Yet again: it’s being used as an insult. And it’s a gendered insult.
Directed at me? Don’t know what you mean by that.
If you mean “used in my presence”, while I doubt the wording’s exact, yes I have heard all three sorts of uses. I didn’t say any of them were common, or that the first one was likely to come up outside of an academic context. The second use is more likely to come up in discussions among feminists, and the third is unlikely within the hearing of men, and not common outside of it.
But in any case you didn’t ask me for common uses – in fact I’ve said elsewhere in this thread that the word’s not in common use among most people in the United States. You only asked me for examples of uses I don’t find offensive.
I’m not seeing the problem with people discussing it again in the future, if necessary.
I also think there’s a pretty clear line of don’t use it as an insult. If that’s too hard, then just don’t use it. The non-insulting use is pretty rare, as you say.
Yes, the same discussion over and over again with nothing being solved, just like this thread.
That’s uncalled for. I’m doing no rules lawyering, in this thread or any other. I gave you a cite of you failing to act on someone saying drunk women deserved to be raped because you couldn’t see what rule they broke when you asked for it, let’s see if you can link to me rules lawyering anywhere on this board. If you think my pushing for a rule that would prevent rules lawyering is rules lawyering, in a forum that’s made for talking about rules, I don’t know what else I can even say to you.
But this is where mods have fallen down with the misogyny issue. Apparently it means different things to different mods. That’s why this thread is here, three mods decided qunt was a perfectly fine word to use to describe a woman. And in the other case, apparently no mod could come up with a reason to sanction someone for blaming women for their own rapes. That points out a serious flaw in your rule or mods interpretation of that rule.
It’s an insult to swear at a machine now? So with the new “rule”, if I said “my cunt of a toaster stopped working”, you would favor me getting a warning?
The only reason it would be discussed here in the future is when a mod decides using the word isn’t worth any sanction. Nobody has ever opened a thread saying “wow, this post was the best non-misogynistic use of cunt I’ve ever seen. Good call on allowing it, mods!” The point is it’s being used as a hostile word and is being given a pass by some mods.
I’m glad you think there is a pretty bright line for use as an insult, I think so too. However, as this thread shows, at least some of the mods have a line that’s way past what the posters think it should be. And that applies to misogyny as a whole, as evidenced by the rape thread/decision that was eight months ago. We were told a new ruling would be forthcoming and we haven’t heard a peep since.
Sure. If you called your toaster the n-word, that would be inappropriate too. (technically, you can say what you want to your toaster, but repeating it hear would be the problem)
The word is incompatible with civilized discourse. I have no problem with this site trying to avoid such offensive behavior. The n-word can be discussed, just as the c-word can be. Neither word should be used as an insult, to machines or people.
If, at some point in time, I found it too confusing or impossible to understand what was reasonable or not to post on a message board without a detailed list of rules, I would probably stop.
The n-word is exclusively an insult, I’ve never heard anyone use it as a swear word. Cunt on the other hand, has entire countries where the word has various uses outside of an insult. And those countries would not use the n-word as anything other than an insult. That’s why I said cunt is nothing like the n-word.
Neither do I, as I’ve said many times in this thread. Having a wishy washy rule about it just leads to people pushing the line, and in this case, mods being okay with it.
Discussed, sure, but that’s not the situation here. This thread is about a poster using the oh so clever word qunt and some mods apparently having a discussion about the word and deciding it was okay. That discussion should have never had to happen. It was obvious from the word go the purpose of the post was to use a gendered insult directly at a woman, it should have been a no brainer warning. The fact that a mod or a group of three mods didn’t immediately see that is disheartening.
Someone saying " show me your titties" in a thread would bring an immediate reaction, but for some reason qunt is no biggie.
You could be talking about the mods here. They are in charge and apparently thought qunt was just fine and dandy. If they don’t know their rules, or follow their rules, how are posters supposed to know?
Last time, it was whether it should be banned in the Pit. I see no reason not to ban usage of the c-word outside of the Pit. As far as I know it is only ever used as an insult or while having sex, neither of which meld with the concept of “civil discourse”.
The solution to that is consistency. Not, “We will not stand for misogyny here.” while three mods are saying there is nothing wrong calling MTG a qunt (but apparently ‘harpy’ is disallowed)
Agreed. The enormous number of words that have been expended on c*** over the years in SDMB are evidence that plenty of decent people just seem to have a blind spot on this issue. So no taboo words or instabans. But given that there does now seem to be consensus that we want a board culture that does not tolerate misogyny, I’d like to see strict moderation to implement that. Strict in the sense of consistent and unwavering, not necessarily severe. To consistently “Mod Note” misogynistic language based on the objective consensus meaning of words in U.S. culture, without handwringing over intent, or individual idiosyncratic use of a word, or whether it’s “British usage”. Only if someone persistently and stubbornly continues to use misogynistic language after they have been made aware of board culture should more severe sanctions ensue.
I was not a mod when Shodan was suspended. I never actually minded Shodan. I never got into arguments with him. I thought the complaints about his sign-off were silly in fact. Stated more than once. Though unlike Shodan, I mostly stopped doing my little signatures as so many posters proclaimed how annoying they were in general.
But Shodan worked pretty hard at getting himself banned and it was summed up perfectly here.
So who’s personal preference should be enforced? Mine, yours, or someone else? As it is now, people can dance around that non line all day. They also have the fallback to “but soandso used it like that and didn’t get a warning.” Which would just lead to another thread like this one without anything concrete being decided.
Yes and the consistency should fall within a standard that all mods are on the same page about and causes the least amount of drama on the board. The “I’ll know it when I see it rule” is obviously not working here.
There has been a consensus on this ever since the misogyny thing came about several years ago. The main problem is that without clear cut lines, the mods seem unable or unwilling to take action. Or they take the wrong action and we end up right back here with the same tired arguments.
As I said above, if the mods were able to completely stamp out all the inappropriate titty posts, and there were many, why are they having such a hard time with much more serious slurs? Serious slurs that aren’t even close in number of times used as titty was.
I’m surprised how often this banning is brought up as unfair. His posting degenerated a lot in his last couple of years. It seemed like half of his posts consisted of him saying “SIGH, you didn’t read my cite last time so I won’t give you a cite this time.”
I can’t say I miss him, but I am a little surprised how little time has passed since his banning. If pushed I would have said five years ago.
Of course you do, but if three mods out of 10(?) make the same mistake at the same time, that means the problem exists in mod interpretation of the rules or the rule itself. I seriously can not see how using the word qunt was deemed acceptable by one mod, much less three, years after the supposed crackdown on misogyny. The rape thread was even worse and that still hasn’t really been dealt with since the forthcoming ruling is still forthcoming after eight months.
So, again, after your discussions with other mods you have no idea what course you are taking? “I expect what we will aim for” doesn’t sound like you reached a decision at all.
How can you move forward without the mods having a clearly understood plan? That’s two of you now in this thread that have said you don’t know exactly what the way forward is going to be. That seems to be pretty much the guideline in effect now that causes this problem in the first place.
I really don’t understand the mod reluctance to share info with posters that would help them understand their decisions. It’s not like anyone wants a written copy of your discussion so we can pore over it. We don’t even need to know which mod came down on which side. Just a general explanation of why a rule was needed and how it will accomplish that. Clearly the no misogyny declaration isn’t enough for mods to recognize misogyny when it’s brought to their attention.
I still haven’t seen an explanation for what the mods were thinking with the okay on the qunt post. This was such a flagrant display of misogyny, I can’t see how three mods got their heads together and decided that was legitimate discourse. Maybe one of the three could speak up and explain the reasoning.
It is the board’s policy to stop casual misogyny. It will not be tolerated, even in the Pit. We are not specifically banning any words, but please report instances of misogyny and expect moderator action.
The use of “qunt” was misogynistic, and a mod note has been issued.
What the mods were thinking before, when they originally said the post was okay, seems moot now. If you read the above quote, there is both an objective (“stop casual misogyny”) and a plan (“report instances of misogyny and expect moderator action”).