A point that elevates said one-note posters to quasi-trolls is that they tend to make everything about their single point. Thus they’ll hijack other topics, even if only most tangentially related, and try to turn it to their point. So it’s hijacks all the way down.
This is not to say that most posters don’t have hot button issues, on both sides of the political spectrum, but are capable and willing to post on other topics. But if all you’re looking for is to talk about hammers, every topic starts to look like a nail…
YWTF is doing that right now, with the ridiculous claim that you can’t even discuss women’s issues on this board, such as MEN in women’s changing rooms. puzzlegal comes back with an excellent post with a whole host of women’s issues that you can discuss here.
Although I take exception to puzzlegal saying it’s “awfully close” to YWTF’s topic ban. It’s exactly the same topic. YWTF continues to misgender women while playing the “I’m not touching you” game.
I think puzzlegal is playing the “I’m a mod so must at least appear impartial” and not throwing out more bait. I think we have plenty of people doing so, and I don’t think anyone in that thread is in any way buying YWTF’s “I’m not touching you” game.
I still feel that they deserved more than a note for violating their topic ban, but since it was missed by @Miller until brought up by another poster, may have felt that it would be retroactive punishment.
As for YWTF… I didn’t come across them in the before-times, so 100% of my experience has been this most recent resurgence, which lead to the following:
Single issue poster > dismissed all other arguments on issue > misconstrues cites (their own and others) > plays rules lawyer and hints at unfair treatment > IGNORE LIST (Forever).
I wasn’t trying to suggest YWTF violated her ban in the ATMB thread. In fairness, she’s in an impossible spot if people want her to explain her concerns and she’s banned from doing so. I think it should be fine for her to state what she wants to discuss in ATMB without arguing for it.
But let’s not pretend her concern is with men intruding in women’s spaces with intent to cause harm. That’s a pretty noncontroversial position. She is concerned with MEN, which in her world means trans women. Reading her sentence in a vacuum, you might give her the benefit of the doubt. But knowing her oeuvre, her meaning is clear.
ETA: for those not following the ATMB thread, her exact line was “Online I’m seeing women routinely demonized for simply saying they don’t want men (and I mean MEN) in places where they undress.”
monstro was an AWESOME poster. YWTF has always been something of a schmuck, in my opinion, not nearly as incisive or interesting as she thought she was.
This is true. I miss YWTF and especially Monstro posting on other subjects.
However, they seem unwilling to do so. And pretending that this is the only possible “women’s issue”, and/or that no others can be discussed, and/or that violence against women can only be discussed in terms of trans women, is nonsense. And the last one is very nasty nonsense.
If she can discuss them without misgendering folks, I’m okay with her doing so. If she can say, for example, “I want to argue on behalf of a space that cisgender women [and possibly transgender men, I don’t understand her POV] can occupy and exclude cisgender men and transgender women from,” that’s a fine post for her to make in ATMB. But if she can’t do that–if she just wants to argue on behalf of a space for WOMEN and I mean WOMEN without MEN and I mean MEN knowwhutImeannudgenudge, ban her bigoted self.
Plus I already said it out loud, since she lied about what happened.
Nah, all that allowing it does is reward her for coming back here to troll us. She now will just say that stuff in ATMB that is already in the pronouns out thread, but we won’t be able to call her out.
Thats what she did before the topic ban, after all.
Better instructions would be like saying you can mention it but you can’t put forth any arguments.