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 →

[–]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.