Note about gendered threads

[Butterfly]

Please note that any gender specific threads are still to be, in spirit, inclusive.

For anybody who identifies as gender fluid, trans, non-binary etc., you are still very much welcome to participate. Please pick whichever "side" you are most comfortable with or amend the rules to fit your specific situation.

We do not tolerate discrimination of any kind.

If you have other suggestions on how to improve the language in these types of threads to be more inclusive, please let me know below.

 

[picaboo]

What about dicks vs cunts? That seems fairly gender neutral

 

[Pluky]

What about dicks vs cunts? That seems fairly gender neutral

I was thinking the same. Like when I made an "F only last pic" on GD, it's specifically for people who want to see boobs and pussy and no cocks (like me), regardless of what pronouns they want to use - it's to not struggle going through 10 pages to find ONE female post, as males are already everywhere. If not for that the specification is rather useless

 

[The Brat Princess]

What about dicks vs cunts? That seems fairly gender neutral

You would think so, but no. For those with body dismorphia (which while mostly ascribed to trans people is not specific to them) it is a the equivalent of a reminder of the thing that makes them uncomfortable in their bodies. Unfortunately when it comes to gendered language it is going to be a dificault one because gendering excludes non binary, and going by physical attributes of gender will will make some uncomfortable.

Hounestly I do think the choose your side as it stands is more comfortable for me than dicks Vs cunts. And for the most part is inclusive. Maybe the best option is a 3 way Vs if that can work, girls Vs boys Vs fluids I don't know. But I am glad to see the discussion being had in any case. Only way we can improve is through healthy discussion.

 

[Guv'nor]

What about dicks vs cunts? That seems fairly gender neutral

Poles vs Holes?

 

[The Brat Princess]

Poles vs Holes?

Same issue as stated above ^^^^

 

[Pluky]

Inclusion unfortunately tends to exclude heterosexual people who might feel uncomfortable playing with a specific biological gender/genitalia. That might be a painful reminder but you can't make people ignore what's there at the expense of their own comfort and desires, I think all types of threads should exist, inclusive and non inclusive ones, and to each their own.

 

[The Brat Princess]

Inclusion unfortunately tends to exclude heterosexual people who might feel uncomfortable playing with a specific biological gender/genitalia. That might be a painful reminder but you can't make people ignore what's there at the expense of their own comfort and desires, I think all types of threads should exist, inclusive and non inclusive ones, and to each their own.

That is exactly what I said. When it comes to this topic it is complex. But I am not saying genitalia should be ignored, also biological gender is incorrect you mean biological sex, sex is biology gender is expression. And also biological genitalia means nothing if someone has had GRS. Again I point out this is more complicated than that and people will never fit into categories neatly.

 

[The Brat Princess]

Ok so I have taken a little time to think bout how I want to say what I want to say. Sorry if this gets chaotic and rambly at times that is how my brain works lol.

Plucky has a valid point that in some cases exclusivity is warrented, some tasks are genital spacific and would require adaption, also peoples prefrances to one or the other is not inherently bad. However the way I hae always viewed the world is that I should do the most possible good while causeing the least possible harm. This is because nothing is perfect and every benit to someone is a detriment to another. So when it comes to this topic I am wholy on the Butterfly side that we should be as inclusive as possible, I would argue that it being more dificalt to ind a cisgeder female post in an inclusive thread douse less harm than excluding trans people and non binery people. At the end of the day even if it was exclusive to cis women only, finding a sutible play partner may still require the same search (all be it shorter)

I feel as though if something is to be made exclusive it should be easy to justify the reasons that is a benifit and why it douse more good than harm, if that cant be justifyed then it should be inclusive. While there are many that desire exclusiity from a gueinuine place and are not aiming to do harm it is all to easy for that to be used to justify the next segragation of excusivity.

But the point my mind keeps running back to is that being incluisve of all in no way forces anyone to play/set tasks for anyone included, that is still a personlal choice we each get to make on where and when we post. But by being exclusive we are forcing people out of a thread. If I am to be forced out one I would like to know it is for good reason. Unfortunatly this is an inperfect world and humans are inperfect creatures and no matter how we do it, it will never be perfect. But we can always do better and I would like to think we can and will.

 

[Guv'nor]

Quick thought, would it be possible to filter thread replies by tags relating to biological sex and gender identity? Then you could include everyone to post, but then people could easily narrow it down to the type of play partner they are looking for?

 

[The Brat Princess]

Quick thought, would it be possible to filter thread replies by tags relating to biological sex and gender identity? Then you could include everyone to post, but then people could easily narrow it down to the type of play partner they are looking for?

My question to that would be, would such a system improve things? Datering sites do the same and I think it is more harmful. The beauty of a forum like this is its not all about play. If you can filter out what you think you don't want you might miss something you didnt know you did want. Not saying it's a good or bad idea, just the devil's advocate of it that there is benifit to seeing all.

 

[MessyAshy]

I've not seen a lot of things that really need to be gendered, tbh. If it's about teams then you can just as well say team A and team B, and people join whichever team they want, or are assigned a team at random. You could have team rice vs team pasta, team beach vs team forest, team meat vs team fish... And for tasks, just do X with whatever genitalia you got to work with and have fun. Team sub and team dom works too, and switches can join as whatever they feel like at the time, if it's about which team gets to do what to the other team.

Though maybe that's just me speaking from a perspective of "i don't really mind who typed these words on my screen as long as they are fun and loving humans."

Also, i would be careful with filters, because you can get into overfiltering. Not only would it be harder to discover new things you didn't know you liked, but it's not easy to post as well. I have seen sites where you can filter, but no one uses it because they don't want to do the whole checklist every time they post like "This task is by A gender, for B gender, it contains fetish C, D, and a tiny bit of E, it takes between F and G hours to complete..." It turns the act of posting into a tedious chore. And it ends up not even working because some people add tagsto their posts, and some don't, and you just miss stuff either way.

 

[baloo]

Inclusion unfortunately tends to exclude heterosexual people who might feel uncomfortable playing with a specific biological gender/genitalia. That might be a painful reminder but you can't make people ignore what's there at the expense of their own comfort and desires, I think all types of threads should exist, inclusive and non inclusive ones, and to each their own.

Respectuflly, I disagree.
Inclusion does not mean everyone's likes and tastes are met or catered for, it means no-one is excluded base on attributes that have nothing to do with the thing you do. Yes there are people that limit themselves or are limited to certain groups, and that is totally fine, but it is my firm opinion that under no circumstances should that be a reason to flat out exclude people. If someone is uncomfortable by the mere existence of a person not in their interest bubble, or comfort zone, then I think by all means that person should feel it. It goes the other way, too: When something is meant to be inclusive, no-one should be excluded by the intensity of what is happening - if someone is overly aggressive in making advances, deliberately making someone uncomfortable just because they are heterosexual, that is not okay either.
I think it is perfectly reasonable, and beneficial to all to expect participants to be open-minded and progressive. Being able to tolerate people outside of one's comfort zone or personal bubble is something we desperately need to make our civilization civilized.

 

[picaboo]

I have a idea! How about @Inkwarden just assigns us all new genders and we all just have to fight for our randomly assigned one