Don't make offensive comments on Gawker. They're not appreciated.

"mcseanerson" (mcseanerson)
12/30/2013 at 21:59 • Filed to: None

Earlier today I made an !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! on a !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . I made a joke about how women belong in the passenger seat of sports cars. I watched the video of the lady winning the Audi R8 and noticed she ran straight to the passenger seat and not the drivers seat. I thought it was odd. I also thought it was funny. I commented in a rude way about how I thought it was funny. Lots of people recommended it and others commented on it as well.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Then it was gone. No explanation. No warning. I could only find it through my notifications. Apparently I offended someone. What's worse though is I did not know I had offended anyone or who I may have offended. I had no opportunity to apologize to anyone I may have offended. I had no chance to work it out and explain my views to someone else while they explained theirs to me. That is my favorite thing about poking and prodding on the internet is getting to really talk to people sometimes and elaborate on our views and how they make us similar and how they make us different and how we can walk away from a possibly bad situation with a mutual sense of respect.

It reminded me of !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! Only I never got to talk to the person/s I offended. I suppose we can't blame Jalopnik or Gawker as a whole. This is the way of the internet and the rest of the media in the modern age. If someone says something offensive or controversial rather than deal with it directly and work out what was wrong with either sides view the media hides it and distances itself from anything that might resemble accountability.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Update: Now I've been grayed out. Let my tale serve as a warning to the rest of you. Make a joke at the expense of the wrong group and it will cost you commenting privileges. Make sure are all your jokes are at the expense of gawker approved groups.

DISCUSSION (96)

Bad Idea Hat > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:07

I know you were trolling, but someone disagrees with your opinion.

Kinja'd!!!

IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:07

I remember that comment. It was a dick comment and it deserved to be removed. Casual sexist jokes like that are not funny. I'm a little sad it was made by an opponaut. There is no room for poking and prodding and mutual respect with your comment, it was blatantly sexist and offensive.

Laird Andrew Neby Bradleigh > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:09

You should get Stef and her Puffalump to post what you wrote... Let's see what happens then :)

IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK > Bad Idea Hat
12/30/2013 at 22:11

I hate this whole recent trend of "I can get away with saying incredibly offensive things by just claiming I was trolling." "Trolling" is not an acceptable excuse for anything.

Tom McParland > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:12

Yeah sexism probably not the best form coming from Oppo, I like to think we are better than that. But then again in was also feeling "trollish" today and made a "Thanks Obama" joke that was hit and miss.

TheBloody, Oppositelock lives on in our shitposts. > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:20

That's not how we do things these days, it's better to be all passive aggressive about it. Some how that's a better approach...

Also I got it was a off colour joke for the sake of being off colour.

Travis Okulski > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:22

I'm the one who dismissed the comment. It was rude, troll-y, offensive, and demeaning. Worst part is that it wasn't even funny.

If you're going to be rude, at least be original and funny. Don't make a shit joke on a lame stereotype that you already know was offensive.

Roberto G. > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:28

I think that your comment was not offensive but a clear provocation, and the dumbs took the bait. On the contrary, I found it funny, intelligent and perfect to describe the winner's personality. Whoever sees other meanings in it, is the actual dumb troll. And deleting it was an error. A big error. But this is the price we have to pay, for writing on a free blog. Free because we do not pay, not free in the sense of freedom, that actually is quite lacking.

mcseanerson > Bad Idea Hat
12/30/2013 at 22:33

I don't think any less of women drivers, further down in my comment without being confronted or guilted or any other way coerced I said that I consider my wife to be a better driver than I am.

mcseanerson > Travis Okulski
12/30/2013 at 22:34

I would rather be called out for it than just be dismissed.

IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:36

Saying that you are not sexist because your wife is a better driver than you is the same as claiming you can't be racist because you have a black friend.

mcseanerson > IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK
12/30/2013 at 22:36

I don't actually like trolling and I've never really sided that well with it, it's just the closest thing the internet had to how I act. I'm ornery, I don't so much want to be offensive as much as I want to joke around. If I hurt peoples feelings now or any other time I typically apologize.

Travis Okulski > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:37

Because reasoning with trolls on the internet is a time honored tradition that works so well. Like the constructive discussions people have with YouTube commenters!

No calling out. No warning. You troll = You dismissed. Done.

mcseanerson > Laird Andrew Neby Bradleigh
12/30/2013 at 22:39

If Stef or any other female Jalop was offended I would apologize directly and I also make a general apology here if anyone took offense by it.

Laird Andrew Neby Bradleigh > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:41

That was not what I meant :) And I can't ever imagine that Stef or Skay would be offended.. Them girls be more bad ass than we guys could ever wish :)

IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:42

"it's just the closest thing the internet had to how I act. I'm an asshole"

Fixed that for you.

mcseanerson > TheBloody, Oppositelock lives on in our shitposts.
12/30/2013 at 22:42

I don't deal well with stuff like that. I need to be addressed directly and have people lay it out what they want. Like Travis's comment up there, made me feel a lot better and also kind of upset that he was offended by it. I thought about it for a bit before I added the "where she belongs bit at the end." In the end I decided that it made the comment over the top and hopefully people would realize it shouldn't be taken seriously.

mcseanerson > IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK
12/30/2013 at 22:44

If that's how you feel.

IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:45

It was offensive even before you put the "where she belongs" bit.

Here's a protip for you: Anytime in include the words "typical woman" where you stereotype half the human race, guess what? It's offensive.

Ian Duer (320b) > Tom McParland
12/30/2013 at 22:45

The unfortunate thing about the internet is that random people can easily read most stuff and have no idea of the commentator's personality or intent.

Example: around people who know me well I will occasionally cross lines for the sake of it, like saying "you make it sound like group x are real people or something". Seriously saying that would be completely out of character. To anyone who didn't know me quite well I'd sound like a bigot. It's a dangerous form of humor that can be misinterpreted easily and with severe negative consequences depending on the situation.

TheBloody, Oppositelock lives on in our shitposts. > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:46

It's gawker, you expect too much.

Taylor Hedgie > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:46

I'm all about rustling jimmies, but that comment was all kinds of distasteful.

PS9 > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:47

Then it was gone. No explanation. No warning.

You are not entitled to an explanation or a warning.

I suppose we can't blame Jalopnik or Gawker as a whole.

We cannot blame Jalopnik or Gawker at all. This platform is privately owned. They are not at all obligated to support or disseminate your opinions, joking or not, trolling or not. You do not own this website. They do. They are completely within their rights to arbitrarily silence you when you say something objectionable, regardless of the motive.

...the media hides it and distances itself from anything that might resemble accountability.

'The Media' is not accountable to you. Gawker has 0% responsibility to explain actions it and its agents are well within their rights to take against you. Honestly, I'm glad your comment got dismissed. Look around you; the automotive scene no matter what subculture you want to pick within it, is pretty much a sausage fest, and this shitty, bigoted, backward-ass, retrograde, 1950s era 'herp derp, git back in the kitchen bitch' attitude is a huge part of the reason why. I want more women indulging in the culture of cars. If that means less idiotic, offensive, and trollish commentary, then good. Nothing of value will be lost in that trade.

IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK > PS9
12/30/2013 at 22:49

This, a million times this.

Tom McParland > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:53

In light of Travis's comment please take that as a reminder that you are a representative of the Oppo community. While I don't think you really meant any malice by it as a moderator I do feel the need to give you a warning in that regard. I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt that it was just a bad attempt at trolling and you understand that is not how we roll here.

mcseanerson > Travis Okulski
12/30/2013 at 22:54

If we write people off and don't try to reason with them then we will be left with a bunch of unreasonable people. I try to explain my thoughts and words and actions. I would much rather see something like thread on the turbo stingray I linked to where two people were arguing and then the guy who was being offensive realized he was being excessively offensive and apologized.

You never get to see people apologize on the internet. It's like a double rainbow or something.

PanchoVilleneuve ST > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 22:54

A big part of the problem was it wasn't funny.

area man > IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK
12/30/2013 at 22:57

I like you.

mcseanerson > PS9
12/30/2013 at 23:00

The part about accountability was accountability for me not accountability to me.

As far as the demeaning attitude, I apologize if you or anyone else found it offensive. It wasn't meant like that. I by no means feel that anyone should feel barred from car culture.

IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 23:02

Honestly fuck off dude. You keep acting like you are somehow the damaged party here and that people owe it to you to have a conversation with a sexist troll. You are not a person who deserves sympathy or an explanation in this situation. Just look at the title of the post you put here: "Don't make offensive comments on Gawker. They're not appreciated." You clearly recognized that your comment was offensive, I would hope you recognize that offensive comments shouldn't be appreciated anywhere, hence why they are offensive. I also like how you seem to be trying to distance yourself from common trolls yet you put a giant trollface on the top of this post. The only difference between you and a common troll is that you somehow think you're better than common trolls, guess what? You're not.

IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK > Tom McParland
12/30/2013 at 23:04

Read the rest of his 'explanations' I don't think he deserves the benefit of the doubt. He still thinks he was somehow slighted by having his comment dismissed and that he deserved an explanation. The mere fact that he made a post on oppo complaining that his stupid sexist offensive troll comment was dismissed is evidence enough that he doesn't get it.

mcseanerson > Taylor Hedgie
12/30/2013 at 23:04

I apologize, I meant it as an over the top not to be taken seriously comment.

Stef Schrader > Laird Andrew Neby Bradleigh
12/30/2013 at 23:07

Passenger seat...

...I'm instructing?!

Balls, dude, I'm not supposed to be over hurr.

mcseanerson > IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK
12/30/2013 at 23:09

I don't need people to sympathize with me or like me or anything else. I have no intention of honestly offending people. I just like to explain my actions so people can understand where I am coming from if at the end of the day you want to write me off or cuss me out or hate me or whatever, I'm not gonna care. I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. I am just taking the time to apologize to anyone who was offended and explain my actions. If you and everyone else wants to forget about me or ban me or mock me then go ahead.

IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 23:12

Explain your actions? What is there to explain? You made a dumb sexist joke, there are not two sides to this story.

Clown Shoe Pilot > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 23:25

I made an offensive comment on Jalopnik and got a note from Orlove that such behavior was pissing off the wrong people.

Since then, I try my hardest to make sure that any offensive comments I make will piss off the right people.

Ian Duer (320b) > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 23:34

Rather than just say it was sexist or insensitive, I'll make an attempt to explain one of the reasons why it wasn't funny, since you claim to respond better to that.

The reason women end up in the passenger seat so often is men. Specifically men with a control freak element to their personality who cannot stand to not be "in control" of the vehicle. I am guilty of this myself and readily admit it is a character flaw. This is not a unique to men, just more common, and probably has something to do with women tolerating the behavior because they were expected to for years by a society that viewed them as second class.

That in mind: your "joke" is actually just you pointing out a consequence of what sexism has done to interactions between the sexes, and is sort of the equivalent of saying, "look at how targeted group just puts up with their station in society" and then being smug about that.

mcseanerson > Clown Shoe Pilot
12/30/2013 at 23:36

I imagine they love you around here. I just wish I knew who the right people were or which offensive jokes were allowed.

mcseanerson > Ian Duer (320b)
12/30/2013 at 23:45

I didn't intend for anyone to take it seriously at all. I don't think anyone belongs in the passenger seat.

Ian Duer (320b) > mcseanerson
12/30/2013 at 23:47

The unfortunate thing about the internet is that random people can easily read most stuff and have no idea of the commentator's personality or intent.

mcseanerson > Ian Duer (320b)
12/31/2013 at 01:25

I know, I shouldn't make comments like this around people who don't know me better but there's something that just seems so two faced about that like we're not being ourselves or being honest.

Ian Duer (320b) > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 01:45

I get what you're saying but it took a pretty jarring experience for me to realize just how dangerous that type of humor is. There was a guy I worked with who was always using that sort of humor and I thought he was a total asshole because I thought he was serious. I would make jokes about people from certain states being insert stereotype here and one day he got pissed at me and called me a dick for "judging" people. Even though we were both using the same type of humor we both thought the other was serious. It really opened my eyes to how it was a bad idea in general unless you really know that people have you figured out.

mcseanerson > Ian Duer (320b)
12/31/2013 at 02:05

Yeah I get that. I have a friend at work who hated another coworker because he said he was a giant asshole, and to be honest he kind of was. The guy was not serious at all and the rest of us for the most part got that but my friend was really upset by him even though we all told him not to take him seriously.

Ian Duer (320b) > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 02:24

Right and no amount of explaining could get this guy to understand that "the asshole" was not being serious and was just screwing around. That's the unfortunate reality.

This has been a good dialog so far, and I want to hit on this point. You may not agree with your comment being hidden, you would probably have preferred if the editor who penned the article had said "dude not cool," but consider this: how many people who gave you a star did so because they got the joke and how many did it because they were laughing for the wrong reason? On that note consider people finding the site for the first time and seeing that you got a few dozen likes for a comment that on the surface seemed stuck in the 1950s. Those people might not have even taken the time to see the editor say "not cool man," they'd have just left thinking "I want nothing to do with this site."

You may not agree with the way that it was handled, and I'm not going to weigh in one direction or the other. I understand the thinking behind hiding your post, whether I agree with it or not it comes down to how the paid editors want the community associated with the website to appear. For better or worse it's a PR thing and closely tied with money. I would suggest that you take that for what it is, even if you don't like it. I find life's better if I try to understand where people are coming from even if I don't always agree with them.

eeee > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 05:09

Also, she didn't go there herself, the whatever assistant opened the passenger side door FOR her. Just a minor detail I noticed.

Laird Andrew Neby Bradleigh > Stef Schrader
12/31/2013 at 05:31

:) may you have a very nice 2014 Stef, hopefully behind the wheel of a rad 911.

mcseanerson > Ian Duer (320b)
12/31/2013 at 08:03

Honestly I'm not upset that it was hidden or if it had been deleted or anything. I just wish I had known why. Without this dialog I might walk away from this bitter and just continue to piss off people for no good reason. This helps me to understand exactly what is and is not acceptable on gawker comments now because for as long as I've been reading the comments seem like the wild west and anything goes. That's one of the reasons I was originally upset was I've read many comments that are far worse on all the gawker sites and I would never assume I needed to be restrained in what I say on the internet.

avens > Travis Okulski
12/31/2013 at 08:26

While that's the description of the internet, it has to be said there's a contet and that is we are all adults. We can laugh at inappropriate jokes without *beeps*.

TheContradiktion > IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK
12/31/2013 at 09:02

This is the same attitude I see crop up when someone makes a mistake, and I really don't get it. Not everyone on earth is a troll, sometimes people make tasteless jokes and don't realize it. I don't see what you risk trying to educate someone before you assume they're a troll, the worst thing that can happen is you try to reach out and make the world a better, more educated space, and they reply "lol umadbrah!"

About a year ago I was very ignorant to the topic of gender vs. sex, and I had a lot of misconceptions that I'm sure would come off as offensive to people who fell outside of the normal gender binary until someone helped me understand that sex and gender weren't the same thing, and that gender spectrum and sexuality spectrum were not necessarily related. I see people who were ignorant to these types of issues pop up a lot, and rather than trying to educate people on issues that aren't always as obvious as you might personally believe, there's a lot of THIS attitude.

You can't expect everyone to self-educate. I didn't know how ignorant I was until someone showed me, and when you try to silence and erase people like mcseanerson instead of giving them a chance to be educated, which it clearly seems he was open to, you will never make the world better. Sexism, racism, intolerance for GLBTA, ableism, etc. is endemic and a lot of it is built into the way people see the world as they develop. We have to work to fix these problems, wasting every opportunity to educate people that could be willing to learn accomplishes nothing.

Chris > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 09:07

Has this site seriously come to the point where articles are written on comments that were written on actual articles written?

mcseanerson > Chris
12/31/2013 at 09:11

such is the internet

DNLM > Travis Okulski
12/31/2013 at 09:13

There's people making jokes about the bombings in Russian where people died and troll comments in the Colorado shooting thread and this is what gets censored? Its not even that bad...not that funny but not really that bad either.

Dick Nickels > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 09:30

Why is it funny? You want to explain so badly, so go ahead.

Also, as other have pointed out, the assistant opened the door for her. This was the door that, not coincidentally, faced the audience. Which door do you think she would have opened if the R8 was facing the other direction?

Thisnewformatisrubbish > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 09:42

The butthurt is strong.

Roberto G. > Travis Okulski
12/31/2013 at 09:44

Intelligence is having an opinion out of the bandwagon.

Trolling is expressing it.

IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK > DNLM
12/31/2013 at 09:45

Gawker mods can deal with trolls how they like over on Gawer. Jalopnik mods decided that this needed to go away and they were right. It was getting a lot of rec-s from similarly minded sexists and making Jalopnik look bad in the process.

IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK > TheContradiktion
12/31/2013 at 09:51

The difference between sex and gender is a more complex issue and an issue that is newer in the public experience. It is more understandable to be ignorant about that simply because it hasn't received much attention and so many people are ignorant of it and have never encountered someone who is trans or gender neutral. This is a very different situation though, women make up 50% of the population, he can not claim to be ignorant of the fact that sexist jokes like hur hur women can't drive, they should let men drive for them hur hur are not funny and are offensive. This isn't Don Draper lecturing Betty about how he doesn't like the way she drives. There is no way this guy didn't know what he was typing was offensive, he specifically said he was trying for something over the top. That is a troll.

SnapUndersteer, Italian Spiderman > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 10:15

Gawker is a whole different world and a lot of the umbrella sites have different standards than ours (Jezebel, Deadspin, io9, gizmodo, etc).

Feel free to comment however you want but do be aware that if it's from an account that regularly posts on the Jalopnik subdivision of Gawker and especially Opposite.jalopnik.com, we will not look kindly on it.

It's your prerogative to do as you wish but we prefer to not be associated directly (or indirectly as much as possible) with that behavior.

It's good you took the time to post this Mea Culpa of your own accord and we moderators praise that...so keep on putting your money where your mouth is and lettuce move forward......

thanks!

your friendly neighborhood SNAPUNDERSTEER

stumpmonkee > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 10:31

Like she ever see's the car again after that.You folks might want to take it down a notch.

Happy New Year.

BigGatorChris > PS9
12/31/2013 at 10:53

And we're entitled to tell them it was a bullshit move.

And they're entitled to make that comment go away.

And we're entitled to take our clicks elsewhere.

DNLM > IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK
12/31/2013 at 11:07

Hell of a transitive property there with one random troll on a Gawker post that is remotely relating to cars and it makes the sister site look bad. I suppose one can't let Jalopnik pick up the opposite stereotype of Jezebel here eh?

IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK > DNLM
12/31/2013 at 11:14

Go read PS9's reply. The TL-DR summary is that car enthusiasts tend to be a bit of dude dominated group, and there is no shortage of sexism contained within those walls which alienates women who might otherwise want to get involved in the community. I for one would like to see a few more women around these parts and around cars in general I have no problem with terrible sexist jokes being hidden in the process.

Erica Jane > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 11:19

It's just too bad that no one treats Hamilton Nolan's posts like this. Sigh.

DNLM > IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK
12/31/2013 at 11:26

At your suggestion I looked it up and read it. I also agree with him on that the mods here can promote whatever they want. I just haven't really seen many censored posts here and it's one of the things I've liked about this site that most people can say whatever they want (even though half of the comments, including mine, are generally stupid). Honestly, I don't think the comment was super bad either. Was it sexist? Yes, but had it been in the form of stupid cat meme or a picture of Don Draper or someone had been thrown up with it I doubt this gets a second glance.

IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK > DNLM
12/31/2013 at 11:28

Gotta start somewhere.

Sir Halffast > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 12:22

You could always start with the "don't make offensive jokes" model of commenting, and work up from there instead of diving into the asshole pool head-first.

Timbo > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 12:47

Yeah... As a regular reader, but infrequent commentator (plus as a Brit nothing offends me, ever)- this was a little border patrol. Sometimes you just got to restrict it to the inner voice my man.

ETA: the graphic you used really negated any apology you've subsequently made. Still, we live and learn, and I trust you'll be a little more mindful in future!

mcseanerson > Timbo
12/31/2013 at 12:56

Honestly I didn't want to use a pic at all but people on gawker are like children and typically don't read anything without pictures. As for the.choice in pics it was how I felt I was being viewed and to some extent how I acted.
If I were really trolling I would've kept at it.

Ian Duer (320b) > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 12:56

Once again I understand where you're coming from but I've started to view visiting websites with an active community much like international travel. Often you will find disparities in what is acceptable, disliked but tolerated, and outright off limits. Frequently, by long time residents, you won't get an explanation because "that's just how it's always been here" wherever here happens to be.

cutty-snark > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 12:57

So, I don't feel the need to weigh in on the core topic here, because I feel it has been adequately covered. But I will say this:

A conditional apology is almost worse than no apology at all.

You either sincerely believe you did something wrong (in which case you can just apologize) or you don't. The "I apologize IF" gambit was likely invented by a PR flack, and needs to be consigned to the Emily Post-approved dust heap of etiquette history. "I apologize IF" really says "Well, *I* don't see what was so bad about it; but if you do, I'm sorry I offended your delicate little sensibilities."

Are you sorry? Or are you sorry people reacted to it?

Timbo > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 13:02

I hear ya. Ah well. I guess now you- and the rest of us- know that it's got to be kept super tidy from now on! I'm sure you're a good dude so say sorry where necc and I'm sure all will be well

mcseanerson > cutty-snark
12/31/2013 at 13:05

I am not saying I am sorry for making the comment because it was made as a joke and not meant to upset anyone or be taken seriously. The if I am referring to is if my joke offended anyone I do sincerely apologize.because it was never my intention to hurt anyone's feelings and I mean that with no snarky they shouldn't be so sensitive undertones. I didn't mean to upset anyone, that is what I am apologizing for.

rwl1776 > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 13:12

It could've been MORE offensive if she jumped on the hood, like this!

Kinja'd!!!

BlazinAce - Doctor of Internal Combustion > Travis Okulski
12/31/2013 at 13:25

Party VI and CalzoneGolem's exchange right below was pretty funny though.

BlazinAce - Doctor of Internal Combustion > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 13:35

The problem with communication on the internet is that texts lack vocal intonation and other clues that might indicate sarcasm or snark. How you come across depends very much on the reader's interpretation, and and a straight comment with no indication might come across as a honest opinion instead of a joke.

That troll face would have been very useul in the original post, by the way...

Philbert/Phartnagle > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 13:50

Think about what you say like this.

Would an idiot or asshole say that?

If the answer is yes, then do not say that.

Devin > IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK
12/31/2013 at 18:51

Banning this guy for one sexist joke is like firing the Duck hunter guy for being Christian.

IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK > Devin
12/31/2013 at 19:07

Show me where he was banned? His one offensive comment was hidden.

TheContradiktion > Devin
12/31/2013 at 20:02

He wasn't banned, I agree that would be a very disproportionate response. Honestly I agree with having the comment removed, my only thoughts were that there are more constructive things to say in this thread since there is definitely a mea culpa element to this post, and someone who is willing to acknowledge that they were in the wrong for something that they typed seems likely to be willing to learn more about why they were wrong, and through that knowledge amend their behavior. There is a lot of social justice blogging going on everywhere, and it taps into the darker elements of social media. People love having a villain to attack, and Hell hath no fury like self-righteous anger on the internet.

Maxima Speed > mcseanerson
12/31/2013 at 20:49

exactly its to much extra weight that negatively effects the cars performance. XD btw haters gonna hate but this idea that we all have to watch what we say because people are a bunch of sissies and cant ignore trollers is stupid. what are we a bunch of nansy pansy, panties in a bunch, mice? or are we men? :P crazy guy rant over.

gt40mkii > Travis Okulski
01/01/2014 at 12:39

I've always liked public humiliation and derision, Corner-Carvers.com style. More often than not, it ends with banishment, but its always a fun trip.

jaro > mcseanerson
01/02/2014 at 06:13

Are you shitting me? You make an extremely sexist comment and then have the audacity to claim that "it wasn't meant [to be offensive]"?

I will believe that you weren't intentionally being a douche, but you were being a douche nonetheless, so hopefully take this as a learning experience and stop making offensive jokes. Because basically they're only funny to straight white men who have never been victims of any sort of discrimination/exclusion that these types of jokes reinforce.

Your joke is alienating to any woman (or, really, any sensible non-sexist person) who comes across it. And this attitude and mindset in any male-dominated field (like cars and tech) is exactly why it's male-dominated. Because it's alienating.

masterglitch > Travis Okulski
01/02/2014 at 10:25

Censorship is just as bad. Let ideas be discussed and reasoned, not censored.

masterglitch > Devin
01/02/2014 at 10:26

And millions of people wanted him fired, unfortunately. Of course, millions more wanted him to stay.

Joshamania > mcseanerson
01/02/2014 at 11:50

Look, I'll try to put it to you in as simple an explanation as I can. While you may feel that you were "just joking around" there are a lot...and I mean a LOT...of people, myself included, that were offended. A way to help you understand might be, say...well, I was as offended by your remark as I would have been had it been, say, a joke about black people and fried chicken or watermelon. That is how offensive and not-joking around what you said is.

Maybe it was because I was raised by my mother, or maybe it's something else, but way too many people out there have no empathy about things like this. You think you're maybe putting yourself in someone else's shoes and still not seeing the big deal...why would half a dozen little words offend any thinking person? It's because those half a dozen little words represent centuries of bullshit, bullshit that you will never have to put up with nor understand what it is like.

Shorter answer: When you say shit like that, you sound like a dick. Banned? Duh.

McLarry > mcseanerson
01/02/2014 at 12:58

Nah, Gawker LOVES offensive posts...That's pretty much their bread and butter. The only caveat is that you just have to offend the right political/social/religious/whatever party or your opinion will not be tolerated.

mcseanerson > McLarry
01/02/2014 at 13:31

That was my thinking as well. I read offensive stuff all the time on gawker and even stuff that offends me personally but I just brush it off and say, nah it's just the internet. People say stupid things.

I always thought gawkers business model was anything for page views. Apparently its anything for page views that doesn't offend their core values. Exuse me now while I go start an abortion debate on jezebel.

MeowRufflet > TheContradiktion
01/02/2014 at 14:03

Agreed.

Jayhawk Jake > mcseanerson
01/02/2014 at 14:32

I'm just gonna say a joke about women sucking at driving or belonging in the passenger seat should be fair game as long as jokes about sports cars/trucks 'compensating' for penis size is fair game.

It's a joke. Was it over the line? Maybe, hell, probably. But come on people, way more annoying jokes are made all the time and brushed over because they are targeted towards a traditional majority such as the white male.

If this comment is going to receive this level of flak, the same level should be doled out to the next person to comment that someone is compensating by buying a big SUV.

Devin > IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK
01/02/2014 at 15:01

It says he is now greyed out, he lost his posting privilege, unless I misunderstand what being greyed out entails.

IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK > Devin
01/02/2014 at 15:33

His one comment was greyed out, the stupid sexist offensive comment. And even if he was completely greyed out he could still comment but he'd be at the bottom of the comments like most beginning commentators. But the fact that he was able to post this drivel should be evidence enough that he still has posting privileges.

X-cchannel-M > TheContradiktion
01/02/2014 at 16:41

Gawker have always been clear on their commenting policy: It is not a democracy - It's their site and they make the rules. They regularly post their commenting guidelines so if one finds their comments removed, that is the first place to look to see if any rule was transgressed.

It is not worth Jalopnik's energy to engage each commenter who feels he has been wronged. While that may be frustrating, it makes sense for any site that wants to use its resources in better ways than trying to 'educate internet commentators': Lol-as Travis hints. If mcseanerson wants to push the boundaries of taste, or is looking for education in gender sensitivity he has picked the wrong forum.

TheContradiktion > X-cchannel-M
01/02/2014 at 18:17

At no point did I suggest Gawker had any such obligation, in fact I agreed with the decision to remove the comment as I had already stated. I my assertion was that since people are already taking the energy to comment in THIS post they might as well take the opportunity to make their comments constructive instead of 1) repeating Gawker's comment guidelines or 2) attacking mcseanerson after he apologized.

Apart from the hypocrisy that IDROVEAPICKUPTRUCK's comment also clearly breaks Gawker's commenting guidelines and was allowed to stand the deeper point is that people commenting would rather attack someone when they're trying to apologize than actually say "Hey, comments about women being lackluster drivers are an offensive stereotype, not a cute joke, and your tone is flirting with the line between misogyny and verbal violence. That's why it got dismissed."

In case there is any question as to the why of your comment being dismissed mcseanerson, comments that suggest women are inferior drivers are a baseless stereotype that stopped being funny a long time ago, right around the time of suffrage. The way you end with "where she belongs" is very offensive, especially since the tone is dangerously close to feeling like it endorses verbal violence towards women. Misogyny isn't funny to begin with, but when your comments can be construed as threatening — which any statement about where anyone of a particular gender, sex, ethnicity, race, religion, sexuality, etc. "belongs" definitely could be — you have stepped over a line.

Iamopenlyjudgingyou > mcseanerson
01/03/2014 at 11:35

On one hand I enjoyed unfiltered content but on the other, comments like that often lead to jezebel commentators posting in jalopnik.

Then its a bunch of idiots mobbing together to declare that they are disgusted by something or another and their stupid contest on who can use the word misogyny the most in one day. I don't come to jalopnik to read that crap.

I reluctantly look the other way from this censorship incident in that it mitigates the risk of idiots from other gawker sites stinking up the place.

mcseanerson > Iamopenlyjudgingyou
01/03/2014 at 12:37

Yeah, I'm never going to make another comment like that. Figured this could be an educational experience for us all and a warning to anyone else. Now I have the luxury of having to get every one of my comments recommended before anyone can see them, so watch out. It could happen to anyone else who thinks they're just joking around.

CKO92 > mcseanerson
01/10/2014 at 10:34

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

In which case Hamilton Nolan is screwed.