Jump to content
Hondo's Bar

new rules & regulations - public discussion


Recommended Posts

yeah, i think the gay marriage topic is a good example: i personally see it hard to argue that those against it aren't coming from a place of homophobia, but i think it's clear that one can discuss viewpoints on tradition/religion/etc and not use homophobic langue in so doing...hell, arch did that for like a baker's dozen threads.  

 

there's absolutely examples with transphobia too, but honestly, if you're on some jordan peterson bullshit with the "there are only 2 genders" nonsense, i'm more likely to give an unofficial warning that your argument is very much veering into transphobia, vs someone using slurs/purposely misgendering or using dead names, etc. bigotry doesn't require intent, but when it's clearly there, i don't think it's hard to see.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

By and large, I agree, but Jumbie raised a lot of my issues. Essentially how these terms are defined, and whether you can have an unpopular/controversial opinion without being told to stop posting/thinking that. For example, the fact that I think you have Jordan Peterson completely wrong, or that there are only two genders? I really don't see how that's transphobic. There is male to female trans and female to male trans, and I completely support them in their struggle for acceptance. That's still just two genders though, right? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we're getting somewhere. 

Both Stilly and NZA have named specific behaviors that cross the line like using the word faggot or deliberate misgendering.

 

Now we have a starting point for debate.

 

e.g. the misgendering one... If someone asks me to use 'ze' as their pronoun, I'm gonna have a lot of issues with that. It's not going to be because I disrespect them, but because I feel like they're imposing their political statement on me for their personal comfort. (I feel like English already has a perfectly good 3rd person singular pronoun for non-binary genders) 


So now we can discuss the specifics of that instance.

 

 

Edited by Jumbie
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, alive she cried said:

By and large, I agree, but Jumbie raised a lot of my issues. Essentially how these terms are defined, and whether you can have an unpopular/controversial opinion without being told to stop posting/thinking that. For example, the fact that I think you have Jordan Peterson completely wrong, or that there are only two genders? I really don't see how that's transphobic. There is male to female trans and female to male trans, and I completely support them in their struggle for acceptance. That's still just two genders though, right? 

 

Requires it's own thread and I'm probably wading into deep water here with what information I have but cliff's notes: While sex is defined by genitalia there are in fact several more genders than male and female based on what chromosomes a person received in the womb.  A person can receive a vagina and internal testicles, a person can have both sex organs, a person can be born with a penis but develop breasts and appear feminine after puberty.  But gender is a largely social construct because behavior and appearance aren't inherently male or female so while many transgendered people (which is itself a blanket term for people with various conditions) will choose either male or female some choose to identify as both or neither, some people choose swap back and forth (model Ruby Rose is famously gender-queer).  Also Jordan Peterson is the fucking worst.

 

Now to answer your first question: Remember how we had a thread about whether Lady Gaga was secretly a man and whether we'd have sex with her if she was?  Now remember how we had a transgender member sign up a few months later and we were all super respectful (give or take a few bad taste jokes that were rightfully negged) and changed our behavior to be more welcoming?  That's pretty much what we should do going forward (minus the sniping comments from people).  Remember how after Amy Nicole's brother died we all got a lot more careful about using suicide as a joke?  And despite the fact that WhoDey and KaraSwims haven't been on in probably a decade we're all careful how we characterize differently abled people and don't make jokes about the special olympics and shit like that?  We're gonna fuck up from time to time, things change and I think that's apparent to anyone who has looked directly into the blowtorch that is their post history (fuck I probably accidentally said some wrong things above and I'll cop to that if corrected) but ultimately if you're respectful and read the room and you're not too proud to back off and apologize when you step on somebody's toes then it's fine.

 

And sometimes you're just not going to be able to discuss stuff like you want to, I've backed off on topics of completely unimportant pop cultural nature because it was clear there was not discussion left, just a fight.  Similarly I rarely if ever discuss religion on here because that's always a fucking shitshow, I don't bear people ill will for it because I know people are having strong reactions due to scars from their real life experiences.  Point is you can never tell when a topic can get too heated by the amount of real world importance it has (see: the fucking Star Wars thread, any time I've disagreed with Nick or Pancho on any sort of pop culture ephemera.)

 

Pick your battles, be respectful, know when to let things go, take warnings seriously.  You'll be fine. 

  • Like 2
  • Really Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not so long ago, 'you' was only plural. 'Thou' was the singular 2nd. But folks got tired of too many pronouns and axed the thous and 'you' became both singular and plural.

Seems like expanding 'they' to a singular non-gendered personal pronoun is a natural progression (given that it is a non-starter) and I and many English speakers already do it.

 

Edited by Jumbie
Link to post
Share on other sites

There's already an organic movement towards they.

 

I think I first heard about Ze in the context that some activists groups were promoting it. I've never actually met anyone using it, but then again, I don't know many non-binary folks. But I've also heard other pronouns promoted and at the moment I feel like we have one of those situations of competing formats/conventions that sometimes grips the tech world (blue ray, Betamax etc).

 

Some genderqueer people prefer to use gender-neutral pronouns. Usage of singular 'they', 'their' and 'them' is the most common;[29] and ze, sie, hir, co, and ey are used as well. Some others prefer the conventional gender-specific pronouns 'her' or 'him', prefer to be referred to alternately as 'he' and 'she', or prefer to use only their name and not use pronouns at all.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genderqueer#Pronouns_and_titles


To me, a need exists for a standard pronoun and the sensible choice is to go with what is already the largest, most convenient convention and help establish it so we get a standard convention and move on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if there's one thing the LGBTTQQIAAP is about it's standard conventions.  A standard pronoun will never exist, we can't even stick with an acronym!  I've been told at times that gay and homosexual are slurs yet we're all now united under the blanket of "queer" which literally was invented as a slur.  I'm not entirely sure whether I should identify as bisexual, pan-sexual, or omnisexual based on jargon, the whole sorting hat scenario is bananas, so I'll call someone by whatever pronoun they're most comfortable with.

Edited by Iambaytor
Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree that this line of discussion is important, I think we've ultimately strayed from the topic at hand.

 

I think the line, as far as warning goes, is essentially:

 

Discussion, dissent, and discourse are encouraged, but personal attacks are not.

 

For example:

Quote

 

Let's say you (universal "you", not specifically you) may not like the fact that I am transgender. That is fine. That's great, that's whatever. I would personally say that making a thread about how much you dislike trans people is a little much, but so long as you aren't calling for their death and calling them generally terrible people, I would probably stay out of it. Your opinions are your opinions, regardless of whether or not I agree with them.

 

Now, let's say you (again, universal "you"), find me in another thread and dismiss whatever I'm saying because I'm trans. That's nearing abuse / bigotry. Or you start calling people out in your hypothetical "are trans bad?" thread, and it becomes more than just a thread of discourse. To an extent, we all generally know where that line is.

 

Of course, it should be noted that, due to my personal....involvement...in certain issues, I would ask Panch or Axels to watch over said thread. I can let things get under my collar, so to speak, so it would be hard for me to remain impartial in this instance.

 

Now, except for minor instances here and there, this hasn't really happened on here in recent history. There have been a few instances of @The NZA having to PM people here and there asking them to chill, but that's about it. This is NOT about suddenly changing the "free speech" aspect of this board, but is rather about having the tools needed as a just in case method.

 

People on the board have generally responded as adults in situations like this. Yes, there was the thing with Jont where he wouldn't stop and I escalated, but Panch was trying to calm everything down on his end, and this system would have allowed us to see what each other was doing and act as a team. We can see each other's warnings, and we can override each other's warnings if someone is acting out of place.

 

 

@Jumbie, I'm sorry if I'm not answering your questions adequately. I know it kind of feels like I'm saying "we'll know the line when we come to it", but...we kind of will. We're all adults here, and we know when lines are crossed. There are things that are deliberately hateful, and that's what we're ultimately trying to avoid. Things that we've always tried to avoid. These are rules that were always unspoken, in a sense, but now are. Just because they've now been "set", doesn't mean we're roaming the streets looking for dissenters. It's just....now there's an official way for us to say "hey, quit being a jerk" without having to resort to someone like me hitting someone like Jont with a 2-day ban for an ill-defined reason.

 

I honestly hope that I don't have to use these tools. Like, at any point. That's not why I'm here. I'm here for, well, this:

11 hours ago, Jumbie said:

hanging out in a good friend's living room being safe to say what you really think.

 

More than anything, I don't want this to be a "real life" version of HondosInc. where people get banned or warned for the slightest hint of dissent from the generally "accepted" opinions.

Edited by Stilly
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

i like the direction this thread's taking, and hope it puts some here at ease.  i don't have much more to add at the moment, other than that jordan peterson is a sophist at best, academic troll at worst and dumb as a bag of hammers 

 

dude literally came up misrepresenting canada's laws & put his transphobia on blast, he's deeply misogynistic & i've read enough to see a homophobic streak too.  his tired shtick is to make claims nebulous enough that when people take him to task, he forever says they're misinterpreting him, even when directly quoting.  



 

DkK_zUOW4AEL1yV.jpg

  • Really? 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm on the bus into Limerick at the moment, so I can't write any essays. Just wanted to say Stilly has quashed my fears. I'm on board with this now. 

 

Also, now that I feel assured I can,  I'll start a separate thread on Jordan Peterson so we can debate this proper.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm glad we're fleshing this out here.  i wanna keep this going for a bit more & see if there's more feedback/concerns before fully implementing it.  you guys think giving it the rest of august sounds fair?

 

6 hours ago, alive she cried said:

Also, now that I feel assured I can,  I'll start a separate thread on Jordan Peterson so we can debate this proper.

 

you were always welcome to....? 

 

not sure how you gathered that this somehow wasn't an option, despite my feelings on dude. 

 

i should, however, let you know that i'm not genuinely interested in "debating" the merits of pseudo-academic bigots.  you're free to discuss what you like, but if it's an effort done for my benefit, i don't want you feeling like i'm baiting you into something i'm not going to engage in a manner you might think is fair.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

nah - nothing i'm saying here has to do with moderating.  ASC isn't gonna get warnings for quoting said bigot, but i suppose we can use any specific defense of his more hateful statements as a litmus test.   still not comfortable with the notion e$ didn't think he "could" make such a topic, though - we've covered far more controversial things for years now. 

 

as a poster, though: if it's to be a debate in which my mind is open to change, hard pass.  he's a charlatan and, again, a bigot on several fronts; if a topic is made for him, i'm saying that's my purpose there: to call a spade a spade.  

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/12/2018 at 12:51 AM, the division of joy said:

That's fair. But I do feel like now I'm back a bit, I'm almost walking on eggshells with what to post 

So in the name of self scouting, I can look back on this and say I probably just needed to adjust to what I remembered the anarchy fest of a few years ago to us all growing up a bit and call a bit of bullshit on myself.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

just a reminder that we intend to implement this system 9/1, so any other concerns are welcome but now's the time! 

 

also, stilly has a surprise for y'all that day - more to come 

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...