What does "family friendly" mean in the context of VJ?

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

The phrase "family friendly" is bandied about a lot on VJ -- we are told that we need to keep our discussion in line with certain (mostly unspecified) standards of decency and decorum. Swearing is off-limits, as well as (understandably) pornography and other sexually explicit material unless it is within the context of a discussion about sex. Of course threats of violence are also unacceptable, which I have no problem with.

However, I have wondered recently if there are not certain topics that whilst not necessarily overtly vulgar are nevertheless offensive to large swathes of the VJ population. I'm not pointing any fingers here, not yet. But there are things I have seen posted over the past six months that I have found rude, distasteful or insulting. I'm not a serial reporter, and it takes a lot for me to push the report button, but I do when I find something offensive. 99% of the time the matter is taken care of by one of the mods (usually Kathryn or Krikit) quickly and I'm grateful for their work and sensitivity (and everyone knows I'm no brown-noser, so I really do mean it when I say that). However, the topics keep getting recycled, and not only recycled, but the tenor of the discussion seems to devolve even further when these topics are raised. Clearly having posts removed or even suspensions is not enough, even though people (and it's not just me) are deeply offended.

Can we have some consensus here on exactly why certain offensive topics are allowed to stay up again and again whilst others are (and often correctly) shut down swiftly? If we are going to be "family friendly," we can't ignore some matter that is offensive to many simply because people don't use bad words.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

It's the same way Hooters is a family friendly restaurant.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

It's the same way Hooters is a family friendly restaurant.

Got it and noted -- objectifying Hooters waitresses for their buxomness is okay because it's in a family friendly context.

[웃 910]

Example?

[^_^ 5,021]

It's a big country (the US) and it's an even bigger world out there. There exist subcultures right here in the U.S. who view women in a manner that would be considered despicable by other subcultures also in the U.S. On top of that we add another layer of complexity when we take Americans of various 'types' and marry them with men and women from all over the world. What you end up with is a population that no longer has any homogeneity when it comes to what is considered respectable. I recall, many years ago, a member on VJ making the joke that I would be proud if my daughter (who doesn't exist yet) were to be on the cover of Playboy. In fact, I would not and remember finding the suggestion despicable. But I've come to the realization that that's the kind of thought process that is 'normal' where he comes from.

So what's my point? That we shouldn't be a family friendly place at all because in a population this size with this level of diversity that doesn't mean a whole lot.

[웃 910]

I recall, many years ago, a member on VJ making the joke that I would be proud if my daughter (who doesn't exist yet) were to be on the cover of Playboy. In fact, I would not and remember finding the suggestion despicable.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

It's a big country (the US) and it's an even bigger world out there. There exist subcultures right here in the U.S. who view women in a manner that would be considered despicable by other subcultures also in the U.S. On top of that we add another layer of complexity when we take Americans of various 'types' and marry them with men and women from all over the world. What you end up with is a population that no longer has any homogeneity when it comes to what is considered respectable. I recall, many years ago, a member on VJ making the joke that I would be proud if my daughter (who doesn't exist yet) were to be on the cover of Playboy. In fact, I would not and remember finding the suggestion despicable. But I've come to the realization that that's the kind of thought process that is 'normal' where he comes from.

So what's my point? That we shouldn't be a family friendly place at all because in a population this size with this level of diversity that doesn't mean a whole lot.

I agree with all of this, and it's for this reason (amongst others, primarily that we are all adults here -- it's highly unlikely that there are any child bride(groom)s on VJ, though we do see the occasional 16 year old, I admit) that I think the family friendly moniker is worthless. We can have standards of behaviour involving respect for each other that do not preclude my use of the word sh!t.

[The_Dude 1,142]

It would be nice to have a clearly defined TOS. It seems like some moderators use it's deliberate convoluted verbiage to take action against those whom they personally dislike.

[^_^ 5,021]

It would be nice to have a clearly defined TOS. It seems like some moderators use it's deliberate convoluted verbiage to take action against those whom they personally dislike.

IMO - TOS verbiage isn't convoluted, it is just vague and open to interpretation.

My favorite example is "... inhibit any other user from using and enjoying the Forums". That could mean anything!!

[The_Dude 1,142]

IMO - TOS verbiage isn't convoluted, it is just vague and open to interpretation.

My favorite example is "... inhibit any other user from using and enjoying the Forums". That could mean anything!!

Well, sometimes, it is crystal clear. I was asked by another member today to GTFO of a regional. I was just trying to engage in a thread.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Well, sometimes, it is crystal clear. I was asked by another member today to GTFO of a regional. I was just trying to engage in a thread.

The next thing you know, that same bunch of dudes will be "winning" on Twitter.

[^_^ 5,021]

Well, sometimes, it is crystal clear. I was asked by another member today to GTFO of a regional. I was just trying to engage in a thread.

You being there may have been inhibiting his enjoyment. You not being there might inhibit yours. It's a dilemma.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

You being there may have been inhibiting his enjoyment. You not being there might inhibit yours. It's a dilemma.

Yeah, but what I want to know is are these guys for real? I mean do they really feel that way about women? Or is all this just a wind up?

[^_^ 5,021]

Yeah, but what I want to know is are these guys for real? I mean do they really feel that way about women? Or is all this just a wind up?

I would submit to you that there are subcultures in the United States where those attitudes are common and perfectly respectable. You should show them some respect and not try to judge them by your standards. You are, after all, pro-choice, no?

To each, his/her own.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

I would submit to you that there are subcultures in the United States where those attitudes are common and perfectly respectable. You should show them some respect and not try to judge them by your standards. You are, after all, pro-choice, no?

To each, his/her own.

Look.

I just want to know if, as a female, I'm allowed to have an opinion.

M'kay?