BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Barbe-flirting

 
  

Page: 1(2)3

 
 
pointless & uncalled for
07:48 / 06.09.06
There's quite a lot of talk of pants and the like but, mores the pity, I don't think I have ever encountered flirtatious behaviour which was directed at me.

I'm not going to go digging for examples, but I'm rather certain that you have not escaped flirtatious attentions.
 
 
Olulabelle
08:02 / 06.09.06
Have I? Fabulous!
 
 
pointless & uncalled for
08:20 / 06.09.06
Perhaps then a case to be made for a general policy that flirting on the board be more obvious by rule.
 
 
Smoothly
09:00 / 06.09.06
Have I? Fabulous!

Indeed. It’s fabulous when directed at one, discomforting and icky when directed at (certain) other people.
Although Flyboy has been getting a lot of stick for his reaction, (ie. The issue isn't that people shouldn't flirt, it's that they shouldn't flirt with Dead Megatron, the wankstain who types like a man (barely).), it seems most honest to me. There’s an element of bridling at the injustice here, isn’t there?
 
 
The resistable rise of Reidcourchie
09:15 / 06.09.06
Can we let this go?

It hasn't broken any rules and might be more appropriate as a Barbannoy post than a policy thread. I'm sure if we all looked hard enough we could find something distasteful on the Barbe, we don't need to jump to the policy everytime it happens.

It also seems a little unfair to shine the spotlight on DM & Kali who, at the end of the day, have not done anything other than make a minority of posters uncomfortable, they're hardly trolls but I would imagine they are feeling very self-concious at the moment.
 
 
pointless & uncalled for
09:16 / 06.09.06
Honest maybe, but is resorting to base level name calling warranted. I would class this as pettyness rather than injustice.
 
 
Olulabelle
09:25 / 06.09.06
Indeed. It’s fabulous when directed at one, discomforting and icky when directed at (certain) other people.

Actually, I think that the issue here was the in your face-ness and that is what was found to be 'icky and discomforting'.
 
 
Smoothly
09:34 / 06.09.06
Honest maybe, but is resorting to base level name calling warranted. I would class this as pettyness rather than injustice.

I meant that the objections to the flirting were motivated by a perceived injustice (not exactly jealousy, but not unrelated perhaps). It came across as quite petty and mean-spirited to me too, but I think the way some people responded is quite interesting. I think this is an okay Policy thread.

Actually, I think that the issue here was the in your face-ness and that is what was found to be 'icky and discomforting'.

But how was it more ‘in your face’ than the rest of the text on Barbelith?
 
 
pointless & uncalled for
09:50 / 06.09.06
Interesting doesn't equate to condonable.

As for the in-your-face-ness. That, I think, comes down to the act of divergence as it were. Other flirting is typically on-topic, in as much as flirting can ever be on topic.
 
 
Smoothly
10:03 / 06.09.06
I never said it did, and, anyway, the ‘interesting’ comment was more of a response to RRR saying that he didn’t think this was worth talking about.

Personally, I didn’t really approve of the objections, but I condone them in the sense that I think that while Kali and DM should be free to flirt with one another, people who find it nauseating (for whatever reason) should be free to say so too. But that’s just me and I’m probably on the permissive wing of Barbelith, in general.

As for divergence, did I miss something or wasn’t it mostly confined to the Barbecrush thread, with a few other instances scattered over the Conversation? Being offtopic is explicitly tolerated in the Conversation. I really don’t believe that that was why people were objecting.
Some people apparently disliked its ‘in your faceness’ although I still don’t quite understand what that means (they weren’t posting pictures or spamming every thread with love poems), but that wasn’t the issue for others (eg. Flyboy). I think there are lots of (possibly quite complex) things going on here.
 
 
Ganesh
10:33 / 06.09.06
Hardly a massive impact on the board then.

Not in my own opinion, no.
 
 
MattShepherd: I WEDDED KALI!
10:44 / 06.09.06
Am I the only person that it didn't really bother at all? Two people flirting publicly, a slight eyeroll, move on to the next thread. In the "crush" thread, no less.

It flared up, it went on for a few posts, and it would have passed if people hadn't started drawing attention to it and using it as an excuse to take tangential cheap shots at DM.
 
 
Olulabelle
11:02 / 06.09.06
Mr Disco, quoted by Ganesh at the beginning of this thread:

Kali and DM, the reason so many people are finding your flirting uncomfortable is not because you're flirting per se. It makes me uncomfortable because I get the feeling that you both enjoy the rush of being explicitly sexual in a quasi-public space. When you address each other privately in a public thread, you make the rest of us feel like we're forced to listen in on a private conversation. The enjoyment you seem to get out of this makes me feel that you're both being exhibitionists here. Exhibitionism turns any reader into a voyeur -- at least, I feel like a voyeur when I read your posts and find myself having to look at Betty Page pics. It feels like you're smearing textual/sexual juice all over my face -- without my having asked for it. So it's not offensive, exactly, but you're making people feel icky, and uncomfortable.
 
 
pointless & uncalled for
11:23 / 06.09.06
As for divergence, did I miss something or wasn’t it mostly confined to the Barbecrush thread, with a few other instances scattered over the Conversation? Being offtopic is explicitly tolerated in the Conversation. I really don’t believe that that was why people were objecting.

I think that purely flirting for the sake of flirting rather than crushing in a flirtatious manner constitutes divergence and whilst offtopicification is wholely acceptable in the Conversation, enforced voyeurism isn't quite the casual wear that we all want to be dressed in on a Saterday night.

Also what Mr. Disco said but without using quite the same words.
 
 
Smoothly
12:25 / 06.09.06
Hmm. If that’s how Mister Disco said it made him feel, then I have to take his word for it. Although I’d quite like to see an example of a post that is equivalent to having sexual juices smeared over one’s face. Or one of the posts that is ‘explicitly sexual’ rather than suggestive, for that matter. I genuinely might have missed something.

However I think it’s telling that the first objections began to come when Kali had done nothing more than describe DM as (shield your eyes) a ‘sexy assassin’ and they’d hypothesised that they’d have (tell me if you want to add astrisks to this) ‘beautiful children’. It was at this point that Nina said:

GO THE FUCK AWAY. FUCK OFF FUCK OFF.

I CAME HERE TO GET AWAY FROM INTERNET BULLSHIT AND YOU HAVE RUINED THIS SPACE FOR ME IN EVERY WAY.


So I suspect that on the whole people’s objections are not summed up by Mister Disco’s characterisation. And I don’t think it’s about going off topic because it wasn’t even off-topic. The significant difference between ‘flirting for the sake of flirting’ and ‘crushing in a flirtatious manner’ is opaque to me. Are other people in that thread not crushing in a flirtatious manner for the sake of crushing in a flirtatious manner?
 
 
The resistable rise of Reidcourchie
12:30 / 06.09.06
I also fail to see in what way it was "enforced" even if some people, subjectively, found it voyeuristic. If it's making you feel uncomfortable then stop reading. Forcing yourself to read something so you can complain about it strikes me as particularly Mary Whitehouseish.

Yours Faithfully Enraged Of Leicestershire.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
12:38 / 06.09.06
Yes yes, reidcourchie, but by that rationale nobody should ever complain about anything posted on the board. Shall we try and move beyond square one?
 
 
pointless & uncalled for
12:48 / 06.09.06
Rather strong reactions on any subject are not unheard of in lithland.
Your description of opaqueness rather proves the point that some people will see a difference and others will not when dealing with relatively closely related intangibles.

The point of not reading further is well made although there is potential argument that the thread, being continuous as it is, may be difficult to not read in it's entirety where you might want to see something that is posted later.

I have, I realise, made grave error in posting analysis of alternative points of view and for the record, I was neither bored nor icked by the events as transpired. Whilst a tad internet obvious they weren't offensive.

I am though, a little concerned about the posts by others critiquing Kali based on history and suspect that the shadow is now longer than the object casting it. In a sense this is only to be expected though. Well done us.
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
13:03 / 06.09.06
So we're not talking about Alex and PW then?

Bugger. I had a hat picked out and everything.
 
 
The resistable rise of Reidcourchie
13:22 / 06.09.06
Yes yes, reidcourchie, but by that rationale nobody should ever complain about anything posted on the board. Shall we try and move beyond square one?

Okay fair point, it just seems we're spending a lot of time complaining about what and how other people post rather than engaging with the topic at hand (which in this case would seem to involve joining in the fun or not depending on your highly subjective taste).
 
 
Tryphena Absent
13:23 / 06.09.06
Susan, you're linking my response to one particular thread when it was a reaction to the interchange between the two over a longer period of time. The first instance of that, as far as I recall was when DM said he wanted to watch Kali doing her porn thing.
 
 
miss wonderstarr
13:34 / 06.09.06
(which in this case would seem to involve joining in the fun or not depending on your highly subjective taste).

Can people "join in the fun" of two individuals flirting? I think perhaps part of the issue was that

~ flirting could easily be conducted more privately, by pm or, if the online relationship develops, by email or msn

and that

~ to flirt "in public" (on a thread, rather than in pm or by other means) seems to be making a point of the exhibitionism; as if part of the pleasure for the couple in that situation is doing it in front of other people, which doesn't really give those other people a choice (apart from not reading the thread, which as Flyboy points out is an option you could apply to anything irritating or offensive on Barbelith).
 
 
pointless & uncalled for
13:41 / 06.09.06
Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't flirting require an audience, aware or otherwise. Anything in private is just hitting on. You could call it flirting but really is just isn't.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
13:44 / 06.09.06
I have to say also that while I think this thread probably has value, I find myself wondering whether it is in fact a Policy thread. I think a lot of us tend to assume that the Policy is the natural home for any 'meta' thread about the nature of Barbelith and people's interaction with each other. But in fact, if no moderation actions or technical issues are being discussed, I'm not sure that's true. Having a thread like this in the Policy might create the impression that either there has been a move for the subject in question to be responded to with some form of moderation activity, or that there is an onus on moderators, or even Tom, to have a view on this. I don't think that's really the case here, is it?

If this thread were in the Conversation I would feel my two cents were more worthwhile, and they would be: like anything else, flirting entertains me when it's done well and irritates me when it's done badly. Which is all very subjective, except when it's not.
 
 
miss wonderstarr
13:46 / 06.09.06
I think that's murky water. You can hit on someone in public and I don't think flirting, by definition, requires any audience. On chatrooms and dating sites ~ so people tell me ~ you exchange private messages which can be extremely flirtatious. I don't think having other people "watching" is necessarily part of the process.
 
 
Smoothly
13:56 / 06.09.06
Fair enough, Nadezhda, but could you quote some posts from that thread that particularly bothered you, or explain in more detail what it was that ruined Barbelith for you?
Kali told us all that she was going to do some porn, lots of people made suggestions, DM expressed an interest in seeing the results.
It’s not hugely unlike lots of other threads in which people talk about their creative endeavours (even exhibit them), others comment or advise, some express an interest in seeing what comes of it.
It’s different because this is porn, isn’t it? In the same way that Kali and DM’s mutual appreciation is different because it is (at least in part) sexual.

Perhaps this is all a further argument for an SBR forum.

Incidentally, I agree with Flyboy in that I think this is a borderline Policy thread, and might benefit from being moved to the Convo.
 
 
pointless & uncalled for
13:59 / 06.09.06
I'll withdraw on that one before there is too much delving into gender psychology and relationship dynamics, on which my ability to comment is less informed than When Harry Met Sally.

As Flyboy admits I suggest a majority of the 'lith could enjoy, or at least not be nauseated by, public flirting that meets a certain, unquantifiable standard. As such I reiterate that this is solely a matter of quality and taste. Dictating on that would have far wider implications for the board. It is certainly a discussion that I would not wish to engage in.
 
 
Smoothly
14:11 / 06.09.06
I don’t think this thread was intended to have any kind of prescriptive of legislative aims, and it looks like people would be more comfortable talking about how they feel about this stuff in the Conversation.
I’ve proposed the move in the hope it can dump the Policy baggage.
 
 
paranoidwriter waves hello
14:13 / 06.09.06
Fair points, all.

Flyboy, you may be right about much of what you just typed.

But I feel this thread is better here because (as I see it) in Conversation there's more chance of the discussion turning into joke and / or ambiguity and /or insults. Sure, that happens here, but it's probably of a much higher...erm...standard?... Plus, this is 'Policy & Help"; and this does seem to be an issue on the board right now that might be learned from and therefore either help people or become an essential part of the Policy.

There's also still a discussion to be had (here or elsewhere) about defining boundries for taste, offence, decency, etc.

Personally, I've found this thread to be very helpful so far, and revealing about myself and others and Barbelith as a whole.
 
 
Smoothly
14:24 / 06.09.06
PW, I personally think we should keep discussion of what’s acceptable in terms of taste and decency to this thread.
 
 
paranoidwriter waves hello
14:28 / 06.09.06
Ahhh... You're right. Strong truth.
 
 
Olulabelle
14:40 / 06.09.06
It’s different because this is porn, isn’t it?

No.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
14:43 / 06.09.06
Susan, could you consider not doing what you just did with Mister Disco's post? It's a bit painful to read.

Otherwise, questions:

Am I the only person that it didn't really bother at all?

Probably not - have a look at this thread. A fair few people appear to have expressed a lack of botheration.

There’s an element of bridling at the injustice here, isn’t there?

I doubt it; I doubt that any male-identifying poster of significant prominence has not had some flirtatious approach from Kali at some point. I would be surprised if it hasn't happened to Flyboy. In the main, I think members have recognised that this is not a paradigm that would necessarily benefit either one of them, and maintained distance.

Being offtopic is explicitly tolerated in the Conversation/ And I don’t think it’s about going off topic because it wasn’t even off-topic.

The first of these observations is not as fully mapped out as you'd think. Have a look at recent developments in the Moderation Requests thread, where posts were being moved for deletion from the Conversation, one argument for which was that they were offtopic, although not _only_ that they were offtopic. It is, however, worth noting in this case that the introduction of putting the rat up the sexy drainpipe, to use Our Lady's truly horrifying phrase, was put into the Barbe-crush thread - that is, it was filling a thread on liking people for their contributions to Barbelith with offtopic posts about liking people because they have emailed you pics and you fancy them and would like to make the sex. We kind of have the photos thread for that, which has a far better pedigree of earcock.

I agree that this is probably not a Policy issue, anyway, unless we're prepared to argue that attention-seeking displays of needy het flirting are a form of harassment. I think that this particular piece is egregious, and its egregious because it's saddening, but people have the right to depress me on Barbelith as long as they don't do it in a way actively harmful to the board. If we move it to the Policy it might also siphon off the posts about this currently rotting "Your watch".

Incidentally, wankstaingate has been discussed at length, and is being discussed, in various other threads, most recently the most recent thread on "bullying". I suggest you take it up there, if you think it would be useful.
 
 
Olulabelle
14:55 / 06.09.06
Susan, you're basically implying that anyone who had issues with the comments in that thread has issues with pornography (which is a completely different discussion) rather than that they have problems with the personal discussion going on within the thread.
 
 
Kali, Queen of Kitteh
15:00 / 06.09.06
I thought this was going to die.
 
  

Page: 1(2)3

 
  
Add Your Reply