Politics and Society Moderation Discussion Only Fans Thread

I assume it has gone to the mod forum. That should be enough for you.

Browser - consider this as food for thought - you are holding the posters on this politics forum to a higher standard of discourse when attacking the opposition than actual politicians are held to when running their own campaigns.

I think browser's reply to this explains his intent pretty well, so I'll leave it at that.

While I don't want to speak definitively for another poster, it seems to me that both Didace and I fully understand browser's intent, and we're both expressing our strenuous objections to his line of reasoning for it.

Fair enough. Didace's initial reply seemed unfair to me, as I see browser's efforts at making discussion of transgender issues less hostile to transgender people as nothing even close to suggesting no one can ever be uncomfortable.

I don't have a magic answer to this, but I don't have an issue with browser attempting to rein in the nonsense in some of the transgender discussion. A prescriptive solution like this may be challenging, but I'm ready to see how it works out.

So, it's not that you want to avoid people being uncomfortable here (which is what you originally said), it's that you don't want name-calling. I can agree with that. But, when one faction defines the other side's argument as de-facto name-calling and that view is enforced, then I have a problem. I also understand that moderating any discussion of trans issues is fraught. That's why I generally don't engage (except in sports).

That's not going to happen

Transgender people face bullying and harrasment at an extreme level. Language matters.

This is such a small ask. It is not politcal correctness gone mad by a long way.

Tbh, my bigger concern is not being able to call you the dumbest mother****er on earth any more.

That truly is political correctness gone mad.

I do hope you are still allowed to entertain me.

Contributing to making life so tough for such a vulnerable group - not so much

Maybe we are just thinking thick skin means different things. If you mean thick skin to keep you from crying when someone tells you the earth isn't flat then I agree. But if you mean to fend off personal attacks and insults then I don't agree. While commonplace in todays political discourse, esp exacerbated by Trumps constant and excessive use of insults over substance, it hasn't always been that way. The best political debaters were known for using wit and cleverness to "stab" their opponent rather than crude insults. I would post an example from our forum but there aren't any 😀

You should have said that's what you're looking for! Go to search, posts by user, d2_e4. Thank me later.

Referring to a man/biological male that is wearing a dress as a “he” is not misgendering. This guideline of yours is just forced speech. Are you trying to make this forum like North Korea or Nazi Germany?

As for the 2nd part of that quote, what you are describing is an echo chamber. “Leave here and go there” why would anyone want to go discuss topics somewhere where everyone agrees and only one side of the argument is discussed?

Please rethink your guidelines unless your goal is to eventually have only a handful members on this forum, so that it will die and you won’t have to mod it anymore.

i don't think this is appropriate, he asked politely to better understand the genesis of the policy

imagine if there were a policy that said you could only use pronouns of the their sex and thus only call lia thomas a he and you politely asked the origin to that rule and got laughed at by a mod

"Politely" is stretching it a bit.

And also, I have it on good authority from our friend KoG that that dude is Hitler reborn.

Bobo is not here in a moderating capacity.

The bolded makes it fine and proper.

And it doesn't mean you can misgender otherwise either, maybe you can, maybe you can't...but you can't use it as a weapon to insinuate trans people don't qualify as persons, or anything to that spirit.

So I can call Lia Thomas a he because I don't agree at all its fair that he won in a woman's competitive swimming division. Its not a statement about trans persons or someone's profile here at all tho.

And I can deadname ellen page here too, which would be different than using it as an attack to someone on this forum.

Let me elaborate on the misgendering topic. It's not going to be a guiz to see who is up on the latest conventions on the use of pronouns. Rather it is to show transgender people the same level of courtesy we show anyone else. If someone presents themselves say, as a woman? Goes by the name Lisa, what purpose is there in referring to that person as a he other than to make a statement that you do not accept their gender identity? It takes absolutely no effort to simply mirror the pronouns the person uses.

Unfortunately there are people who go out of their way to misgender transgender people to seek to out them or belittle them. Teachers have insisted on calling a transgender woman student he in front of the class even though the students refer to her as her. That's just spiteful. Now there are confusing areas such as Caitlyn or Bruce Jenner. Most LGBTQ groups suggest just using the current name. Some newspapers say use the current name unless it requires the old name for clarification.

Taken to extreme you get things like MTG telling a witness at a congressional hearing that she cannot be called a mother because she adopted her child and therefore was not a real mother. Stephanie Germanotta makes great music but people willing refer to her as Lady Gaga. It's just being polite.

I wonder why the policy of not allowing posters to argue that all transgender people are mentally ill is drawing so much concern when our policy of not allowing posters to argue that blacks as a group are less intelligent than whites has not? There are websites that allow that discussion openly. This isn't one of them. In both cases the position of the majority of scientists is that those positions are false. But in both cases the other side will trot out a study (usually old and debunked)!and some scientist to support their claim. But I haven't seen anyone object to prohibiting the discussion of one race being superior to another based on free speech grounds.

Unless he posted under a different account, Broswer was not a politics poster before he was made a mod of this forum. He has been back for a week, and it's pretty amazing how it is night and day between his style and long-time poster Rococo. His style seems pretty out of touch to me for a politics forum. The heavy-handed "you are not allowed to discuss this because I don't agree with it" policies that are now being implemented are a completely new thing around here. The only other time that has happened was when this forum was essentially shut down because people were saying mean things about Sarah Huckabee. We all saw how that turned out.

That'd be that Overton Window. One of these things was settled by science decades ago, the other one, as Luckbox and Meisner pointed out, is not a settled matter within the scientific community.

I am honestly shocked that you were able to write this out when there is a thread in this forum where half the posts are openly antisemitic.

The book is called “ Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders”. If something is in that book it is, by definition, a mental disorder and gender dysphoria is in there. Not all of those people may have that diagnosis but if they do then by definition they suffer from……a mental disorder. Just like depression. Anxiety. Psychosis. Etc.

A person’s speech represents their perception of life. By compelling speech, ie forcing them to call a man “she”, you are effectively denying their reality and elevating the reality of less than 1% of the population. Why are they more important than almost every other human on the planet?
Compelled speech. We’re not in ‘Merica anymore.