If I want to invite people from Ovarit to CH, what criteria is important?
If I want to invite people from Ovarit to CH, what criteria is important?
I don't want this site to become just another Ovarit with that weird conservative flavor. So if I mentioned this site to invite women from there, what should I look for? What should I be cautious of?
I try to keep "criteria" on the downlow to prevent gaming of the application system through someone saying "'all' the 'right' answers." (Though I feel like it wouldn't be hard for a dedicated troll to figure it out and fake it long enough to get past the application.)
I'd say if you're unsure I would just share with them the website's existence and tell them there's an application process to join and let them decide for themselves if they're a good fit.
In regards to avoiding the "conservative flavor", one thing I consider with Ovarit users is if they post on subjects regarding women's rights and women's issues rather than just focusing on transgender politics. Also how do they reply to other users, how do they handle disagreement, etc. (Also, in general, I'm not interested in hosting right-wing content, so that should get shut down pretty quickly here. I struggle with finding the "appropriate edge" of "the paradox of tolerance", but so far I haven't had to really worry about this, so it's more like a "we'll cross that bridge when we get there" kind of thing.)
In summary, imo share the website as much as you want, since new users would go through the application process anyways.
(Feb 4 2025, 7:16 PM)Clover I try to keep "criteria" on the downlow to prevent gaming of the application system through someone saying "'all' the 'right' answers." (Though I feel like it wouldn't be hard for a dedicated troll to figure it out and fake it long enough to get past the application.)
I'd say if you're unsure I would just share with them the website's existence and tell them there's an application process to join and let them decide for themselves if they're a good fit.
In regards to avoiding the "conservative flavor", one thing I consider with Ovarit users is if they post on subjects regarding women's rights and women's issues rather than just focusing on transgender politics. Also how do they reply to other users, how do they handle disagreement, etc. (Also, in general, I'm not interested in hosting right-wing content, so that should get shut down pretty quickly here. I struggle with finding the "appropriate edge" of "the paradox of tolerance", but so far I haven't had to really worry about this, so it's more like a "we'll cross that bridge when we get there" kind of thing.)
In summary, imo share the website as much as you want, since new users would go through the application process anyways.
(Feb 4 2025, 7:16 PM)Clover I try to keep "criteria" on the downlow to prevent gaming of the application system through someone saying "'all' the 'right' answers." (Though I feel like it wouldn't be hard for a dedicated troll to figure it out and fake it long enough to get past the application.)
I'd say if you're unsure I would just share with them the website's existence and tell them there's an application process to join and let them decide for themselves if they're a good fit.
In regards to avoiding the "conservative flavor", one thing I consider with Ovarit users is if they post on subjects regarding women's rights and women's issues rather than just focusing on transgender politics. Also how do they reply to other users, how do they handle disagreement, etc. (Also, in general, I'm not interested in hosting right-wing content, so that should get shut down pretty quickly here. I struggle with finding the "appropriate edge" of "the paradox of tolerance", but so far I haven't had to really worry about this, so it's more like a "we'll cross that bridge when we get there" kind of thing.)
In summary, imo share the website as much as you want, since new users would go through the application process anyways.
Good luck! :( I recently tried to message some more women I've spoken to in the past to invite them here, but they all seem to have quit Ovarit, as I never got a response... I hope you have better luck than me!
I was amused (that may not be the right word) to notice, in a discussion today, someone saying (I paraphrase) âif you donât like all the pro-misogyny stuff on here, go to clovenhoovesâ, in very much the same way that criticism of US foreign policy when I was young used to get you âif you donât like it here, move to Russiaâ.
(Feb 5 2025, 12:35 AM)wormwood I was amused (that may not be the right word) to notice, in a discussion today, someone saying (I paraphrase) âif you donât like all the pro-misogyny stuff on here, go to clovenhoovesâ, in very much the same way that criticism of US foreign policy when I was young used to get you âif you donât like it here, move to Russiaâ.lol
lmao, even
(Feb 5 2025, 12:35 AM)wormwood I was amused (that may not be the right word) to notice, in a discussion today, someone saying (I paraphrase) âif you donât like all the pro-misogyny stuff on here, go to clovenhoovesâ, in very much the same way that criticism of US foreign policy when I was young used to get you âif you donât like it here, move to Russiaâ.lol
lmao, even
(Feb 5 2025, 12:35 AM)wormwood I was amused (that may not be the right word) to notice, in a discussion today, someone saying (I paraphrase) âif you donât like all the pro-misogyny stuff on here, go to clovenhoovesâ, in very much the same way that criticism of US foreign policy when I was young used to get you âif you donât like it here, move to Russiaâ.
(Feb 5 2025, 12:35 AM)wormwood I was amused (that may not be the right word) to notice, in a discussion today, someone saying (I paraphrase) âif you donât like all the pro-misogyny stuff on here, go to clovenhoovesâ, in very much the same way that criticism of US foreign policy when I was young used to get you âif you donât like it here, move to Russiaâ.
Honestly I think as long as the mods put a stop to any misogynistic bs, the place won't turn into the same old misogynistic dumpster fire than any online community turns into. It's not like Ovarit coincidentally happened to end up with a conservative bend. It was an active decision on the part of mods to silence feminist women by banning them and deleting their comments, and to cover for and excuse misogynistic rhetoric, as well as to prop up conservatives as allies because "they're the only ones who give us a platform". The mods actively censored anti-conservative rhetoric if it wasn't sugarcoated enough, and also censored any discussions on feminism that refused to settle on the usual "agree to disagree" bs and actually challenged the users' misogynistic logic. This is probably the most common way of doing this in more self-aware online communities: a single user can casually use broken misogynistic logic and it'll be fine, but the second another user calls them out on this, it's suddenly "drama" and "hostility" and time for the banhammer to get involved.
While I do think progressive communities should allow critical analysis of their own ideas (otherwise you end up with "so open-minded their brains fell out"-liberals who have no clue why they believe in things and who just flanderize progressive values as unlimited permissiveness of men's entitled dicks), there's a massive difference between "Hey I don't know how to address this misogynistic point" vs "hey has anyone ever considered that maybe women really are subhumans that deserve abuse? Anyone?".
Men will come up with entire pseudosciences around hating women and will keep twisting themselves into worse and worse pretzels until they literally sound like flatearthers. And they will all think they're super unique and rational and objective for, gasp, being misogynists! Imagine that! A male misogynist! đ˛
Women on the other hand will usually just parrot whatever the male "wisdom" is in a very shallow way, and the only response after will be to feign massive offence when someone calls them out on that. Conservative women tend not to think too deeply about misogyny because their worldview is based in fear and they know where thinking it through would take them. They just parrot what men want to hear because that's the only way for them to feel accepted and rational in a man's world, so their tactic is usually just to play dumb, keep themselves stupid and then get mad at women who explain to them why their Nigels are full of shit and don't actually care about them and will never turn into Prince Charming nor ever come to appreciate them for changing his diapers every day.
Point being that the "Let's keep this civil and just be đNiCeđ and agree to disagree" kumbaya crap benefits this thought-stopping brainless escape tactic that conservative women rely on, and acts as if something is wrong and evil and hostile just because some woman can make up a stink over it, rather than because there's any merit to it. This manipulative tactic is used both by conservatives and choice feminism to turn feminist critique into a personal attack on women because ofc both of these movements prioritise keeping the patriarchal status quo, except repackaging it as likeable and beneficial for women. If some woman's monocle pops off over some feminazi saying that makeup isn't actually empowering, then you're not supposed to say that because that's "hostile" and "combatative" and you're a meanie turning on other women.
(Feb 5 2025, 8:11 PM)YesYourNigel Honestly I think as long as the mods put a stop to any misogynistic bs, the place won't turn into the same old misogynistic dumpster fire than any online community turns into. It's not like Ovarit coincidentally happened to end up with a conservative bend. It was an active decision on the part of mods to silence feminist women by banning them and deleting their comments, and to cover for and excuse misogynistic rhetoric, as well as to prop up conservatives as allies because "they're the only ones who give us a platform". The mods actively censored anti-conservative rhetoric if it wasn't sugarcoated enough, and also censored any discussions on feminism that refused to settle on the usual "agree to disagree" bs and actually challenged the users' misogynistic logic. This is probably the most common way of doing this in more self-aware online communities: a single user can casually use broken misogynistic logic and it'll be fine, but the second another user calls them out on this, it's suddenly "drama" and "hostility" and time for the banhammer to get involved.
While I do think progressive communities should allow critical analysis of their own ideas (otherwise you end up with "so open-minded their brains fell out"-liberals who have no clue why they believe in things and who just flanderize progressive values as unlimited permissiveness of men's entitled dicks), there's a massive difference between "Hey I don't know how to address this misogynistic point" vs "hey has anyone ever considered that maybe women really are subhumans that deserve abuse? Anyone?".
Men will come up with entire pseudosciences around hating women and will keep twisting themselves into worse and worse pretzels until they literally sound like flatearthers. And they will all think they're super unique and rational and objective for, gasp, being misogynists! Imagine that! A male misogynist! đ˛
Women on the other hand will usually just parrot whatever the male "wisdom" is in a very shallow way, and the only response after will be to feign massive offence when someone calls them out on that. Conservative women tend not to think too deeply about misogyny because their worldview is based in fear and they know where thinking it through would take them. They just parrot what men want to hear because that's the only way for them to feel accepted and rational in a man's world, so their tactic is usually just to play dumb, keep themselves stupid and then get mad at women who explain to them why their Nigels are full of shit and don't actually care about them and will never turn into Prince Charming nor ever come to appreciate them for changing his diapers every day.
Point being that the "Let's keep this civil and just be đNiCeđ and agree to disagree" kumbaya crap benefits this thought-stopping brainless escape tactic that conservative women rely on, and acts as if something is wrong and evil and hostile just because some woman can make up a stink over it, rather than because there's any merit to it. This manipulative tactic is used both by conservatives and choice feminism to turn feminist critique into a personal attack on women because ofc both of these movements prioritise keeping the patriarchal status quo, except repackaging it as likeable and beneficial for women. If some woman's monocle pops off over some feminazi saying that makeup isn't actually empowering, then you're not supposed to say that because that's "hostile" and "combatative" and you're a meanie turning on other women.
(Feb 5 2025, 8:11 PM)YesYourNigel Honestly I think as long as the mods put a stop to any misogynistic bs, the place won't turn into the same old misogynistic dumpster fire than any online community turns into. It's not like Ovarit coincidentally happened to end up with a conservative bend. It was an active decision on the part of mods to silence feminist women by banning them and deleting their comments, and to cover for and excuse misogynistic rhetoric, as well as to prop up conservatives as allies because "they're the only ones who give us a platform". The mods actively censored anti-conservative rhetoric if it wasn't sugarcoated enough, and also censored any discussions on feminism that refused to settle on the usual "agree to disagree" bs and actually challenged the users' misogynistic logic. This is probably the most common way of doing this in more self-aware online communities: a single user can casually use broken misogynistic logic and it'll be fine, but the second another user calls them out on this, it's suddenly "drama" and "hostility" and time for the banhammer to get involved.
While I do think progressive communities should allow critical analysis of their own ideas (otherwise you end up with "so open-minded their brains fell out"-liberals who have no clue why they believe in things and who just flanderize progressive values as unlimited permissiveness of men's entitled dicks), there's a massive difference between "Hey I don't know how to address this misogynistic point" vs "hey has anyone ever considered that maybe women really are subhumans that deserve abuse? Anyone?".
Men will come up with entire pseudosciences around hating women and will keep twisting themselves into worse and worse pretzels until they literally sound like flatearthers. And they will all think they're super unique and rational and objective for, gasp, being misogynists! Imagine that! A male misogynist! đ˛
Women on the other hand will usually just parrot whatever the male "wisdom" is in a very shallow way, and the only response after will be to feign massive offence when someone calls them out on that. Conservative women tend not to think too deeply about misogyny because their worldview is based in fear and they know where thinking it through would take them. They just parrot what men want to hear because that's the only way for them to feel accepted and rational in a man's world, so their tactic is usually just to play dumb, keep themselves stupid and then get mad at women who explain to them why their Nigels are full of shit and don't actually care about them and will never turn into Prince Charming nor ever come to appreciate them for changing his diapers every day.
Point being that the "Let's keep this civil and just be đNiCeđ and agree to disagree" kumbaya crap benefits this thought-stopping brainless escape tactic that conservative women rely on, and acts as if something is wrong and evil and hostile just because some woman can make up a stink over it, rather than because there's any merit to it. This manipulative tactic is used both by conservatives and choice feminism to turn feminist critique into a personal attack on women because ofc both of these movements prioritise keeping the patriarchal status quo, except repackaging it as likeable and beneficial for women. If some woman's monocle pops off over some feminazi saying that makeup isn't actually empowering, then you're not supposed to say that because that's "hostile" and "combatative" and you're a meanie turning on other women.
