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

WomensStuff

622 readers
87 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
CheeseToastie@lazysoci.al
LadyButterfly@lemmy.world
dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zone
-12
Why exclude (edit: feminist) men? (lemmy.ml)
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by jsomae@lemmy.ml to c/WomensStuff@lazysoci.al
63 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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
[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 2 points 21 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 21 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] jsomae@lemmy.ml 1 points 21 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 18 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 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 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.