Let’s Add To The List Or Not

I’m going to go ahead and quote a portion of MA from the Ben Pickard Thread and expand on it with my opinion. MA was replying to one of Milly’s comment.

“Reading through the thread(edit: The Weekly Thread), and truly listening to those who voiced their concerns, those who educated and share valuable knowledgeable, it's pretty clear that it did not turn into a bloodbath as you suggest. Key thoughts and assumptions were pointed out and as stated several times, it was the beliefs behind it, not the person or poem itself." By MA

My reply:

^ I read through the thread and it does seem like a bloodbath ( more like a trial) at some points. I agree that Noura has every right to voice her feelings in regard to that piece being given an honorable mention, however, right after Hellon's first comment the targeting Maher should have ended. Or a Mod/someone else/me? should have open another thread to discuss why the poem was given an honorable mention. It's been a long time since i have been a judge so I don't remember everything, but I know there is a list of things that Janis has specify for judges to look for in poems. I mean, he doesn't want certain type of poems in the front page. Who makes sure these rules are followed? Does sexist pieces are allowed in the front page? IF not, it should be added to that list, no?

When I read Noura’s comment in the weekly thread, I thought she wanted to look into that issue. But I started getting confused as to why more and more people where posting what they could have posted in the poem itself.

So yeah Noura, i read your initial comment on that weekly thread as if you wanted to look into that issue. However, I couldn’t help but get confused as to why Jane, Abracadabra wrote what they could have posted in the poem itself instead of addressing Maher in the Weekly thread.

“Maher, I don't know who you are as a person otherwise, but this conversation that happened is not clever or enlightening, and frankly it's scary that you think this way.” By Jane

“Maher, mate, give yourself and other men a little more credit. You must think men are just brainless masses of slavering grunting grabbing ogling morons..” By Abracadabra

Then Mark brought up another piece written by Maher into the conversation. How is this not creating the idea that Maher is being target?

Then yes, Abracadabra made it clear that she didn’t care about Maher’s opinion and that instead the thread should focus on:

“Plus, Maher’s “opinion” is unfortunately not at all unique, so we can easily remove him as a person from our discussion, and focus on the issue itself: why is the policing of women’s sexuality so pervasive and entrenched in society, in both men and women?” by Abracadabra

However, after Hellon insisted that Maher deserved an opportunity to speak

“NO WE CAN'T...I want him to come on and tell us why he thinks this way...so do you, so do the others so please...don't disregard him just yet...

Maher...the podium is yours...” By Hellon

Abracadabra kind of agreed that this was about Maher

“But, Maher, by all means, go ahead. I didn’t want to make this about you, but people are insisting.” By Abracadabra

So the point I’m trying to make, and going back the portion I quoted MA, it’s that it was NOT CLEAR what was being discussed in the weekly thread.. whether the subject of Sexism or whether Maher was on Trial.

Even Maple joined the conversation some times ( May be three times?)

“What a woman wears or how she dances or where she dances is not the debate. Its the human mind that twists it as such that is the problem. As Maher stated its not a poem but a discussion between a coworker. This bothers me in many ways, on many things - but lets remain and state the obvious it is not a poem... I dont however feel Mauher should step up to say anything- He stated its not a poem and hes not on trial.” By Maple

“A debate is fine, picking apart a member on a public forum is not fine.” By Maple

“I try to protect homeless women now.... Wanna try and debate that? These women are disgraced for asking for some socks and deodorant because "All homeless people are drug addicts" please.... give me a damn break. I am not defending anyone. Nor will I ever. all I am saying is this is a poetry site and there are poems and such people post that I do not agree with nor do I read it, but I dont think the member should be labeled or brought on trial. That is how I feel. If I got offended but what I hear, read and visualize daily... then I would be offended every minute of every day.” By Maple

So, if I didn’t misunderstand Maple’s words, she also felt the way I feel when I read the Weekly thread, that Maher was on trial. And seems Ben felt the same way. And I could be mistaken but Milly did too.

To me that weekly thread is not educational, it’s full of misunderstandings. Not everyone was on the same page. I usually say that any thread that I open can go anywhere to any topic but this weekly thread showed me the importance of remaining within topic.

After reading over and over again, I still feel like the best approach to having dealt with expressing their feelings was to comment on the poem itself or contact the Poet directly instead of doing it in the Weekly. The judge might have read the comments and May have been put off from giving it an honorable mention. Anyone stumbling with that poem would have read different view points. Also, anyone posting a comment might have gotten a reply from the author (it sucks that we don’t get notified if someone replies). But we can always go back and see if there’s comments left. Anyways, A new thread should have been open to discuss what poems should go to the front page and another to add insight about sexism and racism.

The reason why I’m quoting is not to blame anyone but to make the point that it’s was definitely not clear what was happening. And just to clarify, I’m opening this thread to talk about what should go in the front page. I just wrote all of the above so you( general you) could see my thought process and how I arrived to certain conclusions.

Mods, what are the things a judge should look for in a poem subject wise? Should we restrict their choices more? I know there is a list of things a judge should look into but I forgot what it is.

Can we all respectfully discuss this?

Setting aside all The Who said Whats I think your actual question revolves around standards for judging.

Here is the relevant section from the new judge PM:

“ 3. Poems that should not be voted on:
- Your own poem (including one on which you collaborated, or from your alternate account)
- Collaborated poems IF nominated by one of the collaborators (including Club collabs)
- Two or more of the same poem (as in the case of collaborations).
- Poems from the explicit section (that require 18 and over viewers).
- Poems that plagiarize other poems (please notify any mod or report plagiarism anytime you run across it)
- Self-harm poems (but see section 4)

4. Regarding Self-harm poems:

-Though Janis did not wish to see poems of this type on the front page, we have determined that they ought to be allowed in special circumstances. However, they should ONLY be voted on in cases where the poems showcase true literary merit;
specifically DO NOT Vote for a Poem Which in Any Way Glorifies Self-harm or Harm to Others.
For example, poems describing the release of blood and the comfort found therein should be avoided. Poems describing the joy of OVERCOMING the urge to harm are legitimate candidates for voting. That leaves a lot in the grey area; use your best judgment or ask for guidance if needed.”

What guidelines should we give judges with regard to racist, sexist and other offensive works?

^ yes! Thanks that’s what I was referring. The judging standards.

This one is confusing: do you mean poem or poet?

-Two or more of the same poem (as in the case of collaborations).

I believe that's a holdover from back in the day when both parties of a collaboration would post the poem on their respective accounts. Nowadays one person would post the poem and add collab in the title, the site before the update allowed collabs to be linked to both parties of a collab but not anymore.

Getting back to sexist & racist poems, I like what we did with self-infliction: nothing glorifying it is allowed but struggling to overcome it is valid.

Doesn’t necessarily work as cleanly on these topics but we need to understand most sex/race biases problems are endemic & one must be made aware of his/her/their problems before being capable of changing.

A couple of questions for the mods.

Do you look at the nominations page each week?

When the judges vote for a poem do you read the poem to make sure it's acceptable as a potential front page winner?

If I’m hosting I do read each poem. Other weeks I’ll read more sporadically.

Naturally I am on the lookout. However, I did not realize how the poem really screamed sexism until Noura brought it to our attention. This lack of awareness on my part is why I’m asking for help to change how we do things.

Now, Hellon, question back at you: what guidelines would you recommend?

I'll be happy to answer your question after the other mods answer mine. MA hosted that week...so in Larry's words "I did not realise the poem really screamed of sexism until Noura brought it to our attention" Did you MA read all the poems the judges voted for before you announced the winners like Larry claims he does?

Luce, you bring up some valid questions about if we need to update our guidelines and what specifications should be made.

Hellon, when I host, I do typically read all poems, and the front page ones multiple times. Generally, it's throughout the week that I'll look into the nomination list, and as I believe I stated in the other thread, I had read the poem earlier and had some nuanced thoughts on it but didn't know how to articulate it. By the time it was Monday or whenever I posted, it honestly slipped my mind and I didn't pay as much attention as I should. Obviously responsible for that too since I should have been more focused on it.

You are dodging again, Hellon. Come on and provide some constructive input that can help everyone.

I guess yeah, nothing glorifying sexist and racist poems will do, but that’s going to be hard to identify.

It’s not like a judge will have videos to watch and to inform him/her what’s sexist and racist and what not.

I guess we can open a new thread focus just on sexism and another focus just on racism. We can try to debate and bring important information to the surface and from there determine or come up with a set of questions that could help a judge identify what is glorifying a sexist/racist poem or not.

Not sure if I’m making sense.

You make excellent sense, Luce. Perhaps a new thread for figuring out how to do this is a good idea.

This post makes a lot of sense to be honest. It was necessary I believe to bring some points into spotlight. I agree that not everyone was on the same page on the other thread but maybe this could lead to some sort of a change that we need here. Maybe..

And to be honest no. I don't really read every single poem every single week. I read through the nominations and double check if the votes are cast in place or not. Sometimes that's all I do. Focusing on HMs and front page poems. On other weeks I do read the majority of the poems but I don't really read with the intention of hunting down whether the nominated poems went against the site rules. Just being honest here. I guess I took it for granted that all senior members won't nominate such poems or that judges won't pick poems that they shouldn't. So if I was hosting that week..maybe I would have skipped Maher's poem if it didn't receive any vote and wouldn't have noticed that it's a sexist poem or a poem of controversy if I shall say.

Not dodging anything at all Larry. If something needs fixing you have to find out where it's broken first of all, that's all I was trying to do.

I'm going to leave it there.

“I'll be happy to answer your question after the other mods answer mine. “ by Hellon

^so Hellon,

Larry, MA, and Rania have answered. Do you need the rest of the mods to answer your question in order for you to answer Larry’s question? Or would it be enough for you to find out what’s broken with those three replies?

Aside from waiting for their answers, do you have any suggestions?

“Perhaps a new thread for figuring out how to do this is a good idea”

I’ve been thinking and thinking and thinking about it and I arrived go the conclusion that it might not be a good idea. The issue is that based on the outcome I realized we are not ready to discuss sexism and racism because in order to do that we have to let go of our Egos and truly focus on the issue. This implies putting ourselves in a very vulnerable spot. If we start discussing about these topics, I’m afraid we might end up with the same outcome or even worse than what happened in the Weekly contest. I do not want more bullying and labeling people to happen.

So my only suggestion is to please, if anyone finds a poem offensive, be respectful and comment on the poem. Be sincere and share why the poem is offensive. If the author reacts in a negative way and starts insulting you, take it to the mods.

I hope that any judge might read the comments and realized that if they thought about giving it an honorable mention, that they might change their opinion.

Also, if a poem gets lots of comments, it might grab the attention of many so it’ll be easier to spot a poem and stop it from making it to the winners section or from getting an honorable mention.

I’ve been in the lab next to a numb rat all day, so I can’t concentrate enough to read through every post. But I really like the idea of starting a thread that discusses when any content might be considered racist/sexist/homophobic/xenophobic or offensive in general.

"Or would it be enough for you to find out what’s broken with those three replies?"

^^^^^

Thanks to the mods who did reply and yes, I do think it's clear from these replies that the method relied on at the moment isn't working or, at least, didn't work that particular week.

From the list of guidelines that Larry provided, and are given to the judges, we can see that there is no mention of material with sexist/racist or other offensive works so, as Larry suggested, I think something needs to be added in there. I also think this should include a clause asking judges to communicate with a mod if they are unsure if something is inappropriate before voting.

May I also suggest if a member sees material which they feel is offensive, no matter the subject, they approach a mod via pm rather than on the main boards to discuss the problem. The mod could then discretely read the material and, if they too find it inappropriate then the author could be contacted via pm to discuss it further. I believe people should have the right to express themselves so maybe have some warning in the title notifying that the poem may offend some (this giving the reader a choice) or maybe the mods could add something to the bottom of the material saying it is not eligible for nomination.

Is the explicit section still around? I can't see it anywhere. If it's still there maybe this type of material could be relocated there to avoid confusion about nominations in the future.

All just Food for Thought.

What guidelines should we give judges with regard to racist, sexist and other offensive works?

^^

Poetry is an art form that is open to all. To start enforcing guidelines would be wrong.

That being said, by writing anything offensive you open yourself up to the possibility of being challenged.
Those who find the writing offensive have the right to challenge also.

Or to ignore.

LOL!!!!

Hellon, I love your response. It is constructive and very on point.

I had to laugh that you cannot see the explicit section any more. It is because the site is working!

You see, by your profile you are only 1 year old! ;8-)

Hellon, some thought-provoking points here! I think it will be beneficial to have a "tighter" system as to reporting to mods in regard to any possibly problematic content.

The other day, I browsed Allpoetry and Hello Poetry for a bit, and they had pretty lax rules from what I could tell, most of it being about respecting members but not going into further detail. I personally would like a bit more detail outlined in the judge guidelines, so it can actually be addressed instead of a poem being ignored but members secretly feeling uncomfortable etc.

Regarding something being "offensive", I have to say it's a slippery slope about free speech and censorship, but I don't think it should be. Free speech should never exempt a person from consequences. I can only speak from experience, but some people in my life who shout about free speech don't realize that, while they may have the right to say whatever, the demand for more free speech is often weaponized and used as obvious or even subtle discrimination. Someone saying they don't have to tolerate someone else and hiding behind free speech to act like they've done nothing wrong. Like they are irritated that they actively find a way to hate and belittle people.

I also think something being offensive gets misconstrued. Being offended by someone or something is SO valid. It has nothing to do with being too sensitive or "hey just ease up" when it's real concerns that have to do with someone's mere existence or systemic racism (which we NEED to talk about). Laws and institutions are still in place that target people of color or present them with disproportionate options. The idea that "oh well everyone gets offended these days" neglects to address WHY people are upset and usually invalidates someone's struggle or their reason for being angry or outspoken about an injustice. In regard to possibly moving a poem to the explicit section if it's too offensive, I think that's a total cop-out and would encourage someone to post whatever they want regardless of consequences. Like if someone wrote a poem about how immigrants need to leave the country and go back to where they came from, and the poem holds nothing else, just that, then the poet claims they were just ranting and it's free speech, I would have a major issue with that. That's not free speech. That is open xenophobia.

Some ideas that I would like to see:

- something specifically mentioning not highlighting poems that target or harass someone based on their gender identity, expression and sexuality
- as well as not highlighting poems that glorify harmful stereotypes or misconceptions about someone's culture/country (I would see it differently if the poet is from that culture and used quotations or something to address the stereotypes, rather than a poet attacking a group of people and that work perpetuating possible hate speech or negative connotations)
- I think prohibiting xenophobic content is important, and using that word, as there is a lot of anti-immigration or anti-refugee rhetoric on social media in general
- I would love to see rules that specify racism will not be tolerated, same with mentioning white supremacy too, since it really should not be a controversial topic

I'm so not going to tell you how long I've wondered what happened to the explicit section LMAO!

I should think everyone is free to express themselves here, whether in poetry, comments or discussion forums.

If you write in a public space, you are open to your content receiving a public response, especially if it contains themes of sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, etc.
Perhaps this should be the type of clause/reminder every writer has to check before submitting their poem. Moderators can also place content notes as needed above poems and threads that may cause distress.

I was glad that Noura brought up the sexist poem in the public forums. She only brought it up once it was awarded an HM. Individuals will always write awful and offensive crap. But when the entire system supports that crap, that is a collective failure that needs to be addressed to the whole, to judges, to moderators, to nominators, to the community. We are made aware of issues, we all learn from our mistakes together, we are better equipped in future. Or we leave, whatever works best. And in this case, the author heard from members of the community, not just those in authority, and removed the poem himself.

I hope no one lets the fear of ruffling feathers and causing DrAmA get in the way of speaking up about important things.