[uday]

In a post that was nominally about a hand, OP ( original poster ) used a subject line of "How big are your tits?" or some such. I edited out the reference to "tits." OP wanted to know what our stds were, citing a reference to male genitalia ( presumably someone else said that in some other post)


I figure this is a good time to discuss this together and decide what we want.

[helene_t]

Personally I have no issues with people mentioning body parts in bridge posts. I don't have any issues with moderators editing such posts either. But given the choice I would prefer the moderators to focus on ad hominem attacks and other insults which can be quite annoying sometimes.

[Al_U_Card]

Gratuitous references being unnecessary by definition SHOULD be removed.

Adroit or appropriate use of any term in the vernacular such as "as I played the 8-spot, my plan went "tits-up"" Hardly inappropriate nor gratuitous, therefore allowable. The rest is just the application of the same standard and not a moral standard which, while personal, would be logically unenforceable and untenable.

[finally17]

helene_t, on Mar 23 2008, 08:02 PM, said:

Personally I have no issues with people mentioning body parts in bridge posts. I don't have any issues with moderators editing such posts either. But given the choice I would prefer the moderators to focus on ad hominem attacks and other insults which can be quite annoying sometimes.

I have problems with mods editing anything that isn't explicitly stated as being over the line, perhaps with the exception that if "it's clear to an overwhelming majority of the population" it need not be stated.

If it's not explicitly stated, and yet a mod has a problem with it, I believe the proper procedure should be to kindly comment to the offender the first time, and then make sure that it's explicitly stated somewhere.

As for what should be allowable, well I don't really know. I'd like to know what "the size of your tits" has to do with a bridge hand before I commented. Maybe it's slang somewhere I'm not aware of? But if not, it seems reasonable to say that, at least for bridge discussion, "civil tongues" be kept.

[kenrexford]

I am offended mostly by references to the feet.

[Al_U_Card]

Well, if the reference to me would be "Have you got the balls?" or "You've got some balls to make that call!" then no problem. If the person makes a reference to the size of my penis......unless he is an MD specialist.....but even then, something like "You must have a small dick to bid like that!" Ad hominem it is not.

[pclayton]

As long as race, creed or gender (or preference) aren't dissed, I'm fine. Country of origin, body parts, age are all fair game for me.

Occasional profanity doesn't bother me, but I'm concerned how we look to people who drop in occasionally if it gets out of hand.

[TimG]

pclayton, on Mar 23 2008, 10:14 PM, said:

As long as race, creed or gender (or preference) aren't dissed, I'm fine. Country of origin, body parts, age are all fair game for me.

"Have you got the balls?" isn't that much different from "You bid like a girl". It's easy to see how reference to these particular body parts in this way could be considered dissing a gender.

Oddly, it doesn't seem that jelly's problem with the reference had anything to do with possible sexism, but rather she simply didn't want to read reference to testicles.

I don't think the water cooler is the right place to discuss this if the discussion is going to have much influence on policy. Those that read the water cooler are likely to have more tolerance for statements that might offend some readers.

[han]

There should be a sub-watercooler where only people with manners are allowed to discuss this issue. Perhaps in that forum the existence of birthday threads can also be discussed.

That leaves the regular forum for bridge players and the watercooler for other lunatics, both male and female.

[jillybean]

I am obviously the single forum member who takes exception to these types of posts. Primarily this is a bridge forum (with the exception of the WC). In all cases, the same message can be given without using expletives or sexist language. “Do you have the courage/guts/grit/nerve“ seems more appropriate here than “Grow some balls”

While this phrase may be at the extreme low end of the obscenity scale where do you draw the line? Allowing phrases that are widely known/used/accepted seems to be a poor measure. “grow some balls’ ‘tits up’ and the various F’s FE’ed, mother f'er are then considered acceptable while (in context) “How big are your tits/ surely you couldn’t have seen your cards” unacceptable.

I am certainly not beyond using expletives however, I restrict the usage to private chat and don't use them in public.

[jtfanclub]

I always knew I wasn't a rational, thinking person.

"How big are your balls" means, both literally and figuratively, how masculine you are. If I asked my female boss if she had big enough balls to do something, I'd be unemployed the next day. At the very least, it's extremely sexist.

I put this in the same category as "You don't have the balls to...". It's not appropriate for mixed company.

[jdonn]

jillybean2, on Mar 24 2008, 01:09 AM, said:

I am certainly not beyond using expletives however, I restrict the usage to private chat and don't use them in public.

Quite honestly, this is the part that really bothers me. So their use doesn't even offend you, you are just taking offense on behalf of the general public if they all have to read it? And then we have to go through all this for a post that it wouldn't have even occurred to most people would offend anyone.

jtfanclub, on Mar 24 2008, 01:19 AM, said:

"How big are your balls" means, both literally and figuratively, how masculine you are.  If I asked my female boss if she had big enough balls to do something, I'd be unemployed the next day.  At the very least, it's extremely sexist.

Literally yes, but of course no one would have ever even thought to take the expression literally in the context it was used. Figuratively I think it clearly means how brave are you, not how masculine are you. The urban-dictionary website confirms this, mentioning both meanings but the brave one far more prominently than the masculine one, which is hardly mentioned at all.

The reference to your female boss is way off point. She probably wouldn't love you implying in any sarcastic way that she doesn't have the guts to do something, whether you used the word 'balls' or not. Plus it's obvious that people should be held to different standards when talking to a person in a position of authority over them than when talking to a random person.

This is all as dumb to me as if the OP called the thread "are you chicken" and a farmer complained. People should worry about what is at least remotely important in life.

The tits expression doesn't bother me at all either, I just think it's kind of dumb since it's not even a real expression.

[dicklont]

It is remarkable to see that the moderator edited a post because he figured it would offend some people en thereby has now offended others. As a good sport he has opened a thread to discuss his decision.

It is very hard to do the right thing here, therefore you should try to do nothing for as long as possible.
But being a moderator you have to draw a line sometimes and be subject to criticism.

I think that this is a very pleasant forum and heve never had any problem here with the language or the messages. Is this really a problem?

[kenberg]

"How big are your tits?"
"How big are your balls?"
You show me yours and I'll show you mine!

We live in a strange world. Sixty years or so ago when I was young, respectable people (or at least respected people) often used racist language freely but sexual references were taboo, as Lenny Bruce found out. Certainly the change, if we have to have one or the other, is an improvement but the ubiquity of sexual talk sometimes astounds me.

I was walking across campus one day a little behind a young man and woman. The man was telling the woman of the changes he had gone through. His running commentary was along the lines of:

"When I was in high school I used to do a lot of stupid fucking *****. Really all sorts of stupid fucking *****. Now I am older and I don't do stupid fucking ***** anymore." And so on.

I was thinking maybe his next growth spurt would be to stop discussing stupid fucking ***** with young women he was trying to impress.

I don't have any real problem with tits and balls, but I also don't have any problem with deleting it. All in all, I regard this forum as first rate. I learn a lot here and I enjoy it. I applaud your checking back on this, but my opinion is that you have about the right touch.


Congratulations on a good job and
Best wishes,
Ken

[kenrexford]

"Do you have the guts" is very offensive tp people who have had parts of their intestines removed, you know.

[hrothgar]

For what its worth

1. I can understand why folks would want different standards fro the Water Cooler and the more bridge oriented parts of the site

2. In a similar vein, one might argue that different standards should apply to titles of posts rather than content

3. I'd prefer not to see any censoring of content of the posts of Water Cooler threads. I also think that folks have gone over board censoring some threads in the past.

4. If your going to filter anything in bridge oriented threads it seems reasonable to focus on particular "off color" words rather than yanking/locking down entire threads.

5. I don't consider the expression "Grow some Balls" particular blue...

[Rossoneri]

kenrexford, on Mar 24 2008, 08:18 PM, said:

"Do you have the guts" is very offensive tp people who have had parts of their intestines removed, you know.

My mother had her gall bladder removed a few years back, so "do you have the gall" should be offensive to people like her as well, I guess.

On a more serious note, there will be some that will be offended I guess. My personal take is, must it come down to usage of such vocabulary? I trust that everyone should be educated/civilized enough to utilise a better choice of words.

Good call Uday.

[TimG]

jdonn, on Mar 24 2008, 02:01 AM, said:

Literally yes, but of course no one would have ever even thought to take the expression literally in the context it was used. Figuratively I think it clearly means how brave are you, not how masculine are you. The urban-dictionary website confirms this, mentioning both meanings but the brave one far more prominently than the masculine one, which is hardly mentioned at all.

Either way, figuratively or literally, brave or masculine, there is a sexist implication. The fact that it has become so common to have dulled our perception of it, should not matter.

One of my pet peeves is the use of "gay" to describe something that is lame or stupid. Urban-dictionary defines it as "often used to describe something stupid or unfortunate. originating from homophobia. quite preferable among many teenage males in order to buff up their 'masculinity'." I hope we can all agree that even though this usage has crept into the vernacular, it is undesirable and even offensive.

When I have seen this usage and brought it to someone's attention, the typical reaction has been along the lines of: "yeah, but they don't mean anything by it, it's just the way it's used these days." Pretty much the same reaction most of us have to "grow some balls".

"Gay" has been taken a step further and been transformed to "ghay". Urban-dictionary says of ghay: "Should be implemented whenever you use the word gay, but are not refering [sic] to anything homosexual. The extra 'h' makes it less offensive."

Anyway, I don't think that the urban-dictionary saying something is "less offensive" makes it so. Nor do I think that urban-dictionary featuring "brave" over "masculine" makes it less sexist.

The intent of the OP was undoubtedly not sexist. But, upon reflection, you have to see that the phrase is sexist.

I didn't give the subject line a second thought until I read jilly's reaction. And, I am surprised that the problem she had with it was one of vulgarity rather than sexism.

[Fluffy]

uh? I always though guts and balls were synonims lol.


I don't care what words people use, I don't care if someone wants to name a hand after a kamasutra sexual position involving animals. At some point I guess I am protected by my lack of english knowledge.

But for example when someone says religion should be banned I start to feel angry.