# Ivory Tower Denizen, Is There a Reason for a Warning Rather than an Explanation? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [September 23, 2017, 12:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033 "2017-09-23T12:01:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/81 "2017-09-25T12:30:13Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Okay, then let’s not bring any other thread into it - in what way is trolling to say that self-identifying gender is a key factor in deciding on gender definition? How many words does it take before expressing what is the consensus view on the SDMB is not trolling, and how does mentioning that it is a key factor dismissive? Or were there other specific words that made it so? > > Regards, > Shodan But you didn’t say “self-identifying gender is a key factor in deciding on gender definition”. I’m very confident that if you had used those words, you would not have received a mod note, much less a warning (which I think was excessive – I think a mod note was appropriate since your intention could not clearly be discerned, IMO). Just to be 100% clear, you did not mean it in a dismissive way, correct? The words you used (“whatever you decide it is”) have been used before in dismissive ways about trans and gender identification issue, even if that’s not how you meant it. I agree that you shouldn’t have received a warning, but perhaps you could this advice on board for the next time you want to contribute to a thread on the issue. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/82 "2017-09-25T12:44:37Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > No more than I missed the post where you declared that it was not your intent either, in this thread or any other. 😉 and IYSWIM. > > As far as the usual “conservatives are held to a different standard”, I don’t even think it is necessary to cover in this thread. **ITD** has said it was the specific words that I used in the specific thread that made it trolling, and/or that I didn’t flesh it out enough. Okay, then let’s not bring any other thread into it - in what way is trolling to say that self-identifying gender is a key factor in deciding on gender definition? How many words does it take before expressing what is the consensus view on the SDMB is not trolling, and how does mentioning that it is a key factor dismissive? Or were there other specific words that made it so? Very good questions. Prepare for handwaves as answers. Now, that said, I should point out that had I noticed your original post, I would have not reported it, but I certainly would have replied, and said something like: This comment can be taken a couple of ways, but to the extent that you’re being scornful of the idea that gender identity is simply ‘whatever you want it to be,’ I’d say you’re missing a world of underlying meaning. You identify as male, you experience your gender as male, and your assigned sex at birth was male, based on your physical body, and so it may be tempting to conclude that those who cannot those same questions each in the same way – that is, whose gender identity differs from their assigned sex at birth, for example – are simply experiencing a whim. If that’s what your comment hinted, then you’re wrong, as a moment’s thought would demonstrate. People undergo stress, social ostracism, sometimes surgery, and experience increased risk of suicide in fidelity to their gender identity. This is not consistent with the idea that it’s fleeting or capricious. And even if we were to give an example someone who simply rejected the fixed gender binary, and experienced gender fluidity, and could without sarcasm genuinely say, “Today I experience myself as a male; but this may not always be the case,” my question would be: so what? If it’s possible (and it is) to be born intersex, with a body that has both male and female characteristics, then why is it impossible for someone’s mind to run along a similar course? Why is it worthy of scorn to contemplate someone who experiences gender as something other than simply A or B, when it’s beyond cavil that there is a physical analog to this identity? And even if there were not – again, so what? Now, all of the above is predicated on a tone I discerned from your message, and if I was in error in sensing that tone, I withdraw the censorious tone of my words above. . . but not the underlying facts, because they, of course, remain facts. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 12:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/83 "2017-09-25T12:45:50Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > What was bigoted about the post in question? And we’re still waiting for you to point out the slur that you claimed **Shodan** used. Agreed. I’d also like to see this slur. ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/84 "2017-09-25T13:05:57Z")
> [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#): > > I did not think it was incomplete. I think you said exactly what you meant to say and that you were doing it for the purposes of trolling that thread. > > **AHunter3** took a nuanced position despite your attempt to derail the thread. If you actually were looking for nuanced debate and discussion that’s what you would have lead with, not dropping an inflammatory one-liner. So by this standard, just about every single post by a poster (who’s name can’t be mentioned because of the idiotic forum rules) which are nothing but one or two sentence snarky, content-free, “un-nuanced” politicized trollish drive-bys that are failed attempts at “wit”, will also garner a warning? Or another Poster Who Cannot Be Named who mostly posts idiotic rhetorical questions in an attempt to derail discussions…can we expect these sort of posts to be Warn-worthy? Because if that’s the case and we can start watching those comments cause warnings, I’ll support you completely\* with you warning Shodan here. \*To whatever degree my support is worth ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/85 "2017-09-25T13:42:19Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Given that one of you just got warned for trolling, and the other didn’t, I’m okay not holding y’all to the same standard in terms of looking for a clarification here. In case I wasn’t clear, I would prefer, if possible, not to discuss different standards for different posters. One will do. **ITD** said it was the specifics that matter. Then let’s not bring other threads into it - in what way is it trolling to express the notion that the consensus view of gender on the SDMB is that self-identification is a key, even THE key, factor? In that thread - not others, that thread. Based on the specifics of that thread, why was the assumption made that it was trolling? Because it was not fleshed out enough? What is the minimum? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/86 "2017-09-25T13:45:36Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > In case I wasn’t clear, I would prefer, if possible, not to discuss different standards for different posters. One will do. > > **ITD** said it was the specifics that matter. Then let’s not bring other threads into it - in what way is it trolling to express the notion that the consensus view of gender on the SDMB is that self-identification is a key, even THE key, factor? In that thread - not others, that thread. Based on the specifics of that thread, why was the assumption made that it was trolling? Because it was not fleshed out enough? What is the minimum? > > Regards, > Shodan I think the assumption that it was trolling was made because the specific language you used has been used before in dismissive and scornful ways about trans people and their gender identity. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/87 "2017-09-25T13:47:35Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > In case I wasn’t clear, I would prefer, if possible, not to discuss different standards for different posters. One will do. > > **ITD** said it was the specifics that matter. Then let’s not bring other threads into it - in what way is it trolling to express the notion that the consensus view of gender on the SDMB is that self-identification is a key, even THE key, factor? In that thread - not others, that thread. Based on the specifics of that thread, why was the assumption made that it was trolling? Because it was not fleshed out enough? What is the minimum? Maybe it was a variant of, “I can call my sister a skank, but you can’t.” I’m certain that if someone with impeccable gender identity diversity creds had made that post, it wouldn’t have garnered a warning. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/88 "2017-09-25T13:48:47Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I think the assumption that it was trolling was made because the specific language you used has been used before in dismissive and scornful ways about trans people and their gender identity. If that exact same language had been used by someone who was solidly known to be accepting of gender fluidity, do you believe it would have garnered a warning? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/89 "2017-09-25T13:54:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > If that exact same language had been used by someone who was solidly known to be accepting of gender fluidity, do you believe it would have garnered a warning? I don’t know. I don’t think it should have gotten a warning at all – since the motive was unclear, I think a mod note would have been appropriate. As a general principle, I don’t have a problem with a moderator taking into account a poster’s past statements on an issue or related issues when moderating. It’s entirely possible that a post could be sincere if it came from one poster, and an attempt to troll from another poster. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/90 "2017-09-25T14:13:18Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Maybe it was a variant of, “I can call my sister a skank, but you can’t.” I’m certain that if someone with impeccable gender identity diversity creds had made that post, it wouldn’t have garnered a warning. WADR that is a pretty wide variant - “skank” is clearly a slur, and I don’t think anyone is claiming that I was using slurs.\* I don’t know if I can address the point about my credentials on gender identity without bringing in other threads, which **ITD** says wasn’t the issue. Which brings me back to the question of the OP - why is expressing the consensus view of gender on the SDMB trolling, if it is not fleshed out enough? Does that mean I needed to add some verbiage saying that I am not trolling? How much verbiage, and why is it necessary? I didn’t see anyone else in the thread making that disclaimer. Nor do I recall anyone ever being warned for expressing the same idea that I did (I could have missed it). As mentioned, it is pretty much the default position on the SDMB. But that position wasn’t mentioned in the OP of the linked thread - why is bringing it up trolling? Regards, Shodan \*ETA: OK, maybe the claim has been made, but not by **IvoryTowerDenizen** , and it isn’t true. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/91 "2017-09-25T14:23:05Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > WADR that is a pretty wide variant - “skank” is clearly a slur, and I don’t think anyone is claiming that I was using slurs.\* > > I don’t know if I can address the point about my credentials on gender identity without bringing in other threads, which **ITD** says wasn’t the issue. Which brings me back to the question of the OP - why is expressing the consensus view of gender on the SDMB trolling, if it is not fleshed out enough? > > Does that mean I needed to add some verbiage saying that I am not trolling? How much verbiage, and why is it necessary? > > I didn’t see anyone else in the thread making that disclaimer. Nor do I recall anyone ever being warned for expressing the same idea that I did (I could have missed it). As mentioned, it is pretty much the default position on the SDMB. But that position wasn’t mentioned in the OP of the linked thread - why is bringing it up trolling? > > Regards, > Shodan > > \*ETA: OK, maybe the claim has been made, but not by **IvoryTowerDenizen** , and it isn’t true. I’m pretty sure “whatever they decide it is” is not the consensus view of the Dope. I think the consensus view is much more nuanced, going in depth about how a person’s gender identity can be assessed and evaluated, and is far more than a single momentary whim, which could be implied by “whatever they decide it is”. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/92 "2017-09-25T14:42:21Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I don’t know. I don’t think it should have gotten a warning at all – since the motive was unclear, I think a mod note would have been appropriate. > > As a general principle, I don’t have a problem with a moderator taking into account a poster’s past statements on an issue or related issues when moderating. It’s entirely possible that a post could be sincere if it came from one poster, and an attempt to troll from another poster. Sure. But insincere, sarcastic, trolling posts appear quite frequently. When they attack conservatives or conservative positions, they are generally immune from moderator action, presumably under the theory that it’s not really trolling because everyone who matters agrees with the underlying intent. In this case, the inference that the post is insincere is a jump, but even if it were intended to poke fun at the idea that gender identity arises from something beyond physical body attributes, that just makes it factually in error, and the way to correct that error is by debate, not by stifling the expression of the view. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/93 "2017-09-25T14:42:47Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I’m pretty sure “whatever they decide it is” is not the consensus view of the Dope. I think the consensus view is much more nuanced, going in depth about how a person’s gender identity can be assessed and evaluated, and is far more than a single momentary whim, which could be implied by “whatever they decide it is”. That may be, but if someone you knew decided, for all you could tell, to switch genders on a whim, would you refuse to comply with their request to be referred to by the pronouns for the new gender? If someone asked you what gender the person was, what would you say? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/94 "2017-09-25T15:16:25Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I’m pretty sure “whatever they decide it is” is not the consensus view of the Dope. I think the consensus view is much more nuanced, going in depth about how a person’s gender identity can be assessed and evaluated, and is far more than a single momentary whim, which could be implied by “whatever they decide it is”. Can you name an example of someone announcing their gender, and the consensus of the SDMB was that no, it isn’t? The only one I can think of is **Number Six/Kaitlyn** , and that was based on a large number of contradictions and inconsistencies in his/her story. And the person who pointed out the contradictions was banned, and **Una Persson** posted later that she had met the poster and still believed that **Kaitlyn** was/is transgender. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/95 "2017-09-25T15:23:56Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Can you name an example of someone announcing their gender, and the consensus of the SDMB was that no, it isn’t? The only one I can think of is **Number Six/Kaitlyn** , and that was based on a large number of contradictions and inconsistencies in his/her story. And the person who pointed out the contradictions was banned, and **Una Persson** posted later that she had met the poster and still believed that **Kaitlyn** was/is transgender. > > Regards, > Shodan I think both answers are perfectly good. Of course, someone’s gender identity is determined by “nuance, nuance, blah, blah, blah”, but for the vast majority of interaction most of us will ever have with the issue “however they self identify” is operationally all you really need. We don’t go around demanding people show their Long Form Gender Identity Assignment Certificate before we agree to their wishes. Almost all the time. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/96 "2017-09-25T15:38:27Z")
BTW, [here is what I would call good moderation towards needless partisan sniping.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=20498037&postcount=49) And no warning issued. BTW, that is not to be taken as me saying I think **Shodan** was partaking in needless partisan sniping in this case. Maybe he was and maybe he wasn’t. But the other poster clearly was. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/97 "2017-09-25T15:51:02Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > BTW, [here is what I would call good moderation towards needless partisan sniping.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=20498037&postcount=49) And no warning issued. BTW, that is not to be taken as me saying I think **Shodan** was partaking in needless partisan sniping in this case. Maybe he was and maybe he wasn’t. But the other poster clearly was. Was here to link to this same example! And make the same observation with respect to the lack of warning. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/98 "2017-09-25T16:12:00Z")
Well, to be fair, different forum, different mod, different topic, and the sniping was obvious. I agree it was good moderation. **ITD** , can I request that this at least be discussed in the mod loop? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/99 "2017-09-25T16:14:32Z")
I suspect there’s a whole lotta loopin’ going on right now. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2017, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033/100 "2017-09-25T16:15:31Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure. But insincere, sarcastic, trolling posts appear quite frequently. When they attack conservatives or conservative positions, they are generally immune from moderator action, presumably under the theory that it’s not really trolling because everyone who matters agrees with the underlying intent. > > In this case, the inference that the post is insincere is a jump, but even if it were intended to poke fun at the idea that gender identity arises from something beyond physical body attributes, that just makes it factually in error, and the way to correct that error is by debate, not by stifling the expression of the view. Sounds reasonable to me – though I don’t think a mod note is “stifling” when it’s just concerned about the possibility of someone trying to derail a thread with scorn/trolling/etc. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ivory-tower-denizen-is-there-a-reason-for-a-warning-rather-than-an-explanation/797033.md?page=6)