The Powder Room is Now Ladies Only. But I LIKE Talking To Ladies!

[Lady Day]

Just on the practical side I suggest we use the "golden era" forum for topics that will interest both genders. The everyday women of the golden age topic could have a sister thread there for snapshots?

That's a splendid idea.

 

[Flat Foot Floey]

I wrote this before I saw the Front Parlor which would fit the same purpose. Well done!

 

[ianbrettcooper]

Just saw the email regarding this change. So the Fedora Lounge has now opted to become a sexist organization.

As a proud feminist, I'm hoping this is some kind of tasteless sexist joke. Since when does an organization that welcomes all sexes prevent one gender from voting on issues of inclusion, and from participating in all forums?

It's not as if I ever abused anyone or behaved in a sexist way towards anyone. Why should I (or anyone else who has been a contributor in good standing) be banned from any discussions?

If people are being abusive/disrespectful, they should be banned. Punishing all men for the abuse of a few is wrong.

If it's not possible for me to delete my own account (I'm going to try to do it now), could a forum moderator please do it for me. Thanks.

 

[LizzieMaine]

We'll miss your contributions.

 

[LuvMyMan]

Not sure about anyone else, but really, someone is upset after being "not here" for a few years, and expect anyone that is here, to take it seriously that now, they want to parachute out of the fedora lounge plane in mid flight? It is fine that some may not agree with the new policy, but really, it sort of reminds me on something new on a menu. "I am refusing to even go to Denny's, they added a new salad on the menu". Well then, so long. You could have stayed and had some very interesting times here. As we all know, this is the place to be.

 

[ianbrettcooper]

Here are just a few problems I see with this decision:

1. The "vote" was not democratic: only those who profess to be women were invited to vote. This is inherently SEXIST - the opposite of what is surely the goal. Two wrongs don't make a right.

2. The decision tacitly allows misogyny anywhere else on the site EXCEPT the Powder Room. It also invites misandry within the Powder Room. Surely sexism should not appear ANYWHERE on the site. If there was a problem, why was it not met with a no-tolerance policy?

3. It makes women into "The Other" or the "out-group", which will tend to INCREASE misogyny rather than decrease it.

4. It gives moderators a way out of accepting responsibility for the fact that they permitted sexism to run rampant on the site to such an extent that women feel forced to claim a corner of the site in which they must deny access to all men.

5. It invites those who are sexist to camouflage their activities, which will allow them to work in far more harmful ways.

6. Where does this leave transgender/transsexuals? Must they now declare their gender identity? Since these folks are already victims of prejudice and harassment, this has a lot of potential for negative consequences for them.

7. Male feminists such as myself are now banned from commenting on women's issues. Sure, I haven't exactly been loquacious on the subject (or any other), but now I can't even if I wanted to. That's one LESS voice for women's rights and gender equality. How does that help?

8. The decision sets up an "us vs. them" culture which cannot possibly be healthy.

9. It disenfranchises men who have never caused a problem. Again, this is inherently SEXIST - the opposite of what is surely the goal.

10. It allows supporters of the decision to deride less active (but no less worthy) members who choose to come out against the decision. This kind of ad hominem attack is evidence of elitism.

And those are just off the top of my head.

Mark my words: this will lead to more sexism on a site which has apparently already endured a lot of it. This is a terrible way to address the problem, and it promises to make things far worse for women and for any men who are not sexists. Meanwhile, the misogynists must be thinking all their birthdays have come at once.

Somehow I doubt that any of the above issues were given proper consideration before the vote or by the moderators or owners of the site. What seems to have happened here is a knee-jerk reaction, and it is sure to backfire.

 

[LizzieMaine]

The women have made their decision. And it stands.

 

[ianbrettcooper]

The women have made their decision. And it stands.

Yes, "alea iacta est", and because of the decision's impact, the women will have to deal with the consequences. It's really hard to even acknowledge when one makes a poor choice - reversing it is even harder.

It seems to me that the women have allowed themselves to fall into this particular trap. But hey, by all means continue to think that you've won a victory when you've really given up ground. Just don't say I didn't warn you.

 

[LizzieMaine]

I think the women here can live without a man presuming to lecture them about feminism.

 

[scotrace]

Well, let's see:

1. Web fora are not governments. They are not democratic, socialist, communist, oligarchy, matriarchy, or meritocracy. We are pleased to host the conversations of our members. Like any host, we warmly receive our friends, and show the door to those whose company we find unpleasant. That's the sum of it.

2. I have no interest in explaining yet again what has been clearly spelled out just about everywhere this topic has been raised.

3. They seem to not feel this way. I, as a man, do not assign thought to others. I let them own their reactions.

4. It gives us a way to offer our members a more pleasurable stay, under conditions they find accommodating. I am wondering, in five contributions (three of which are on this page), how you've come to gain such depth of understanding of our community.

5. Thank you for your keen insight.

6. Already accounted for, thank you. They've always been welcomed.

7. That's right. You can't participate.

8. We shall judge the relative health of our 30,000 friends in a few months and see if any are dying off.

9. Thank you for your ready supply of labels.

10. See #9.



While we appreciate your input, we have more than a decade of wading the waters here, and believe we have a pretty good feel for the place. We don't make any decisions quickly or without a nauseating amount of discussion.

As my friend Mr. Finch, of NC, pointed out recently, the remedy for your disillusionment lies directly below the exit sign.

 

[skydog757]

"The question is, What is the upside for the site to have a Woman's Only Thread? How do all the members benefit from this rule?"

The most certain test by which we judge whether a country is really free is the amount of security enjoyed by minorities. John Dalberg-Acton, 1st Baron Acton, in The History of Freedom in Antiquity (1877).

Sometimes it's not about what's best for all. I respect that a decision has been made without the need of my input and I do not feel insulted by it. I do wonder though; what would the reaction have been if the male members voted that the female members had to allow us to interject on discussions that they felt were gender specific?

 

[Ghost Rider]

Here are just a few problems I see with this decision:

1. The "vote" was not democratic: only those who profess to be women were invited to vote. This is inherently SEXIST - the opposite of what is surely the goal. Two wrongs don't make a right.

2. The decision tacitly allows misogyny anywhere else on the site EXCEPT the Powder Room. It also invites misandry within the Powder Room. Surely sexism should not appear ANYWHERE on the site. If there was a problem, why was it not met with a no-tolerance policy?

3. It makes women into "The Other" or the "out-group", which will tend to INCREASE misogyny rather than decrease it.

4. It gives moderators a way out of accepting responsibility for the fact that they permitted sexism to run rampant on the site to such an extent that women feel forced to claim a corner of the site in which they must deny access to all men.

5. It invites those who are sexist to camouflage their activities, which will allow them to work in far more harmful ways.

6. Where does this leave transgender/transsexuals? Must they now declare their gender identity? Since these folks are already victims of prejudice and harassment, this has a lot of potential for negative consequences for them.

7. Male feminists such as myself are now banned from commenting on women's issues. Sure, I haven't exactly been loquacious on the subject (or any other), but now I can't even if I wanted to. That's one LESS voice for women's rights and gender equality. How does that help?

8. The decision sets up an "us vs. them" culture which cannot possibly be healthy.

9. It disenfranchises men who have never caused a problem. Again, this is inherently SEXIST - the opposite of what is surely the goal.

10. It allows supporters of the decision to deride less active (but no less worthy) members who choose to come out against the decision. This kind of ad hominem attack is evidence of elitism.

And those are just off the top of my head.

Mark my words: this will lead to more sexism on a site which has apparently already endured a lot of it. This is a terrible way to address the problem, and it promises to make things far worse for women and for any men who are not sexists. Meanwhile, the misogynists must be thinking all their birthdays have come at once.

Somehow I doubt that any of the above issues were given proper consideration before the vote or by the moderators or owners of the site. What seems to have happened here is a knee-jerk reaction, and it is sure to backfire.

A short response to a long post: Come on, get real! What's your problem here? If you don't like it, then leave - simple as that!

 

[V.C. Brunswick]

7. Male feminists such as myself are now banned from commenting on women's issues. Sure, I haven't exactly been loquacious on the subject (or any other), but now I can't even if I wanted to. That's one LESS voice for women's rights and gender equality. How does that help?

Sir, there is nothing preventing you from commenting on women's issues if that is your passion. The only thing is that, paradoxically, according to the bylaws you just can't comment about them in the ladies room. However, despair not for there are several threads elsewhere throughout the forum where you can give full vent as related topics do come up for discussion from time to time, most notably the "General Decline in Standards" thread in the Observation Bar and "Some Things in the Golden Era Were Not Cool" in The Golden Era section.

 

[LizzieMaine]

The irony of a so-called "male feminist" trying to force his point of view on women whether they want it or not does not, of course, escape notice. That's exactly the kind of behavior that a lot of women who've complained to me over the years are most fed up about. You few guys who keep kicking about a decision that's already been made only prove the point that these women raise.

 

[PADDY]

A massive Five posts in nearly four years and then this..? *sigh*

 

[Two Types]

For those still complaining about this change:

Read through all the discussions, this move appears to have been taken reluctantly. It's not a perfect solution (and it goes against my own opinion of how things should ideally be) but it is a solution.

Above all else, drastic action should send out a strong message out to those who have caused offence etc.

And, if you are concerned that men are being stereotyped due to the bad behaviour of a few, the best thing you can do is lobby the bartenders etc about the behaviour of the offenders. Request that they be identified and banned. If you see inappropriate posts, take positive action and complain.

But the bottom line is, this is not a free space. Politics is banned. As a result I have complained to bartenders about political comments.

Now, if I had my way, religion would be a banned topic. Since religion is just as dangerous territory as politics. But it's not up to me.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

3 of 'em today!

A massive Five posts in nearly four years and then this..? *sigh*

 

[LizzieMaine]

Rest assured that one significant result of this whole situation is that we will be marking people who give evidence of being here just to "stir the pot," and they will be dealt with. This is a discussion board for people interested in the Era, not Reddit or 4Chan.

 

[Lady Day]

And, if you are concerned that men are being stereotyped due to the bad behaviour of a few, the best thing you can do is lobby the bartenders etc about the behaviour of the offenders. Request that they be identified and banned. If you see inappropriate posts, take positive action and complain.

This is the crux of it there. Bartenders can only do so much and we can't see everything. If you see someone being inappropriate, let someone know who can do something about it. Be the neighborhood watch of the lounge.

 

[Brad Bowers]

3 of 'em today!

Truly someone who's an important contributer to the Lounge.

Brad