I think part of the problem with the issue that we’re facing is that the whole definition of misogyny and rape culture, etc… are still somewhat in the process of being defined. Or maybe redefined, or at the very least, brought into the open as a cultural phenomenon. That’s why the whole #METOO and Kavanaugh hearings are such a hot topic in recent months. If it was a foregone conclusion within society, like say… pedophilia, there wouldn’t be anywhere near so much controversy.
So for large chunks of the population, this ISN’T nearly the done deal that a whole lot of people on the SDMB have decided that it is (if it was, there wouldn’t be any debate!). That’s the echo chamber nature of the place at work- the majority of the people here have made up their mind a certain way, and now are advocating that anyone who essentially fails to toe the party line about certain topics should get banned.
I disagree. I think it’s too early for some of these topics to be automatically banned. However, I do wholeheartedly agree that trollish behavior and general assholery should be vigorously modded. I mean, if someone can get into a thread and discuss the other side of the issue without trolling or being a giant ass, then they should be allowed to do so. Their words will speak for themselves, and who knows- maybe they’ll get their mind changed. It’s happened to me on a few things during my tenure here.
I realize that takes a certain kind of poster who’s at least willing to consider the other side without assuming they’re automatically and necessarily wrong. I also think that posters who do think that way (think the other side is automatically and necessarily wrong) tend also to be assholes about it, and that’s where the moderation effort should fall.
I’m pretty opposed to making the SDMB a safe space or enhancing the echo chamber aspects of it any more than they already are; banning topics that are controversial at this very moment in national life because one side doesn’t line up with the prevailing opinion of the board seems very much like censorship to me, and I don’t like it. I’d much rather a jerk be able to come in and espouse his viewpoint, no matter how odious, as long as he stays within the boundaries of good behavior as a poster (topic or view choice notwithstanding), and let people draw their own conclusions. We shouldn’t be in the business of pushing a particular viewpoint, but rather letting the discussion have its own life, with both sides vigorously expounding their points.
And we should also be careful to not confuse spin-off topics with the actual topic, or conflating expressing concern about the spin-off topics with endorsement of the actual topic. Being concerned about people being crucified in the court of public opinion and wondering to what extent someone’s teenage stupidity is going to be allowed to bite someone in the future is NOT condoning sexual assault or misogyny anything like that. It’s important that a line be drawn on both of those- what other things should people be pilloried for some 40+ years later, and what should be attributed to youthful stupidity and ignorance? And also where/how much do life experience and changes and/or redemption come into it? Or is someone who does this kind of thing at 17 forever damned? Discussing that doesn’t equate to legitimizing or condoning misogyny or rape either.
There’s a lot of fertile discussion ground here, and I think automatically disqualifying the topic misses out on a lot of that. We should be here for intellectual stimulation and new points of view, and automatically banning the topics instead of moderating obnoxious individual posters is kind of like the opposite tack.