The basis of that thread was a hate-filled transphobic op-ed piece in The Federalist. The thread should have been closed based on that alone. The OP didn’t provide any cites about Biden’s EO until others pushed for it, and then provided that op-ed from the Federalist. In my own search for cites, that’s the only one that came up.
So, I think the thread should be closed because the topic appears to be patently false.
I don’t think a warning is warranted, but a mod note that said, when bringing up a controversial topic, please include a cite for your claims. That way, the responders don’t have to search around for where the claim is coming from.
I didn’t say that. I am aware that rhetorical devices like irony and sarcasm exist. I mentioned them in my post.
But their use is not universal. People usually say what they mean and in most cases it’s reasonable to take what people are saying at face value. Which is what I did in this case.
I’m losing patience in that thread with the OP’s obstinate and continued game of anti-trans microaggressions. She insists on calling transgender female athletes “trans people” and “trans students”, even when she’s obviously referring only to female transgender people, and using the term “girls” to refer only to cisgender girls.
I say close the goddamn thread. I am really trying to be respectful and considerate of legitimate concerns about differences between transgender and cisgender women, but this surreptitious terfy mumsnuttery malice of just constantly needling people with the linguistic exclusion gets on my last nerve.
I don’t irritate all that easy, and I very rarely make any kind of formal complaint about other posters, but, y’know…
This is the correct interpretation. And given the much lesser interest, audience and pay most women’s sports get, I don’t think anyone can say it’s not true.
Somewhat OFF-topic: you know, “XO” has an entirely different meaning once you invoke LGBTQIA issues. I know in this context you intend it to mean “executive order” but…
This is actually the strawman that annoys me most. Neither the mod nor any of us agreeing with the mod have argued that the issue was just that DemonTree was wrong or that we disagreed with her.
The issue was that her topic was one that it already seemed fishy that someone would believe (as the EO on its face does not make that claim), and then she threw in the disingenuous argument that people just don’t care about women’s sports (at least, that’s the most positive interpretation). She was deliberately sabotaging the discussion she claimed to want to have.
And, as I pointed out, she has a bit of a pattern of this sort of disingenuous arguing. It’s not like this was a first time issue.
She also knows very well that the trans issue is one that is being moderated tightly, and thus should have been on her best behavior. @What_Exit made that clear in case that wasn’t obvious.
Hari Seldon is a disastrously bad Mod for Great Debates. Warning people for posting controversial opinions in that forum pretty much defeats the purpose of that forum. And notice the posters who agree with his actions because they agree with his OPINIONS. To paraphrase Justice Brandeis, ‘The antidote for poor speech is more speech.’. We really dont need an intolerant debate killer moderating Great Debates.
So what? No one should get a warning for posting an opinion in a debate forum. The population here is small enough. Let posters with opposing opinions deal with bad or poorly thought out opinions.
…this isn’t about the warning, but rather than start a new thread thought would just post it here. In the lasted mod note in that thread it was stated that we should "keep this about the Executive Order as it pertains to students. "
Does that mean the rest of the OP can’t be debated? In my single post I addressed other aspects of the OP, but has the thread now been narrowly constrained and we shouldn’t be challenging the assertions made in the OP that aren’t specific to the executive order?
If someone posts they opinion that Jews secretly run the world and need be culled, then yes that should be warned.
If someone posts they opinion that Black people are genetically predisposed to be subhuman criminals and needed to be enslaved to protect the White race, then yes that should be warned.
You were talking about my views at the time, very well explained in an earlier thread, which include the subject of sport, and you implied you disagreed with all of them. I don’t think it was so unreasonable to assume that included sports.
@Hari_Seldon@What_Exit - We never did get a conclusion from the other ATMB thread about trangender topics, but it looks to me like it really should be added to the GD list of banned topics. Because this new GD thread just demonstrates again that the anti-transrights side apparently is incapable of arguing in good faith.
