Complaint against a sig

[REK]

what an awsome sig...

[Draleg]

one question... who are you Timaral? no id... no alliance... nothing about you 16 posts from Wed Jul 20, 2005 5:55 pm until today...

this is not your thread to discuss my business, please take your queries elsewhere until this is dealt with by admin.

i'm shure you mean "Jacks ghost" as he is one of the head mods.

[REK]

The phrase was first coined by James Joyce in his smash-hit musical, Annie, in which he geniously depicts the stereotypical Irish-male's concern for slamming whiskey and disrespecting women, especially the ones from the loins of his sinner wife. (See child support.) Several years later, Joyce also uses this phrase in a letter to his actual wife to describe his penis.
1) Beat that thing like a red headed stepchild

A person or group treated without the favor of birthright.
The boss treats this department like his red headed stepchildren.

One who is beaten often.
Man, he smacked her like she was a red headed stepchild!

[Tekki]

I don't live in America and I admit I'd never heard the expression before but I did a bit of searching and the origins of it are and there is a lot of talk but no real consensus. One site will say that this is the origin, another says something else. Here's some examples just to show how wide a thing it 'could' be:

1. A child who is obviously not your own, a child who is treated worse than other children in the family

2. The phrase was first coined by James Joyce in his smash-hit musical, Annie, in which he geniously depicts the stereotypical Irish-male's concern for slamming whiskey and disrespecting women, especially the ones from the loins of his sinner wife. (See child support.) Several years later, Joyce also uses this phrase in a letter to his actual wife to describe his penis.

These two definitions come from : http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... +stepchild And were also supplied by REK

WikiAnswers says something else, referring to vikings and the children they left, to black americans, and to early irish American immigrants. Some of the answers from WikiAnswers - http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Where_did_the ... es_it_mean

The origin of the phrase "red haired step child" dates to the 1830's & 40's when Irish emigrants began arriving in America. The newly arrived Irish were somewhere below free blacks on the social scale at the time, and lived in segregated communities. Then, like now, young men were having sexual relations with young women before marriage. Sometimes the men were Irish and the girls were not. This resulted in many out of wedlock children with that red Irish hair. When these young women did finally marry, usually to a young man not of Irish descent, the new husband was not particularly patient or sympathetic to the red haired step child and treated them harshly. The phrase is derogatory although many do not know its origin, it is still considered an insult to knowledgeable people of Irish descent, and should be avoided in polite conversation.

It may have arisen from the feudal/mideval practice known as jus primae noctis. This was an ancient privilege of the lord of the manor to share the wedding bed with his peasants' brides. This right was depicted in the film Braveheart. The English declare they will "breed out" the Scots by introducing the ancient English custom, giving noblemen the right to sleep with the bride on the night of a tenant's marriage. Jus primae noctis was also said to have been practiced in Ireland where it passed with title to the land as part of the land rights. A first-born child might have been assumed to be the offspring of the landlord, would be a de facto stepchild, and may have been treated differently from other offspring.

I believe that it is linked to the Viking invasions experienced in Britain and Ireland in the 11th century. The Vikings came down from their area, pillaged and raped and left a few red-headed children. Being so obviously different from the rest of the children in the area, they were subject to discrimination by parents knowing their origin was from an invading source. I can imagine that these children would have suffered the wrath of the local population who could obviously identify them as products of the Vikings violent influence on their culture. They were an easy target to vent the frustration of this phenomenon of force.

I don't think anyone is denying it's a derogatory phrase but it's not directed towards an individual on the forum

[semper]

Seems very interesting to me.

When someone makes a remark about another person, then that can be considered offensive and be responded to by the mods correctly.

When someone makes a remark that is taken as a joke, then the mods do nothing accordingly.

When someone post's a signature that is taken as offensive...much like the Anus Pact signature...we have mixed feelings about it all. I dont see why tbh.

Either make REK take the signature away, or remove the rules pertaining to offensive signatures...I mean this method has been applied to so many of the forums rules in so many other instances...

You guys have to make your minds up really, the double standards are a general feature of this forum, and every other aspect of life, but they are usually discreet, this is a little too obvious...

[Jack]

It might be a double standard, Semper, if it was the same people making a different decision about a similar instance. But it is not the same people, and as has been pointed out, the phrase is hardly an offensive phrase.

[Timaral]

It might be a double standard, Semper, if it was the same people making a different decision about a similar instance. But it is not the same people, and as has been pointed out, the phrase is hardly an offensive phrase.

No idea about double standards and idc tbh. But the phrase is derogatory (tekki's words not mine) and is an offenisive phrase.

I don't think anyone is denying it's a derogatory phrase but it's not directed towards an individual on the forum

Exactly, i know it isn't directed at any individual person but thats not the point for me personally, im just saying its how people "might" react to it.

[semper]

It might be a double standard, Semper, if it was the same people making a different decision about a similar instance. But it is not the same people, and as has been pointed out, the phrase is hardly an offensive phrase.

This guy IS taking it offensively and because of that IT IS in breach of the forums rules.

Are you telling me Jack, that you and none of the other current mods that have the ability to address this topic had nothing to do with anything regarding the Anus pact sigs? None of the current mods decided to enforce that rule, or make any judgments on it? Not to mention double standards can take many forms other than the form you stated, like reacting (notice no identification of who..) to an offensive sig in one case, yet not in the other because of its origin and the mods dealing with it..the use of a nus in cruel humor is a very common feature of english culture, yet I see it very readily frowned upon and punished for on these forums...all of a sudden its interesting how something of an equal position from America is not taken to such a degree...Do I sense a racist tingle here from the mods? Conforming to the majority of the population? I hope not...(alas..before people start thinking I am making accusations, I am not, I am merely openly pondering the social position of the supposedly more responsible members of this forum team..in the form of rhetorical questions..)

A Nus is NOT an offensive phrase to most, yet once again it is filtered. lol.

I believe thats game, set and match...

I shall say it again...admins...mods... make up your minds!

[IllegalOperation]

image in question used as REK's sig.



i don't know about any other people, but the words used in this sig are quite meaningfull and abusive to red headed people.

Also the "beating step children about" or what ever it is is extremely distastefull. people are abused in real life and it seems that you are openly saying its fine to Child Abuse which is an occurance.
so mods please discuss this and i would like this sig taken away or altered. this isn't a personal "dig" i am just asking you to remove or alter the sig as it offends people.

thanks

Hang on a second, your saying that it may offend people but you haven't said specifically who it offends. Your presuming that it offends people without any evidence, if you have been a victim of child abuse or are a red head and are offended then it is valid however your trying to pro-actively censor for no valid reason.

I don't find the signature amusing or tasteful, however it doesn't mean that things in bad taste should be removed, if a censor everything policy was in place we wouldn't have Monty Python and then we wouldn't have Fawlty Towers, Steptoe and Son, Till Death Us Do Part, Porridge, Not the Nine O'Clock News, The Young Ones, Have I Got News For You, Blackadder, The Day Today, Little Britain, The Thick of It (Some of these are british only comedies). You'll find that the victims or such jokes aren't actually bothered its the complainers looking for a cause/campaign to follow that derive the most offence without any actual reason.

People who have been a victim of abuse have issues that need to be resolved with a trained professional, not on public forums.

[Timaral]

Hang on a second, your saying that it may offend people but you haven't said specifically who it offends. Your presuming that it offends people without any evidence, if you have been a victim of child abuse or are a red head and are offended then it is valid however your trying to pro-actively censor for no valid reason.

I'm sorry did i fail to mention it affects me? My personal reasons, but they are resolved and i do not want other people to be offended by this signature.

People who have been a victim of abuse have issues that need to be resolved with a trained professional, not on public forums.

People who may get affended by this sig have every right to post here as anyone else; or does equality not reach red headed people?

[Zeratul]

none of the current mods had power to affect sigs at the time of the sigs you refer to, semper... only admins have that power...

many a mod might not have liked the sigs, but that does not make it so that they could do anything about them...

[Timaral]

none of the current mods had power to affect sigs at the time of the sigs you refer to, semper... only admins have that power...

many a mod might not have liked the sigs, but that does not make it so that they could do anything about them...

please don't spam the thread thanks
not relevant to topic

[FreeSpirit]

none of the current mods had power to affect sigs at the time of the sigs you refer to, semper... only admins have that power...

many a mod might not have liked the sigs, but that does not make it so that they could do anything about them...

please don't spam the thread thanks
not relevant to topic

Acctually it is in relevance to the post semper made wich was on-topic

Anyway I'll try to bring it up for u in the mod meeting wednesday. DOnt hold me responsable for the result though.

[Jack]

It might be a double standard, Semper, if it was the same people making a different decision about a similar instance. But it is not the same people, and as has been pointed out, the phrase is hardly an offensive phrase.

This guy IS taking it offensively and because of that IT IS in breach of the forums rules.

That is not the rules. If everything that someone took offensively was against the rules then a whole helluva lot more would be against the rules.

Are you telling me Jack, that you and none of the other current mods that have the ability to address this topic had nothing to do with anything regarding the Anus pact sigs? None of the current mods decided to enforce that rule, or make any judgments on it?

I'm saying that the people who had the power to make the rules then, are not the same people that have the power to make the rules now. The mods do not dictate the rules, we enforce them, regardless of whether or not we like them.

[Lore]

It might be a double standard, Semper, if it was the same people making a different decision about a similar instance. But it is not the same people, and as has been pointed out, the phrase is hardly an offensive phrase.

This guy IS taking it offensively and because of that IT IS in breach of the forums rules.

See statement below

Are you telling me Jack, that you and none of the other current mods that have the ability to address this topic had nothing to do with anything regarding the **Filtered** pact sigs? None of the current mods decided to enforce that rule, or make any judgments on it? Not to mention double standards can take many forms other than the form you stated, like reacting (notice no identification of who..) to an offensive sig in one case, yet not in the other because of its origin and the mods dealing with it..the use of a nus in cruel humor is a very common feature of english culture, yet I see it very readily frowned upon and punished for on these forums...all of a sudden its interesting how something of an equal position from America is not taken to such a degree...Do I sense a racist tingle here from the mods? Conforming to the majority of the population? I hope not...(alas..before people start thinking I am making accusations, I am not, I am merely openly pondering the social position of the supposedly more responsible members of this forum team..in the form of rhetorical questions..)

A Nus is NOT an offensive phrase to most, yet once again it is filtered. lol.

I believe thats game, set and match...

I shall say it again...admins...mods... make up your minds!

I removed all versions of Anus from the filter list but one, and it was one that would not allow people to create forum accounts using the word and therefore filtered it. My mistake. It should be fixed now.

As for my statement concerning this matter, I'll say this. If it had been me admining during those times anus would not have been filtered. I would have simply removed the sig privlidges of those who didnt remove them when asked and been done with it. Now to this matter at hand. If you feel so strongly about this that you wish to continue to push it then by all means lets dance.

If you fell like this needs censering due to one person being offended then surely you must also agree to ALL the following

1. Using the word "gay" can be offensive to people with one type of sexual preferance

2. Using the word "Straight/Heterosexual" can be found offensive as well

3. refering to some one as either "male" or "female" can be offensive

4. Calling someone by their nationality such as a "Brit" or an "irishman" or an "Aussie" can be offensive

5. Speaking anything about any religion can be offensive.

6. Any picture can be offensive

9. Refering to ansestory can be offensive

10. Using sexual explicit language can be offinsive

11. Using violent language can be offensive.

12. Any quotes can be offinsive simply due to the author or his race, creed, color, gender, ansestory, or subject matter.

13. Basicly ANY subject matter can be veiwed as offensive to someone

14. etc, etc, etc, etc.


So to make everything simple, we can simple make any remark concerning anyones Race, Creed, Nationality, Ansestory, Gender, Sexual orenintation, Geographical location, Bannable. Any remark Veiwed as violent, sexually explicit, or hurtful should be banned. Any picture in a signature or avy is Bannable. Any quote can now be a Bannable offense. Any subject matter that anyone else finds offensive can now be bannable.


So is this the forums you seek after? Hey sounds kinna sucky to me but it would take a load off the mods. About 1 week of banning everyone but 1 or 2 and its clear sailing after that.

I do question why you chose this topic to Debate Semper. Its not something I expected from you.