What makes some people call some questions voyeuristic while not calling others along the same line as such?

If someone constantly asks questions about sex or fetish-related topics, whether anyone calls them out on it or not, some people are going to consider the question or the questioner to be a bit skeevy. Whether a question makes people feel uncomfortable can relate to who is asking it or how the question is phrased. Sometimes people might ask the same thing but just the way the question is worded can give the whole topic a very different feel.

I once stood up to poo at a shopping mall rest room that was nasty.

Difrent strokes.

What color panties are you wearing?

Details: Answers about boxers or briefs also welcome.

Women do you stand to pee?

Details:Can you urinate whilst standing? Or do you have to sit? If you can do it standing, how often do you do so? And do you have good aim?

When you are alone are you clothed or unclothed?

Details: Or, when you are just hanging out with your significant other? Or are you usually clothed in one case, but naked in the other? If you always keep your clothes on, why?

Yours:

MTF who is the AA sponsor?

Details:Seeing he/she would have grown or had acquired aftermarket melons, got liposuctioned, maybe butt implanted, laser hair removed, etc., but still has the sausage and most likely still officially male by the driver’s license

How much as a fat Blasé thinking of the US contributed to its overweight problem?

Details:For women who traditionally benefitted less by being fat because of the blasé concern about fat and the advent of ”chubby chasers” who find women who decades ago had to settle for other really fat men or whoever they could get from a dating pool as small as a thimble, isn’t that taking away one motivation for them to slim down because they now don’t have to compete, they have men who are used to fat women and thus the dating pool for them has enlarged.

The difference in the questions are in the details. In the 3 examples you selected the details in no way, shape or form disrespect women.

Your details IMO always disrespect women by referring to their breasts as melons or fat shame them.

You asked, I answered in my most honest perception of you. I am hoping you are asking this question to help you understand why some of us call you out on your questions. I’m sure there will be some to say I’m bullying you. I’m not.

@Earthbound_Misfit If someone constantly asks questions about sex or fetish-related topics, whether anyone calls them out on it or not, some people are going to consider the question or the questioner to be a bit skeevy.
Oh, really, I know of one Flutheronian who built much of his career on Fluther by way of NSFW questions to the joy of those reading the question, and not once a slight or rebuke, that I have seen. What is the spin for that? If someone cuts their teeth on zombie questions would one think them preoccupied with necromancy?

Sometimes people might ask the same thing but just the way the question is worded can give the whole topic a very different feel.
That would kind of leave the scuttlebutt told to newbies who ask leaking almost like a colander. If the only ones who can truly ask anything are those one feel comfortable with, that leans back to the ol’ boy network. Who is one comfortable with if not one they like? Have you ever seen someone in a relationship with someone they liked but said they are uncomfortable with their spouse?

@RedDeerGuy1 I once stood up to poo at a shopping mall rest room that was nasty.
Because things did not go as planned and it made a mess of you?

@chyna The difference in the questions are in the details. In the 3 examples you selected the details in no way, shape or form disrespect women.
Telling, I guess that could be the fodder for a different question as I won’t bring it up now, because someone will attempt again to hijack the conversation, but what a person see as disrespect is conjecture, I have seen a lot of what I consider disrespectful, but the people who did it thought it cute, funny, or whatever.

I am hoping you are asking this question to help you understand why some of us call you out on your questions.
I know there is an unwritten double standard here in spite of what the newbies are told. I use terms which people can understand, if I would have thought to say ”Obese Advocate” instead of ”chubby chaser” (which I know many have heard at least once in the context it is used) they may not have understood. And I am sure I am not the only one who ever used the term melons for breast. I have over the years heard them call ”racks”, ”boobs”, ”tit”, ”ta tas”, ’twins”, and then some. We are adults, if it is about clinical terms then quit saying ’slept with” or ”making love” or any other term than sexual intercourse, or its more common on the street cousin.

I’m sure there will be some to say I’m bullying you. I’m not.
I am sure some will, if I just showed up on the block with the ”loving treatment” I experienced around here, I might feel bullied and split. Not that I think you are a bully I will just say there are some around who would make what bullying anyone would say you did look like a knife fighter going against a Navy SEAL with an assault rifle.

@Hypocrisy_Central, you asked a question. I gave you my answer. I know the person to whom you refer, and I have had a few people comment on his motivation for asking them. Whether or not they challenged him on them or not, or whether they contacted the mods about them, I can’t say. However, I know I thought he was getting his jollies off asking the questions. So I say again, if someone constantly asks questions of a sexual/fetish nature, whether anyone challenges them or not, you can be pretty sure some people find their behaviour and/or questions skeevy.

I also didn’t say it’s just the person asking the question that makes its content acceptable or not. It has as much to do with how a question is phrased. Asking what coloured underwear someone is wearing could feel like the person on the other end of the computer is wearing a dirty raincoat and is drooling on their keyboard, or it could come across as a fun, silly question. It’s all in the framing. And if the person asking about the underwear regularly asks skeevy questions, then people are quite likely to assume the reason for asking is not about fun, but is about fulfilling some deviant need for the asker. I think I asked a question about underwear once. I was in a silly mood. The question wasn’t skeevy, but I’m almost certain some people thought I was a nutter. I don’t and didn’t really care what people thought about my question.

If I think someone is being skeevy, I just don’t answer. I don’t really care if people ask such questions, I don’t have to answer them.

^ So I say again, if someone constantly asks questions of a sexual/fetish nature, whether anyone challenges them or not, you can be pretty sure some people find their behaviour and/or questions skeevy.
But sex in these modern days have busted loose like a swarm of hornets from a nest, hardly anyone will admit to doing in the old “missionary position” with the light totally out and no foreplay. Seeing that is a fact and not fiction, if trying to get the standard current pulse on sexuality is skeevy society is rather absent in the mind for what it seems afraid to engage in conversation it wants to do in action by the droves. ;-)

@HC, you can ask about sex. Whether the question is considered skeevy will depend on how you ask about sex. And the skeeve factor will also depend on how often you ask about sex. If sex is the main focus of many of your questions, unless you are doing research into sexual behaviour, people are likely to find your questioning skeevy. Even if you don’t intend it to be that way.

Didn’t you post an advert about a condom ad from Australia the other day? I would say Aussies are by and large much more liberal than people in the US. We have our fair share of wowzers, but people are generally pretty easy going and liberal. However, if something is seen as tasteless, exploitative or gratuitous, it will get bagged. The ad you (I’m pretty sure it was you) posted lacked finesse. It wasn’t funny. It wasn’t clever. It was crude and silly. So again, it’s all about the delivery and, in some cases, about who is delivering the message.

There is also a big difference between having sex and talking about it. Those who feel the need to talk about sex constantly are often those who aren’t getting any. The person who goes on and on and on about sex comes across as sexually frustrated. Given I have noticed you being told to go out and get some instead of constantly jabbering on about it, perhaps this is something you could consider.

^ Didn’t you post an advert about a condom ad from Australia the other day? I would say Aussies are by and large much more liberal than people in the US.
People are in such defense they missed the point. That commercial is no worse than many gratuitous sex scenes in many movies and trying to sneak its way into prime time, for some reason it is felt to be an intricate part of the movie that needed to be in there. In that commercial it pretty much mirrored what sex is here, no big whoop, you can be boinking in a store and have people step over you and go about their shopping.

However, if something is seen as tasteless, exploitative or gratuitous, it will get bagged. The ad you (I’m pretty sure it was you) posted lacked finesse.
Again, a basic description of most sex scenes injected into movies that could have been left out. I guess there is more finesse in having a woman suck on a corndog as if it were a male phallus and feign the dripping mayo to be the sperm? It is no mystery that sex is used to sell anything and everything in the US.

There is also a big difference between having sex and talking about it. Those who feel the need to talk about sex constantly are often those who aren’t getting any.
I guess the ad men of Madison Avenue and the moguls of Hollywood bombard people with sexual imagery to get people to do more sex because they feel people are not getting enough. ~~ From my experience, whether or not people are doing it daily or hardly ever talk of sex is about equal, maybe the subjects are different, but there level of occurrences are equal.

The person who goes on and on and on about sex comes across as sexually frustrated. Given I have noticed you being told to go out and get some instead of constantly jabbering on about it, perhaps this is something you could consider.
I have been there, done that, it is akin to what some told me about when they hit that crack pipe, they say it is never as good as the 1st hit, then you forever chase that experience again only to never find it.

Even though the urban legend that men think of sex every 30 seconds is maybe just that, a legend, according to some studies men think about sex more than women or dozens of times in a week. I also know guys at least, spend a lot of time talking about cars, fishing, and sports that is in season until their tongues are blue; no one has a problem yacking about those. If one does of sex when it is by default one of the top three favorite things people do, to me it is rather disingenuous. Rather than try to get to the seemingly double standard behavior of it, I could speculate and go off what I appear to see. I can then assume that those who ask a myriad of zombie questions have some fixation with necromancy or using some zombie apocalypse as a replacement for end of the world paranoia. I guess for me, if sex is supposedly seen as common and normal as a jog around the park, why be so put off speaking of it as if it is a shameful thing? It would be like a person swearing they are not a racist but every time someone other than their race sit near them, they get up and relocate, it would appear someone was lying or in denial.

No harm, you still cool. :-)

Whether or not there is a double standard afoot at fluther, the fact that so many of us comment on the voyeuristic aspects of your questions is telling. I don’t buy the notion that there is some contingent of censoring prudes aligned against you here. I wasn’t here for yesteryear’s questions, but the frequency of such questions from you directed specifically at women cannot go unnoticed. This is an open forum, and I frankly believe you should be free to ask whatever you choose. On the other hand, you should also be prepared to weather any criticisms leveled at you. Perhaps you are correct about a higher number of prurient questions as well as questioners in the past. If so, then your seeming persecution may simply result from the fact that you’re the only “pervert” left.

HC, one of the reasons you get a negative reaction for your sexual questions is because we know you’re judging us for being sexual beings without being married.

Is that what this is about?

I think there’s a major difference between a friendly pervert asking NSFW questions and a holier-than-thou hypocrite using NSFW questions as self-righteous soapbox masturbation-fuel.

@Mariah HC, one of the reasons you get a negative reaction for your sexual questions is because we know you’re judging us for being sexual beings without being married.
Not that it has much to do with any discussion on the de facto double standard, because I have seen others apart from myself make certain comments or ask certain question (if of a sexual nature) get snapped on. There was this one Flutheronian whose moniker I cannot remember who always seemed to get snapped on. However, it is intriguing enough to investigate where you are coming from and how you got there. In what way do you think I am judging you? There is only Onn Law Giver and One Judge, and I am not He and not trying to jump out of my lane to be Him. That said, a person can be the sweetest one around baking cookies for the Girl Scout fundraiser but if they are swerving all over the road, anyone looking can see they cannot control a vehicle well. If I see the vehicle swerving and point it out, it is what it is. If you feel convicted maybe it is something else trying to get your attention.

You and other believe it is OK to boink someone you are not married to, but on the other hand you say those people having that type of sex is weird, but I will take a neutral stance on it, but those people doing that type of sex is flat wrong. When I ask anyone to qualify it in a world that is just the world, and they can’t because there is truly no standard, they get huffy. If they just get huffy and never come up with an answer, I am thinking maybe the question too hard for them to follow so let me rebranded it and put the cookies on a lower shelf. All I am seeking is on what omnipotent authority are those who say what they say hinged on that only the way they want to do sex is correct and other ways wrong; a simple question but apparently an answer, if they could ever find one, too hard to compose.

@Seek I think there’s a major difference between a friendly pervert asking NSFW questions and a holier-than-thou hypocrite…]
So if there can be a holier-than-thou hypocrite, then there has to be a ”wicked, self-god-hedonist”, every action as an equal but opposite reaction…so goes the scientific motto. Who but one omnipotent would really know that? If mere men are to determine that or feebly try, it is all assumption, and we know about assumption.

@Hypocrisy_Central
“So if there can be a holier-than-thou hypocrite, then there has to be a ”wicked, self-god-hedonist”,every action as an equal but opposite reaction…so goes the scientific motto”

That doesn’t even make sense. Being a hypocrite isn’t an “action”, and another person being an honest hedonist isn’t a “reaction” to your hypocrisy.

The rest of your response is nonsensical gibberish that I won’t bother trying to parse in order to form a response.

Just think about it. I am well aware that you consider yourself better than me because I engage in the victimless crime of premarital sex. You consider that to be an evil thing that I am doing, and you consider me to be a worse person because I do it than I would be if I didn’t do it. Don’t pretend like you don’t.

Then you come in with these questions and want to know the intimate details of how much, what way, with whom etc I like to do this act. And I am supposed to conclude that this is innocent, fun discussion? When I know you’re behind your screen chuckling at how sinful and wrong I am?

It is inherently different to talk about sex with someone who believes the things you do than it is to talk with somebody with sex-positive attitudes.

@Mariah I am well aware that you consider yourself better than me because I engage in the victimless crime of premarital sex.
Let me make this as clear as the Moon on a cloudless night, if you believe that, and that is the reason for all your vexation, let God strike me dead and you never hear from me on Fluther again of what I say now is a lie, I DO NOT think I am better than you; if anything worse. If it is a victimless crime is another whole story I am bypassing at the moment.

You consider that to be an evil thing that I am doing, and you consider me to be a worse person because I do it than I would be if I didn’t do it.
I don’t in my own skin, but the standard was not set by me, and I can see why the standard was set the way it was. Even if I adapt the standard that the action is wicked, I do not, and cannot brand the person as evil. In reality, both you and I are in the same boat, the only difference is I have an advocate to pay my penalty for me so I don’t have to try and pay it myself when I can’t.

Then you come in with these questions and want to know the intimate details of how much, what way, with whom etc. I like to do this act.
You think about this, how many people see sex the same? Some do not see a hand job as sex, others do not think a blow job is sex (Bill Clinton didn’t), some would say putting your finger in a female’s vagina under her clothes is not sex, others say clutching her privates on top of her clothes is not sex. With so many views these days, would it be easy for people not be able to even answer the question factually if they have parameters that are truly nebulous without any direction? That would be like saying schools need to revamp and stiffen curriculum. Which schools, what grades? Without narrowing the channel you might as well be in the ocean of responses some as far from the statement as the Earth is from the planet formally known as Pluto.

And I am supposed to conclude that this is innocent, fun discussion?
This is not a fluff question, it was not for fun or amusment, it was to hunt down facts, if they exist, or find they are not facts.

When I know you’re behind your screen chuckling at how sinful and wrong I am?
Again, so wrong, if you are convicted it may not be me doing it. I am just as sinful, but as I say, I have someone that paid for it in my place. I say again, though, if you believe this world is just this world, then there is no sin in it and whatever you do as long as you like it and the masses allow you to do it, it is all good; don’t let others worry you over it.

It is inherently different to talk about sex with someone who believes the things you do than it is to talk with somebody with sex-positive attitudes.
The it is there, perspective, I believe I am speaking from a sex-positive stance, because God created sex and knows how it was intended and it works best in spite of how man sees it. I am sure when you mods mod something you sometimes have to pow wow to get on the same page because you all don’t see it exactly the same.

How on earth am I supposed to consider any of that sincere? Here’s a recent, direct quote from you on one of my questions: “Which illustrates that in this society sex is just a commodity, something used by way of another for basically one’s own pleasure, no matter how you slice or dice it.” That sentence doesn’t contain any judgement? Really?

—If it is a victimless crime is another whole story
—you and I are in the same boat, the only difference is I have an advocate to pay my penalty for me
—if you are convicted it may not be me doing it.
—God created sex and knows how it was intended and it works best in spite of how man sees it

That’s all just from the last post you made.

It’s very, very apparent that you agree with the Christian stance of sex being sinful outside of a marriage between people who had no sexual contact before marriage.

Who wants to have a fun, light-hearted, sorta-pervy discussion with a person who is getting “sinful jollies” off of us but it’s ok because Jesus will forgive him and don’t we wish we had Jesus as a scapegoat too?

The big issue is – you are the only one that thinks sex is sinful. No one cares how “forgiven” you are. Only you do. Literally only you. No one cares what you think God’s purpose for sex is. No one. Only you. And we all are painfully aware of what you think about unmarried women who enjoy sex.

We’re not “convicted”, we’re annoyed. Big difference.

@Mariah How on earth am I supposed to consider any of that sincere?
That is on you, either you do or you don’t. If someone says ”we are not insulting you but just trying to honestly show you whatever”, it is up to me to either believe it or figure that is what they think and they are insulting me. The Lord has not stuck me dead so it must be something to it.

“Which illustrates that in this society sex is just a commodity, something used by way of another for basically one’s own pleasure, no matter how you slice or dice it.”
If you believe there is no truth in there, make the case. I don’t see many very attractive women just going to bars picking up unattractive and dumpy men to take home for a torrid ride between the sheets just because they feel sorry for the bloke and want him to feel better even if they get nothing out of the night’s romp. Have you ever been with a person and just gave of your body to him because you were more concerned with him getting pleasure even if you got nothing from it? How many of your girlfriends do you know do or did that long-term?

That sentence doesn’t contain any judgement? Really?
That is a real statement, if you feel it is false, make the case, show how it is false in part in whole, show something…..or sadly it is all hat, no cattle.

@Seek It’s very, very apparent that you agree with the Christian stance of sex being sinful outside of a marriage between people who had no sexual contact before marriage.
And, I have a standard I adhere to and believe. Some people do not, when I ask them then if there is no all-inclusive standard set by one sovereign and omnipotent to make a standard on how they believe sex should be…..they can’t do it but go off trying to attack the way God set it. If you believe sex outside of marriage is not sinful, believe that, but that means all sex outside of marriage is OK to those who think it is OK to engage whatever, because who is to say ”this sex is OK, that sex is OK, that we will say is neither OK or not, but that is surely not OK”. If it were like gravity then one would not have to even think of it, it would be the way it was. I can say we are held to Earth because the soil sucks us to it, someone else can say it was a physical reaction, another can say it is the magical power of trees, it doesn’t matter, if you slip on a wet leaf someone is hitting the deck. Sex in a world that is just the world has no absolutes, and if people think it dies and I ask a question to have them produce it, then it is seedy or something. Come up with the island in the ocean and there can be dispute.

The big issue is – you are the only one that thinks sex is sinful. No one cares how “forgiven” you are. Only you do. Literally only you. No one cares what you think God’s purpose for sex is. No one. Only you. And we all are painfully aware of what you think about unmarried women who enjoy sex.
It is only a ”big issue” if anyone makes it. You should not care where my relationship with God is or not because that does nothing for anyone, they have to do for themselves. However, the issue is the double standard one can have on an issue they cannot possibly put a standard on and call themselves not judgmental?

I’m going to abstain from answering that until you figure out how to write a sentence. I can’t make heads or tails of anything you just said.

@Seek I can’t make heads or tails of anything you just said.
Then let me strip it down nekkid (I think that is Fluther’s version). Do not worry about my relationship with God but your own, because that is the only thing that will matter for your soul being saved, if you don’t believe, then to think on 8any of it* is wasted thought you could use elsewhere.

If you can say sex outside of marriage in not sinful, OK, should be done etc. if someone cares to engage in a form of sex you do not like or agree with, you have zero stance to say they are wrong or evil because no one has complete authority to set any sexual standard, so to say anything about them is showing judgment as if they are doing something evil.

A little tip for you: you can’t partake in discussions in an incredibly flippant and preachy tone and then say “I’m not insulting you” and expect us to just accept that as fact. They say “actions speak louder than words” and your consistent, frequent tone of disapproval to anything related to women’s sexuality speaks louder than you coming here now and saying “no no I didn’t mean it.”

I’m not going to go down another rabbit hole of debating why people other than you have sex in this question, HC. I pointed out that quote of yours merely due to its incredibly judgmental tone.

@Hypocrisy_Central – The fact that I do not believe in your god gives you absolutely no right to determine where my morality comes from, and it certainly does not give you the right to determine what I am allowed to discuss. Kindly fuck off.

If you don’t want us “worrying” about your relationship with god stop fucking talking about it.

@Mariah A little tip for you: you can’t partake in discussions in an incredibly flippant and preachy tone and then say “I’m not insulting you” and expect us to just accept that as fact.
Again, you can decipher it how you want, it is your opinion to make. It is a far cry from addressing Him as she when it is known by context Who is being spoken of. It would be different if every time you mentioned an unwed mother I simply chose to address her as ”whore”, that would be blatant disrespect, and it has been done here by others, I try my best to address people in the context of the conversation and not use euphemisms that are a clear disrespect by common populace outside Fluther as well.

[…your consistent, frequent tone of disapproval to anything related to women’s sexuality speaks louder than you coming here now and saying “no no I didn’t mean it.”
Misinterpretation again, I do not disapprove with any sexuality a woman has, and I will bet my dollars to anyone’s donuts to find different, and I will eat well off donuts without losing a cent. However I see sexuality as a whole it is the same for men as it is for women.

I pointed out that quote of yours merely due to its incredibly judgmental tone.
Thank you, you are free to have an opinion….

@Seek The fact that I do not believe in your god gives you absolutely no right to determine where my morality comes from,…]
How can I determine the morality of anyone when no one has been able to tell me who that was? Even those they point out got it from somewhere and that somewhere has never been determined so I cannot even comment on it because I do not know who is the author of it to examine their actions to see if they were ”holy enough”, to decide their morality was the most superior in all the Earth.

[…and it certainly does not give you the right to determine what I am allowed to discuss.
I am not trying to determine what you discuss but people sure as hell try to determine what I can discuss, how ironic. You can discuss what ever, you came to this thread, I did not jump on yours so you can’t get huffy.

If you don’t want us “worrying” about your relationship with god stop fucking talking about it.
I don’t think about if anyone worries about it, I only respond if someone mentions here they seem to be preoccupied with it. I will make a deal, no one wants to hear me speak of my relationship with God, and then no one here speaks of their relationship with their spouse….oh…that would surely not be fair some would think. Those who speak of their spouse, it is nothing to me and I tune it out….try it sometimes.

If you want us to believe you try changing your tone. That’s all I’m saying. You asked why you’ve been poorly received and I answered. Sorry if you don’t like it, but nothing’s going to change with the way you’re received if you choose to place the blame on listeners and their “interpretation.”

Seriously. This “I know you are but what am I?” attitude is really old.

@Mariah If you want us to believe you try changing your tone.
Isn’t that ironic, people want to say my tone is this or that yet hold their tone is correct and I should adapt mine to theirs, and call it nonjudgmental? Why don’t they change their tone as well, or do they believe there is nothing wrong with it, and if nothing is wrong with theirs why should I believe them and say there is something wrong with mine? By that, it is an opinion, and just that.

@Seek If you do not like a diner but you stop in there to get a plate anyhow, how can you complain when the meal did not taste good to you? You stopped there, they did not need you to buy a plate, you could have gone where you would have been happy. decipher Go to questions that make you happy, not stop at questions that irk you then get upset what you find there.

Your metaphors are ridiculous.

So let’s be point blank then, why come to a thread that will irk you when you have dozens of other who will not make you think with more power than an ant to choose from? You can answer questions of someone who might be a carbon copy of yourself then you should get along like two peas in a pod.

Sweetie, in order for you to irk me, I would have to value your opinion.

You are entertainment. You’re hilarious. Trying to figure out what is going on in that wind tunnel between your ears is half the fun I get out of this site.

@Seek Sweetie, in order for you to irk me, I would have to value your opinion.
Well I guess when you say ”Kindly fuck off.” you speak like that to everyone? Do you speak like that to family members you are cool with? I only know people curse when they are frustrated, vexed or worse. Myself, even with people that vex me I still do not curse at them but speak to them like people.

Trying to figure out what is going on in that wind tunnel between your ears is half the fun I get out of this site.
I guess the reason you are still searching is you have not figured out what you are looking at because there is certainly no wind tunnel between my ears. LOL LOL Maybe it is a mural painted on a wall, but keep looking.

I never said nobody else’s tone sucks either. We could all do with some shaping up.

Oh the hypocrisy and I’m not speaking about HC.

For what it’s worth, I want to clarify that my statement about tone. What I’m trying to say is that he claims he doesn’t have any problems with women’s sexuality, but his tone says otherwise. I advise a change of tone so that he will not be misunderstood, if in fact he truly doesn’t have a problem with women’s sexuality, because a lot of us clearly have the impression he does. If he’s telling the truth right now then something has gone sorely wrong in our attempts to communicate with each other.

I can definitely see why it comes across as hypocritical to criticize him for tone when a lot of us have been super mean to him. I may not agree with HC on most topics but I can totally acknowledge that of everyone in the conversation his language is some of the least offensive.

I’m a bitch.

@Mariah I advise a change of tone so that he will not be misunderstood, if in fact he truly doesn’t have a problem with women’s sexuality, because a lot of us clearly have the impression he does.
So many are caught up looking for some misogynous terms or speech they miss the parts I blast the douche bag men on, those who claim they can love two women equally that is why it is OK to have something on the side. Certainly those sperm donors who feel being a man is leaving litters of children all over and not raising any of them, people miss those comments…..so I guess it is a miscue in communication, I will leave it at that.

Well, to me, not being misogynistic doesn’t simply mean that you say something bad about men every time you say something bad about women, it means not saying bad things about women as a whole in the first place. For what it’s worth.

This is all out in the open now. Apparently ten of you are tired of HC’s questions. The rest of us either scroll on by or want to answer a legitimate question.

I think some of you enjoy pestering HC and derailing his questions. We can count on the same 5 or 6 people who voice their distaste every time he asks something that offends them.

Now what? Why can’t some of you ignore the questions you don’t like? Do you want to censor what we can ask? Is that what you really want for this site?

Not at all. But I also don’t think we should have a policy of “ignore anything you disagree with.” That would also be censorship and it would end debate.

I came here from a site literally called “Am I right or wrong?” where the premise was that someone posted an opinion and we told them whether they were right or wrong. I’ve always enjoyed these sorts of forums primarily for debate and discussion. I realize that’s not the primary purpose of fluther, but I’d be sad to see that aspect of it go away.

I agree that some of the reactions HC has gotten have far surpassed “debate” and become nasty. That’s not good either.

I don’t know what the solution is beyond just asking people to be nicer. I don’t think “if you don’t like it, move along” is the solution, though.

Just my opinion.

^ Not at all. But I also don’t think we should have a policy of “ignore anything you disagree with.” That would also be censorship and it would end debate.
That would be greatly unenforceable, but as common sense it should be a practice. People do not book cruises to destinations they do not like, they do not purchase a ticket to a movie they do not care for, the do not order a plate of food they do not like, they do all of that without anyone telling them to, they do it because it is their will or likes.

I agree that some of the reactions HC has gotten have far surpassed “debate” and become nasty. That’s not good either.
If a person hangs around a thread not to further the debate or add to the discussion but because of ”entertainment value” does that help? Anyone doing that could in actuality (even if the person doing it doesn’t believe so) be back alley, or underhanded bullying? Maybe they believe it is just heckling, but in certain situation I believe that can be seen as bullying.

To answer the original question: @chyna got it right in my opinion. It’s often in how the details are written. Perhaps you could work on that.

As for the rest of the meshugas, I’ll simply say that if something doesn’t taste good, stop eating it. Maybe stop thinking about it. Don’t engage.

^ To answer the original question: @chyna got it right in my opinion. It’s often in how the details are written. Perhaps you could work on that.
By that, if we are to go that @chyna is the authority here, I should doctor my questions and comments to suit other people. I wonder if they will doctor their questions and comments to suit me or others who might find offense in how they phrase things?

[…I’ll simply say that if something doesn’t taste good, stop eating it. Maybe stop thinking about it. Don’t engage.
I think that weighs more in common sense then the aforementioned method.

Trying to break it all down with logic and examples and reasoned explanations on both sides just doesn’t seem to be quite working here. I think, @Hypocrisy_Central, that the way you sometimes word things just hits some of us on such a negative visceral level that for us reaction is a knee-jerk, immediate thing. That’s why we (well, why I) don’t just scroll past and ignore. @jonsblond is not reactive to your stuff, she is reactive to other things. It’s just what triggers each one of us.
I read your Qs, @Hypocrisy_Central, because in the past I have found you to have a keen, if untrained, intelligence and insight at times. I haven’t seen much of that, recently, and I kind of miss it.

And honestly, you don’t need to dumb down your wording, we’re a savvy enough group here to understand that “obese advocate” can be interpreted as “chubby chaser”, and other such phrases. (Your Why do people read in the bathroom?” question is a pretty good example of that.

@Hypocricy_Central: I did not say @chyna was the “authority”, I simply agree with her points — but thank you for putting words in my mouth.

And, you don’t have to “doctor” anything. I said ”Perhaps you could work on that.” It is a suggestion. Nothing more.

Best of luck with everything.

@Hypocrisy Central I think I try to pass on questions I find disagreeable, but once in awhile something bites you so hard that you can’t keep quiet.

The same way that a priest constantly asking question about the “sinful behaviour of choir boys” would rightfully raise suspicions.

Thinking back to my own strict Christian upbringing and the sexual repression that went along with that, I recognize that I was way more obsessed with sex in those days. When you stifle such naturally powerful drives, they tend to surface in awkward, if not toxic, ways.

I was intensely curious about sex, but since a healthy exploration was off limits, my imagination went into overdrive. The sexuality of our fantasies is inherently compulsive and voyeuristic and objectifying. So sex seemed like a bigger deal and occupied a lot more bandwidth in my mind than when the normalness of it all eventually settled in.

Honestly, that’s the vibe I get from the overall pattern of your questions having to do with sex, women, their bodies, their clothing…they remind me of those godawful days when I had no actual experience of sex as a normal (i.e. not taboo, salacious or sensationalized) aspect of humanity. Maybe I was actually more repressed than you, though, because there’s no way I would have been as talkative about it as you are.

@canidmajor I read your Qs, @Hypocrisy_Central, because in the past I have found you to have a keen, if untrained, intelligence and insight at times. I haven’t seen much of that, recently, and I kind of miss it.
Tell you the truth, I miss it too. These days I ask fluff, someone is vexed, I ask a substantive question, people are vexed, instead of even trying to answer the question it is all about debunking the question or questioning why I even asked the question. Hard to know what to ask when some (usually the same group) just want to try to derail it for ”entertainment value”.

@cookieman @Hypocricy_Central: I did not say @chyna was the “authority”, I simply agree with her points — but thank you for putting words in my mouth.
If that is not what you meant, my apologies, that is the way the cookie crumbles (sorry, was too juicy to pass up), did not mean to put anything in your mouth, a bad habit I picked up from others here.

@stanleybmanly @Hypocrisy Central I think I try to pass on questions I find disagreeable, but once in awhile something bites you so hard that you can’t keep quiet.
Thank you for your honest answer. I often find myself almost posting to a question I do not agree with or find detestable, but I stop myself and say why waste time on a question so stupid or clearly so biased as to not make a different. That works for me, but it may not work for others.

@thorninmud Honestly, that’s the vibe I get from the overall pattern of your questions having to do with sex, women, their bodies, their clothing…they remind me of those godawful days when I had no actual experience of sex as a normal (i.e. not taboo, salacious or sensationalized) aspect of humanity
Well, just like seeing wax fruit from a distance, it might look good and appetizing but you can never eat it. As you say, these days sex has lost a lot of its honor, reverence or mystique, it is as common as a happy meal, and since it is, there should be no difference conversing on that than toasters, cars, smooth river stones. To get all squeamish talking about it when it is supposed to be a healthy adult activity shows it is anything but, and certainly must still carry some stigma. If someone makes a comment or statement I think is cliché, misunderstanding, two-faced application of sex, or whatever, sometimes I will post a question asking people to explain or expound on it as to not derail the thread in which it was made. It has as much to do with repression as some here believe it has with lack of self-control sexually.

Maybe I was actually more repressed than you, though, because there’s no way I would have been as talkative about it as you are.
It is more about the sheer irony of it all.

@Hypocrisy_Central, Hard to know what to ask when some (usually the same group) just want to try to derail it for ”entertainment value then ask those interesting, insightful questions. Ignore those who will always criticise you. Some people here want to see you asking those thoughtful questions @HC. You can play to your critics and they win, or you can play to your supporters and then who cares what your critics think, your supporters and you win.

@chyna‘s details above are really helpful.

The questions are voyeuristic because none of them are really questions. The details are overly explicit and show a morbid fascination with some imagined cartoon version of sex. They’re all leading questions designed to elicit certain answers. Like “aren’t fat women awful?” [Elaborate description of fat woman body parts.] or “What if a hot woman was wearing (garment)” [Elaborate description of hot woman wearing something.] Then we’re supposed to dutifully provide examples for the OP to salivate over.

There’s no, like, actual inquiry there. Just a hashing and rehashing of the same obsessions over women’s bodies. A real question has a question in it- like the OP genuinely wants new ideas or opinions about something.

My litmus test for questions with sexual content is, does this provide value for the rest of fluther? Or just for the OP? Like, a genuine sex question might help other people who were wondering about the same thing but too afraid to ask. Or a lighthearted and raunchy question might be fun for everyone in the thread, like questions about celebrity crushes or whatever. They don’t have to be, like, Pulitzer prize-winning questions. “Value” can mean something as simple as a bit of new information or a light chuckle. Or for the silly relationship questions, if the OP learned something new, that’s value. It’s a very low bar.

@Haleth The questions are voyeuristic because none of them are really questions.
There are a lot of questions that aren’t questions here, but either people don’t notice, don’t care or love non-questions.

A real question has a question in it- like the OP genuinely wants new ideas or opinions about something.
What is a real question or not is up to the individual. Or maybe some like questions that cannot possibly be answered. Just because something is old hat to you doesn’t make it so for others. Someone might have a question after seeing African American males play dominoes on several occasions and wonder why they are so vocal. If during the thread someone says it might due to the fact they are drinking, and if the asker thinks back and remembers someone always had a beer or something and ask another question about domino games and African American males as to not derail the original thread, and so on, people can form a wrong opinion that they are racist.

My litmus test for questions with sexual content is, does this provide value for the rest of fluther?
Why not use that for all questions here on Fluther, for there are many questions that add nothing to Fluther and might even dumb it down.

Like, a genuine sex question might help other people who were wondering about the same thing but too afraid to ask.
Maybe it is not so much afraid to ask something but not having anyone to ask. If a person doesn’t have a sister he might wonder if a boy ever walked in front of his sister nude or vice versa. Maybe a person had an ex-girlfriend who shaved below the belt, but since she is no longer in his life might wonder when she started doing that and why? Value is like antiques; one person sees and old vase, another sees a rare artifact, you cannot determine value for everyone.

I know you are but what am I?

@Hypocrisy Central This thread can probably continue forever with you at the wheel. You have a valid point in the fact that others have posted prurient questions. The rebukes ARE about you, or more accurately, what are perceived as your motivations. As far as I’m concerned, you’re entitled to ask as many “show us your boobs” questions as you choose, but you can’t reasonably expect a deluge of such stuff to float through here without notice or commentary. While I’m strongly opposed to you being sanctioned or censored, I fully intend to level whatever verbal criticism of such stuff as I believe it merits. Perhaps I crossed the line in calling you insensitive. Next time (and we both surely know there WILL be a next time) I’ll bitch about the question rather than you.

”bitch about the question rather than (the Jelly)”

Sounds like a fair plan.

Umm… yeah, this is basic Fluther etiquette. Well, basic life etiquette, really.

@stanleybmanly The rebukes ARE about you, or more accurately, what are perceived as your motivations.
As much as I take that as an honest comment, it somewhat adds a tinge of truth to the fact I say not all Flutheronians are equal, no matter how one tried to spin it. If every member is not having their question raked through the coals to decipher why it was asked or in the manner it was asked but only certain people, how would you spin the equality on that? If women were handle that way, or a certain minority or people with a certain medical problem would one say they were not singled out for special treatment? Why worry why any question was asked, if the question doesn’t suit one, should they not just go find one that does, it is not like there are no choices here.

While I’m strongly opposed to you being sanctioned or censored, I fully intend to level whatever verbal criticism of such stuff as I believe it merits.
So, if I should keep my questions so simplistic even an amoebae would not get excited, you will find something to blast if of? Or is that the reason you may not blast other question, because an amoebae would not bother with them either?

No that is NOT what I’m saying. What I AM saying is that just as you should be free to ask what you please, we must have the leeway to comment on questions In front of us. I am also claiming that if you ask more questions, you can expect more criticism. No one is obligated to ignore anything they consider offensive. If you put it out there, I will tell you what I think. If you put it out there on a daily basis, there is no double standard involved with my pointing it out, regardless of who else is doing it.

^ No that is NOT what I’m saying. What I AM saying is that just as you should be free to ask what you please, we must have the leeway to comment on questions In front of us
There is commenting, and then there is rudely blasting something with veiled insult and indignation.

Veiled?

Concealed @Seek. I don’t think it’s an inaccurate statement. There is a difference and I believe @HC has been subjected to this treatment to an extent that others do not endure.

Oh, I know what veiled means.

Once again, I don’t believe that HC is being overly persecuted. As I said before, the sheer volume of his questions here guarantees him more chances of being criticized. After all, it isn’t every question or even the majority of his questions that receive sharp retorts. If you flood the site with questions your chances of a hostile response increase proportionally. And if you flood the site with NSFW questions directed at women, what should you expect?

^ If you flood the site with questions your chances of a hostile response increase proportionally.
And of those who have nearly as many questions and three times the comments posted but insults at such a low level it would hardly be vapor? By that criteria should anyone within that certain level or prolific input have the same or equal level of scorn, and if not, why do you think?

Offhand, I can’t think of a single soul to match your level of participation here when it comes to questions. And as I said, it isn’t every question of yours that elicits “scorn” from the gallery. I thought (and still suspect) that the “girlie parts” inquiries might be tossed in to “wake the place up” and postpone fluther’s death from boredom. But again, who am I to assess you motives? All that matters is that you clearly have a tough hide and can take a punch. So go ahead and poke at the women all you want. I actually have to grin at the thought of you pretending that your feelings are hurt.