# Disputation and The Straight Dope Message Board **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [November 25, 2019, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977 "2019-11-25T18:20:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 21
**Author:** ![thorny\_locust](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thorny_locust/32/431_2.png) [@thorny\_locust](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thorny_locust)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2019, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/401 "2019-12-04T22:20:00Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > They aren’t all lost causes. Bound to be out of editing time by now – No, they’re not all lost causes. But expecting them to be won by telling them that it’s perfectly possible to want entire groups of people to disappear from their homes while not wanting to do any harm isn’t going to win them. That’s just going to make them feel comfortable with their nonsense. They have to recognize that pain, in order to be won. And the people who are in pain aren’t required to dedicate their lives, or even a chunk of each day or each week, to explaining their pain to bigots. Some do anyway; but it needs to be optional. The question here is, to what extent do the people in pain need to have the fact of the bigotry shoved in their faces every time they come here? That seems to me to be what we’re debating. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2019, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/402 "2019-12-04T22:26:56Z")
> [@thorny\_locust](#): > > Going out without pants will result in people seeing your legs, yes. Nobody’s expecting everybody to go around with some sort of blinders that prevent the viewing of legs. Looking at legs in such a fashion that it’s noticeable to others that you’re looking specifically at legs, and not at the person in general, is another matter entirely. If the “girls” you know (are they all minors?) are terribly embarrassed by having people look at their legs, it’s almost certainly because the people in question are staring at their legs, not just casually noticing them on the way by. It’s not polite to stare at people in general. It’s proper in some situations to be looking directly at a particular person, rather than generally and casually around the room or the sidewalk or whatever, but in most of those situations one is suppose to be looking at the face. I agree with everything here. By girls I was referring to minors, I guess mostly adults by now but this sort of thing doesn’t really come up so often in discussions with grown women. > [@thorny\_locust](#): > > The result of bigotry is harm to the persons who are targeted by it. > > The result of attempting to forcibly move all black people who were in the USA in the 1900’s or the 1800’s to Liberia would have been to do harm to many of them, even if not all those who wanted to do so wanted to think of it that way. The result of some people in the Americas wanting Native Americans out of their towns did a great deal of harm. > > Wanting entire categories of people to just disappear is to wish harm upon them. > > In addition, while there may be some bigots who are deluding themselves into thinking that it’s possible to want all the people they disagree with to not exist, or to want them to exist but Somewhere Else, or to want them to exist but only as second or third class citizens, without that doing them any harm: bigotry in general also encourages the people who do actively want to do harm. Again, don’t you read the news? > > […] > > ETA: Just saw this: > > No. It may be possible to claim that one supports the separation of Native Americans onto reserves away from their homelands, but decries the Trail of Tears but the Trail of Tears was an essential part of the policy. You can’t force people out without forcing them out. You can’t force people out without harming them. You are right, of course, about how things are in the real world. _I_ know that you can’t support Native American reservations _and_ be against forced removals _and_ be consistent. I don’t think you are right about how people _think_ things are. A person can also hold a self-contradictory opinion, and if we’re talking about bigots that argue sincerely and without malicious intent, isn’t that a given? ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2019, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/403 "2019-12-04T22:41:45Z")
> [@thorny\_locust](#): > > And the people who are in pain aren’t required to dedicate their lives, or even a chunk of each day or each week, to explaining their pain to bigots. Some do anyway; but it needs to be optional. It is optional. There is no requirement that a trans member jump into a single trans thread. They can go to any other thread, or make their own. People might ask them to join such a thread, but they are under no obligation to do so or explain why they won’t. > [@thorny\_locust](#): > > The question here is, to what extent do the people in pain need to have the fact of the bigotry shoved in their faces every time they come here? That seems to me to be what we’re debating. I think there’s a limit to all things. If every other thread is about the morality of homosexual relations I would support the administration saying, cut that out, keep it in one thread please. I believe they did exactly that with the gun control threads this summer (or was it abortion?). Too much of _anything_ is toxic. But I don’t expect the question to go away any time soon. Plenty of people have diverse opinions and the morality of homosexual relations is, in fact, one of the great debates of our time. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![nelliebly](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nelliebly/32/5422_2.png) [@nelliebly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nelliebly)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2019, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/404 "2019-12-04T23:33:39Z")
> [@thorny\_locust](#): > > Going out without pants will result in people seeing your legs, yes. Nobody’s expecting everybody to go around with some sort of blinders that prevent the viewing of legs. Looking at legs in such a fashion that it’s noticeable to others that you’re looking specifically at legs, and not at the person in general, is another matter entirely. If the “girls” you know (are they all minors?) are terribly embarrassed by having people look at their legs, it’s almost certainly because the people in question are staring at their legs, not just casually noticing them on the way by. It’s not polite to stare at people in general. It’s proper in some situations to be looking directly at a particular person, rather than generally and casually around the room or the sidewalk or whatever, but in most of those situations one is suppose to be looking at the face. > > The result of bigotry is harm to the persons who are targeted by it. > > The result of attempting to forcibly move all black people who were in the USA in the 1900’s or the 1800’s to Liberia would have been to do harm to many of them, even if not all those who wanted to do so wanted to think of it that way. The result of some people in the Americas wanting Native Americans out of their towns did a great deal of harm. > > Wanting entire categories of people to just disappear is to wish harm upon them. > > In addition, while there may be some bigots who are deluding themselves into thinking that it’s possible to want all the people they disagree with to not exist, or to want them to exist but Somewhere Else, or to want them to exist but only as second or third class citizens, without that doing them any harm: bigotry in general also encourages the people who do actively want to do harm. Again, don’t you read the news? > > There may be blame applicable to the parents. But _shifting_ blame onto the parents is still a distraction from placing blame on the rapist. And it comes across way too much as ‘well of course an 11 year old girl isn’t safe outside her own house, that’s just the way people should expect the world to be!’ > > ETA: Just saw this: > > No. It may be possible to claim that one supports the separation of Native Americans onto reserves away from their homelands, but decries the Trail of Tears but the Trail of Tears was an essential part of the policy. You can’t force people out without forcing them out. You can’t force people out without harming them. Excellent post. ---
**Author:** ![nelliebly](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nelliebly/32/5422_2.png) [@nelliebly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nelliebly)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/405 "2019-12-05T00:02:46Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > It is optional. There is no requirement that a trans member jump into a single trans thread. They can go to any other thread, or make their own. People might ask them to join such a thread, but they are under no obligation to do so or explain why they won’t. > > I think there’s a limit to all things. If every other thread is about the morality of homosexual relations I would support the administration saying, cut that out, keep it in one thread please. I believe they did exactly that with the gun control threads this summer (or was it abortion?). Too much of _anything_ is toxic. > > But I don’t expect the question to go away any time soon. Plenty of people have diverse opinions and the morality of homosexual relations is, in fact, one of the great debates of our time. > > ~Max I’m getting very weary of this “If you don’t like it, don’t read that thread” approach to racism, misogyny, and transphobia. It’s one of the approaches that helped perpetuate iniquitous, damaging situations: \*Don’t like Blacks having to sit in the back? Don’t eat at that restaurant. Distressed that Issei and Nisei are getting herded into internment camps? Don’t watch. Don’t like sundown laws? Don’t live in that area. Don’t like your boss referring to female employees by their bra sizes and refusing to promote them? Don’t work there. Easy-peasy. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/406 "2019-12-05T00:05:00Z")
> [@nelliebly](#): > > I’m getting very weary of this “If you don’t like it, don’t read that thread” approach to racism, misogyny, and transphobia. To _discussions_ about racism, misogyny, and transphobia. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/407 "2019-12-05T00:49:01Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > To _discussions_ about racism, misogyny, and transphobia. > > ~Max Would you say that at work or the gym? If people are carrying on a big old racist conversation, the solution is to just keep walking? You can still create an atmosphere that is hostile even if all the women and colored folk dutifully scroll past the hostile threads. This should be obvious. ---
**Author:** ![str8cashhomie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7cd45c/32.png) [@str8cashhomie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/str8cashhomie)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/408 "2019-12-05T00:52:26Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > To _discussions_ about racism, misogyny, and transphobia. > > ~Max Avoiding the discussion altogether would be happening to avoid actual bigoted opinions that come out of the discussion. ---
**Author:** ![thorny\_locust](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thorny_locust/32/431_2.png) [@thorny\_locust](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thorny_locust)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/409 "2019-12-05T01:12:37Z")
> [@nelliebly](#): > > Excellent post. Thanks! but I’ve found a problem with it, though at least I had the sense to say “may”: > [@thorny\_locust](#): > > There may be blame applicable to the parents. That was in partial response to this: > [@Shodan](#): > > No, it doesn’t mean that. The fact that the parents did not impose a curfew, and especially that they allowed their eleven year old daughter to “date” a nineteen year old, does not shift any blame onto the eleven year old. Does it shift blame onto the parents? Hell yes, it does, and rightly so. > > “What in bloody hell were you thinking?” is a perfectly valid question when directed at a mother or father who, when a nineteen year old shows up at the door and wants to “date” your eleven year old, lets it happen. > > Nobody expects an eleven year old to make consistently wise decisions. Because they’re eleven years old. That’s why they need parents - and why those parents had better have two brain cells to rub together and see if they can strike a spark. I haven’t read all of that 8 year old thread. But I’ve now been through the first hundred or so posts; and read the stories linked in those posts. Shodan, where are you seeing that the parents allowed their daughter to “date” a nineteen year old? I’m not finding that anywhere in those news reports. I’m finding, rather to the contrary, that the mother, when she saw signs of trouble (though it’s unclear whether the “young man” was the 19 year old in question), called the police. [https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Cleveland-residents-still-reeling-after-gang-rape-1691603.php](https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Cleveland-residents-still-reeling-after-gang-rape-1691603.php) > [@](#): > > Shortly before the video recordings surfaced at school, there was a sign of trouble. Her daughter had borrowed her father’s cell phone, and afterward Maria discovered a lurid photo of a young man that had been e-mailed to it. > > “I asked about it, and she said she knew nothing. So I told her I was taking it to the police, and I did,” Maria said. “They still have the phone. And I’ve not heard anything back.” I’m also seeing that the mother had been in the hospital. Hard to supervise one’s kids from a hospital bed. > **[Gang Rape of 11-Year-Old Girl Sparks Racial Tensions in Texas Town](https://abcnews.go.com/US/gang-rape-charges-18-men-sparks-racial-tensions/story?id=13095476&page=1)** > > The alleged gang rape of an 11-year-old girl by at least 18 boys and young men has sparked outrage in the tiny town of Cleveland, Texas, and broken open racial tensions in the town just 45 miles from Houston. Houston community activist Quannell X... > [@Max\_S](#): > > To _discussions_ about racism, misogyny, and transphobia. If those discussions are ignored, then the Dope is hosting, unchallenged, racism and misogyny and transphobia. So people concerned about that may well not feel safe simply ignoring the threads. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/410 "2019-12-05T01:23:04Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > … The problem isn’t with the people being offended, it’s with the people offending. The proper treatment for that is pretty obvious, and it isn’t “allow them to offend as much as they’d like”. > [@DirkHardly](#): > > The issue is whether being offended is a reasonable reaction and whether, even if it is, someone’s being offended is sufficient cause to shut down discussion. … > [@Max\_S](#): > > I don’t need to understand someone’s experience or agree with their position to “understand” it. The problem is that I am unconvinced by appeals to consequence. That kind of argument isn’t usually persuasive to me … > [@Max\_S](#): > > I believe people who say they are offended. That people are offended is not enough to change my opinion on anything except whether or not people are offended. I need to know what specifically they are offended by, and why (doesn’t have to be specific) they are offended. Then I can determine, for myself, whether or not it would be appropriate to take some sort of action that addresses the offender. … First just to Max. My post made no appeal to consequences. It was an appeal to basic decency. What follows addresses all of the above posts - 1. Individuals A are the presumed expert on whether or not they were offended by what individual B posted. They have ZERO expertise on whether or not individual B meant to offend or whether or not any other inference about Individual B’s thinking is valid. 2. Feeling offended does NOT give a free pass to offend others, which is what many want to do based on what they think they “know” the other person actually meant. Agreed it is the offending not the being offended which is the issue to control. 3. Once individual B knows that a type of statement offends individuals A it is high order jerkdom to persist in that sort of statement if it could be avoided and still have meaningful discussion of the subject of the op. Obviously if a progressive is offended by someone claiming Sanders is unelectable, then respecting that offense would hobble discussion, and they would need to suck it up, for example. But OTOH I don’t care if you know or understand _why_ say “Hymietown” or accusations of “dual loyalty” are offensive. Or for someone else maybe the word “cracker”. If you use it, without some fairly unavoidable need in a conversation, knowing that it offends some other in the conversation then you are an ass. That is true for posts received as misogynistic, racist, and transphobic, AND for ones announcing your “knowledge” of the hateful intent of others. Moderation does not require proof of the hateful intent; the being a jerk by persisting in offensive posting for no adequate conversational subject need is sufficient. 4. Setting up an op in GD along the lines of “[Hateful beliefs X] are horrible.” when expressing X is something that will offend others, is trolling. An op is an invitation to offer counters to it, not a post on your Facebook feed looking for likes and shares. Inviting someone to say [hateful belief X] in that manner is trolling and should be forbidden to the same degree that a thread espousing [hateful belief X] is. If you want _support_ and _affirmation_ post in MPSIMS, not in GD. That forum should be maintained as fairly safe spaces fairly strictly IMHO. OTOH an op that asks if [set of actions Z] is an effective way to address [hateful belief X] should not be allowed to be hijacked by those who would defend the hateful belief. In that context they should be warned fast. 5. Whether or not we decide that moderation is the tool chosen to implement this standard, being a jerk as above (and Max S., I would describe your standard as being a jerk in this regard) is something to avoid in all but The Pit, where jerkishness should stay contained. ---
**Author:** ![thorny\_locust](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thorny_locust/32/431_2.png) [@thorny\_locust](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thorny_locust)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/411 "2019-12-05T01:30:28Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > You are right, of course, about how things are in the real world. _I_ know that you can’t support Native American reservations _and_ be against forced removals _and_ be consistent. I don’t think you are right about how people _think_ things are. A person can also hold a self-contradictory opinion, and if we’re talking about bigots that argue sincerely and without malicious intent, isn’t that a given? It requires, on some level, malicious intent to be that willfully ignorant. The intent may not be on the conscious level, I suppose. But ‘I sincerely want all those people to disappear, which they clearly don’t want to do, but I have no malicious intent towards them’ is the kind of statement that, if you’re present at the discussion at all, IMO really calls for pointing out the contradiction. (“Supporting reservations”, now that they exist, is a confusing statement. I don’t think people and communities should now be driven unwillingly off the bit of land they were allocated, even though they were unfairly driven there in the first place. But you probably didn’t mean that.) ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/412 "2019-12-05T01:42:55Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > To _discussions_ about racism, misogyny, and transphobia. > > ~Max > [@CarnalK](#): > > Would you say that at work or the gym? If people are carrying on a big old racist conversation, the solution is to just keep walking? > > You can still create an atmosphere that is hostile even if all the women and colored folk dutifully scroll past the hostile threads. This should be obvious. And I’d like to press this point. Do you think we’ll ever again get decent female or person of colour moderators if they are expected to simply scroll by racism and misogyny? ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/413 "2019-12-05T01:51:20Z")
> [@thorny\_locust](#): > > … Every form of human communication is limited in its usefulness. It’s vitally important that humans try to communicate anyway. … > \ > … I’m going to guess that you didn’t have a large number of your relatives murdered by bigotry a handful of years before you were born. … > \ > … I’m not entirely clear, in my own mind, to what extent we should ban particular language, let alone particular topics. But I’m fairly sure that ‘we need to keep endlessly debating everything as if everything were a serious position which it’s reasonable to hold’ is creating problems. … > \ > … The question here is, to what extent do the people in pain need to have the fact of the bigotry shoved in their faces every time they come here? That seems to me to be what we’re debating. I want to express how much I appreciate your thoughts here. FWIW I did have relatives murdered by bigotry a handful of years before I was born, and I am with you with an appreciation that communication is messy, dangerous, and important to keep chugging at. I am in fact very comfortable with major constraints, if not outright bans, on some topics. Some are not reasonable to endlessly debate. The discussions are of no value and of distinct harm. The list though should be small and kept with consideration that not every discussion that offends some number is without value. There _are_ those who see any significant divergence from their specific bubbled POV as “hateful” in some way, as literally supporting torture and murder, for example, and experience pain every time they come here. To them a majority of Americans are hateful and not worth talking to. Catering to those specific people in ways that hobble any meaningful discussions about a wide variety of subjects is not reasonable. And we cannot be a place in which the hateful posts are allowed to run rampant and jerks of all stripes dominate the posting space. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/414 "2019-12-05T01:53:44Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > Why do I want to welcome bigots who aren’t bad people? Who only happen to be ignorant? Who actually stand a chance of being reasoned out of their bigoted views? > > I live among these people. They aren’t bad people, at least not all of them. These are your fellow human beings, whether you live in the U.S. or any other state with bigots. They aren’t all lost causes. > > Apparently you don’t believe in the tagline, but I do, and fighting ignorance is the explicit reason that I am here on these boards. Be it someone else’s ignorance, or my own… > > ~Max In other words, they’re not bad, just stupid. If you feel like wasting your time arguing with stupid people, feel free. But why should the rest of the board have to host these losers? The whole “fighting ignorance” is just a corporate slogan, like Burger King’s “Have It Your Way” or whatever. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/415 "2019-12-05T03:28:24Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Would you say that at work or the gym? If people are carrying on a big old racist conversation, the solution is to just keep walking? I would not, because in my opinion the purpose of a gym is not to discuss potentially offensive topics or fight ignorance. Contrast with a message board or philosophy/debate club. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/416 "2019-12-05T03:30:15Z")
> [@str8cashhomie](#): > > Avoiding the discussion altogether would be happening to avoid actual bigoted opinions that come out of the discussion. Yes… it would. If you were making a point to me, it’s gone right over my head. Sorry. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![nelliebly](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nelliebly/32/5422_2.png) [@nelliebly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nelliebly)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/417 "2019-12-05T03:36:00Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > To _discussions_ about racism, misogyny, and transphobia. > > ~Max Yes. Pardon me for leaving out the phrase “discussions of.” Interesting that that’s the only bit you saw fit to comment on. ---
**Author:** ![str8cashhomie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/7cd45c/32.png) [@str8cashhomie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/str8cashhomie)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/418 "2019-12-05T03:37:57Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > Yes… it would. > > If you were making a point to me, it’s gone right over my head. Sorry. > > ~Max It seemed like you were drawing a distinction between “racism/mysoginy/transphobia” and “discussions about racism/mysoginy/transphobia”. If you were this distinction isn’t valid because the point of avoiding a discussion about those topics is that people in the discussion will actually make racist/sexist/transphobic comments, and you would therefore be asking people to have to actually scroll past real bigotry, not just a discussion about bigotry that avoids bigotry itself. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/419 "2019-12-05T04:09:26Z")
> [@thorny\_locust](#): > > If those discussions are ignored, then the Dope is hosting, unchallenged, racism and misogyny and transphobia. > > So people concerned about that may well not feel safe simply ignoring the threads. As I said, perhaps I don’t understand what these “people” (of which you are one, right?) are offended by, or why. I made the assumption that you are offended by being exposed to misogyny because being exposed to misogyny makes you uncomfortable. But the exposure is largely voluntary, and now you are telling me that closing your eyes or passing by offending threads might make you feel unsafe. But you haven’t told me _why_. The reason might be obvious to you, but it’s not obvious to me. What can I do? I can make another assumption, and I hate to do this, but I _have_ to understand things at least in a general sense before I can truly accept them. There’s [DEL]three[/DEL] four things I can think of. These are not intended as insults or even accurate representations of your motives and I’m sharing my thought process, trying to rationalize your opinion: [ul][li]You feel compelled to correct bigots and therefore cannot stay away from obviously bigoted threads, even if they cause great distress to you[/li][li]You take some sort of pleasure in reading bigoted arguments, even if they cause great distress to you[/li][li]You aren’t offended about yourself being exposed to bigoted arguments, you are offended because other people are offended[/li][li]You aren’t offended about yourself being exposed to bigoted arguments, you are offended that bigots still exist[/ul][/li]I doubt that I’ll bend for #1 or #2. #3 is only delegating whatever reasoning I might understand to another person. #4 seems most likely to me. But if you are offended by the persistance of bigots in general, I still don’t think that’s any basis for banning bigoted debates. Removing them from this place does not change the world for the better, it denies them a platform yes, but no minds are going to change as a result. Less communication between bigots and non-bigots is worse for everybody, and this is my opinion, isolation breeds ignorance breeds fear breeds hate. If by magic I could prevent any bigoted idea from being spoken, would bigotry disappear? I don’t think so. I’ve seen young children formulate complex notions of racism and sexism and other tribalism all on their own. I think part of it is a natural survival strategy. Just telling everybody that the question is settled won’t eradicate bigotry. It emerges _ex nihilo_. I shared a story earlier about how I used to be sexist. I can imagine myself today, having never learned that lesson. I would still be just as obstinate about not accepting anything as truth unless I understood it. I could have been one of those bigots, this message board could have been an opportunity for me to change my ways, but not if we take it as a settled question, unworthy of debate, deserving of punishment for questioning, the equality of the sexes. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2019, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/420 "2019-12-05T04:23:53Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Being considerate to others sensitivities even if we don’t understand the reasons for the sensitivity, even if we can’t imagine ourselves in that place, is simply the right thing to do. Advocating that others not be rude in that context is also something I’d think you could sign on to. Reading your more recent comment, I would like to return to this. Being considerate to others sensitivities is simply the right thing to do - _to an extent_. I am not going to join you if being considerate or respectful means changing my opinion about an issue others might find offensive. Speaking my opinion? I can usually bide my tongue, for the sake of respect or friendship, unless it is my job to speak my opinion on that issue. Support a measure that I don’t understand? Vote or argue against my conscience? Absent some extreme circumstance, it’s almost definitely not going to happen. I’m not that considerate, and I am not that polite, if it can still be called that. ETA: I suppose, I could drop this cause. After all, I’m no misogynist or racist or transphobe. Banning those topics will not prevent me personally from expressing myself. I really don’t have any skin in this game. I think it’s the wrong move to make though, and the thread _is_ soliciting my opinion. ~Max [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977.md?page=20) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977.md?page=22)