Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Luciferian wrote:
Disagreement is not trolling on its face. If you present your opinion on a public forum, expect people to express their own. If you just want to state your desires without any kind of discussion, the shower is a good place.

I'm absolutely fine with having a discussion. Hell, I really don't even mind heated discussion, nor am I easily offended. The whole point of this thread was that it is impossible to have that discussion, if threads get locked and/or deleted!

I'd guess that the reason the mods deleted the previous thread was because it has been done to death and they could see no benefit of keeping it around.

If I made a recurring thread, such as "I think there should be female Orks for reasons" every week I'm sure they would also be deleted.

People don't want to have the same discussion time and time again. It becomes mundane and tedious and completely detracts from the point in the first place. I guess that's where the femmarine threads are at now?

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Not so much. When your justification for it is 'feminism', it seems more like you're trying to sell what you want, and anyone who disagrees is a misogynist, and the reason you want it is some activist crusade.

Well, that is a bit extreme description. But sure, whatever. I think that more equal gender representation in media is overall a desirable thing. Quelle horreur! Does saying that somehow taint my desire to have female Guard models? How bizarre...

Show me egalitarianism, and I'll agree. But feminism's 'equality' is about as much 'equality' as ISIS is peaceful.

Feminism is about the equality of the sexes.

 Crimson wrote:

Show me egalitarianism, and I'll agree. But feminism's 'equality' is about as much 'equality' as ISIS is peaceful.

Feminism is about the equality of the sexes.

Right, in the same way that taking everyone's lunch away because little Johnny doesn't have a lunch is 'equality'.

This is the culture war. This is the discussion that's happening in comics, movies, TTRPGs CCGs and now wargaming. Just like it happened before in video games. Each area of fandom is just a microcosm of the whole. Unfortunately, the extremes of each side are framing the debate as a zero sum game.

On one side, those crusading for social justice are fighting against entrenched and pervasive social constructs of oppression, and anyone who opposes them is a reactionary apologist for the oppressors.

On the other side, people are defending themselves and their hobbies from what they see as unproven and unwarranted aspersions of bigotry in order to halt a campaign of ideologically motivated social engineering that is changing their leisure time pursuits into political bludgeons.

As long as that's how the discussion is framed, there's nowhere this can go.

It is extremely unusual for moderators on DakkaDakka to actually delete threads. We normally just lock them.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Right, in the same way that taking everyone's lunch away because little Johnny doesn't have a lunch is 'equality'.

The feminists took your lunch?

For example, in this context no on has asked removing anything, merely adding.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
It is extremely unusual for moderators on DakkaDakka to actually delete threads. We normally just lock them.

Right, I know. Thus doing it here is even weirder...

 Crimson wrote:
For example, in this context no on has asked removing anything, merely adding.

'Adding'. Except it isn't, and we both know that. Everywhere it rears its head, it only 'adds' conflict. They can't create, they only want things to change for them.

Feminism is not egalitarianism. If it were, it'd be called 'egalitarianism'.

'Adding'. Except it isn't, and we both know that

And baseless assertion makes it so? Man wish I had the power to completely distort reality with internet posts.

I better go protest my local deli - clearly offering both ketchup and mustard is "taking away" from me somehow.

Hello!

Since I was involved in the discussion in question, please allow me to shed some light on what happened.

First, the way the thread began (something like, "we haven't argued about this for a while so ...") was not great. It was also posted in 40k General Discussion, which in a sense is appropriate. If you want to talk about why you think GW should make certain models then that is the right forum. But the discussion - as usual - drifted to why, from an in-setting POV, women cannot be made into Space Marines. So I moved the discussion to the 40k Background sub-forum.

But the in-setting arguement is actually not what people really want to talk about, I think. There are two ways to talk about this subject:

(1) talking about models; and

(2) talking about politics

I made some posts trying to steer the discussion more toward (1) but by the last few pages the thread was off the rails even by the standards of the OT board (including violating the current ban on discussing US politics). At that point, I locked the thread but simultaenously another moderator deleted it. So you can see the post in my post history where I locked it but you can't access the post or see in my post history any of the other posts I made in the thread.

As to why another mod deleted the thread: TBH it was really bad with posters making no pretense at talking about the 40k background or even the notion of femarine models. I thought about going through and deleting the offending posts but it would have meant deleting, one-by-one, about four pages of the thread! I can see why another mod would have concluded it wasn't worth the time pruning it back to something reasonable.

The main lesson here is if you don't want threads deleted then you have to avoid going off the rails and not respond to people who are driving a thresd off the rails.

Finally, a warning: this thread is not for discussing feminism; it is for discussing thread locks. If it keeps going off the rails (as it has for the last two pages) I'll just lock it. Thanks!

 Manchu wrote:
Finally, a warning: this thread is not for discussing feminism; it is for discussing thread locks. If it keeps going off the rails Oas it has for the last two pages) I'll just lock it. Thanks!

I think all threads that reference feminism should be locked, so please feel free to do so at your leisure. This entire topic is toxic, and nothing more than an excuse for some members to hurl baseless accusations and put down members who disagree.

If people want to discuss models they'd like to see, that'd be one thing. But this is a bunch of male feminists posturing.

As you can see, once the cult of feminism is questioned or attacked, the followers come out in force to attack people.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
This entire topic is toxic

I am inclined to agree. I have participated in and moderated femarine threads many times over the years and the main takeaway is that the ideological portion of the topic overwhelms the rest of the discussion without adding anything meaningful. OTOH one of the reasons this happens is because rather than ignoring arguments about social justice, posters tend to take the bait.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
As soon as someone makes an argument and tries to support it with 'muh feminism', I automatically know that disagreeing is going to get me labeled a bigot, a woman-hater, a virgin, or something pathetic. I want this ideology as far away from my hobby as it can possibly get, because my hobby brings people together and feminism has done nothing but cause disputes with otherwise reasonable people caught up in the mix.

Exactly the point I was making earlier. It has become an attack vector to attempt to drag people into a fight they can't win.

Years ago I would have called myself a feminist. I worked for a feminist organization that helped sexual assault victims. (not all were female, but a good 80% were) I helped people get their lives back together and seek justice. Helped panicked parents calm down and see that they had support, options for counseling, legal help. The more visible and vocal minority, the ones getting attention - they aren't helping people. They're predators feeding on outrage to generate clicks, or media execs using it to silence critics. They're commercializing outrage as a defensive strategy. They don't care that they're damaging legitimate rational feminist causes and debate because it helps them stuff their pockets.

 Manchu wrote:
OTOH one of the reasons this happens is because rather than ignoring arguments about social justice, posters tend to take the bait.

I will honestly say it is difficult, because where the 'Social Justice' topic is slimed into the argument- it's usually to disparage and slander anyone who disagrees with the original argument. I will be 100% honest. Social Justice isn't about good people caring about others, it's about people that want others to think they're good people and they will go to extremes to lash out at anyone who questions this.

I game in a group of men, women, Jews, Gentiles, black, white, hispanic, gay, lesbian, trans, democrats, republicans, etc. I have always gamed in diverse groups that have always gotten along just fine and had great fun despite our differences, even when we openly discussed our differences. SocJus/Feminism has done nothing but cause friction in otherwise diverse and happy gaming groups.

It. Is. A. Cancer.

And somehow a thread on a board about the mechanical workings of the DakkaDakka website has been derailed by an argument about whether Feminism works towards equality or positive discrimination/outright sexism. I can see why these discussions are deleted.

 Manchu wrote:
Hello!

Since I was involved in the discussion in question, please allow me to shed some light on what happened.

First, the way the thread began (something like, "we haven't argued about this for a while so ...") was not great. It was also posted in 40k General Discussion, which in a sense is appropriate. If you want to talk about why you think GW should make certain models then that is the right forum. But the discussion - as usual - drifted to why, from an in-setting POV, women cannot be made into Space Marines. So I moved the discussion to the 40k Background sub-forum.

But the in-setting arguement is actually not what people really want to talk about, I think. There are two ways to talk about this subject:

(1) talking about models; and

(2) talking about politics

I made some posts trying to steer the discussion more toward (1) but by the last few pages the thread was off the rails even by the standards of the OT board (including violating the current ban ln discussing US politics). At that point, I locked the thread but simultaenously another moderator deleted it. So you can see the post in my post history where I locked it but you can't access the post or see in my post history any of the other posts I made in the thread.

As to why another mod deleted the thread: TBH it was really bad with posters making no pretense at talking about the 40k background or even the notion of femarine models. I thought about going through and deleting the offending posts but it would have meant deleting, one-by-one, about four pages of the thread! I can see why another mod would have concluded it wasn't worth the time pruning it back to something reasonable.

The main lesson here is if you don't want threads deleted then you have to avoid going off the rails and not respond to people who are driving a thresd off the rails.

Thank you for the explanation. I feel that in such a situation it would be preferable to merely delete the offending posts rather than the whole thread, but I understand that is might not be worth the effort.

It is unfortunate that this topic seems to be so hard to discuss constructively.

Finally, a warning: this thread is not for discussing feminism; it is for discussing thread locks. If it keeps going off the rails Oas it has for the last two pages) I'll just lock it. Thanks!

But not delete it?

SirWeeble wrote:
Years ago I would have called myself a feminist. I worked for a feminist organization that helped sexual assault victims. (not all were female, but a good 80% were) I helped people get their lives back together and seek justice. Helped panicked parents calm down and see that they had support, options for counseling, legal help. The more visible and vocal minority, the ones getting attention - they aren't helping people. They're predators feeding on outrage to generate clicks, or media execs using it to silence critics. They're commercializing outrage as a defensive strategy. They don't care that they're damaging legitimate rational feminist causes and debate because it helps them stuff their pockets.

This. Exactly this.

There is a difference between doing good things for people, and 'wanting people to think you're a good person'.

Plus, outrage fetishism is the new way to weaponize idiots.

SirWeeble wrote:
It has become an attack vector to attempt to drag people into a fight they can't win.

The most powerful tactic on a discussion forum is to ignore. Don't get dragged into a toxic subject. If you do, you can only blame yourself.

And somehow a thread on a board about the mechanical workings of the DakkaDakka website has been derailed by an argument about whether Feminism works towards equality or positive discrimination/outright sexism. I can see why these discussions are deleted.

Yep, I can see exactly why these topics get deleted because no one wants to read a bunch of dudebro whining about how contrary viewpoints are personal attacks and part of a conspiracy against all gamerdom.

I mean we all like fictional universes, but that one is a bit out there.

 mrhappyface wrote:
And somehow a thread on a board about the mechanical workings of the DakkaDakka website has been derailed by an argument about whether Feminism works towards equality or positive discrimination/outright sexism. I can see why these discussions are deleted.

Well, it doesn't help that comments calling one side of the argument cultists, idiots, and a cancer are allowed to remain. The heckler's veto is bad enough without apparently a thumb on the scale tacitly egging it on, but I guess it is what it is.

 ScarletRose wrote:
Yep, I can see exactly why these topics get deleted because no one wants to read a bunch of dudebro whining about how contrary viewpoints are personal attacks and part of a conspiracy against all gamerdom.

I mean we all like fictional universes, but that one is a bit out there.

This is the exact sort of statement that should sell the mods on purging literally every feminism topic. It's not enough that we disagree, we're 'dudebros whining' and it's a 'conspiracy'.

This is why feminism is toxic.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:
Well, it doesn't help that comments calling one side of the argument cultists, idiots, and a cancer are allowed to remain. The heckler's veto is bad enough without apparently a thumb on the scale tacitly egging it on, but I guess it is what it is.

Calling an idea a cancer isn't wrong. It's an idea and it doesn't have feelings.

Cult-like behavior is cult-like behavior. No idea has the monopoly on it.

Outrage fetishists are actual idiots and I will never, ever think otherwise.

Well, it doesn't help that comments calling one side of the argument cultists, idiots, and a cancer are allowed to remain

Exactly, I think if anything points out the need for discussion on how the underbelly of the gaming community is harmful it's stuff like this. It's not just the direct trolls but the implicit assumption that one's sides insults are ok for some reason.

 Crimson wrote:
I feel that in such a situation it would be preferable to merely delete the offending posts rather than the whole thread, but I understand that is might not be worth the effort.

Well, mods can and do disagree. At the time, I just felt like locking it but at the same time I figured the posts were so off the rails that I might need to delete them. And at that point I was looking at deleting something like 30% of the thread, post by post. So I completely understand why another mod was like, EFF THAT - DELETED.

I think what we're seeing here is you have some posters who trot out the "agree with me or you are a misogynist" arguments and then you have other posters who take that bait, knowingly running with it to force a thread lock.

I think what we mods will have to do here is lay down a rule like "this is not a thread for debating the merits of feminism." But even then, it;s just going to be a race to thread lock. So at that point, we will have to start handing out suspensions.

 ScarletRose wrote:
Exactly, I think if anything points out the need for discussion on how the underbelly of the gaming community is harmful it's stuff like this. It's not just the direct trolls but the implicit assumption that one's sides insults are ok for some reason.

People who dislike the topic are not justification for the idea. Circular logic is faulty.

Sorry, guy. Some of us are just simply sick of this topic rearing its head where it's not welcome or wanted, just so that one party can label detractors 'the harmful underbelly of the gaming community'.

So please take your identity politics elsewhere.

OK one side says cultists and the other side says underbelly but each side can only see how the other is offensive.

So yes here's a demonstration of exactly why this topic is toxic.

 Manchu wrote:
OK one side says cultists and the other side says underbelly but each side can only see how the other is offensive.

So yes here's a demonstration of exactly why this topic is toxic.

Harmful underbelly.

Don't forget that. Disagreeing is pretty much terrorism or assault or something.

Can't you create a sub-forum on here called "KEEP YOUR DAMN POLITICS IN HERE!" and just let them run wild calling each other poo-poo heads?

 Manchu wrote:
So yes here's a demonstration of exactly why this topic is toxic.

By I think a reasonable measure, there are 3 or 4 "rule one" violations on this page alone. Right now they're mostly being ignored, but the fact they're still there makes it hard to read that as anything other than waiting for someone to respond to them and then saying "well, now it's a huge mess!" and then locking the thread.

So, the answer to the OP is "no".

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Plus, outrage fetishism is the new way to weaponize idiots.

On that we can agree on.

I feel that when anything that even remotely smells like feminism is approached, a bunch of people get aggravated, and will drag all sorts of evildoings of 'SJW's real or imagined to the discussion, that had nothing to do with the original topic. I have to say that you have done this a lot. You, and many others, have a chip on your shoulder about the topic, and cannot just concentrate on what has actually been said.

If people barge in to threads blaming of evil feminist about all sorts of nonsense, then sure, I guess we will be discussing that and the tread gets derailed.

 Ouze wrote:
By I think a reasonable measure, there are 3 or 4 "rule one" violations on this page alone. Right now they're mostly being ignored, but the fact they're still there makes it hard to read that as anything other than waiting for someone to respond to them and then saying "well, now it's a huge mess!" and then locking the thread.

I believe you are confusing statements about ideologies and extremists with personal attacks. If your ideology needs to be protected this much, it's weak and has no place in reasonable discussions.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:
On that we can agree on.

I feel that when anything that even remotely smells like feminism is approached, a bunch of people get aggravated, and will drag all sorts of evildoings of 'SJW's real or imagined to the discussion, that had nothing to do with the original topic. I have to say that you have done this a lot. You, and many others, have a chip on your shoulder about the topic, and cannot just concentrate on what has actually been said.

If people barge in to threads blaming of evil feminist about all sorts of nonsense, then sure, I guess we will be discussing that and the tread gets derailed.

Feminists are annoying. That's about it. Annoying and divisive.

They aren't really ruining anything, and anything that's been 'ruined' by feminism (or anything) tends to get it in the end financially. Extremists of any sort are quite easily dealt with in the real world, all you have to do is make them feel unwelcome and tell them to kick rocks. Which is, exactly what people do to extremist feminists, conservatives, etc. in the real world. Online, there's a different sort of thing because there's a collection of places where extremists can coagulate and ass-pat one another, unlike the real world where we tell them to STFU.

And when I say 'outrage fetishists', keep in mind I wouldn't leave out the morons that believe every pundit on Social Media. I spend a lot of time talking to my conservative relatives about sensationalism and poorly-written misleading articles.