So… LHoD is a white man and Shodan is a black man?
It’s interesting that conservatives here are VERY interested in equal outcomes when it comes to banning someone from a message board, and so very “he didn’t follow instructions” when it comes to minorities being killed by cops. This is why IDGAF about whether Shodan, you or other law and order loving conservatives get ground up by law and order moderation on this board. Follow the rules or get banned. Don’t try to use your minority status here as an excuse, when you spit on that idea in every place where it actually matters.
I think that one of Shodan’s many faults was his sexism. When other posters pointed to your post on Melania and how it went unchallenged I think it supported some of the points that Shodan’s defenders made: that he was treated differently because he was a conservative. I also think that it demonstrated that we still have a problem with casual misogyny on this board.
Then, when you derided anyone who disagreed with you by using language that is sexist in tone: pearl clutching, fainting couch and panties in a wad, you further made their point that Shodan was targeted for being a conservative. Your phrasing is clearly calling anyone who has a problem with your post a hysterical woman and being a woman has a negative connotation in the post. You didn’t choose gender neutral language, you choose sexist language.
I think misogyny needs to be called out here. I think it needs to be called out whether the poster voted the way I like, or not. I don’t think every instance rises to a post being reported, but I think this moment is a chance for us to keep working on this issue.
I think if we don’t do that and ban Shodan, but don’t call out other posters who aren’t conservatives, then Shodan’s defenders are correct.
I don’t know, maybe? I think they’re on the same spectrum. I think our society is such that misogynistic slurs are essentially background noise and we often can’t even recognize them. Similar to how ethnic and racial slurs were used for most of American history – just regular, background language, noted as insignificant by all except those whose diminishment and degradation such language helped reinforce.
I hear what you are saying but I think it’s a far more nuanced conversation than you are letting on. Misogyny isn’t every time someone uses a word you don’t like. Comics like Michelle Wolf and Ricky Gervais (among many others) famously use sexist remarks to illustrate a point that seems to be getting lost here: Context matters.
I agree to an extent. My rule on a comic using very offensive language is a) you better have a point and b) the joke better be really funny.
But we’re not in a comedy club, we’re in a message board that covers a lot of different topics and benefits from having the participation of as many different types of people as possible and that requires respect.
I was all for banning Shodan, because he was dishonest troll. But I think some of his defenders have a point in this thread and I think that if we want people to be on board with cultural change here then we have to acknowledge that. As I said earlier, it pains me to say that because I have never bought into their claims before. I still think that they are calling a nugget of truth a mountain.
She definitely is a public figure, at least according to the standard typically implied by that term (i.e. for defamation actions).
Specifically, she is a “limited purpose” public figure, which includes those who have “thrust themselves to the forefront of particular public controversies in order to influence the resolution of the issues involved.”
Context matters. For me, the crack against the two Trump women was just out of place in MPSIMS, which I consider to be the relaxing, non-aggressive board. Call them feckless cunts all you want in the Pit, but it was just jarring there.
Right - but when about to ban someone for using a certain word, you could easily do a search to see how common is its use.
Count me among those who would have been surprised at a mild warning for this. Despite Shodan’s awkward history, this ban really looks way out of line.
I think you should consider converting this to a suspension. If Shodan really is the board criminal some believe, he’ll soon commit a genuine offense and can be banished without the current stain on Mod reputation.
Meh. You’ve thought me a liar for years, and are really clever at saying so with enough innuendo and conditionals that you don’t run afoul of the rules. Which, hooray for having talents.
So you’re challenging me here to show that I’m telling the truth. BUt there are two problems:
I don’t think that you’re persuadable in this matter; and
I double-checked my bucket list, and “Convince Fotheringay-Phipps that I’m honest” isn’t appearing anywhere on there.
So yeah, I take your question. There’s no particular “effect” I’d achieve in answering it. You are welcome to your opinion of me and I won’t try to change it. And that’s the last I’ll say on that topic here.
Well, yes, it does, at least when you use it that way. When someone goes around trying to trigger people, they are trolling. It’s just another way of describing deliberately trying to piss people off.
Given Shodan’s past trolling history (including that which he admitted) I am nearly certain his use of “harpy” was to try and “tweak the liberals” by going right up against the line on the anti-misogyny rules.
If he did not have the history he had of trolling, then I would understand saying that using the word “harpy” was ill-advised but not a Warnable offense. But he did. And since he was warned for the same behavior 4 times, and even was suspended once, that’s a good indication he was not going to stop.
You can’t look at Shodan’s posts which were constantly snarky and telling other dopers they were bad people, and think he wasn’t trying to rile people up. Again, the only way that argument makes sense is if you just hadn’t read most of his more recent posts.
And, again, he harassed a mentally ill veteran for having a mental illness caused by her service. I will keep stressing this. Arguing that he’s some poor misunderstood champion for conservatism on a liberal message board DOES NOT WORK.
I think we should take into account that “Harvard Harpy” sounds exactly like the kind of alliterative insult first popularized by Nixon speechwriter William Safire (who put “nattering nabobs of negativism” into the mouth of Spiro Agnew) and then brought back into popularity by a certain conservative radio talk-show buffoon.
I’m not saying that the poster in question hasn’t edged increasingly closer to participating on this board exclusively to insult people with whom he does not agree, but I’m not sure that particular insult was intended to be misogynistic.
Personally I prefer gender-free terms like “buffoon,” “asshole,” “jerk,” etc. There’s plenty of room in the English language to get one’s opinion across without accidentally smearing entire races, religions, or genders.
I also said that they have had this discussion before.
If you use a “forbidden word”, that you did not know was forbidden, then you can certainly be excused from reprimand.
Once you know that it is not an appropriate word, then you are not just being reprimanded for using it, you are being reprimanded for using it in direct violation of moderator instructions that you are very well aware of.
If you look down the thread, there were several posters who responded directly to the word “harpy”. This derails the discussion, which, IMHO, and my understanding of the Mods opinion, was exactly what Shodan wanted.
You do know there will be those who will reply to you that on *this *subject there are not two sides worth being represented.
Your lips to Og’s ears, but that is a hope and aspiration, not a fact yet. Plus even if so there surely are others who would already be condemning this Board for not tackling it years earlier.
Right, like they’d ever pay in anything other than SD merchandise
Well, yes, we should all watch out for offensive language out of context and for implicit biases, but it is also true neither members nor Mods can be tasked with having to act as the Neighborhood Watch or else we are somehow failing to be good citizens.
In any case most of us know the appropriate time, place and manner for different expressions, as witnessed by that most of us are not getting warned and banned left and right. That there may be cases in which there is no absolute consensus on whether those parameters were met and what to do about it is inevitable, but usually only brought to our attention when someone actively objects.
This was a bullshit warning, and a bullshit banning. Some professor making national policy recommendations is no less a public figure than Ms. Trump. Public figures are usually fair game here.
Also, I assume I can still call Hanoi Jane Fonda a traitor. Why can’t I also call her a harpy? Treason can be a capital crime, and is dishonorable. It’s a much more offensive claim that calling her an obscure entry in the Monster Manual. If harpy is out, can I call her Medusa? Medea? Xaviera Hollander? Bonnie Parker? Hillarywannabee? AOhmygodimstupidC?
