Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Xenophon]

I get the strong impression that the vast majority of posters here are male. (Going by names, not all. Certainly most.) My question is whether it is commendable, permissible, or "am strengsten verboten" to pose as a female in order to create an impression of inclusion and thereby increase actual female participation. Otherwise this forum will remain a pillbox of patriarchy.

[Sy Borg]

That's an assumption. Belindi isn't male. I'm not male.

I think that posing as the opposite gender will do no one any good. It will just make some people look foolish, which is not necessary, because philosophy forums are the kind of place where people engage in brainstorming and exploratory thinking, and it's easy enough to look foolish when stretching beyond the norms.

I would prefer that people forgot about shallow political playthings like gender, race and sexuality and focused on issues of substance.

[Lagayascienza]

It's interesting how, in situations where gender is unknown, the human mind (or at least some humans minds) still seem to want to categorize on the basis of gender. When discussing philosophical issues, is knowing the gender of posters with whom we engage relevant to a discussion, even if the topic under discussion is about an issue in which gender is relevant? I mean, would the fact that I am female or male have any bearing on whether I can argue cogently on any issue including say, women's' rights? It's hard to see why that should be so. In other areas, say science, does gender, or knowledge thereof, have any bearing on the quality of the science done? It may be true that one's gender might provide insights into certain issues that are less available to the opposite gender, but even so, our interlocuters' lack of knowledge of our gender still doesn't seem to be relevant. If we are discussing, say, reproductive rights, would, or should, my interlocutors' knowledge of my gender, be relevant in any way to the discussion? Might being uncertain about gender even enhance philosophical discussion?

[Xenophon]

Hey, I just know that the issue is broached in almost every online forum I visit: the clientele sounds "too male," "too white," "too old," "too young," "too ______." I thought I'd perform a public service here and volunteer to tip the balance.

[Lagayascienza]

I have not noticed any problem of this sort on the philosophy forums I participate in. I have detected no gender imbalance at all. And even if one suspected a slight preponderance of one gender over the other, how would one's guessing about the gender of other participants be relevant to philosophical discussion?

[Xenophon]

I have not noticed any problem of this sort on the philosophy forums I participate in. I have detected no gender imbalance at all. And even if one suspected a slight preponderance of one gender over the other, how would one's guessing about the gender of other participants be relevant to philosophical discussion?

Calm down, toots. Maybe we don't visit the same forums. "onlinephilosophyclub.com" is not unique. Nor did I say "philosophy forums." (Yes. There are indeed other sorts of forums out there besides philosophy ones.) You're taking all this far, far too much in earnest. You remind me of a cocked pistol left on the dashboard or a car rumbling down a potholed road. One just knows this will not end well.

[Lagayascienza]

What???? I have no idea what you are talking about.

You can drive down a potholed road with your pistol cocked if you like. Just leave me out of it. And do not call me "toots". It's a smart assy, disrespectful and peurile.

[Xenophon]

What???? I have no idea what you are talking about.

You can drive down a potholed road with your pistol cocked if you like. Just leave me out of it. And do not call me "toots". It's a smart assy, disrespectful and peurile.
[/quote/]

Sorry there, li'l buckeroo.

[LuckyR]

I get the strong impression that the vast majority of posters here are male. (Going by names, not all. Certainly most.) My question is whether it is commendable, permissible, or "am strengsten verboten" to pose as a female in order to create an impression of inclusion and thereby increase actual female participation. Otherwise this forum will remain a pillbox of patriarchy.

So your theory is: imagined female perspectives of males are a reasonable substitute for actual female perspectives?

[Sy Borg]

I get the strong impression that the vast majority of posters here are male. (Going by names, not all. Certainly most.) My question is whether it is commendable, permissible, or "am strengsten verboten" to pose as a female in order to create an impression of inclusion and thereby increase actual female participation. Otherwise this forum will remain a pillbox of patriarchy.

So your theory is: imagined female perspectives of males are a reasonable substitute for actual female perspectives?

I think he's treating it more like a loss leader. You commit the small sin of impersonation to attract more women.

I deliberately changed my UN from my name to a bot because I was sick of being called a b1tch and a wh0re - often by PM when someone didn't like my modding (ironic, given that I chose the peacefulness of celibacy for the last fifteen years). Thankfully, it's only a minority - but loud minorities can give the impression that they are a majority.

[LuckyR]

I get the strong impression that the vast majority of posters here are male. (Going by names, not all. Certainly most.) My question is whether it is commendable, permissible, or "am strengsten verboten" to pose as a female in order to create an impression of inclusion and thereby increase actual female participation. Otherwise this forum will remain a pillbox of patriarchy.

So your theory is: imagined female perspectives of males are a reasonable substitute for actual female perspectives?

I think he's treating it more like a loss leader. You commit the small sin of impersonation to attract more women.

I deliberately changed my UN from my name to a bot because I was sick of being called a b1tch and a wh0re - often by PM when someone didn't like my modding (ironic, given that I chose the peacefulness of celibacy for the last fifteen years). Thankfully, it's only a minority - but loud minorities can give the impression that they are a majority.

Well there's no doubt that the largely imaginary illusion of anonymity of the interwebs gives the cowardly the "cover" to say things online that they would never have the personal confidence to say openly. Thus conversations tend to be more openly critical.

I apologize to you on behalf of the universe, for that. Therefore if true, I don't disagree with the sentiment, though I'm not confident of it's efficacy.