HOME > Chowhound > Site Talk >


"F*cking in the Kitchen"

I wonder if there's a double standard around here -- that CHOW.com can print whatever they want (i.e., a story with that title), but posts on Chowhound are scrutinized and subsequently deleted if deemed offensive or off-color.

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
  1. Hilarious, people and CindyJ...was this the response you were looking for?

    3 Replies
    1. re: HillJ

      Given the audience, I shoulda' known better than to have even asked the question. :-)

      1. re: CindyJ

        Ha! I was wondering how you were taking in all the responses (which would have made for much better reading over at the comment section of this CHOW article.)

      2. As we explain in our posting guidelines at http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/367605, our policy on incidental vulgarity, obscenity, and general offensiveness in otherwise chow-ful postings is that anything is OK so long as it's not said in anger or is clearly intended to stir up trouble.

        7 Replies
        1. re: The Chowhound Team

          I think that an article entitled "f*cking in the kitchen" is intended to stir up trouble.

          1. re: pikawicca

            Intended or not, that title def. stirs the pot!

            1. re: HillJ

              Something has to "stir the pot" in order for amorous behavior to take place in the kitchen. I have a butcher's block that can't come in the house, because of it.

              1. re: pikawicca

                Whereas I think it's just intended to stir up interest. Sex sells.

              2. Assuming there is a double-standard, what's wrong with a double-standard?

                7 Replies
                1. re: ipsedixit

                  It's confusing, ipsedixit. Maybe not confusing or a bother for you but many of us have found the CHOW vs. CH community guidelines head-scratchingly curious. CindyJ has a point. Since rules & guidelines are applied to members contributing to the community and subject to deletion and CHOW writers and editors use content from the community to write some of their stories/digests/ideas...AND have the pleasure of writing content subject to diff rules and guidelines. Yeah-a bit puzzling/confusing/double standard-ish.

                  1. re: HillJ

                    I am willing to bet that had I, or some other hound, started a thread that had the same title under discussion here it would NOT have been moderated out of existence. You have to keep in mind that the paid writers over on CHOW have editors reviewing their content and article titles. So it's not as if they are free to write whatever they desire, without any "moderation" being brought to bear.

                    1. re: Servorg

                      Hi Servorg, happy holiday.

                      In part I agree yes, paid writers have editors and CH's have moderation. I'm willing to bet that there are diff guidelines/rules for reasons I am not aware of. But again, I am willing to admit I find it confusing and at times unfair to this community.

                      1. re: Servorg

                        The reason I put the phrase in quotes in my subject heading is because I thought if I didn't, or if I had written the phrase out without the *, it would have been edited out in a flash.

                        1. re: CindyJ

                          "...because I thought if I didn't, or if I had written the phrase out without the *, it would have been edited out in a flash."

                          I doubt that would have been the case. We fairly often (not overly) see the use of fuck, fucking ("fucking up in the kitchen" would be my thread title for sure) and fucked up in threads on the site. I don't think your actually spelling out the word when complaining about the apparent double standard here on Site would have resulted in any moderation.

                      2. re: HillJ

                        Why is the fact that there are different rules for Chowhound posters (e.g. you and me) versus those who write for the Chow site confusing and/or puzzling?

                        One is for a community message board, another is for a Webzine. So what if the latter uses or even cribs content from the former?

                        I don't mean to be flippant, but I seriously do not see how it is confusing that there are different standards for each platform, or even why or how it could be considered a double standard of any type.

                        1. re: ipsedixit

                          I already answered this question but perhaps it was not the answer you were looking for. I already said I believe CindyJ has a point.

                          Beyond that, it's Christmas Eve and I'm going to join my posse! I hope you're enjoying the holiday, ips!

                    2. Most Chowhounds are grown-ups, Cindy. CHOWphiles have more in common with Yelpers than Chowhounds. I, for one, have no interest in CHOWpap. Vive la double standard!

                      1 Reply
                      1. re: greygarious

                        My original query was merely based on observation. I rarely pay attention to CHOW content, but that ubiquitous story headline was hard to ignore.

                      2. cindy j, chow editors and writers often get away with degenerate, pandering crapola - because they can. they also have mouthpieces on here that will ever defend that. this comes up perodically, and apparently no matter what we say over here, it continues. almighty dollar.

                        1 Reply
                        1. re: alkapal

                          Maybe CH should declare its independence and secede from CHOW.

                        2. Rats. I thought this topic was going to be about something else.

                          1 Reply
                          1. I'm glad I didn't see this on my FB feed or I would have unliked the page. Ridiculous. I hope no one actually got paid for it. And I'm a fully grown adult. Actually greygarious, posts like this are intended for, if not the most juvenile among us, at most the giggly high school boy.

                            1 Reply
                            1. re: Lambowner

                              The powers-that-be at CHOW believe they know their market; ergo the headline.

                            2. oh wow. I thought F. cking was an abbreviation for French Cooking.

                              1 Reply