A gender-neutral option to click when joining (please hear me out on this)

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

wwjd_kilden

Guest
#21
#21
I actually like the idea of a gender neutral option. I am not here for the flirts, and peoples genders are irrelevant to me.
However I can imagine quite a headache for the mods if they are to make sure these "gender neutral" users not flirting :p , so I don't think it would be doable.

+1 for the idea though :D
 
S

sealabeag

Guest
#22
#22
Alternative idea that may be a solution to this problem: Instead of an "ignore" button, have an "allow" button; i.e. only the people that you "allow" can PM you.
 
Consumed

Consumed

Senior Member
#23
Jun 4, 2015
112
1
0
#23
Never knew people could get so rude over a suggestion...good way to crush peoples spirits guys.

Maybe they go on chat because, I don't know, they want a decent and normal conversation? Forums are not the easiest avenue of chatting for some people. They prefer something more interactive, or even one on one. Can they hit the ignore button? Yes, but why waste time talking to a person, and having a good conversation, when all of the sudden they start acting more and more like they're looking for a hook-up

She's not saying to completely negate showing gender. I'm not even saying I completely agree, doesn't mean it's a bad idea, and it certainly doesn't make me want to talk to her like she's an idiot because of it. You guys got a lot of growing up to do.
 
Willie-T

Willie-T

Banned
#24
Feb 7, 2015
22,418
413
0
#24
I treated this thread with all the seriousness I thought it was written with.
 
M

Mitspa

Guest
#25
#25
Its sounds like it related to the whole gay agenda thing? If Im wrong...im sorry
 
Willie-T

Willie-T

Banned
#26
Feb 7, 2015
22,418
413
0
#26
Mitspa said:
Its sounds like it related to the whole gay agenda thing? If Im wrong...im sorry
Click to expand...
That's exactly how I saw it... something along the line of that sort of silliness.
 
Consumed

Consumed

Senior Member
#27
Jun 4, 2015
112
1
0
#27
And if you actually took the time to read rather than assume you'd probably know that wasn't the case.
 
Willie-T

Willie-T

Banned
#28
Feb 7, 2015
22,418
413
0
#28
Consumed said:
And if you actually took the time to read rather than assume you'd probably know that wasn't the case.
Click to expand...
The logical suggestion would have been to ask that we simply don't have a M/F designation. Very simple. Many forums don't. Why a request for a third category, like a transgender bathroom in a school?
 
D

didymos

Guest
#29
#29
Jilly81 said:
First off, anyone who clicked this "gender-neutral" option instead of "male" or female" would be held on a VERY tight reign; no flirting allowed by them whatsoever...
Click to expand...
They'd better not flirt!

 
Jilly81

Jilly81

Senior Member
#30
Jan 16, 2011
2,365
136
63
#30
Rather than respond to each person individually, I'll just type it all here. I'm even ignoring the comments of "duuuhhh" and general rudeness that one or two of you showed.


I did not make the suggestion for my own intended use at all. I generally ignore the flirts myself, though sometimes I find them to be amusing and laugh along with them. My name is staying pink.

I'm not encouraging lying; you can avoid giving details about yourself and it doesn't mean you're fibbing. Some of us prefer listing a gender while others do not. Another reason for this would be to avoid being judged based on gender stereotypes. We could make these folks unable to post in the Bible Discussion Forum if the mods wanted to.

As mentioned earlier, these unspecified-gender people would get banned if someone reported them either flirting or trying to discuss body issues with anyone else. They will not be able to see the Women's Forum or join the Men's Discussion group.

This thread is not in support of homosexual behavior, though (as mentioned previously) an insecure/confused seeker who isn't even saved yet and shouldn't have stones thrown at him/her would feel a bit more comfortable joining and hopefully discovering what Love REALLY is, though, again, a ban would follow flirting or discussion of body issues by said member immediately after being reported. Honestly, some adults have teens so confused about things that some of them seem to truly believe that they can switch throughout the day between being male and female, as though a Y chromosome in each cell can suddenly materialize or be destroyed. I want to reach these teens with the Gospel and let Jesus clean everything else up after they surrender to Him.




Thank you to the gentleman (and anyone else who applies) who asked the others to respect the thread, the two ladies who repped me for it, and the other gentleman who sent me a kind message about it :).
 
Last edited:
secularhermit

secularhermit

Banned
#31
May 3, 2013
8,719
75
0
#31
Let´s say some ppl are denied TO LIE, that way (as anyone has chosen to haide faces, citizenship... or the place where they are) why not giving the option to having a banner of AROMANTIC?

Which is NOT like saying; "Aromatic".

:p
 
A

atwhatcost

Guest
#32
#32
Jilly81 said:
First off, anyone who clicked this "gender-neutral" option instead of "male" or female" would be held on a VERY tight reign; no flirting allowed by them whatsoever, nor may they discuss body issues with another member, under penalty of immediate ban. In theory it'd mainly be used by those did not want to flirt or be flirted with; they would only allowed to be treated in a totally platonic way and act so themselves. There would also be those who honestly have confusion issues in that area of life and have come here hoping to get said issues resolved. Another group would be those who are content being celibate, yet do not identify with the gender with which they were born (like a certain former user). Also self-described "gender-fluid" seekers who have come to the site wanting to learn and hopefully get issues resolved (I talked to a girl with such a mental condition a year ago). There are also those to whom Matthew 19:12 pertains:
For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.




Some of the folks about whom the preceding verse mentioned may prefer to click the "non-specified" button, though I don't consider those men to be any less masculine than "standard" ones :).


Any user who clicked said button would not be able to see the Women's Forum or join the "Men's Discussion" chat group, and his/her screen name could perhaps be green instead of blue or pink.
Click to expand...
I'm going to be truthful, so, please, don't assume this is rude. You may consider it rude at first, but it's really not.

My first reaction really was, "Are you nuts?" BUT, that came from knowing who you meant by "like a certain former user." THAT is my concern if this idea was accepted. That member coming back all changed and proud.

But, I've already established myself as pretty greenhorn when it comes to gender issue. Pretty greenhorn, not totally greenhorn. Because of that, I went to PM a friend about this thread, because she's good at this issue in so many ways.

She's been banned. I can think of only two reasons she was banned -- enough people leaped on who she was and decided she was something else or she exploded over someone doing the same thing to another member. Either way, it was because of this very issue of gender-identification. Too many of us don't get it. I didn't, until she educated me, and she educated me while she dealt with "a certain former member."

So, yeah, I really do get why, except for one thing -- doesn't that put a bull's eye right on the people you're trying to protect?

Yeah, yeah, yeah, flirting in the chatroom. Don't care. First, two of my friends met here and got married. So, yo! I'm sure a certain amount of flirting happened, unless they're like me and never learned how to do it. (I just tell what I'm thinking to make sure the person gets the right idea. It worked. We were dating for a week, before I found out I proposed to him. Didn't even know I had, until I asked who proposed and when. He's my hubby now. lol) But, if you don't want to be flirted with, my inability not to flirt works just as clearly the other way. Just tell the person, "I'm not interested." If that doesn't work, "Get lost" usually does.

So flirting, meh. It happens, if someone is too shy, then don't go chatting with a bunch of strangers. Seems reasonable.

But I really do get where there are gender problems on here most aren't even catching, and because the vast majority of us don't understand, it's easy to assume the person is (slap label here) and report often enough to get the person banned.

I don't know what the answer is, but I'm pretty sure it's not putting a bull's eye on them and notifying everyone "This person is different."
 
A

atwhatcost

Guest
#33
#33
secularhermit said:
Let´s say some ppl are denied TO LIE, that way (as anyone has chosen to haide faces, citizenship... or the place where they are) why not giving the option to having a banner of AROMANTIC?

Which is NOT like saying; "Aromatic".

:p
Click to expand...
Because stupid people like me would instantly want to know which aroma the person was giving off? lol

I did figure out what you meant, but that's not what I first thought. :eek:
 
Jilly81

Jilly81

Senior Member
#34
Jan 16, 2011
2,365
136
63
#34
AtWhatCost, I addressed at least some of what you said in previous posts (I didn't read your entire post).
 
S

Siberian_Khatru

Guest
#35
#35
That this is a serious suggestion for the site - and that it's not the first reaction to the problem - really says something about the male user base here.

But then again, who wouldn't want to flirt with you, Jilly? :cool:

Responses here have been disappointing, to say the least. Still, I don't think this suggestion would really nip the issue.
 
Oncefallen

Oncefallen

Idiot in Chief
Staff member
#36
Jan 15, 2011
6,031
3,261
113
#36
Closed at OP's request
 
Status
Not open for further replies.