No bigoted hate speech against gender is in there. What you'd need is to speak out more toward the juries about it.

Hell, there are a one or two active ones in H&M right now.

Here's how those posts have consistently gone since DU3 went live:

OP: I can't believe the jury didn't vote to hide this outrageously sexist language
Form responses: "The Brits use it," "I use it," "The person who used it is no misogynist," "They were using this term for female genitalia to insult a man, so the intent was not to be misogynistic," "I can't stand the PC police," "It's just a word."

The discussion then becomes about those red herrings and rationalizations, the two sides dig in, and nothing changes. This isn't a difference of opinion (as some jurors would put it), it's the difference between respecting women and knocking them over then kicking them when they're down.

The main reason why nothing has changed is because of the deeply ingrained sexism in society. Misogynists are bigots and for the most part, bigots don't change until they're forced to do so. The admins started forcing that change with respect to homophobia, they can do the same with respect to misogyny.

Although the jury system doesn't work 100% of the time, it does grasp onto the few that says these types of things eventually.

The MIRT keeps track of the offenders who are new to the website. Spammers, obvious freepers, obvious trolls, obvious socks, etc. They go in their hidden little forum and talk things out and I'm sure a lot of them pays attention to H&M.

The jury system bumps up the long-term members who have an obvious pattern to their behavior. So, it's a lot easier to find these people who muck up the system for the admins.

Jury decisions are also moderated by the admins, from what I understand...

So basically, you're never going to get justice to your alert 100% of the time. And when you alert something, explain exactly how it's against the TOS in the explanation box. A lot of people are still not used to DU3.

It's in the copy of this thread in Women's Rights if you want to read it exactly, but basically I strongly believe if we make it a point to always alert, always check the TOS box, and always confront the poster, we can raise awareness of the problem and effect positive change.

-By always alerting, the problem gets more visible and discussed more (though those discussions are rarely productive).
-By always checking the TOS box, the alert always goes to MIRT or admins and they become more aware of the problem.
-By always confronting the poster, we can educate and change minds.

If we don't alert, the problem can slip under the radar, and if we don't confront, those who are using sexist language out of ignorance or habit rather than malice will start to get resentful of 'censorship.'

We'll ruffle feathers, but that's always how it goes when fighting for social justice

I'll be on the alert.

if it stays it only goes to admin. Admin get TOS violation whether or not the post is hidden.

MIRT if hidden, admin if not.

and it was a long termer the MIRT hands are tied. That is why they get all TOS alerts.

And I have served on a couple of juries where misogynistic posts were hidden, but there are too damned many 3-3 verdicts out there. Sometimes I think there must be a handful of jurors who will "leave" anything, just to be contrary.

We need to begin to request that admins take action against the serial misogynist. It's all well and good to alert and confront their bigotry in the thread but we need to also hold the PTB accountable to this as well.

That definition is not as clear cut as you might think.....

You mention LGBT as if they have been completely successful in erradicating terms being written that are offensive towards them. I wish it were true but they have not. It still goes on. Same with terms about every minority group. We have an ongoing fight against those who believe they should be able to write anything they want regardless of how offensive it is. Here is my latest OP on the subject titled "We should accept when those from a discriminated against minority say that something is offensive.
" - http://www.democraticunderground.com/124053747

I meant to use LGBT as an example of a group that has had some success.

to be done. Sad really.

The recent flood of "OxyRush must be secretly gay" is a good example of that

Since I think hiding "bad words" is a patently bad idea

Maybe an example of where the context makes the use as an insult of a term for female genitalia not sexist?

Here's a little thought experiment:

Replace the C-word with the N-word in that comic. Would you still regard the context as overriding the history of the N-word?

Before you start on with "that's completely different!" Keep in mind that the C-word has been used as a slur to oppress women for longer than the N-word has existed.

A big problem I am noticing in regards to misogyny is that many jurists do not seem to realize what is and what is not misogynist. It happens a lot with homophobia and transphobia too.

Probably worse with mysogyny, at the moment, because at least there was a period of pretty diligent post-hiding to prime the well for good recognition of homophobia and transphobia.

Would it be a bad idea to be allowed to take posts which are misogynist and sexist, and dissect them for the purpose of teaching?

Is it better to TOS, or better to dissect and show the reasons why the posts are misogynist and sexist, so people become aware, rather than just throw them out without explanations?

I'm just asking.

That's why I think it's important to confront (for lack of a better word) those making the posts. It can be very useful to inform someone that what they've posted is sexist and ask them to edit or delete and there's no reason why that can't be done before alerting.

I suspect that a jury called to judge a sexist post will be more likely to vote to hide it if the poster was confronted about it and refused to edit.