I am saying it is an absolutely absurd interpretation of the rule and heretofore not remotely enforced in that way. It is a reasonable debating point. Sure, get rid of the “Hitler had it right all along” threads and garbage like that, but this is a rather reasonable issue to talk about.
The implications are far reaching and will only be known once a warning is handed down. What if, in a thread about child custody, a poster says, “Notwithstanding modern sensibilities, women have a built in advantage in family court because of the old fashioned belief that young children should be with their mother.” Off limits?
I mean, this isn’t complaining about some off the wall thing. The people who say that men should have no choice are affirming in this thread that they believe that men should have no choice in the abortion decision. Why is it MRA stuff to say that maybe they should? I guess you can say that men shouldn’t have such a choice (not MRA) but if you say that they should then that’s MRA and banned. All about fair and open debate, ey?
This board has really, really lost its way.