Sorry to start a new shitstorm, but I think this is worth discussing.

Because I know some folks still believe it doesn't exist, I present the following exhibit:

https://www.facebook.com/DSNGRR/photos/ ... 57?__cft__[0]=AZVokIGjCMiRlHFPambPaCv8ZRE6ht0d6ZuGABTDzYhyFGCxRy_vSFYKs4KddlJ2IzGuXQWwlvYCcELnf_ocM_6zg9GhegJU5jtJx4qvTAGHTkL8mLFU0td38Dlyj_6fyq3hUMqWQPjC5XJ9ruuIMiZ9XsSMeXeOOexVgpNai4BXH6NS0n4qwrRTOtPEbo-TIRHEQ1oILB7dvFy3ThNN8s_fUpgk2GfFpdoGJyS64p2MYg&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-y-R



I've edited down the comments in the attached screenshot (removing a bunch of people criticizing the ones you see presented), but what you see here is EXACTLY what people mean by "systemic".

These comments are creepy and disgusting, but represent the types of things that women have to deal with when spending time around railroads all the time.

Take a look at these and think about your response, and then think about how that'd reflect on any organization you take part in.

Sure, people are entitled to their thoughts and opinions, but why is it that people feel comfortable making these types of remarks publicly? It's because not enough people have let them know it's unacceptable. THAT is what was meant by "systemic" in the original discussion.

It's not that every person participates actively, but when we don't act to correct bad behavior, it allows a toxic culture to continue to flourish.

But... here's the flip side. In the screenshot I posted I edited out MANY comments doing exactly what I prescribed above: calling people out on their bad behavior. So I wouldn't say hope is lost. In fact, after seeing all of the responses calling out the creepy comments, I think we may be seeing improvement in the situation.

The big takeaways I want to provide here:
1. This behavior irrefutably exists.
2. It's important to think about if you're personally contributing to it or helping to end it.

Ed, why did you think it was appropriate to use RYPN to amplify the sexist harassment in the screenshot you posted?

Because I am using it as an example of what NOT to do.

Yes, I saw that. Why do you think that was a good idea?

Because there are people who still do not think this is an issue and need to see it to believe it.

*FWEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEET*

Calling foul on the attempted play here.


This is the "social media world" you are highlighting, NOT the "railroad preservation world."

This is the Facebook account of the Durango & Silverton, an outright commercial tourist operation that just HAPPENS to overlap into rail preservation, similarly to the Grand Canyon Railway, the Manitou & Pikes Peak RR, or the Strasburg RR.

The page has (according to FB) over 145,000 "followers."

This set of seven photos that includes this photo was shared with the railroad (probably via Instagram tagging) by a visitor, and then by the RR or its staff itself. The RR even includes the contributor's Instagram "handle."

The railroad shared it in a set.
A bunch of cretins made distasteful comments, or at least seized on the opportunity for bad puns and/or double entendres in that one photo.
A bunch of other people called those first folks out. Some were met with "OK BOOMER" style responses.
WELCOME TO MAINSTREAM SOCIAL MEDIA, Ed.


The person in question did not apply to work at the RR. She did not volunteer to become involved in preservation. There is NO indication she garnered rude or distasteful remarks from the staff or the other passengers.
This IS NOT a "rail preservation" problem.

Now, there exists the possibility that somebody else--friend, family member, etc.--posted the photos in question, and that these are not "selfies," she doesn't know about this, and the reaction is unwelcome and highly offensive.
BUT, this being "social media," it's also entirely possible that this person actually welcomes the reaction, revels in it, and is enjoying the response.
We don't know.


The ONLY valid debate here is whether the RR's social media jockeys should have shared this specific photo, and/or deleted it later in light of the responses.
Unfortunately, the way Facebook's algorithms work, there is far more to be gained (in views, rankings, etc.) by letting such controversy snowball and feed upon itself than there is from applying censorship (which the RR is fully within its rights to do) and removing the photo. Honestly, if someone reported this photo to either FB or the D&S FB page admins, there's good reason to think the complainers would be dismissed as puritanistic ranters, and maybe only a couple comments might get deleted. (It's even possible that some more offensive comments already have been deleted, either by administrators or by FB's own optional settings for a page that censors non-"family friendly" words.)

Maybe you can market your "expertise" to Mark Zuckerberg and Company. Good luck with that. At least you're not obviously a member of the social/political factions targeted by FB institutional bias.

Did she reply in the negative about any of the comments made? If so it is illustrative of the hypocrisy of some women, by showing off that much skin then feigning offense when men notice it.

This photo has nothing to do with railroad preservation, the fact that a train is in the background is incidental to it's subject, and the comments it garnered.

Not that we know of, though she could swiftly delete the original if so inclined.

Stand by for accusations of "sexist victim-blaming" in three, two, one......................

It was Facebook, not the "social media world".

The D&SNG posted the same photo set on their Twitter account and there aren't any sexist responses to the picture on that site: D&SNG Twitter Account - 11:26 AM · Sep 21, 2021

I have a wife, 4 sisters and an ex-wife. None would be caught dead wearing an outfit like that.

Are you suggesting that it is okay to judge women by what they wear?

The important question is:if the woman in the photo showed up to volunteer at your museum, would she be treated respectfully or not?

Hello folks,

Before we get back to the very narrow (and hard to define) topic of "sexism", let us realize that this example that was shared is NOT sexism ....

The inappropriate comments shared in the Facebook post are pure sexual harassment. Period. Can we please stop conflating these two topics? Sexual harassment and sexism are NOT the same thing.

"The person in question did not apply to work at the RR. She did not volunteer to become involved in preservation. There is NO indication she garnered rude or distasteful remarks from the staff or the other passengers.
This IS NOT a "rail preservation" problem."

Agreed.

"it's also entirely possible that this person actually welcomes the reaction, revels in it, and is enjoying the response. We don't know."

No, we don't know in the sense that we don't have the subject's affidavit that she took/allowed the picture for attention, but we don't really need it.

We know human beings are attention-seeking- because that's what people do and most are even more needy now after continued isolation and reduced social interaction. (Simon Sinek has some excellent videos that explain how attention, including anti-social media attention releases dopamine, just like alcohol or gambling and how it can be addictive)

Some people attention with their bodies, some with their wealth, some with political office or social status and some with gamma virtue signaling posts that purport to be regrettable necessities, but are little more than reflexive male-bashing-because here's the little secret-women talk about men and can be just as crass and raunchy.

In this case We can however, make inferences-unless she's stupid, she knows she's buxom. Wearing revealing clothing draws attention-whether you are male or female. She's also wearing a necklace with a pedant that fixes your attention dead center. Res Ipsa Loquitir.

When I go to the gym there's plenty of people wearing spandex (something I thought mercifully dead with leg-warmers but making a comeback) that looks like it was purchased at Sherwin Williams. Nobody is going to tell me after decades of working out that form-fitting "clothes" that reach into intimate crevices are necessary or comfortable-especially when you are hot and sweaty. There's also plenty of revealing clothing, and somehow it always seems to be the guys that have six-packs and don't look like they drink a six-pack every day.


Nor is this "sexual harassment" because here's the definition.

https://www.eeoc.gov/sexual-harassment


Shameless plug: My friend Matt runs a health clinic with a physician that finds disorders like low serological testosterone -which is rampant due to obesity, inactivity, stress and chemical pollution-and can assess levels with a quick trip to Quest.


Anyway Whiskey Tango Foxtrot does this have to do with preservation?

"Are you suggesting that it is okay to judge women by what they wear?"

EVERYBODY is judged by what they wear.

Are you suggesting it's not?

Are you suggesting its ok to judge men, but not women?

Are you suggesting only women get to judge women by what they wear?


Here's a reality check. Try showing up for an interview in ratty shorts and flip-flops. If what people weren't attempting to be judged by what they wear, my local Salvation Army wouldn't have a sign informing donors they aren't accepting donations. When I inquired as to why-they are overwhelmed with donations of suddenly superfluous "office" clothes.