Moderation question: When if ever should we allow the discussion of someone else's body/appearance on LetsRun?

Dude, never. We can throw out what little possible good can come to lose all the bad. You can talk about your own body, that's it. One of the original fatal flaws on this board and the entire website was ever allowing those hotness threads, that set a tone that the tone deaf sophomorically ignored. This should be as obvious as the nose on your face, I'll be surprised if you actually follow through.

Other sports routinely discuss this. Is Zeke fat and out of shape at the beginning of the Dallas Cowboys training camp? Charles Barkley was also at the forefront of the press discussing his weight. Boxers have to meet a certain weight. Ryan Hall and Tiger Woods are too pumped up and buff...

So why should runners be "off limits"?

So what is the rule? Can we drop a compliment on Sara Hall's rearend? Can we mention Allie's trunk? What about Hasay being a twig? SFH's nudity.

It seems to me that if these professional runners are putting themselves out there in bunhuggers (or in SFH's case, nothing!) on various social media, why would a message board object, provided vulgarity or profane language is not submitted?

You know the answer. We can't talk about women's weight but we can talk about Chris Solinsky being large or we can call Rupp pudgy after surgery. Imagine if a woman had surgery and gained a few pounds and it was made fun of here?

banned Pete wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:On-line comment and in-person comment aren't the same; that's one of the things that makes social media different. Your '*sshole' or objectionability test, to be consistent, would apply to much more than comments about personal appearance. It's an invitation to censorship. It would also be a matter of opinion.

You're right that on-line comment and in-person comment are different. That's because people feel free to behave like a$$holes when nobody's going to call them on it. I know this won't change, and I didn't expect any serious consideration of my suggestion, but it's what I think, and, wejo did ask...

People do call them on it. They are free to object - just as you do. That is the opposite of censorship, which is what you are effectively advocating.

I don't think the board should censor speech.

Big part of it is a lot people into running, and who visit running sites have very little interest in the sport of running and only know of athletes like Mary Cain from mainstream human interest coverage and then tend to see her as a girl who runs fast and not as a professional runner.

Leah O'Connor

2019-11-12

https://www.instagram.com/p/B4yMCMEF0FI/

SFH

2020-01-05

https://www.instagram.com/p/B68lYGEn56J/

2020-01-12

https://www.instagram.com/p/B7OegyInZHX/

https://onlyfans.com/favorhamilton

I agree with your assessment Wejo, if you shut down the dialogue you lose potentially valuable comments (babies with bathwater).

Protecting oneself from offense has reasonable limits, if you adopt this as a way of life your sensitivity levels will be very heightened and that in my opinion is very unhealthy. We see this in popular culture today and there is no end in sight, I mean who would of thought something like Jazz Hands would ever come into fruition?

Posting in forums has been a good exercise for me, after a while you learn to ignore obvious trolls (though sometimes I admit to counter punching just for fun) and it's a good mental exercise. Criticism can be harsh but is always worth consideration, it's like relationships where you adopt some of the changes after you're divorced because doing so while married causes you to lose face.

When should you ever disallow the discussion of someone else's body/appearance on LetsRun?

On the scale of controversy or importance, discussion of someone else's body/appearance is negligible compared to any discussion of politics or religion, isn't it?

rojo wrote:

Predictor wrote:

She may be the most talented runner in the US but is not willing to get her body to the fitness level of Coburn, Simpson, or Houlihan. It is obvious that they spend hours in the gym.

That to me is an ignorant comment. You act like everyone can just work to get their body to a certain state. I imagine plenty of male distance runners could hit the gym for 3-4 hours a day and never get big enough to be NFL linemen.

What? Predictor compared Cain's fitness level to "Coburn, Simpson, or Houlihan" not Klosterhalfen, or Hassan. To refute that you're making the leap from male distance runners to NFL lineman? That can't be the way your mind works. More likely being outrageously bombastic to get some kind of point across.

A better analogy would be Power 5 conference offensive lineman working their buts off to become an NFL caliber offensive lineman. Cain isn't a gymnast.

I say no censorship. Power to weight ratio in our sport is a real thing and shouldn't be censored.

I'm now dealing with the subject of weight with my HS running kids. They see the NXN kids, they see collegiate and US National finals, they see Olympians. They are acutely aware of body types and always ask me if they can compete at a national level if they grow to over 150 lbs. They Google the heights and weights of Kipchoge, Bekele, Rupp (before surgery).

I tell them stories of me racing against the 140 lb'ers in track and how I could get some semblance of revenge in Steeple and XC. Cursed with a Solinski body type, it was a frustrating sport for me that seemed, at the time, to take more than it gave, until I grew up.

This sport can accommodate just about any size of runner as long as the runner is realistic. It's the same for any sport, if you want to be competitive you're going to have to squeeze or grow your body into the optimum form, otherwise you'll have to lower your expectations and enjoy the sport for what it is.

I really like the idea of a previous poster who mentioned warning labels on some threads. Of course nobody will pay attention to them but at least they were warned.

When you care about your reputation and how other people feel about your treatment of them, you censor yourself.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot wrote:

When you care about your reputation and how other people feel about your treatment of them, you censor yourself.

No, you don't - you make a choice. Censorship is not a choice; it is imposed.

That's where we are. The trolls have all the power to start flame wars and change the narrative by saying something inflammatory.

Mencken1976 wrote:

I agree with your assessment Wejo, if you shut down the dialogue you lose potentially valuable comments (babies with bathwater).

Protecting oneself from offense has reasonable limits, if you adopt this as a way of life your sensitivity levels will be very heightened and that in my opinion is very unhealthy. We see this in popular culture today and there is no end in sight, I mean who would of thought something like Jazz Hands would ever come into fruition?

Posting in forums has been a good exercise for me, after a while you learn to ignore obvious trolls (though sometimes I admit to counter punching just for fun) and it's a good mental exercise. Criticism can be harsh but is always worth consideration, it's like relationships where you adopt some of the changes after you're divorced because doing so while married causes you to lose face.

QFE of my prior post.

I’m late to this post because I actually have cut back on my time spent on the boards but saw a link to this question in the recent Outside article. I’m a woman and over the years the toxicity of the boards has really gotten to me and felt unhealthy. So I try not to read them as often, which is a bummer bc sometimes there is some really great running commentary but I’m not willing to take the time to weed through the trolls to get to that content.

Anyways, Brojos, I think if you really are interested in making a change to the boards in an effort to reach a wider audience and make these conversations more productive/healthier, then you should be having in-person/phone conversations with the demographic you are trying to help. Posting on the message board that you already know is biased/toxic isn’t helping. You should be talking to professional female runners, hobby jogger women, women in the industry, etc. Those are the people (I’m assuming) you want to make these boards more accessible to. Having those conversations in real life will help give you an understanding of what might make these boards a better place for women/minorities. I would love to see some sort of feature or podcast where you guys really try to solicit those opinions and hear that point of view, bc I don’t think it is reflected here often.

I think if the draw of the boards is to have productive conversations in the running community then it’s doing a disservice to be potentially excluding that community bc you aren’t willing to make some tougher moderation choices. If you don’t really want to change then none of this matters and some women might continue to ignore the boards/site (which probably isn’t a great business option)

I also think having women on staff (even potentially as volunteers) would help a lot.

Feel free to email me if you want to discuss further.

The Brojos just did a podcast with Des Linden. And the Brojos interview female athletes all the time so I don't see where you are thinking they don't even speak to the opposite sex.

Male Troll wrote:

The Brojos just did a podcast with Des Linden. And the Brojos interview female athletes all the time so I don't see where you are thinking they don't even speak to the opposite sex.

Accurate handle?

Des Linden is sort of the opposite of the type of person swilson40 was talking about. Des said she reads the boards and doesn't mind the trolls too much. She's not one of those people who feel like reading the messageboard is unhealthy and tries to stay away from it.

David S wrote:

Accurate handle?

Des Linden is sort of the opposite of the type of person swilson40 was talking about. Des said she reads the boards and doesn't mind the trolls too much. She's not one of those people who feel like reading the messageboard is unhealthy and tries to stay away from it.

More Linden's and fewer Cain's, please.

Do you want LRC to become the next Runner's World forums that pandered to the most annoying complainers? How did that work out for them?

As a coach of an elite female this is always a delicate topic. I never discuss weight with her. In saying that anyone who has ever been elite or near elite knows that carrying extra weight or more honestly body fat will not help in one's pursuit of being elite.

Now what does that mean on this forum. Due to social media we all see what different athletes look like at different times of the year. There are times when athletes need to carry weight as being at extremely low fat levels for long periods of time have terrible repercussions. I don't know what your solution is but I will report anything that I feel is offensive in the future.

Running is an extremely tough sport and knowing the history of how body image and body shaming can have such negative impacts on young or old females is something that everyone who reads anything on this board should be aware of.

But many here don't care and the ridicule will go on but lets say if those that engage in that type of behaviour were called out or suspended may be a good start. I don't know if you can do that but maybe us in the know should take more responsibility in this regard.

Good luck.