, the way ovarit is set up discourages - even prohibits - thinking and posting in a "big picture" way that seeks to find and explore connections between phenomena that might appear to be separate at first glance when looked at superficially but which are actually linked. I've always been a big picture kind of thinker attuned to how multiple elements and forces shape our lives, and I've always been very interested in history and understanding how the complex forces shaping us in the now came to be - and how we're all products of the past as much as the present. As a result, I don't think ovarit is a place for me.

I wouldn't have started a thread saying this, coz I have no wish to to badmouth ovarit - and coz most internet forums are not places for people with my particular kind of thinking and posting pattern. I don't take that personally. Nor do I take umbrage at ovarit's setup. To each her own. I only bring this up here and now coz someone else started a thread about it, and you have kindly taken the time to try to explain ovarit's categories and to say

If your post still gets removed for being in the wrong category, isn't it better figure out why?

It doesn't take a big leap in imagination to wonder and fear that there might be a link between removing posts "for being in the wrong category" and removing them coz they contain "wrong think" and might have been made persons of "the wrong sort."

[–]akkordeonplayer[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Moreover, again in my view and only in my view, the way ovarit is set up discourages - even prohibits - thinking and posting in a "big picture" way that seeks to find and explore connections between phenomena that might appear to be separate at first glance when looked at superficially but which are actually linked. I've always been a big picture kind of thinker attuned to how multiple elements and forces shape our lives, and I've always been very interested in history and understanding how the complex forces shaping us in the now came to be - and how we're all products of the past as much as the present.

This is a great way of putting it. The thread I created (that was deleted) was an article could have been linked to GC in that this same political entity that is torturing a particular minority group of women was Tweeting about how they were "re-educating" those same women in terms of their "gender ideology" just a few weeks prior. The manner of which these same people are torturing these women also echos what trans extremists fantasize about doing to "terfs". It's not as if the article was completely unrelated to gender extremism.

It doesn't take a big leap in imagination to wonder and fear that there might be a link between removing posts "for being in the wrong category" and removing them coz they contain "wrong think" and might have been made persons of "the wrong sort."

THIS also, particularly at this moment in time- women are being censored for the most minor "infractions" on various platforms. Deleting entire threads for being slightly off topic seems self-defeating when one reflects on what the larger end goal of the entire website/platform is. Is the end goal to place information in perfectly contained bubbles, or is it meant to educate women about what's going on in the world, and to give them a voice and a means for sharing information?

[–]alttrawl 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The thread I created (that was deleted) was an article could have been linked to GC...It's not as if the article was completely unrelated to gender extremism.

If the source material itself isn't clearly gc to begin with and you don't frame it as a discussion where you point out the less than obvious connection as you have here, then it may be removed. I'm sure if you posted a discussion where you linked the article and wrote your reasoning it would have passed. It's unfortunate you weren't able to see the sidebar on mobile. Yes, the mod who replied to me did come off a little curt when I asked why my post didn't meet the criteria, but I didn't take it personally. I'm sure they're busy removing trolls. It's fine that you dislike the site format and prefer saidit instead but most people want this kind of site format. Originally, these were separate subreddits that were all banned together.

THIS also, particularly at this moment in time- women are being censored for the most minor "infractions" on various platforms. Deleting entire threads for being slightly off topic seems self-defeating when one reflects on what the larger end goal of the entire website/platform is.

Well, it's also important to maintain an orderly site so users can have some certainty that when they click gc they'll get gc discourse and not discussions about women's healthcare. If you try hard enough, anything in women's liberation can be related to gc, it depends on the angle e.g. posting an article about women being misdiagnosed for a certain condition without an obvious connection vs. a discussion containing a link to the article that includes your writeup of why this is relevant

[–]alttrawl 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

As someone else mentioned here in this thread, some people get tired of seeing nothing but gender critical posts when they want to have general feminism discussions. It makes sense then to split the topics for a majority of people. For those who disagree with the site format, that's fine too, but it's not "censorship" to have posting categories. Most internet forums with active mods operate this way in order to maintain order.

Moreover, again in my view and only in my view, the way ovarit is set up discourages - even prohibits - thinking and posting in a "big picture" way that seeks to find and explore connections between phenomena that might appear to be separate at first glance when looked at superficially but which are actually linked.

I think you are mistaking the topic split for a ban on discussions touching on other topics. No one is banning anyone for making "big picture" comments, you absolutely can talk about general feminism in gc, but if the source material itself is not gc to begin with and you don't frame it as a discussion where you point out the less than obvious connection, then it may be removed.

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

some people get tired of seeing nothing but gender critical posts when they want to have general feminism discussions

LOL, even you can't keep the circles straight: there is no "general feminism" circle. Also, maybe the issue here is defining what "gender critical" means then. The circles directory says that circle is the place to

Discuss gender and transgender ideology/politics from a critical, feminist perspective

Which suggests that sex stereotypes are only an issue insofar as they are related to transgenderism.

you absolutely can talk about general feminism in gc

But as you said, not the other way around. No talking about sex stereotypes, which is all "gender" is, in "general feminism," which isn't the name of a circle...

but if the source material itself is not gc to begin with and you don't frame it as a discussion where you point out the less than obvious connection, then it may be removed.

I don't understand what you mean by "the source material itself" here. Everyone is supposed to cite sources showing what informs our POVs? I see lots of threads started by, and posts made, by people who cite no "source material" whatsoever. But if someone does cite "source material" in a thread or post, you say

if the source material itself is not gc to begin with and you don't frame it as a discussion where you point out the less than obvious connection, then it may be removed.

So if someone mentions source material that's not specifically, obviously "gc" - whatever that's supposed to mean - it's up to the moderator to decide whether the poster has done a sufficiently good job making clear to others what "the less than obvious connection" is? Why not let the others read it and see if it's clear to them. If it's not, why not let them tell her, and ask her to explain. That way, posters can have a back and forth that might be informative and interesting to the posters having the dialogue, as well as to all who just read it. Like we are doing here.

[–]alttrawl 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

LOL, even you can't keep the circles straight: there is no "general feminism" circle. Also, maybe the issue here is defining what "gender critical" means then.

I'm really confused by your understanding of my comment. I really don't get why you think I can't keep the circles straight or what's so difficult. If someone calls you out for standing in the wrong place for the queue, you go to the right place. Why would you question the need for a queue? It's not like they're asking people to do advanced latin plant identification. All gc content goes in gc. Everything NOT gc but is still feminism goes in women's liberation. No gc content in women's liberation. If there's a unapparent connection to gc, point it out then it gets to stay. That's it. This is all in the sidebar.

If you go off-topic under a gc thread and talk about radical feminism or your life experiences, that gets to stay. But you can't open an off-topic thread in gc about feminism when there's a specific place in women's liberation for it.

So if someone mentions source material that's not specifically, obviously "gc" - whatever that's supposed to mean...Why not let the others read it and see if it's clear to them.

That's not how the majority of forums work if they have any semblance of order. It's fine if you find these classifications arbitrary, but almost all internet boards work like this. There are lots of reasonable arguments about censorship, but not following the community guidelines for posting in the right place is NOT censorship. Some reddit subs won't let your post go up if you don't follow their specific title format. Still NOT censorship.

[–]akkordeonplayer[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

This isn't the case where someone is posting cat memes to a dog sub, though. Most people know what a cat is, or what a dog is.
Most women aren't well versed in feminism, feminist theories, and even the general definitions of terms are debatable among self proclaimed "experts". Many women grew up thinking "feminism" itself was a dirty word.

Deleting threads because they "would be better placed over there" puts posters off, annoys readers who enjoy a thread then see it nuked, and doesn't really help the overall aim of the site. "Oh great, these people who run the site think they're smarter than everyone else... No wonder people hate feminists! I'll pass on this!"

This is assuming the thread isn't violating regular site standards of not advocating violence, of course, or that it isn't literally a cat picture in a dog meme circle.

[–]ZveroboyAlina 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It is strange that posts are nuked and asked to "your post was great, so please repost it in correct sub" instead of just being moved into other sub in database by mods, or at least given time for poster to copy paste topic before nuking, as they could not have backup copy.

[–]akkordeonplayer[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, exactly.