We had our discussion and the thread will be reopened. There will be a modnote to stay away from arguing Men’s Rights and I’ll add staff notes where needed.
Whew! Thank God! Our long, dark time wandering in the wilderness is finally over.
Lol
(C4d)
That’s because you don’t have any rights to govern whether or not a woman chooses to reproduce, just as I don’t have the right to force you to have a vasectomy so you don’t get me pregnant. You don’t have the right to determine what others do with their own body. Why is this such a foreign concept to you?
Yeah, thread drift is exactly what I was thinking of. I often like reading the side discussions, and many of them just don’t need a whole separate thread dedicated to them. Often putting the kibosh on them is warranted, but also often it’s just an interesting little sidebar.
It was about all of that
First the title included the word “marriage” then starting with the second sentence.
And the fact that an adult could not marry who they wanted to because of the archaic views on miscegenation or religion reasons that may not even apply to me or that if you are married you need to be a breeder. Marriage is a civil contract and so any two competent adults should be able to marry and enter into the corresponding financial and legal commitments to each other. (Loving and Obergefell ).
Moderator Note
This is something that should be discussed in the actual thread, not here in ATMB. Please keep all comments here appropriate to the rules and moderation of the SDMB.
After the ridiculous ruling by the mods in question, I have to ask again:
Now, I would also add Child support to the list.
Are these able to be discussed outside of the Pit, or are they too tainted by the boogeyman of men’s rights?
Yes, they’re too tainted. Don’t blame the mods, blame the MRAs who couldn’t be civil in the past.
Do we even have any real MRAs here?
Oh, hell, yes.
If you say so. I haven’t noticed any, myself, at least not lately. What I have noticed is a lot of this thing is tangentially related to this bad thing, so it’s off-limits all the time.
Hey, did you know that 12-year-old rape victims sometimes have to pay child support to their rapists? But shhhh… we can’t talk about that here.
https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trolls-r-us-resurrections/950518/3388?u=what_exit
Look, we have a rule which I quoted. The mods agreed the child support portion and the talk about men having a say in the decision the mother gets to make were in violation.
The rule was put in place almost 3 years ago and apparently the MRA stuff came up all too often. I was not a mod then and in fact none of the GD mods were mods then.
The conversation in the temporarily closed thread did cross the line and it did take awhile to reopen the thread due to the number of posts involved. There was a chance it would remain closed, that is not what was decided.
I know from experience when I just put a modnote into a thread like that with posts scattered throughout it is not enough. I have to find and address the posts that broke the rules.
If you have a problem with the rule, I guess that is another discussion, but remember, do not actually make the arguments in this thread. That is also against the rules. Your last line there is actually pushing it in my mind.
So I guess you would have to make your arguments without any whataboutism. Makes it hard, but that is how it works.
I’ll repost what you quoted from me.
Reposted
When a thread veers into the territory of conversations that are against the rules, (and it was the OP that pretty much took it there), closing it while sorting out the mess was a reasonable option. Leaving a Men’s Rights conversation going was not something I thought should be done but I didn’t have time to sort it all out and was the only GD mod online at the time. The other GD mods didn’t both get back to me after I actually went to sleep.
Weekends are funny that way, Mods have lives too, even me.
It took some work this morning to handle the posts that were in violation. Closing a thread for a day should not have drawn such an over the top response.
You have wrongly interpreted the rule. You have wrongly enforced the rule. That’s my entire point.
I will continue to use examples that support or clarify any claims I make, just like everyone else here has always done.
I’m sure that’s hard for you, but that is how it works.
Well, if I have, it was only after consensus was reached. I did not make that decision on my own. I’m not sure why you think you’re a higher authority on the rule in question.
It wasn’t just the 3 newer mods that weighed in. We heard from one of our most experienced mods on this issue, too, before deciding how to proceed.
I’ll defer to the opinion of an experienced mod about how the rules are meant to be interpreted before any participant on the board.
Well, that’s disingenuous. I am clearly giving my opinion, which I will readily admit is not infallible. As I said ridiculous ruling by the mods in question.
OK, fair enough, the way you wrote read differently to me.
Apologies for not making myself clear, then. Mea culpa.
I would recommend not deferring to anybody. Consider their advice, certainly, but make up your own mind. Or recuse if you don’t have an opinion.