It was a side-note. My main point is that the word is usually used to describe humans who are invading. And while I agree that it is inappropriate and inflamatory in the context of immigration, I think trying to say that “invader” is “dehumanizing” is not the best case to make. As I said above, I far prefer “demonizing”, which I think gets much more directly at what is wrong with referring to people attempting to peacefully immigrate as “invaders”.
it’s kinda insulting. It’s certainly being a jerk. I would moderate that in my forums. I’d like to repeat what I said above: if you find yourself so angry at a post that it’s hard to reply politely, you are almost certainly better off reporting it than responding to it.
Well, I’m also thinking at the human level, leaving mollusks out of the picture, I’m referring here too about the intolerant declaring immigrants as not being “human” as in the dictionary definition one also encounters about being human (usually the second or third meaning)
“of or characteristic of people’s better qualities, such as kindness or sensitivity.
“the human side of politics is getting stronger””
What the intolerant like to do is to dehumanize immigrants both ways, as being animals or by declaring that immigrants have no kindness or empathy, in this case the intolerant are telling others that immigrants are ‘beings that are able to take over a nation by force, because they do not have human qualities’.
I’m going to be completely honest here. I’m getting really pissed off about this mess.
Don’t parse the post!, that is not how we moderate. The angry language leading " and it’s deeply shameful that you" is clearly attacking another poster. I can’t believe we’re still talking about this part of it which shouldn’t be part of this thread.
Another poster calmly explained in the cornfielded thread what was wrong with using “invaders”, I think it was @wolfpup that stayed within the rules and accomplished something. The angry tirade by LHOD accomplished only getting him tossed from a thread.
Now, can we please drop litigating and breaking down a post from a cornfielded thread and get back to the point that @Johnny_Bravo is trying to get clarification on?
Just curious. Would this apply to the Pit as well? I’ve seen people called a lot of things over there.
Sorry, but to finally address the OP, as of right now the plan is to handle these on a case by case basis. We’re not drawing any bright lines. This is our usual policy.
I can easily see calling a specific group invaders being a moddable.
I don’t really see “illegals” as used in that thread as being moddable. But a reply that explains why the usage is offensive without going after the poster that said it is well within the rules. If it turns into a back and forth that hijacks a thread, all posters will be advised to drop it or take it elsewhere.
I do. It’s helpful in that it clarifies that we’re not going to be burdened with yet more rules, and explains why the rules we already have are sufficient.
The problem with more rules is that mods then feel an obligation to interpret them and enforce their interpretations, and in a few cases this has already led to some questionable and strained judgment calls. There is no reasonable person here who is in favour of letting racism and xenophobia run rampant, at least no one that we would want to keep on the board, but we already have plenty of tools for dealing with such posts and the individuals who make them.
I am tremendously disappointed that “illegals” won’t be modded as a reprehensibly hateful slur.
Not sure what rule that would fall under and was pretty common usage for even newspapers until recently.
Just out of curiousity, would calling a poster, an outside individual or a group ‘pieces of shit’ be dehumanizing? Because we have thread titles like that. Only they are always aimed at one side, so apparently it’s acceptable. And the language used against conservatives on this board is often dehumanizing.
If we start modding on vague categories like ‘dehumanizing’ words, I will make it a mission to mod report every fucking time someone uses ‘dehumamizing’ language against me, Republicans, conservatives, etc.
This weaponizing of language is getting ridiculous.
And if you look into the reason most newspapers changed their minds, you would see why we might want to follow suit.
Outside of The Pit?
I see this more like deweaponizing of language.
Hate speech. Do not post hate speech directed against any race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, or gender in any forum.
And surely we have a rule against hateful slurs somewhere, do we not?
Not the thread titles - at least I haven’t seen the use of ‘piece of shit’ in a thread title outside the pit. But for clarity, are we saying that dehumanizing language should be okay in the Pit?
And dehumanizing language against the right is pretty common here, in multiple fora. I’m glad we’ll be getting rid of all of it if we go this way. I’ll do my part to help.
You can always report it to the Mods, right?
Outside the pit, yes. In the pit no.
We’ve pointed out specifically what we mean be dehumanizing(or perhaps, demonizing) when it comes from the right. Perhaps you can point out specific examples when it is directed at the right?
Specifics would be good, generalizations are fairly useless.
As always, as always, context should be considered. There is a current, active movement of violent terrorism against immigrants, thoroughly cited here and elsewhere, that relies on othering language against immigrants to stir up murderous activity against them. That’s what elevates these terms to something we should be concerned about. Diluting this concern with “BUT WHAT ABOUT THE CONSERVATIVES” is a terrible idea, unless we’re looking at specific cases in which there’s a significant movement of people who are actively murdering conservatives based on the “dehumanizing” rhetoric.