bushbred wrote about the lack of female participants in OLO. We have Foxy who is most articulate, but I think more women would change the tenor of the discussions in a positive way. What can we do? Does the male contingent discourage female participation?

I think quotas are the only answer.

Affirmative action!

It's well known that Severin's posts can be deleted by the male posters. They're always trying to silence her. It's just not fair. And Graham is biassed too, he called her difficult. There's a long history of misogynist exclusion on OLO.

They cant handle that she has an opinion while being female. I've often tried to tell her to post more while she's male, but she just doesn't listen.

david f
You are very sweet, but this woman feels fine with OLO. It is an open public forum and anyone can join.

The strong anti-women sentiment that prevails at times on some threads is usually fuelled by personal emotional experiences and better not to take offence. They are a minority and don't represent most men. (If that is what you are referring to)

Houlley should be banned though - he is just mean and cruel to chickens, even going so far as saying they have no chardonnay rights - Boo Hiss. :)

How can you tell?
I have been mistaken for a woman.
Some of our very best posters are female.
Rarely have I needed to know a persons sex age or other than the on line persona.
Surely we are ok as we are.

Dear David F.,

Thank You for the lovely compliment.

I agree with Pelly.
I think there's a pretty good mix on OLO - overall.
There's some very strong female posters -
Pelly is one of my favourites - as is
Suze, Pynch, Bronwyn, Severin (Fractelle),
Cornflower, and many others. All of whom
are more than capable of holding their own
in a discussion.

Sure, there will always be people on a public
forum such as this one who will dislike multifaceted,
talented, informed on the issues, constructive debaters
such as ourselves (I forgot to add humble as well).
But they are usually from the shallow
end of the gene pool - and a minority on OLO.

Perhaps we could have these repeat offenders tagged
With - "Beware - Alpha Dog!" every time they post?

Foxy:"
Perhaps we could have these repeat offenders tagged
With - "Beware - Alpha Dog!" every time they post?"

or perhaps they could be tagged with "beware- alpha bitch!", which my mate Max would regard as a challenge.

I bet he'd prevail 'n'all...

Why should OLO be made more welcoming to women?

Dear Anti,

As I wrote on another post -

"I refuse to have a battle of wits
with an unarmed person!"

Dear Peter Hume,

You asked why should OLO be made more
welcoming to women?

Perhaps so that there could be better conversations
than those found in alphabet soup!

There are far too many pussy-whipped barrows at large and it is good to see the occasional boar have the goolies to make a call for order against what he sees as the excesses and wrongs of that shape-shifting bush pig called feminism.

For Christ's sake never make a joke about the feminists, incoming.....

...whoops, now I've gone and inadvertently upset the God Squad too, damnation!

Hiya davidf,

I think OLO should be made more welcoming to MEN. There are so
few of them here :)

(Hiya to CJ if he shows up - he is one of the few).

Foxy:""I refuse to have a battle of wits
with an unarmed person!""

Oh Foxy, how..erm...banal.

It seems to me that your "arms" are all a bit second-hand and rusty. I'll even tie one hand behind my back and type slowly, if that helps.

Pynchme:"wheet, wheeet, here CJ, come to mummy little fella Who's Mummy's good little boy then? Here, have a bikkie and roll over for a tummy rub."

Nope, no alpha dogs here...

You're so jealous antiseptic.

I've long felt the sexual tension between you and pynchme.

Be careful though, you're so alike I fear you may be brother and sister.

I have to feel strongly about any issue before I make the time to add a comment. Generally speaking I think I have more useful things to do with my day. I never then enter into an argument with other writers after making my comment.
It is a well known fact that in any conversation men will interrupt the speaker more often than will a woman.
I think OLO suits this aspect in a man's nature that he wants to do battle, whereas women usually just want to state an opinion.

Dear Anti,

I can't take anything you say seriously.
You're such a mouther of tired words.

I would argue that the conversation so far misses the point it's more about the level of angst and general gamespersonship for dominance than anything else.

I find the notion that one has to aggressive, strident or particularly articulate to express good points on OLO is preposterously neanderthal. i.e. Those who are aggressive, strident, articulate aren't necessarily smarter or more correct than the proverbial social mouse.

To me the quality of the points made is what counts.

Therefore, how do we make OLO more inclusive? is a more apposite question.

My observations are topics are often dominated by extremes or overtly aggressive persons with personal agendas as opposed to sharing comments. Which in turn tends to narrow the range of contributions and contributors.
I note the names in the article section often don't appear in the general discussion threads the why is holds a key (I think)

The females/males in my family all have views and have on occasions followed some OLO conversations. All could and perhaps would contribute but ultimately conclude that while there are good contributors the unnecessary 'high voltage' personal attacks makes discussion not worth the the discomfort.

I am a past veteran of stouches attempting to encourage lifting quality/substance over argey bargey.

To some degree this has happened albeit slowly.

Well, blow me down with a feather and call me Tulip.

Severin = Fractelle.

Thank goodness for that. I can now ask the question that has been nagging me since 9th November.

Fractelle, what's a custard apple? And what don't you like about them?

' Those who are aggressive, strident, articulate aren't necessarily smarter or more correct than the proverbial social mouse.'

How do you feel about the wordy pontificators who brain dump with little punctuation and over-use the word apposite after they learned it from CJ?

People who find themselves being attacked personally need to have a look at that amount of agression in their own posts. It is hard to stay angry with someone who stays calm and reasonable. I cannot recall any truly nasty comments made towards Robert, Foxy or The Pied Piper [smile]. I wonder if TPP will ever re-appear like Fractelle/Severin. She wrote her last post about the wonders of internet gambling and we never heard from her again.

Benk,

You're just not accounting for sociopaths or people who revel in winding others up.

Foxy:"You're such a mouther of tired words."

tres derive, mon cher.

The soul of wit is originality. OTOH, humour is often found in the repetition of a theme. The trick is in finding the balance, much like the challenge facing the Pomeranian when confronted by a 6 foot tall Lithuanian's legs.

As the bard probably should have said, sour grapes make the best whine.

I you're going to be pretentious, Antiseptic, it helps to get the French right.

>>tres derive, mon cher<<

And your similes could do with some work, too.

>>like the challenge facing the Pomeranian when confronted by a 6 foot tall Lithuanian's legs.<<

To the Pomeranian, the height of the Lithuanian is hardly relevant, I would imagine.

Fortunately, your pun worked.

>>As the bard probably should have said, sour grapes make the best whine.<<

The "bard" cliché at the front spoiled it a bit, though.

Dear Anti,

You're on your own.
Your originality,
rapier-wit, and the exuberance of your
own verbosity has totally taken me back.
You're free to carry on -
I won't be re-loading!

Pericles

Your absent keyboard warnings could do with a little work too.

Oh well, I was getting around to cleaning the keyboard and the instant coffee wasn't much good anyway.

cont'd ...

Dear Anti,

before I go ...

Seeing as you brought up the topic of
Lithuanian legs... and originality ...
We say "Didelis Aciu,"
for doing so.

You might enjoy this extract:

"Sam, who didn't like to be called Samantha, was
anything but average by anyone's definition.
She stood out in any crowd. She was tall, five
feet ten inches in her bare feet, even taller in heels.
She had a slender build, extremely long legs, small
hips, an appetizing cleavage, an infectious smile with
a dimple in her cheek. She was quick to blush, flirted
outrageously, with both sexes, while still retaining
her ladylike demeanour. She had a mane of thick, wavy,
red hair. Almond-shaped hazel eyes, killer cheek-bones,
and a peaches and cream complexion. She had a sensuality,
yet vulnerability about her. One of her lecturers at
university described her as, "The Girl With The Untouched
Look." Yet she loved raunchy jokes. When asked once
whether she objected to "dirty" jokes, Sam replied,
"Only if they're not funny!" ...

That will have to do for now...

Original enough for you?

A quiet dog has a loud bark.
(Old Lithuanian saying).

It gets boring not because lack of women but lack of different people. Just the same people post everyday the same comment. Like High school. Yawns.

I'd rather see OLO more welcoming to those who want discussion more than combat. I don't know how that can be achieved but I suspect that really is the issue. OLO can be unwelcoming to both men and women if they don't want to spend their time around personal squabbles.

Too many threads become heavily polarised (and I've been party to that at times) and drag on for hundred's of posts primarily consisting of personal attacks on others and a variety of insults against those holding contrary opinions and little genuine content.

I'm finding that trying to stay out of that stuff and still add worthwhile comment is becoming more bother than it's worth.

Mostly now I could not be bothered tying to take part in discussions where people I respect (or have some appreciation for) on both sides of debates spend their time exchanging insults with each other.

Some enjoy the fighting, Holly is quite open about that, others pretend they don't but get into it at every opportunity and some others seem to go with the flow. Others mostly try to stay to the sides but get dragged into it from time to time.

I've been trying to work out if it's OLO which has changed or if it's me. There has always been combat but I can't tell if it's got worse or not.

R0bert

Pericles:"To the Pomeranian, the height of the Lithuanian is hardly relevant, I would imagine."

Well no, but the challenge of balance remains for the little chap.

Pericles:"Fortunately, your pun worked."

It was independently derived, but I'm not sure if I can claim first utterance. Nonetheless, I like it and I'm glad it fell not on deaf ears.

As for the French, much as I would have preferred the correct adjectival form, the noun seemed to work better in the context of the audience Anglais.

Foxy, Sam sounds like my kinda chickybabe. Send 'er over.

If that is your aim, then perhaps OLO needs more common kind of
female topics. "Days of our Lives", "the Bold and the Beautiful",
or the latest gossip from New Idea. :)

In my experience anyhow, thinking women like say Pelican, are a
rare breed indeed. Plus she has a great sense of humour too !

Perhaps we'll have to try and clone Pelican :)

Dear Yabby,

I have met quite a few thinking women. I live with one. Her first husband was a very good-looking man but afraid of her intelligence. I am not so good looking but appreciate her mind. My daughter is intelligent and witty. She decided to go to an all-girl high school after going to a co-ed school since, according to her, boys were louder and monopolised classroom discourse. In my experience I have met many intelligent women. Maybe you have also but didn't listen to them.

My mother became infirm and had to go to a nursing home. She was labeled antisocial since she preferred to sit in her room and read rather than join the others in the common room to watch daytime TV. She had never liked that sort of thing before but was supposed to like it then.

You don't have to clone Pelican. If you are intelligent you might clone yourself.

[to the tune of Home on the Range.]

Oh, give me a clone,
A clone of my own,
With the Y chromosome turned to X.
And then this clone,
This clone of my own,
Will be of the opposite sex.

All women are not confined to "Days of our Lives", "the Bold and the Beautiful" and the latest gossip from "New Idea" any more than all men are absorbed in the footy, fishing and the local gin mill.

Current posts from Anti, Houellebecq a [mis used] nom de plume if there was ever one), the missus, Yabby make my case (with or without correct punctuation).

Foxy
wise word from my son "don't argue with an idiot, They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"

RObert,
Nice try A+ for effort. I support your intent.

Dear David F,

I love reading your posts.
You're one of the reasons that
make me glad to continue to be part
of this forum. Thank You.

Dear Examinator,

You always know the right thing to say
at the right time. But then you always
were very perceptive.
It is appreciated!

I once had a lover who was Estonian rather Lithuanian, but Foxy's description of Sam fits her well - except that she was very blonde, rather than a redhead. Since I'm more of a Golden Retriever than a Pomeranian, I neither had problems with her legs nor her hair.

R0bert's right - people should be nicer to each other. Besides which, I've always found that women feel more welcome when you're nice to them.

Men too, now that I think of it :)

Gee I have enjoyed this thread so far. Some comments were very funny indeed- eg. Foxy< " Perhaps we could have these repeat offenders tagged with - "Beware - Alpha Dog!" every time they post?"
I was not quite sure who she was talking about though? :)
'Septic seemed to know.

I don't believe there should be quotas re numbers of female/male contributions to these pages.

It should be up to the contributors as to which sex they want to be anyway- under the cloak of the online names they choose.

I am still not sure of the sex of some of the regular contributors, let alone the occasional ones!

I would just like to encourage people to report any abusive or nasty posts as quickly as possible to Graham, so that he, in his wisdom, can decide if that comment should remain here to offend others.

Suzeonline:"I would just like to encourage people to report any abusive or nasty posts as quickly as possible to Graham"

And just think, "no one need ever know your name"...

Has Australia really become a nation of intellectually-bereft cowardly informers like Suzie here?

What is "offensive" to some may also be of vital interest. I'm sure that Peter Garrett, Kevin Rudd and the Unions regard any mention of the insulation debacle as "offensive"; should they then be able to demand that public discussion be curtailed?

I'm sure that many women who look forward to a ride on a feminist-inspired gravy train regard discussion of feminism in anything other than glowing terms offensive, but what of the 50% of the populace who aren't feminine?

Suzie, I recommend you HTFU.

I think that OLO would be much more welcoming to women if posters like Antiseptic stopped posting egregiously nasty comments directed at them. Suzeonline is quite correct - unless people alert the moderators to hateful and insulting comments they are unlikely to be aware of them.

Haters rely on people's reluctance to report them in order to continue and escalate their abuse, which at OLO often is directed at women.

When someone attaches unkindness to criticism,
they're angry.

Angry people need to criticize as an outlet
for their anger. That's why we can reject
unkind criticism because unkind criticism is
never part of a meaningful critique. It's
purpose is not to teach, or help, its purpose
is to punish.

Discussions aren't supposed to be battles. When
your discussion slips into being dysfunctional,
well there's another just around the corner.

People don't have to face insults.

Gawd you lot are funny.

I think OLO has been abused by people constantly banging on about the style of communication rather than the content.

Seriously, if anyone is really that upset they can just ignore that poster. It's not very hard.

I am really excited about Graham's new idea to nominate the Police. Foxy and pontificator will be beaming with pride. Sorry r0bert, I'd rather you just continue to sadly decry the 'missed opportunity' for 'productive' discussion. For some reason I enjoy your straight man, good all round nice guy thing you've got going on. I love it when you plead for clemency from the girls too.

I think in the end you all drastically overestimate this potential of OLO. I see few new ideas, and I know I'll be shot down, but the few new perspectives I've witnessed on OLO, looking from a topic from a different angle (apart from on gender threads) was actually antiseptic.

Phanto is good sometimes too. Pelican I agree with nearly everything she says, but that's boring. I don't know, is it really such an issue for people to slag each other off in a light hearted way. People seem to come back, and enjoy themselves.

I know I do. If anyone is genuinely offended after observing the way I relate they really are being silly. I'm nothing more than one of the two guys in The Muppets observing the show and making snide comments.

antiseptic,

'Suzie, I recommend you HTFU.'
That's bully talk. Suze can relate any way she wants.

As can I. As I will continue to do.

CJ,

'I think that OLO would be much more welcoming to women if posters like Antiseptic stopped posting egregiously nasty comments directed at them.'
You love him. You're f9ckn obsessed man. You'd be lost without him. Anyway, when I started you were one of the least 'welcoming' of posters with your little 'established' posters club.

If you're just messing with anti I like your style, but I think you really need someone to look down on.

Houellebecq,

The two guys in the Muppets are in context and funny, sadly, you're neither.

A misanthrope might suggest, that in other ways you do match them, Tired, cynical and a head full of stuffing. Ha ha he he Ho ho.:-)

PS
:-) = :) (allowing for *my* nose).

Foxy:"People don't have to face insults"

Certainly true, but one of the best ways to elicit a strong response from someone is to use language they regard as "insulting", regardless of the content.

I get a laugh every time someone describes me as "condescending", or "offensive", because I know it means they've been confronted with something that they found difficult to answer.

I get a kick out of a good response, too. Sadly, the level of rhetorical skill displayed on OLO is not as high as I'd like it, but it's better than many other sites.

I particularly enjoy hecklers, like the Pomeranian. All he has to do to stop me mocking him is stop heckling, but he's completely incapable of doing so: a consummate sideline-stander and leg-humper.

You'll note that I have rarely ever been directly insulting to you. That's because I respond in kind as much as possible and you have mostly been a reasonable and sensible poster who offers no insult herself. Of late you do seem to have got a bit carried away with your self-appointed role of thought-police...erm...person, though.

Houellebecq:"That's bully talk. Suze can relate any way she wants. "

Yes, indeed she can. I recommend that she'd do well to want to HTFU.

Foxy

You suggest "alpha male", that wouldn't work, some would see it as a badge of honour. Might I suggest "wannabe alpha male" (WAM) would be more apt. That field of thinking yields some delicious fruit (options). here are a few that could be applied :
i.e. MV mental vandal, for the mathematically minded... LMx2 little mind little man, R=e. rudeness is exponential. Well Some OLOers seem to love labels and pigeon holes.

Food for thought.
One wonders, how many of OLO ers do you think
- believe that parliament question time is representative of parliamentary debate? Therefore, appropriate all debates.

- believe that question time actually achieves anything?

If we consider that parliamentary debate rules have evolved
- over 100's of years
- designed around substance
- give fair voice to all sides
- rarely have issues with PC etc.(politeness)

Doesn't this say much about the ignorance and/or arrogance of those who choose BFI (brute force and ignorance) as their preferred mode?
_______________________________________

Davidf I forgot before, you deserve an A+ for effort too

Hay Houellebecq, you've got to be damn careful, walking on the ground, around here, & keep looking up.

If you are not switched on, you are likely to get crushed by some of this lot, falling off their high horses.

This especially relates to those who are more interested in spelling & punctuation, than what is being said.

I suppose it's what you would expect. It's easier to learn to spell, than to understand ideas.

Hasbeen,

Yeah, but I think I might get into it now. I really enjoyed joining in the morally superior lot in castigating antiseptic recently. It's so much fun, I can see why they love it so. Although I don't want to discourage people from letting rip, especially now some of my good influence has rubbed off on Foxy. Maybe as Foxy turns to the dark side I will slowly turn to the light. Me and Foxy have this yin/yang relationship.

[sic] Definition: An opportunistic put-down enacted by a pedant to disguise the fact they have no real comeback, relying on the false assumption that the writer of the original quote gives a sh1t that they've been 'caught out' spelling something wrong.

Septic,

'I particularly enjoy hecklers, like the Pomeranian. '
Yeah I'm getting real bored of that stuff. You need some new material, all the avenues have been exhausted. I think I've finally decided that CJ isn't just sycophantically sucking up to the female posters to wind you up, I fear he really is getting something more perverse out of it.

R0berts needy searching for affirmation from all female posters that he's not a raving misopgynist like that nasty antiseptic is somehow less creepy. Not sure why. Maybe the absence of the homoerotic competition between you and CJ, or maybe the lack of blatant hypocrisy seeing as how r0bert is never abusive himself.

Anyway, it's time for a new metaphor I think. A humble request from the audience.

Oh, and a request for Hyacinth (pontificator);
I haven't heard anything at all about your candle light suppers recently.
What's happened to the altruistic counsellor?

And finally,

A desperate call for the return of Col and Piper!
Even 'the vile ginx'.

Pericles

I have just caught up with this thread.

Laughed out loud when I read your post.

Custard Apples - tropical fruit; very juicy, but too cloyingly sweet for my tastes, I prefer (among tropical fruit) Mangos, Pineapples - zesty, tangy fruit for me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Custard-apple

Reading through all these comments, some warm and heart-felt, others redolent of the bitterness within the author.

Sometimes I feel OLO isn't welcoming, but mostly I do. I didn't have to return after I recovered but I did because there are many people I missed:

Some people I often disagree with like Hasbeen, or R0bert, but are worth reading because they have good hearts (something that can only be ascertained over time).

Many others; Pelican, Foxy, Pynchme, CJ Morgan, Examinator, Davidf, Belly, King Hazza; too many good people to mention as I would probably forget someone.

I won't be reticent, I believe that this forum would be pleasanter without the likes of Antiseptic or Formersnag - but then they are so extreme only other extremists would take them seriously - but I do enjoy cutting them down to size sometimes. Houellie, self-admittedly, likes to take the piss, so that if he does write something of worth, I'll probably miss it.

___________________________________________

Finally, I don't believe that women should receive any special treatment above that offered to men. Women have been treated like hot-house-flowers instead of human beings for far too long. Just a fair go is all that I'd ask for anyone - male or female.

*When someone attaches unkindness to criticism,
they're angry.
Angry people need to criticize as an outlet
for their anger. That's why we can reject
unkind criticism because unkind criticism is
never part of a meaningful critique. It's
purpose is not to teach, or help, its purpose
is to punish.*

Foxy, sorry but that is basically rubbish. I know
that you are a delicate little petal, but some people
simply say things as they see them, some sensitive types
take it to heart. Its also false, just like when mommy
says "it will all be better in the morning".

Fact is, it may well not be, the kid might well be dead.
That is the reality, which so many don't want to deal with.

This very issue has just been discussed on Bloomberg, in
relation to the Toyota saga, where it took a whole lot of
people dying, before the company woke up to reality.
Japanese culture is all about saving face, so people only
say nice things. Telling the boss that he might have screwed
up would be unkind, so stuff is covered up. Now they have
to face a much much bigger mess.

That has nothing to do with hatred at all, just facing reality,
or closing your eyes and wishing reality would go away, which
is a typical emotional response, not a rational one.

Dear Yabby,

Let me explain ...
(drum roll please).

I'm not talking about people expressing an opinion.
I'm talking about insulting behaviour.

What I am talking about is personal attacks,
racial, ethnic or religious hate words, or the use
of terms that are used to deliberately
cause offense. I'm sure that you're aware of what
these are.

However, as I've stated previously, constructive
debating is an art. And not everyone can be good
at it. That's to be expected.

However, it's only a small minority
of people on this Forum that deliberately use personal
attacks on posters that they view as "opponents."
Most posters realize that discussions aren't supposed
to be an all out or nothing battle. And most people
can get their views across without having to insult.

As Severin/Fractelle said, - most of us don't want
or expect any "special treatment," simply a "fair go!"
It's best to remember that there are people out there
reading what you're posting - you're not talking to a
blank screen. There is an etiquette that should be
observed in posting - we're not ferals. - We're supposedly
intelligent, human beings, taking part in social and
political discussions.

*There is an etiquette that should be
observed in posting*

But Foxy, there is a huge difference in peoples opinions,
in terms of what that etiquette should be and what people
find insulting or offensive.

So my point it, people might write in ways which does not
suit your etiquette, that does not mean that they are
angry, as you claimed.

I am sure that I have offended many others on OLO, but they
would be offended by things that I would not even dream of
as being offensive.

I simply try to see life as it is, no rosy coloured glasses.

I'll give you an example. I commonly mention that when we
die, we'll land up looking not much different to that sheep
that died in the corner of the paddock, a bag of bones and
dust. I mentioned this as a kind of joke at a supermarket
checkout recently and it turns out the bloke was very religious
and taken aback by this. He knew he was going to heaven and
found my notion quite offensive it seems!

So my point is, life is about perspectives and that your
point, about anger being the driving force, would commonly
be wrong. Thats all.

Dear Yabby,

Deliberate personal insults - are offensive.
I'm not talking about terms that can be
interpreted differently by different readers.

When someone deliberately tries to provoke
with comments like:

"Have you stopped beating your wife?"

They're not trying to present a "different
perspective."

And that's what I'm talking about.

Deliberate insults!

I can't make it any clearer for you.

Houellebecq, <" 'Suzie, I recommend you HTFU.'
That's bully talk. Suze can relate any way she wants."

'Septic was certainly looking to bully me there alright, but it is the only way he has ever been able to relate to women I would imagine.

Doesn't really bother me. Certainly not the worst he has offered.

'Septic, right back at you little man

Worked in and around shearing sheds for most of my life and adult life; what the hell is the [acronym]'HTFU'? Interpreted the Ram and Ewe part yet not the 'HT'prefix; gone over this a few times tired. Not one my 19yr old and 15yr old use in texts or on the net either. However, it is between yourself and Suzeonline Antiseptic.

Harden.The.Fcuk.Up
H.T.F.U

I think.

Severin <"Some people I often disagree with like Hasbeen, or R0bert, but are worth reading because they have good hearts (something that can only be ascertained over time).

Many others; Pelican, Foxy, Pynchme, CJ Morgan, Examinator, Davidf, Belly, King Hazza; too many good people to mention as I would probably forget someone.">

Thanks Severin and likewise!

Btw CJ Morgan, 'zaminator, davidf and maybe Belly and I have indeed disagreed in the past and still do on some things, but they have also had me consider or set me straight on something with information that was new or that hadn't occurred to me. Those blokes have skillz. No doubt of it.

pynch

Six of one, half dozen of the other.

How is 'HTFU' any worse than calling a person 'septic', relating him to pus, putrefaction and sewage?

Likewise, when a women refers to a male adversary as a 'little' man there are several unflattering interpretations, all meant with malice aforethought.

Returning to the topic, the intentions are good but looking out for the 'fairer sex' has been passe for yonks. Fair dinkum and with the greatest respect, if their language and delivery are any guide some here could kick start a Harley with their tongue and yes, I am aware there is another method they might use as well. Not that there is anything wrong with wrong with strong, forceful women of course. Some men could be their partners and possibly were in a previous life.

It is a public forum and some will put their views passionately. I would like to see more wit but some more than make up for that with research and well reasoned argument.

No need to take any of it to heart and I doubt that many (any?) do. I will preach no more, there are others far better at it.

Severin (fraccy)

So glad you are back even if wearing a different dress. :)

I don't get too hung up on gender (or try not to), and sometimes I have gone along thinking a poster is female or male (yes I know there are only two choices), only to find they tis the other.

I could really be male (I'm not) marathon runner who knits in his spare time, Foxy could be a six foot ten bikie who wears leather boots to bed, CJ could be a Japanese woman who does origami in her spare time, Anti could really be a feminist who loves debating and comes on OLO to try and argue the 'other side', Houlley could be a political staffer who gets bored and comes on OLO to have a bit of a stir, Pynchme could really be a pincher :) and Yabby might be a higher order intelligent crustacean.

Gender doesn't matter - we are all just usernames from a forum point of view.

Pelican

<<< Gender doesn't matter - we are all just usernames from a forum point of view. >>>

Exactly.

PS

I have always suspected that Antiseptic is Germaine Greer having a stir; something she delights in.

pelican: << CJ could be a Japanese woman who does origami in her spare time >>

Spooky... actually it's bonsai that's my passion. I do, however, have a black belt in origami.

"r0bert is never abusive himself." not quite, sometimes I fire off a post before I think about it enough. Unnecessary conflict is not part of my preferred approach to posting or life. Polarising debate does get attention, it get's affirmation from those who agree with you but I don't see that it helps.

I don't want to be in the habit of responding to people abusively here then take that stuff back into the rest of my life.

Houellebecq I've not worked out if you really believe that I'm "searching for affirmation" or if it's just a dig that you hope get's under my skin. It's certainly not my view of the world. I would rather be someone that most readers bothered trying to understand than dismissed based on past history even when they disagree.

R0bert

Posted by pelican, Saturday, 27 February 2010 7:57:28 AM:



"Gender doesn't matter - we are all
just usernames from a forum point of view."



Collectively, that would make us foruminifera, would it not?




In these now arbitrarily more verbose times (see: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3478&page=0 ),
I can't pass up the opportunity to congratulate david f on his skillful use of a lower case sans serif 'l' in what would otherwise have been the acronym OLO in the topic title, making it doubly bilaterally palindromic. Back to front, and inverted, it reads the same. Very insightful in the context of the topic, david f. Doubly bilateral palindromicity is not easily achieved.

Speaking of usernames (which pelican does), I note the relatively recent re-badgings of erstwhile Forum identities 'Fractelle' and 'Q&A'. Specifically, to 'severin' and 'qanda', respectively, judging by the literary styles of posts. Do these changes reflect the acquisition of new computers, or alternatively re-installations of operating systems, concomitant with loss of the original OLO keys and passwords for login, I wonder? Or are there other reasons for the changes?

Tell me qanda, qanda, qanda. Tell me qanda, tell me why.

Dear Forrest Gumpp,

In addition to being doubly bilaterally palindromic OlO also stands for the dichotimising of the OlO kinds of humanity into those who understand binary notation and those who don't.

lOl david f (in a strictly binary doubly bilaterally palindromic way, of course).

I now feel suitably dichotomised. Ol Ol Ol!

Is such binary notational comprehension a sex-linked characteristic in your experience, O font of all wisdom? Not wishing to engender any conflict on the Forum, but this just strikes me as something you are likely to have your finger on on OlO.

Cornflower, <" How is 'HTFU' any worse than calling a person 'septic', relating him to pus, putrefaction and sewage?
Likewise, when a women refers to a male adversary as a 'little' man there are several unflattering interpretations, all meant with malice aforethought."

Well it is heartwarming to see someone standing up for 'septic there Cornflower. We will wait and see what happens next time he has you in his sights for a nasty response.

Unfortunately, I asked my 18 year old daughter what HTFU meant, and she said it stood for "Hate To F... You"! So you can see why I then came up with the belittling comments that I did to poor dear 'septic.

You are right though Cornflower, and I now regret stooping to his level and making personal insults.
I stand corrected, and I will NEVER consult my daughter about these things again!

Dear Forrest,

Certainly it is sex-liked. If I had a sex change to a soprano I would palindromically become Diva David.

suzeonline

You should thank me for drawing your attention to your exposed posterior. There has been some disquieting gossip that there could be Alpha Dogs around. 'Dogs' being non gender specific you need to watch both ways. Make that all ways, there being a third and possibly other sexes.

Your inference is right though, HTFU is an acronym that would never be found on some sites, more is the pity.

Dear Suze,

Let me tell you the story of a small green
farm with a large pink problem ...

It's the story of Granville, but he's known
as Grunter because that's what he does!

He hates everything and everyone.

He is overfed and overweight.

He is mad, bad, angry and sad.
(and dangerous to know on days with a "d"
in).

He has serious attitude...
and SHOCKING wind!

Yesterday he flattened the farmer,
spat on the cat,
dunked the dog,
catapulted the cow,
and mashed three-short-sighted mice
into the mud.

The day before, he bit the badger,
grabbed the goat and choked the chicks
with one of his outbursts.
He ran amok in the muck,
sat on the sheep and dropped something
dirty on the duck!

The other animals think that he's too big
for his trotters.
The other animals think that he should be
taught a lesson...

Anyway, to make a long story short - he is
taught a lesson - an explosive one - on
how not to treat your fellow man, or pig.

The book is a breath of foul air - and no
real animals were hurt during the writing of
it - it's written by Mike Jolley - and is
a great picture book for children.

The moral of the story is - some animals
will remain true to their nature - they
enjoy their gruntlement - (more's the pity),
but it's best to just let them be!

Keep posting Suze and do not be concerned about people generalising about your character or character assassinating. For at the end of the day [as you would undoubtedly know by this time in your life]there are people who have not walked in your shoes professionally and personally. I admire the fact you are honest, giving and courageous in your posts as I am. You are entitled to your opinion and do not need to watch your back or backside. Keep expressing your opinions and if you need to defend yourself from ignorant and rude remarks: do it.

If you walk in someone else's shoes make sure they take their feet out first.

Foxy
I believe that if someone is being a hypocrite no matter who i will make the relevent points, and also include facts.
No OLO is a opinion site and debates are good, but when those who wish to spin instead of facts then they shall recieve.

So with regards to parliamentary question time it actually reminds me of what certain people here do, an act like clowns.

Question time is a joke, and we pay for it.

Then we have personal insults.

Now if you support a party or anything and has done very bad things then are you not also supporting those who have done such.

Where are your morals so to say.

So personal insults are only those which are untrue.

Well really how can it be more welcoming to men, or the general public.
How do we do that.

Really gender does not really make a difference.

Dear Mr Tapp,

As I've stated to you before - it's
always a good idea to be informed on the
issues and you can only do that by
checking more than one source. Otherwise
you may well get only a very narrow
biased point of view of limited information
not giving you the full picture.

Also so called "facts" in politics can be
interpreted differently - depending on
whose point of view is being presented.

We do agree on Question Time however...

It was formerly a democratic safeguard, now
a rancorous farce. Questions on notice are
defensively answered by public servants.
Questions without notice receive irrelevant
rambling and propagandist replies.
Governments also use up the time with
Dorothy Dixers where sycophantic and ambitious
backbenchers ask questions for which the Minister
has a well prepared answer boasting about his own
and his government's brilliance.

As for gender not mattering on this Forum. I fully
agree. It shouldn't!

Gender shouldn't matter.

Bear in mind though that most women and men, especially young women and men, would see the 'f' wars (and I don't mean fcuk) that are waged on some sites as the useless, boring, spiteful, time-wasting, energy-draining and needlessly conflict-generating parlour games of geriatric Greer clones and dinosaurs who have nothing more creative to do with their time.

The 'f' word definitely puts women and men off contributing (except for the habitual devotees) and so would the cat calls of racist, xenophobe, homophobe and other labels that are instantly applied to muzzle anyone who has the temerity to ask the 'wrong' question or appears to disagrees with the pack.

Of course none of that happens on OLO, which is fortunate because there is gold among that brown stuff. Ahem, on OLO the 'brown' stuff is fertile soil, not the other disagreeable stuff found on other forums.

Thanks for the kind words Foxy and We are Unique.

I have learnt my lesson now, but that doesn't mean I have given up or that I won't disagree with someone in the future!

I hope we continue to have a good mix of both genders on this forum, as it often makes for the most spirited conversations!

I've often wondered whether the more obnoxious and ill mannered posters would be so, if they were required to use their real names.
Anonymity is often a wonderful aid to courage, isn't it?
Peter Grim-ley

Grim:"I've often wondered whether the more obnoxious and ill mannered posters would be so, if they were required to use their real names."

I'd not be posting about my Family Law experience because to do so would be a breach of the Act (S 121) while discussion of my Child Support Agency experiences would be in breach of THAT Act (S 172) as they would by necessity identify other participants.

Anoymity is sometimes a wonderful aid to getting at the truth in a society muzzled by laws designed to "protect", that are actually used to hide misfeasance on the part of Gevernment Departments. Whistleblower laws ensure anonymity for very good reason.

Of course, if you get a warm inner glow out of being so "brave" as to use your real name, you go for your life. Personally, I couldn't give two hoots if your real name is Pete Grimley or Bleat Dimly, your words are all I have to know you by and that seems fair enough.

Anti is right on this one IMO.

If I were to use my real name in talking about experiences working with government I would be arrested for breaching the APS Code of Conduct and lose Security Clearance status.

Even whistleblower legislation only protects disclosures made within appropriately designated authorities, not if one were to reveal sensitive or embarrassing information to the media or to the Opposition. This has not changed with the change of government although FOI laws have improved (on paper) and Conclusive Certificates were repealed under The Freedom of Information (Removal of Conclusive Certificates and Other Measures) Act 2009.

Public servants must be obedient and loyal to their department and if you are career driven you must basically keep your mouth shut while the empire builders and political animals manipulate their way to the top.

There are many good people working in the APS but fear is what traps most people into keeping quiet.

I am getting off track, but it would be mad to use one's real name on a public forum given some of the problems people have had with revealing email addresses and many people are listed in white pages.

Agreed, Pelican. As a former public servant myself, I am aware that even after having left the organisation, the Official Secrets Act still applies. However, there are people here I would really rather not know my identity. As an example, CJ Morgan was 'stalked' by Ludwig just recently.

Suzeonline
Until Cornflower has sprayed you with her venom, you have not really been making a difference. The more you irritate her, the more you know you are on the right track.

Cheers

Forrest
"Collectively, that would make us foruminifera, would it not?"

Are you likening us to aemoeba? :)

Grim I see exactly what you're saying and I think you're right about courage in anonymity.

I am quite sure the sociopathy we sometimes see is quite real - just interesting to think about how it's hidden for every day purposes. IRL some of our loudest misogynists are prolly really meek and henpecked; I might be a brothel madam, one never knows :)

In at least one of my roles though I'm a public servant so anonymity works for me, just as Pelican says, though I still have to be careful that I don't give out information that could make someone else recognizable.

I don't like the social networking sites because they don't give much of a look beneath the veneer - the social 'niceties' carry on as usual - blah; it's not for me. Too RL.

"In at least one of my roles though I'm a public servant so anonymity works for me, just as Pelican says, though I still have to be careful that I don't give out information that could make someone else recognizable."

Ditto Pynchme. I am not a public servant anymore - gave it up a while ago, but disclosure of information and privacy of individuals still applies.

*As an example, CJ Morgan was 'stalked' by Ludwig just recently.*

Oh what nonsense! That was hardly stalking lol. More like CJ having
an anxiety attack over nothing. His mind was seemingly the problem,
not Ludwig.

IMHO the benefit of nicks is that people are more apt to say what
they really think, rather then the impression that they are trying
to give society, which can be quite different. Take a politician
for instance. He has to preach the party line in public, he can't
say what he really thinks. On a forum like OLO, he/she can.

In the mid 90s, there was a crazy programme called Freetel on the net.
I became the resident shrink on there for quite a few people, mainly
Canadians and Americans. There were few Aussies on the net in those
days. One of the reasons was that I was simply so far away from their
circle of daily life. If they told their deepest problems to their
best friend, she might well tell her friend and so on. So people
sometimes have real problems finding somebody that they can confide in.
In the US, they then commonly hire a shrink, but they are not
cheap.

So I find that there are two sides to the net. Yes, somebody like
Pynchme, could well be a brothel madam :), but eventually the truth
will likely come out, as eventually they will contradict themselves.
People can usually only remember the lies that they told and to whom,
for so long.

More likely people commonly use the net to say what they really think,
if they can do it without it affecting their standing in
society, friendships and relationships.

But a site like OLO will always only have limited appeal, because
the majority of the population are not focussed on THE world, they
focus on THEIR world, their family, their friends, their footy team
etc. A huge number are simply not interested in most issues
beyond that.

Fractelle/Severin, "Suzeonline, Until Cornflower has sprayed you with her venom, you have not really been making a difference. The more you irritate her, the more you know you are on the right track."

There you go inventing things again. Your nose will be a metre long if you keep it up.

Suzeonline made certain remarks about another poster and I challenged her for living in a glass house while throwing stones.

Below is my comment and I have also given the link:

"Six of one, half dozen of the other.

How is 'HTFU' any worse than calling a person 'septic', relating him to pus, putrefaction and sewage?

Likewise, when a women refers to a male adversary as a 'little' man there are several unflattering interpretations, all meant with malice aforethought."

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3480&page=9

Cornflower, I fail to see the problem with using 'septic as a name for antiseptic. It is, after all, merely a shortening of his online name, which is done by many on this site.

What is your problem with that?
Maybe I will call you flower from now on, and you can call me suze?

As for 'little man', well you must be a very sensitive flower indeed!
Especially given the lovely comment I was replying to.

Maybe, as some posters have suggested above, it is not the male posters we should be looking out for.

suzeonline,

There is no doubt those nicks are chosen with malice aforethought, to humiliate and bully.

What prevents you from using the person's chosen name? That you choose to do differently says more about you than them.

Cornflower <" There is no doubt those nicks are chosen with malice aforethought, to humiliate and bully."

Ok, we will have to agree to disagree on this one.

Maybe you would like to take the time to read back on 'septics posts and see all the bullying he has done to me and others?

Calling him 'septic has never seemed to bother him, so why does it bother you?

Just ignore me if you are that sensitive.

suzeonline,

Since you appear to have lost your memory, the background was that you thought that you were being bullied by use of the acronym HTFU. Yet you are oblivious to the bullying implied by your offensive name-calling. That is why I said six of one, half a dozen of the other, the meaning of which is obvious.

However, regardless of whether you have a thick skin or not, you are wrong to think that all forum members are gifted (sic) with a similar insensitivity.

suzeonline, "Maybe, as some posters have suggested above, it is not the male posters we should be looking out for."

It that the whistle for the pack and something I should be concerned about? Mobbing is nasty and not uncommon on some forums, but lets not have it here, huh?

As I said before Cornflower, just ignore me.

I am not going to change just because you read something into my posts that isn't there.

Your problem, not mine.

I enjoy OLO and still feel that women are made welcome in the main.
Have a good day.

Suzie, I wouldn't worry about police officer Cornyflower.

You've been very polite in even replying to those provocations. I get grumped at frequently too - but no bloke ever will you know. Cornyflower lives in pathological fear of feminists or anyone who even vaguely resembles one. Terribly uninformed about feminism, but nevermind.

I think Corny is a bloke btw; though some have wondered if he/she is
Antiseptic'c mum.

Which would explain a few issues I guess:)

Heh, heh, that must be Forum Rage.

I forgive you Possum and so would your long suffering Mum, God bless her.

Fair enough, I accept there are some valid reasons for anonymity, but I still don't accept there are valid reasons for bad manners.
I put my real name in, because to do otherwise on such a post would invite calls of hypocrisy.
Perhaps it's the medium, as much as much as the anonymity.
It really takes me back to my school days. The real blokes stood up against the tyranny of the teachers, even if it meant a few strokes of the cane.
The wimps only played up on the 'weak' teachers, when they were sure there'd be no consequences.

suzeonline:"Maybe you would like to take the time to read back on 'septics posts and see all the bullying he has done to me and others?"

LOL, yeah that big bad bully antiseptic with his two posts a day.

Did I mention that you should HTFU?

As for using 'septic as an effort to insult me, pfft, silly Suzie. You odn't have to go out of your way to show how childish you are - your every post reeks of it.

Now off you toddle, you wannabe victim, you. You can look at your collection of photos of pus-oozing penises as consolaton...

Cornflower, don't sweat about Suzie, she's still in a tizzy at the thought that I don't want to have sex with her.

Pynchme, I too believe that the lovely cornflogger is a man.
I think it may be 'septic in another disguise :)

Antiseptic <" Cornflower, don't sweat about Suzie, she's still in a tizzy at the thought that I don't want to have sex with her."

In your dreams 'septic.

It's interesting how we deal with provocation.

Do people who enrage us do it intentionally, or
is it a by-product of words or behaviour that they
think perfectly appropriate?

If it's the former - don't give them the satisfaction
of knowing they succeeded.

If it's the latter, will displaying annoyance stop
their behaviour or simply let them know they've
found a soft spot?

This could be an idea for another thread...

Antiseptic: << You can look at your collection of photos of pus-oozing penises as consolaton...

Cornflower, don't sweat about Suzie, she's still in a tizzy at the thought that I don't want to have sex with her. >>

What a charming post in a discussion entitled "How Could OlO be Made more Welcoming to Women". Truly gallant.

I can't imagine why anybody would call him "Antiwomen".

Still trying to blow that whistle, little fella? It's much harder than sniffing crotches, isn't it?

You might like to look up your girlfriend's posting history: I didb't mention pus-oozing penises, she did and ditto for the sex with antiseptic bit. She seemed upset that i would say "HTFU" on the basis that she thought it was "Hate to.. etc". Even called me a bully for saying what she thought that meant to her, which I can only conclude means she was upset at the idea I was choosy

Never mind, little fella, I'm sure she'll give you a lovely pat and you can feel good about yourself for a few minutes. If you could arrange a penis oozing pus, I'm sure she'd appreciate it. I know I would...

Foxy:"This could be an idea for another thread..."

Yes, it could. Will you start it or shall I?

Ah, so Antiwomen was provoked. That makes it OK then.

Sounds familiar.

Pomeranian:"Ah, so Antiwomen was provoked."

No, antiseptic was simply repeating her own words back at her.

Still, high points for effort little fella. You almost got that whistle to work. Remember, it's BLOW, not SUCK. And sniffing is right out.

'Ah, so Antiwomen was provoked. That makes it OK then.

Sounds familiar.'

It sounds very familiar.

It's the standard excuse trotted out every time one of the 'nice' posters slags anti off, calling him a sad lonely guy, pitying his poor ex-wife, suggesting he's been abusing his kids. 'Oh, but that bully antiseptic provoked me'.

Dear Anti,

You go ahead - you need it and it
will also provide your mate Houellie
with the entertainment that he's seeking,
while the rest of us move on to serious
discussion.

Someone lights a match, then another throws on some sticks, yet another rolls on some logs, one more stirs the coals and finally someone throws on some petrol. Yikes, a bonfire!

Which one is the arsonist?

I wonder if it matters anyway where some like a fire (pyre?) to dance around.

foxy:"the rest of us move on to serious
discussion."

Like "who would you turn gay for?<giggle>"?

Wow, deep.

Dear Antiseptic,

As someone once nearly said:

"There's no such thing as a stupid
discussion - only a stupid response!"

Dear Cornflower,

If you don't want a fire -
don't light the match in the
first place...

Foxy:""There's no such thing as a stupid
discussion - only a stupid response!""

I'll defer to the experts...

Dear Antiseptic,

You should know them well!

They're deep thinkers ...