# 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:** 37
**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 18, 2019, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/721 "2019-12-18T18:35:37Z")
> [@Babale](#): > > When it comes to the posters that people routinely complain about here in ATMB, you can easily find threads where all three criteria apply to each of them. If you want me to agree with you on whether a particular member is a troll, lay out a strong and specific case (in the Pit) and link it to me. Maybe cc a moderator, too. Isn’t that what the Pit is for? ~Max ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2019, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/722 "2019-12-18T18:36:02Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > I agree, if and only if the “someone”, “them”, and “they” refer to the same single person. > > ~Max I can see that there is a hack in this. If different actors are responsible for saying each element then you will not agree to a problem. If they are coordinated would that concern you? ---
**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 18, 2019, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/723 "2019-12-18T18:42:04Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > How about stop worrying about why someone said something and just focus on what they say? If you want to respond to that do so if you don’t don’t? No mind reading necessary. No, it is reasonable to take into consideration a person’s motivations _when deciding whether to engage with them_. ~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 18, 2019, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/724 "2019-12-18T18:44:26Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > I can see that there is a hack in this. If different actors are responsible for saying each element then you will not agree to a problem. > > If they are coordinated would that concern you? Yes it would, that is very astute of you. “[…] if and only if the “someone”, “them”, and “they” refer to the same single person, or group of coordinated people”. ~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 18, 2019, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/725 "2019-12-18T18:51:11Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > Sometimes. > > Sometimes the one making the interpretation is a moderators. That can be useful, indeed. To fit this in with what I just said, it is reasonable for a community as a whole to take a person’s motivations into consideration when deciding whether to engage that person. The moderators perform that role when they decide to ban a member. ~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 18, 2019, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/726 "2019-12-18T18:56:12Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > a so-called line There is no single so-called line after which a person becomes a jerk. The concept of jerk-ishness is nebulous, on purpose. There are lines you can cross, but there are also vague thresholds. Arguing in bad faith is a vague threshold, because it is a determination of intent, and nobody can read minds, therefore it is subjective. But arguing in bad faith _is_ being a jerk. So, there. ~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 18, 2019, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/727 "2019-12-18T19:04:36Z")
> [@margin](#): > > And here on the dope we STILL cannot get certain persuasions to agree that terms like “hysterical” and “harpy” are blatantly, viciously sexist and have been for thousands of years. You are the first person I have heard claim the word “hysterical” is still sexist. The word has evolved beyond its root, in my experience. I never thought “hysteria” carried a gendered connotation, but now that you say it does, I guess that means it does. And until a couple weeks ago, I only ever heard the word “harpy” refer to the mythic bird-human creature. Is “harp” (verb, to dwell on something) also sexist? Different cultures, I suppose. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2019, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/728 "2019-12-18T19:15:26Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > Yes it would, that is very astute of you. > > “[…] if and only if the “someone”, “them”, and “they” refer to the same single person, or group of coordinated people”. > > ~Max “Coordinated” can mean a number of things. When people who are otherwise strangers hear some kinds of whistles they know what is being asked for, identify as those being asked for that thing, and then try to deliver it. Under those condiitons they are also required to deny any coordination that may have existed. As a condition of the “coordination”. IOW this “coordination” only exists as a remotely implied but very effective secret. ---
**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 18, 2019, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/729 "2019-12-18T19:19:33Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > “Coordinated” can mean a number of things. When people who are otherwise strangers hear some kinds of whistles they know what is being asked for, identify as those being asked for that thing, and then try to deliver it. > > Under those condiitons they are also required to deny any coordination that may have existed. As a condition of the “coordination”. IOW this “coordination” only exists as a > remotely implied but very effective secret. If you don’t have convincing evidence of coordination I’m not going to assume that Mr. A should be faulted for claiming he was unaware of the times you refuted the same argument somewhere else. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2019, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/730 "2019-12-18T20:46:25Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > If I were moderating a debate between you and a Baptist minister, and you pulled a “he’s clearly lying/he clearly doesn’t respect homosexuals” in your opening statement, I would kick _you_ out of the room. > > ~Max Good thing that we don’t follow such dumb rules for debate here, then, isn’t it? This isn’t college, chum, and you don’t get to hide behind stupid rules lawyering when such obvious, evil, incoherent absurdities as “love the sinner, hate the sin” are paraded around. ---
**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 18, 2019, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/731 "2019-12-18T21:50:45Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Good thing that we don’t follow such dumb rules for debate here, then, isn’t it? > > This isn’t college, chum, and you don’t get to hide behind stupid rules lawyering when such obvious, evil, incoherent absurdities as “love the sinner, hate the sin” are paraded around. If I were a moderator _here_ under current rules and your early reply to an OP, post #2, was “he’s clearly lying” then I would warn _you_. The problem isn’t initially holding an incoherent position, it’s accusing people of arguing in bad faith from the get-go. ~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 18, 2019, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/732 "2019-12-18T22:03:10Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > such obvious, evil, incoherent absurdities as “love the sinner, hate the sin” In my opinion, you are free to claim or argue that a particular statement has the effect of causing evil. You are not free to accuse a poster who makes that statement of being an evil person with evil intent, at least not based solely on the fact that they espouse what you consider to be evil views. ~Max ---
**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 18, 2019, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/733 "2019-12-18T22:30:08Z")
> [@thorny\_locust](#): > > “Hysterical” in the sense of ‘that person is hysterically funny’ may be applied to any gender. The “hysteria” itself is, in that sense, being applied to the speaker and not to the comedian; it means that the comedian is so funny that the speaker laughs in an out-of-control fashion. > > “Hysterical” in the sense of ‘that person is just getting hysterical over that issue and therefore their opinion ought to be ignored’ is, IME, a gendered insult. Men are rarely accused of getting hysterical in that sense. There’s got to be a Somebody’s Law that covers this one. If not, I’m going to claim it. Broomstick just used “hysterical” in the second sense about a man, over in a different thread. Good thing that at least I said “rarely”, not “never.” > [@The exact psychology behind people being angered by others' food choices?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-exact-psychology-behind-people-being-angered-by-others-food-choices/844986/75): > > I once had an on-line encounter with someone who had a _serious_ meltdown over people calling a mashed potato topped casserole variant made with ground beef _shepherd’s_ pie. NO NO NO ONLY GROUND LAMB CAN BE CALLED SHEPHERD’S PIE was how the rant started and it only got hysterical and incoherent from there. > > It would have been entertaining if he wasn’t entirely drop-dead serious. Amazing how worked up people can get about food _other people_ are eating. ---
**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 18, 2019, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/734 "2019-12-18T22:32:16Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > That’s because you seem to view “love and respect” and “an abomination under God” as perfectly compatible. Which, of course, is insane. I don’t, but given a different and decidedly more Baptist moral framework, I could. But the reason I would kick **Mr. Dibble** out of a debate is because he _assumed_ that the Baptist was lying, when it very well _could be_ that the Baptist disagrees or is ignorant. During the course of debate it could become clear that the Baptist is lying. That is a possibility, yes. But such an accusation cannot be justified in the opening statement, based on what I had written alone. And so we have **Mr. Dibble** accusing the opposing side of bad-faith before the debate even started, which is ironically bad-faith on **Mr. Dibble** ’s part. The paradox of tolerance was mentioned by **Der Trihs** earlier, but the intolerant practices mentioned in Popper’s _The Open Society and Its Enemies_ is “to begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive”. But this is exactly what **Mr. Dibble** is doing: he has begun a debate by denouncing his opponent, by claiming that they are deceptive, and concluding that the debate should not be allowed to take place at all. ~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 19, 2019, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/735 "2019-12-19T00:50:25Z")
I’m ok with not allowing “Are gays an abomination under God?” debates. And no, I don’t feel like discussing why. ---
**Author:** ![margin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/65b543/32.png) [@margin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/margin)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2019, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/736 "2019-12-19T02:15:11Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > A common refrain on this message board is “language evolves, that’s how it works”. > > Nobody is referring to a uterus (or gender) when using the word “hysterical” any longer. > > Seems to me that people who get offended by the use of the word itself are looking for something to be upset about. > > YMMV. Hey, wait, aren’t you the guy who got caught defending the use of the word “harpy”? People do in fact used “hysterical” as a slur against women. On the rag, emotional, hormonal,…there’s reams of slurs designed to imply or say outright that women are overly emotional and their opinions are meaningless because of it. “Hysterical” still gets hurled at women. And acting like using, “Amy Schumer was hysterical last night,” somehow erases the sexism of the straight use of the word is as disingenuous as your claim that “people” “are looking to get upset about something.” If you’re the guy who was complaining about “harpy”, looks like you want to attack women AND stop them from complaining. ---
**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 19, 2019, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/737 "2019-12-19T02:33:56Z")
I really think “hysterical” is much more neutered in modern useage, certainly compared to “harpy”. I mean, how do you describe a man who’s having an unreasonable freak out? But this isn’t really the place to dig into it. ---
**Author:** ![margin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/65b543/32.png) [@margin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/margin)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2019, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/738 "2019-12-19T02:50:22Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > You are the first person I have heard claim the word “hysterical” is still sexist. The word has evolved beyond its root, in my experience. I never thought “hysteria” carried a gendered connotation, but now that you say it does, I guess that means it does. And until a couple weeks ago, I only ever heard the word “harpy” refer to the mythic bird-human creature. Is “harp” (verb, to dwell on something) also sexist? > > Different cultures, I suppose. > > ~Max I’m the first person? Yeah, I kind of doubt that. The word “hysterical” gets discussed fairly frequently when there’s discussion of sexism. Hysteria is to women what _drapetomania_ was to slaves. These are diagnoses coined by the powerful to cast the people they oppressed as crazy, unnatural (slave owners used to argue that slavery was “natural”, even Biblically-ordained) to dismiss their opinions and feelings about what those powerful people were doing to them against their will. Once slavery was outlawed, mysteriously, the diagnosis of _drapetomania_ (the desire to be free) and _dysaesthesia_ (in part, an insensitivity of the skin of slaves that made vigorous and frequent whippings an actual necessity) instantly vanished, it seemed. > [@](#): > > **Is “harp”, (verb, to dwell on something) also sexist?** Bolding mine, because THIS is exactly the kind of BS that dominates this board. This is the kind of smarm that gets trotted out constantly. It looks frankly like you don’t care and then you dismiss whatever contradicts your happy opinion of what women face. It seems to me that you could look it up and not imply that it’s all just foolishness. This is precisely the type of way women complain about getting treated here. Presenting: a slightly sarcastic paraphrasing of this and many other discussions about sexism on the Dope. “Harpy is sexist.” \*No, it’s not. \* “Here’s the history of it, and oh, I’m a woman so I’ve actually bothered to look it up and kind of note when _when men hurl it at women, especially those in public life_” > [@](#): > > The word has evolved beyond its root, in my experience. _Finis._ In your experience. In your experience? Why doesn’t _your experience_ include looking it up, asking women, and \*listening to women when they tell you you are wrong? \* Frankly, a guy’s opinion about sexism against women rather seems like consulting vegetarians about steak… ---
**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 19, 2019, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/739 "2019-12-19T02:53:19Z")
If you’re gonna respond to me, please put it in another thread. ---
**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 19, 2019, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977/740 "2019-12-19T04:47:41Z")
> [@margin](#): > > The word “hysterical” gets discussed fairly frequently when there’s discussion of sexism. I don’t frequently hear discussions of sexism. In my experience “hysteria” reminds me of the tulip craze, salem witch trials, generally people running around like chickens with their heads cut off. I did learn in school that the Greek root word means uterus, and separately that throughout history of medicine and psychology did some real harm slapping “hysteria” on women, but that’s been some obscure history knowledge that has literally never been brought up until today. > [@margin](#): > > It looks frankly like you don’t care and then you dismiss whatever contradicts your happy opinion of what women face. > > It seems to me that you could look it up and not imply that it’s all just foolishness. Looks can be deceiving. I was being sincere. I did a quick search for “is harpy sexist?” when it came up the other day and the results were and are: [ul][li][The top answer seems to say not really - Quora](https://www.quora.com/Is-it-sexist-that-Hillary-Clinton-is-called-a-%E2%80%9Charpy%E2%80%9D-by-critics)[/li][li][An irrelevant article on sexism from a magazine called _Harpy_](https://harpymagazine.com/home-1/2018/3/13/red-sparrow-sexism-and-casual-discrimination-how-can-you-change-this)[/li][li][A _Cracked_ article listing 5 weird sexist sci-fi tropes, mentions a space harpy (the beast)](https://www.cracked.com/blog/5-weirdly-sexist-sci-fifantasy-tropes-that-just-wont-die/)[/li][li][Another irrelevant article about sexism from _Harpy_ magazine](https://harpymagazine.com/home-1/dvla-everyday-sexism)[/li][li][A picture of a book called “Invisible Women” on _Harpy_ magazine’s Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/p/B2SI0KMn7YU/)[/ul][/li]I mean, yes, if I had scrolled on the Quora page or down further in the search results I would have found that “harpy” is used as an insult and not just the mythical beast. But my initial impression was more like, “oh really?” “hmm I guess” “whatever, note to self, never call someone a harpy”. Not like I’ve ever thought to call someone a harpy before, any more than I think to call someone a sphinx. Apparently Hillary Clinton was called a harpy once (source: Quora). I’m not surprised that I never heard about that outrage. I also learned that some people think “banshee” is a sexist term. For me it has always meant the aircraft from Halo (a video game) or the ghosts from Warcraft III (a video game), but I’ll keep that in mind too. > [@margin](#): > > _Finis._ > > In your experience. In your experience? Why doesn’t _your experience_ include looking it up, asking women, and \*listening to women when they tell you you are wrong? \* > > Frankly, a guy’s opinion about sexism against women rather seems like consulting vegetarians about steak… I looked up “is hysterical sexist?” too. Apparently it is, at least for internet people. I also asked my (female) coworkers. Negative. I had dinner with my sister. She doesn’t think hysterical is sexist. I’ll keep it in mind and try not to use that word on the Straight Dope or when otherwise talking with out-of-towners. Clearly people 'round here don’t see it the same way, though. ~Max [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977.md?page=36) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/disputation-and-the-straight-dope-message-board/843977.md?page=38)