this post was submitted on 04 May 2025
-12 points (33.3% liked)

WomensStuff

622 readers
94 users here now

Women only trans inclusive This is an inclusive community for all things women. Whether you're here for make up tips, feminism or just friendly chit chat, we've got you covered.

Rules…

  1. Women only… trans women are women, and transphobic or gender critical talk isn’t allowed. Any woman-identified person under the trans umbrella (e.g. non-binary, bigender, agender) is welcome.
  2. Don’t be a dick. No personal attacks, no aggression, play nice.
  3. Don’t hate on groups, hatefilled talk about groups is not allowed. Ever.
  4. No governmental politics, so no talk of Trump actions etc. We recommend Feminism@beehaw.org for that, but here is an escape from it.

founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS
 

This is an inclusive community for all things women. Whether you’re here for make up tips, feminism or just friendly chit chat, we’ve got you covered.

I feel like men can do all of those things, so I don't see why we are excluding them. Just because it's a women-centric community doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed. I think we should exclude people who are bigoted instead, or even people who just don't "get" women's issues.

Aside: I'm personally irritated that make-up is what's considered a woman-centric topic. That's kind of reductive -- not everyone is femme.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ZDL@ttrpg.network 10 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Picture a well-intentioned man. (I'm not even talking trolls who do this deliberately and strategically.) This well-intentioned man intrudes into a conversation about, say, workplace sexual harrassment experiences. They say something ham-fisted like:

How is it 'creepy' if I put my hand on a woman colleague's shoulder when looking at something on their desk to help? I do the same with my male colleagues.

Again, we're presuming a well-intentioned man here. Not a troll who's deliberately triggering. Just a well-intentioned man who genuinely believes that it's fine to do this.

Now five women, say, have been comparing war stories about sexual harassment at work. They each respond with a further example, or a a plausible progression from "hand on shoulder" to real life experience that ended badly or whatnot. Each of these five women brings up a different point or point of view, so this isn't just repetition.

Now the well-intentioned man responds to each one, asking for more details, or failing to understand and needing explanation, or whatever.

We now have, with only one round of this, a situation where five women in total have spoken: one twice (to report the original story, and then to respond to the man), the rest once each. Six messages from five women in total. And from one man we have six messages.

And this never ends in one round, does it? In no time flat we have a thread that is 80% written by one man and 20% written by five women. One man's voice is drowning out five women's voices.

Now multiply this by the number of men (again, here we're assuming only the well-intentioned!) and the number of threads and you rapidly have a forum for women that is mostly men talking.

That is how you "talk over" a group on Lemmy.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 2 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

(Sorry for the late response.)

I actually don't agree that this is "talking over." For one thing, this is a tree-structure forum, so on any give root-leaf path, the man is only 50% of the messages (and this is more relevant IMO). For another, I don't even see what this man is doing wrong. He is politely responding to every response in turn. But ultimately, I just don't think this really counts as "talking over" -- I experience being "talked over" in real life a lot, and it feels like being unable to get a word in. It does not feel like "being able to say as much as I want to, and then get a direct reply," which is the experience all the women you have described are having.

[–] ZDL@ttrpg.network 2 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

I'm sorry you aren't seeing the problem.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

I think I understand the problem you are pointing out. You're saying that the forum shifts to have too many comments by men. But that's not the same thing as being talked over.

[–] ZDL@ttrpg.network 2 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

OK, I'm going to put this gently.

Seeing the point, understanding the point, then continuing to belabour it because you think the terminology is incorrect is called "pedantry".

Please stop being a pedant.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

You've misunderstood me entirely. This is not merely an argument of semantics. Being talked over is a really bad thing, and yeah, I obviously don't want that to be a thing that happens more. In contrast, increasing the proportion of men is essentially by definition the thing that I'm asking about in this thread -- why aren't men permitted. This means you're begging the question: "permitting men would be bad because it would increase the amount of posts by men." You're just asserting that's bad for some reason. I'm really not being pedantic here.

Anyway, if you're trying to educate me about basic etiquette, you obviously think I'm arguing in bad faith. So let's just call it off here.

[–] dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 week ago

yes, this is a great example! And men IRL who talk over women can have a chilling effect that the man responding to everyone can create - there is a confrontational nature to the interaction that gives it a "talking over" feeling, it's basically just aggression and not reading the social situation that then leads to women not feeling like participating as much or being vulnerable about how they feel (esp. if they think they will be challenged or criticized for it).

Sometimes it's just nice to have a break from that confrontational style of interaction and to feel like people are going to be receptive and kind to you. (I would like to think plenty of men feel this way in male spaces, too, btw!)

[–] SharkWeek@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 week ago

You've very thoroughly explained exactly what I was thinking of! Thank you :-)

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Fair enough. Anyway, I am not advocating that well-intentioned men be permitted into the community -- just ones that fit in.

[–] SharkWeek@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That comes with the logistical challenges of ...

a) how do you find out which ones will fit in?

b) who defines what "fitting in" means?

c) would the men who are feminist and "fit in" not feel weirded out by being allowed into somewhere that's meant to be for women to talk amongst themselves? I mean, I would feel like I was invading something private if I were invited into a support group for men.

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (2 children)

I presume that any woman who acts like a disrespectful man would be kicked, so that would be the same predicate for (a) and (b).

As for (c), how should I know. Maybe they would feel kinship for some reason, like they're in touch with their feminine side. Or perhaps they are facing an issue most commonly experienced by women. IDK, I'm not a man. Is this a support group?

[–] dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 6 days ago

Rule 2 is don't be a dick, so being disrespectful might get someone kicked regardless of their gender. Someone's gender is not just from being disrespectful, we often just ask the person.

[–] SharkWeek@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 6 days ago

Any place where we (assuming adult women) talk amongst ourselves is a support group sometimes