Too many male mods here and no woman section

Tell us how you think the forum can be improved. We will listen.
alan...
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:37 pm

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Post by alan... » Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:32 am

Kim O'Hara wrote:
pilgrim wrote:How about one for Asian Buddhists? and one for Youths? Unless it serves a clearly identifiable purpose, I don't see good reason to divide and subdivide ourselves.
I agree.
I will go a step further: if something can't be said to everyone, it is possibly (probably?) not Right Speech.
pilgrim wrote:When posting here, I don't even notice the gender behind the monikers used.

Notice? A lot of the time you can't even know unless the member has mentioned it.
Just quickly - no checking or anything - can you tell me the gender of skydancer, catmoon, Ayu, songhill, Astus, Chris, seekeroftruth, termite, jrh001, pink_trike, fig tree? They are all good DW usernames. :thinking:
My own username is gender-ambiguous and some of you may remember that I posted regularly to e-Sangha for a year before anyone knew my gender. I suggest that means it can't be terribly important.

Finally, even when the member gives the information, you (sadly) can't be sure they are telling the truth - and a rule or policy that can't be monitored or policed is a waste of time and energy, IMHO.

:namaste:
Kim

and one for people who like sports, people who hate sports, for people who suffer from baldness, people with big feet, and so on and so on. you are absolutely right: right speech transcends gender on every level. i can't think of a single step on the eightfold path that would be more appropriate for one gender over another. men and women meditate the same, practice mindfulness the same, use right speech the same and so on. saying otherwise or implying it by separating the genders is totally absurd.

all differences are delusion.

not to mention i would be very sad to not here the voice of any of the women on here if they stuck to a women only section. and as you pointed out, most of the women on here i can't even tell are women! so it's not about not hearing women, it's about not hearing PEOPLE. a chunk of people would disappear to a separated section and i wouldn't get to hear them as much. we are all equally valuable and should be encouraged to share with everyone equally.

alan...
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:37 pm

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Post by alan... » Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:39 am

not to mention real life! if this attitude was held in the world today i wouldn't have heard all the wonderful teachings of the bhikkhunis at the zen temple i used to attend! and ayya khema and shaila catherine are two of my favorite authors, if there was a big separation attitude in the world like this for me i wouldn't have read their books as instead of being in the general "buddhism" section in the book store they would have been in the "womens" section! and i wouldn't have found so much wonderful knowledge.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 20167
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Post by retrofuturist » Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:41 am

Greetings,
AN 5.200 wrote:"Furthermore, there is the case where the mind of a monk, when attending to self-identity, doesn't leap up at self-identity, doesn't grow confident, steadfast, or released in self-identity. But when attending to the cessation of self-identity, his mind leaps up at the cessation of self-identity, grows confident, steadfast, & released in the cessation of self-identity. When his mind is rightly-gone, rightly developed, has rightly risen above, gained release, and become disjoined from self-identity, then whatever fermentations, torments, & fevers there are that arise in dependence on self-identity, he is released from them. He does not experience that feeling. This is expounded as the escape from self-identity.
Metta,
Retro. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3375
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Post by Mr Man » Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:09 am

I think it is worth remembering the context that originally brought this thread about. If a member of some length of time who has made a fair contribution, feels uncomfortable or as if they feel they have been treated without sensitivity or whatever, I think we should reflect on the situation and see if there is a need or possibility for change.

I would also note that there were two interrelated monastic orders created not one combined order. And although I haven't really looked at the nuns rule, as I understand that there are some rules that are gender specific and rules that were put in place to protect women from men.

User avatar
Dan74
Posts: 3012
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Post by Dan74 » Tue Jan 15, 2013 10:27 am

Mr Man wrote:I think it is worth remembering the context that originally brought this thread about. If a member of some length of time who has made a fair contribution, feels uncomfortable or as if they feel they have been treated without sensitivity or whatever, I think we should reflect on the situation and see if there is a need or possibility for change.
:goodpost:

I think while it's definitely worthwhile to examine how we form identity around gender and cling to it (a lifelong pursuit?) in the meantime, some measures may help make a place comfortable for both genders. So encouraging female members and having more female mods may be some of them. Worth considering at any rate. As for women only fora, well if there was a real momentum for that I would support it - I can see there being some topics that women would feel better about discussing if no men were present. But I am not sure this momentum exists now.
_/|\_

User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 5800
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Post by Aloka » Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:40 pm

Dan74 wrote:I think while it's definitely worthwhile to examine how we form identity around gender and cling to it (a lifelong pursuit?) in the meantime, some measures may help make a place comfortable for both genders. So encouraging female members and having more female mods may be some of them. .
As a female member myself, I haven't noticed women generally being discouraged here, so I don't really understand why they need to be encouraged any more than men are. I also think that if a woman is able to take part in a robust debate she doesn't need to be treated differently, or like fluffy pink candy-floss just because she's female ! .

Regarding mods, my personal opinion is that they should be chosen not for their gender but for their calm and reasoned communication skills, ability to take a neutral rather than an emotional stance in disputes - and also have a good knowledge of the Dhamma.


:anjali:

gendun
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 10:49 am
Location: Guildford UK

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Post by gendun » Tue Jan 15, 2013 1:29 pm

It hadnt struck me to wonder about the gender difference until I read this thread..It has now caught my attention. Is it known what proportion of regular posters are women ? And how many moderators ?
Just out of interest.
Gendun P. Brownlow.
Karma Kagyu student.

Justsit
Posts: 648
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 6:41 pm

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Post by Justsit » Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:47 pm

No reply to this question as asked previously.
An old "what's your sex/gender?" thread had 72% male, 27% female, and 1 transgendered person. No notation of gender of mods. And only 64 respondents out of 6500+ members.
Not exactly statistically significant.
My guess would be closer to 95%+ male posters.

gendun
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 10:49 am
Location: Guildford UK

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Post by gendun » Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:54 pm

Thank you Justsit
Interesting.
Gendun P. Brownlow.
Karma Kagyu student.

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6629
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Post by Cittasanto » Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:44 pm

Aloka wrote:
Dan74 wrote:I think while it's definitely worthwhile to examine how we form identity around gender and cling to it (a lifelong pursuit?) in the meantime, some measures may help make a place comfortable for both genders. So encouraging female members and having more female mods may be some of them. .
As a female member myself, I haven't noticed women generally being discouraged here, so I don't really understand why they need to be encouraged any more than men are. I also think that if a woman is able to take part in a robust debate she doesn't need to be treated differently, or like fluffy pink candy-floss just because she's female ! .

Regarding mods, my personal opinion is that they should be chosen not for their gender but for their calm and reasoned communication skills, ability to take a neutral rather than an emotional stance in disputes - and also have a good knowledge of the Dhamma.


:anjali:
:goodpost: :goodpost: :goodpost:
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6629
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Post by Cittasanto » Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:53 pm

Mr Man wrote:I think it is worth remembering the context that originally brought this thread about. If a member of some length of time who has made a fair contribution, feels uncomfortable or as if they feel they have been treated without sensitivity or whatever, I think we should reflect on the situation and see if there is a need or possibility for change.

I would also note that there were two interrelated monastic orders created not one combined order. And although I haven't really looked at the nuns rule, as I understand that there are some rules that are gender specific and rules that were put in place to protect women from men.
This involved two long standing members with only a week between them joining the site.
The monastic set up wasn't intended for laypeople, but that is a simple and correct assessment, although the only rules I can think of involve requisites.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

User avatar
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Post by beeblebrox » Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:48 pm

alan... wrote:all differences are delusion.
Hi Alan, I think that we should take care that we don't live in clouds.

Retro posted something about not grasping self-identity... I'm not sure how he reads it, but I don't think it means that everyone suddenly becomes similar like oatmeal, and that their needs also become similar. That's absurd. I think it just means that we don't paste an identity over an experience, anymore.

What does the experience tell us? Does it tell us that everything (or everyone) is the same? Is everyone treated in the same way? Do you actually see this in real life, even at a Buddhist temple or monastery? What about all of the different ways of looking at the practice in between traditions, or even within the same tradition?

You don't see the separation in between the monks and nuns, and the different ways that they handle their affairs? Are you familiar with the way that nuns are required to act around the monks? Are there any agreement about whether the bhikkhuni lineage are valid in Theravada, even when we look at the way it's practiced only in Western? Not to burst your bubble, there are even some western bhikkhus who don't think that there should be bhikkhunis.

I think that when something is said (such as the Buddha Dhamma having one taste), and it isn't shown to be the case, then it's mere idealism, wishful thinking, or even hypocrisy. We should be careful with these in our dhamma practice.

We should always look at the reality the way it is... learn how to live within it skillfully, and with peace, without any greed, aversion (especially to the differences), and delusion (especially with the idea that everything should be seen as the same... as if they're all the one body of Brahma, or some nonsense like that).

Of course, I'm not trying to argue that there should be a women's only section... but I think it's overreaction to say that these would draw all the women away from us, and that they wouldn't be interested in participate with all of us anymore. Let's not worry like that, Alan.

:anjali:

User avatar
BubbaBuddhist
Posts: 640
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:55 am
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Contact:

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Post by BubbaBuddhist » Wed Jan 16, 2013 5:48 pm

retrofuturist wrote::goodpost:

There's certain topics I won't touch with a bargepole. You know the kind I mean - the ones that no matter what you say, someone is going to project their dissatisfaction with the world onto you.

One bitten, twice shy.

Metta,
Retro. :)
You have achieved enlightenment, Paul. Why didn't you tell me? :tongue:

BuB
Author of Redneck Buddhism: or Will You Reincarnate as Your Own Cousin?

alan...
Posts: 824
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:37 pm

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Post by alan... » Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:21 pm

beeblebrox wrote:
alan... wrote:all differences are delusion.
Hi Alan, I think that we should take care that we don't live in clouds.

Retro posted something about not grasping self-identity... I'm not sure how he reads it, but I don't think it means that everyone suddenly becomes similar like oatmeal, and that their needs also become similar. That's absurd. I think it just means that we don't paste an identity over an experience, anymore.

What does the experience tell us? Does it tell us that everything (or everyone) is the same? Is everyone treated in the same way? Do you actually see this in real life, even at a Buddhist temple or monastery? What about all of the different ways of looking at the practice in between traditions, or even within the same tradition?

You don't see the separation in between the monks and nuns, and the different ways that they handle their affairs? Are you familiar with the way that nuns are required to act around the monks? Are there any agreement about whether the bhikkhuni lineage are valid in Theravada, even when we look at the way it's practiced only in Western? Not to burst your bubble, there are even some western bhikkhus who don't think that there should be bhikkhunis.

I think that when something is said (such as the Buddha Dhamma having one taste), and it isn't shown to be the case, then it's mere idealism, wishful thinking, or even hypocrisy. We should be careful with these in our dhamma practice.

We should always look at the reality the way it is... learn how to live within it skillfully, and with peace, without any greed, aversion (especially to the differences), and delusion (especially with the idea that everything should be seen as the same... as if they're all the one body of Brahma, or some nonsense like that).

Of course, I'm not trying to argue that there should be a women's only section... but I think it's overreaction to say that these would draw all the women away from us, and that they wouldn't be interested in participate with all of us anymore. Let's not worry like that, Alan.

:anjali:

we are on a forum chief. not in a temple. on a forum all differences are utterly imagined. if a woman posts and never openly says "i'm a woman" or otherwise implies it, no one would know. the same goes for guys obviously, if you don't say or imply your gender, it remains ambiguous and irrelevant. separating people by gender on a forum is absurd. in real life there is a lot of conflict about it, the pali canon talks about it and some temples today go by those rules and others don't even let women ordain. that's life for you. no bubbles burst. in reality though, men and women can follow the same path to reach enlightenment. separation may be a good idea in temples so that there is no urge for people to start fraternizing in ways that are not conducive to dhamma and lead to lust. for example in the zen temple i go to the men and women are separated by housing but they share the temple and grounds. this way everything is fair and equal but they're not sharing a roof which could promote inappropriate behavior. but other than situations like that separation is very backwards. women should not have to follow the rules in the vinaya about how they act around male venerables and all that. those rules were only created so the buddha and his sangha wouldn't be washed away in a flood of outrage for having allowed women to ordain. today he wouldn't have made those rules but back then women were considered lesser than men and allowing them to ordain was a huge deal, he created those rules just to keep the peace. even so, he was still showing major compassion and was super progressive for 500 BC.

as far as your order: "Let's not worry like that, Alan". some posts of the women on here would end up in the womens only forum and would not be seen by me. this is a fact. not all of them but this would create threads not visible to me or depending on how it works, threads that i wouldn't be able to share in the discussion. and surely, as much as on the regular forum, some would be fantastic and i would be missing out by not being able to see them or be involved in them, as well as the rest of the men. this would be a shame as i want to be able to hear what everyone has to say. and it is something to worry about. so i reject your order and retain my freedom to worry how i please.
Last edited by alan... on Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Mawkish1983
Posts: 1286
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:46 am
Location: Essex, UK

Re: Too many male mods here and no woman section

Post by Mawkish1983 » Wed Jan 16, 2013 8:34 pm

alan... wrote:those rules were only created so the buddha and his sangha wouldn't be washed away in a flood of outrage for having allowed women to ordain. today he wouldn't have made those rules but back then women were considered lesser than men and allowing them to ordain was a huge deal, he created those rules just to keep the peace. even so, he was still showing major compassion and was super progressive for 500 BC.
Off topic, I know, but I'm interested about this idea that the Buddha wouldn't have set the same vinaya rules now as he did then, and the reasons put forward to explain why. Could anyone point me at some relevant reading about this idea?

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests