Should discussion about The Poem be ... censored?

[Mungri]

RE making assumptions about groups of people:

 

There is nothing wrong with this. Prior to the abuse of political correctness, I remember being taught that we had to do good things to reflect our communities as a whole. The actions of a few can speak loudly for many people, and particularly when positive, people feel a shared pride through the accomplishments of others like them.

 

But on the other hand, of someone does bad things, people want to ostracise and ignore that this person is representative of a culture. However it is very true that environment and culture can play a huge part in determining negative characteristics. People from lower socio economic and / or troubled backgrounds are far more likely to develop negative personas, and this definitely can represent the environment and culture in which they were raised. To ignore this and say that one persons negativity cannot be attributed to a group of people is neglect and ignoring the socio economic and environmental factors that can contribute to creating troubled individuals in the first place. On the other hand, accepting these issues can lead to creating measures to make improvements to the underlying causes that lead to negative / anti social behaviours developing in the first place.

 

E.G. Achmed is a terrorist who blows himself and a plane up. Political Correctness will say 'This is only one individuals actions and not representative of anyone else'. Reality will say that Achmed was raised in an extremist culture and recruited into an organised terrorist movement that also lead to the creation of thousands more Achmeds among all the other unfortunate people they manage to raise / recruit / brainwash within such a culture / regime.

[mrmonocle]

A priest had a dog

And he loved it

It ate a piece of meat

And he slew it

And put it 2 meters below the ground

And wrote a limmerick that sounds

 

so

 

A priest had a dog

And he loved it

It ate a piece of meat

And he slew it

And put it 2 meters below the ground

And wrote a limmerick that sounds

 

so...

[scrotiemcb]

I think the original lyric was, technically, hate speech from someone who had absolutely zero ill intent. Which is actually quite common. Promoting an unfair view of other people accidentally is a relatively simple error, we've probably all done it at some point... actual bigotry is far less common.

 

What I do but think is unfair is any accusation that the original limerick had ill intent, or that either the backer or Obsidian are transphobic. Saying a transphobic thing naively does not a bigot make. It's ad hominem fallacy, pure and simple.

Edited April 14, 2015 by scrotiemcb

[MLMII]

 

 

 

 

I don't make assumptions about groups of people

 

Nonsense. Everybody does. The trick is (1) attempting to be aware of making those assumptions and (2) being able to set them aside when they're pointed out to you.

 

Human cognition is based on categorization and generalization. It's just the way we tick. It's how we deal with the resulting biases that count.

 

 

Once again give me examples of where I have made assumptions of groups of people ?

 

Your reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired. Try reading it again. If you want I can help you.

 

Please do, I clearly need help 

 

 

 

Originally I was going to largely ignore this series of posts outside of my rather snarky "like" as I'm under the impression that you aren't really interested in the necessary introspection but then I remembered how your reaction caught in my throat while everyone else was rightfully expressing their shock and sympathy for the legitimate and completely unexcusaeble bigotry Mungri's own father hurled into his face. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As a gay I do not side with the whine babies over this incident. The original limerick was top funny.

But on the other hand I agree that all straight men should want to sleep with me ... Because.

Like in PoE how there's machines that absorb souls, I need to invent machines to turn everyone gay. This of course is the ultimate homosexual agenda - You see any display of homosexual flamboyance and that will turn you gay. This has been our master plan all along. But unfortunately the alcohol and roofies are no longer enough, we need soul altering machines with straight to gay altering properties pronto.

Even better if the effects of such a machine are temporary and only last for about 24 hours but with no memory loss, hence all the straight men can remember in full vivid detail what they did the previous night with another man. There will be many men jumping off cliffs as a result of this, an unfortunate side effect.

 

 

Mungri can I ask you a question? As a gay man how do you feel about some of these comments on this thread? Do you find comments like " homosexuality is not natural " annoying? Offensive? Or do you just not  care. My gay friends seem to care less about gay rights than I do, they say things like " you will never change some peoples minds so why bother ".

 

But I refuse to accept that. I don't need to change peoples minds, I just want to let people that homophobia is not acceptable

I'm pretty much desensitised to such stuff after my father told me that he would have had me aborted if he knew I was going to turn out gay.

 

Yeah some of my friends have similar stories, not all of them but some. Living in South Africa we have a very liberal constitution that protects your sexual orientation in society but that doesn't stop all  homophobic comments and of course nothing can stop what people and family say and act on a personal level 

 

 

One of my friends told his mom at the age of 20 he was gay and she didn't speak to him for 3 years because her  boyfriend was homophobic. They get on very well now but when he told me the story he didn't even seem angry with her....I was thinking   " how can your mom chose some random guy over her  own son...and how can you not be angry and disappointed with her " ... but I never said those things to him because I didn't want to make him feel worse about his moms behavior

 

I know you aren't looking for sympathy and I'm sure we  will now  hear comments like  " oh so now  only gay people have a monopoly on there parents treating them badly..my parents did this to me and my parents did that  " but the reality is most straight people have never had to deal with the emotional and verbal abuse and hurt  that many gay people have to deal with including the incredibly insensitive  and appalling comments that your were subjected to by your dad ...anyway thanks for sharing

 

 

 

So ... was that another BruceVC?

Edited April 14, 2015 by MLMII

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

 

I don't make assumptions about groups of people

 

Nonsense. Everybody does. The trick is (1) attempting to be aware of making those assumptions and (2) being able to set them aside when they're pointed out to you.

 

Human cognition is based on categorization and generalization. It's just the way we tick. It's how we deal with the resulting biases that count.

 

 

Once again give me examples of where I have made assumptions of groups of people ?

 

Your reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired. Try reading it again. If you want I can help you.

 

Please do, I clearly need help 

 

 

 

Originally I was going to largely ignore this series of posts outside of my rather snarky "like" as I'm under the impression that you aren't really interested in the necessary introspection but then I remembered how your reaction caught in my throat while everyone else was rightfully expressing their shock and sympathy for the legitimate and completely unexcusaeble bigotry Mungri's own father hurled into his face. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As a gay I do not side with the whine babies over this incident. The original limerick was top funny.

But on the other hand I agree that all straight men should want to sleep with me ... Because.

Like in PoE how there's machines that absorb souls, I need to invent machines to turn everyone gay. This of course is the ultimate homosexual agenda - You see any display of homosexual flamboyance and that will turn you gay. This has been our master plan all along. But unfortunately the alcohol and roofies are no longer enough, we need soul altering machines with straight to gay altering properties pronto.

Even better if the effects of such a machine are temporary and only last for about 24 hours but with no memory loss, hence all the straight men can remember in full vivid detail what they did the previous night with another man. There will be many men jumping off cliffs as a result of this, an unfortunate side effect.

 

 

Mungri can I ask you a question? As a gay man how do you feel about some of these comments on this thread? Do you find comments like " homosexuality is not natural " annoying? Offensive? Or do you just not  care. My gay friends seem to care less about gay rights than I do, they say things like " you will never change some peoples minds so why bother ".

 

But I refuse to accept that. I don't need to change peoples minds, I just want to let people that homophobia is not acceptable

I'm pretty much desensitised to such stuff after my father told me that he would have had me aborted if he knew I was going to turn out gay.

 

Yeah some of my friends have similar stories, not all of them but some. Living in South Africa we have a very liberal constitution that protects your sexual orientation in society but that doesn't stop all  homophobic comments and of course nothing can stop what people and family say and act on a personal level 

 

 

One of my friends told his mom at the age of 20 he was gay and she didn't speak to him for 3 years because her  boyfriend was homophobic. They get on very well now but when he told me the story he didn't even seem angry with her....I was thinking   " how can your mom chose some random guy over her  own son...and how can you not be angry and disappointed with her " ... but I never said those things to him because I didn't want to make him feel worse about his moms behavior

 

I know you aren't looking for sympathy and I'm sure we  will now  hear comments like  " oh so now  only gay people have a monopoly on there parents treating them badly..my parents did this to me and my parents did that  " but the reality is most straight people have never had to deal with the emotional and verbal abuse and hurt  that many gay people have to deal with including the incredibly insensitive  and appalling comments that your were subjected to by your dad ...anyway thanks for sharing

 

 

 

So ... was that another BruceVC?

 

Sorry I have no idea what you are talking about? Can you explain a little further ..are you suggesting I didn't show concern about how  Mungri's dad treated him? I want to have this debate with you so please respond 

[BruceVC]

RE making assumptions about groups of people:

 

There is nothing wrong with this. Prior to the abuse of political correctness, I remember being taught that we had to do good things to reflect our communities as a whole. The actions of a few can speak loudly for many people, and particularly when positive, people feel a shared pride through the accomplishments of others like them.

 

But on the other hand, of someone does bad things, people want to ostracise and ignore that this person is representative of a culture. However it is very true that environment and culture can play a huge part in determining negative characteristics. People from lower socio economic and / or troubled backgrounds are far more likely to develop negative personas, and this definitely can represent the environment and culture in which they were raised. To ignore this and say that one persons negativity cannot be attributed to a group of people is neglect and ignoring the socio economic and environmental factors that can contribute to creating troubled individuals in the first place. On the other hand, accepting these issues can lead to creating measures to make improvements to the underlying causes that lead to negative / anti social behaviours developing in the first place.

 

E.G. Achmed is a terrorist who blows himself and a plane up. Political Correctness will say 'This is only one individuals actions and not representative of anyone else'. Reality will say that Achmed was raised in an extremist culture and recruited into an organised terrorist movement that also lead to the creation of thousands more Achmeds among all the other unfortunate people they manage to raise / recruit / brainwash within such a culture / regime.

 

Yes this is correct about being influenced around a certain extremist ideology 

 

But that is not the type of assumptions I am talking about, what you saying is fact  because he was raised in a certain environment 

 

But it would be wrong to say  " all Muslims are extremists " , those are the types of assumptions of groups of people I don't make 

Edited April 14, 2015 by BruceVC

[Serdan]

I think the original lyric was, technically, hate speech from someone who had absolutely zero ill intent. Which is actually quite common. Promoting an unfair view of other people accidentally is a relatively simple error, we've probably all done it at some point... actual bigotry is far less common.

 

What I do but think is unfair is any accusation that the original limerick had ill intent, or that either the backer or Obsidian are transphobic. Saying a transphobic thing naively does not a bigot make. It's ad hominem fallacy, pure and simple.

Has anyone actually accused either Firedorn or Obs of being transphobic?

I haven't done so and I haven't seen anyone else do it either, so I'm genuinely curious as to what prompted your post.

 

As to ill intent, I'll just point out that Firedorn has explicitly stated that he knew the limerick was offensive (though for other reasons) and that he expected it to be rejected in the vetting process. Whether that should be labelled as "ill intent"...  

[achaye]

Yeah, I don't get that statement either - regardless of what position the authors of the posts in this thread take, I've yet to encounter a single one accuse Firedorn or Obsidian of being transphobic (though truth be told, I have not read every single post in the thread).

 

What I have seen though are plenty of disturbing, clearly homophobic, misogynistic, or transphobic remarks throughout this thread and others, from posts whose authors may or may not consciously understand that such statements are homophobic, misogynistic, or transphobic.

 

Such discriminatory mindsets have as much to do with culture (certainly a force not lacking in homophobia and transphobia) as with ignorance. For example, I read in one of these threads where the author, whom I cannot remember, states that he (and it's almost certainly a he) only considers "genetic" females as females (that is, no Y chromosome, period), and continues on on how someone born "male" but identifying as "female" is unnatural. This completely undermines transsexual individuals and is a bigoted mindset, even if no ill-intent is on purpose. It's the same kind of reasoning that people used to think interracial marriage was "unnatural," or that women working rather than taking care of kids was "unnatural," or currently, that homosexuals are "unnatural."

 

Gender isn't as black-or-white (or more apt, male-or-female) as people think. The whole notion of genders, in fact, is actually pretty archaic. All I have to do to refute the author who opined that only "genetic" females are females is to tell him about androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS). People with this condition can be born "genetically" male (XY), but due to certain developmental quirks, their bodies do not respond to androgens, and have a range of female secondary sexual characteristics, ranging from a small amount to having full-blown female curvatures and fully-developed breasts.

 

This is why I am so vocal about these issues and am proud to be a SJW, a term I've only recently become aware of, thanks mostly to the GamerGate crowd (seriously, how can detractors think using such a term will be insulting? Who ISN'T for social justice? I guess homophobes and bigots in general). If people can't see why the limerick is clearly transphobic (and misogynistic), considering that things like AIS exist, then there is still much to be done to increase the awareness of the general public.

[Psychevore]

Yeah, I don't get that statement either - regardless of what position the authors of the posts in this thread take, I've yet to encounter a single one accuse Firedorn or Obsidian of being transphobic (though truth be told, I have not read every single post in the thread).

 

What I have seen though are plenty of disturbing, clearly homophobic, misogynistic, or transphobic remarks throughout this thread and others, from posts whose authors may or may not consciously understand that such statements are homophobic, misogynistic, or transphobic.

 

Such discriminatory mindsets have as much to do with culture (certainly a force not lacking in homophobia and transphobia) as with ignorance. For example, I read in one of these threads where the author, whom I cannot remember, states that he (and it's almost certainly a he) only considers "genetic" females as females (that is, no Y chromosome, period), and continues on on how someone born "male" but identifying as "female" is unnatural. This completely undermines transsexual individuals and is a bigoted mindset, even if no ill-intent is on purpose. It's the same kind of reasoning that people used to think interracial marriage was "unnatural," or that women working rather than taking care of kids was "unnatural," or currently, that homosexuals are "unnatural."

 

Gender isn't as black-or-white (or more apt, male-or-female) as people think. The whole notion of genders, in fact, is actually pretty archaic. All I have to do to refute the author who opined that only "genetic" females are females is to tell him about androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS). People with this condition can be born "genetically" male (XY), but due to certain developmental quirks, their bodies do not respond to androgens, and have a range of female secondary sexual characteristics, ranging from a small amount to having full-blown female curvatures and fully-developed breasts.

 

This is why I am so vocal about these issues and am proud to be a SJW, a term I've only recently become aware of, thanks mostly to the GamerGate crowd (seriously, how can detractors think using such a term will be insulting? Who ISN'T for social justice? I guess homophobes and bigots in general). If people can't see why the limerick is clearly transphobic (and misogynistic), considering that things like AIS exist, then there is still much to be done to increase the awareness of the general public.

Oh, if only I could like this post more than once.

 

And that last paragraph should... kudos.

[BruceVC]

 

Yeah, I don't get that statement either - regardless of what position the authors of the posts in this thread take, I've yet to encounter a single one accuse Firedorn or Obsidian of being transphobic (though truth be told, I have not read every single post in the thread).

 

What I have seen though are plenty of disturbing, clearly homophobic, misogynistic, or transphobic remarks throughout this thread and others, from posts whose authors may or may not consciously understand that such statements are homophobic, misogynistic, or transphobic.

 

Such discriminatory mindsets have as much to do with culture (certainly a force not lacking in homophobia and transphobia) as with ignorance. For example, I read in one of these threads where the author, whom I cannot remember, states that he (and it's almost certainly a he) only considers "genetic" females as females (that is, no Y chromosome, period), and continues on on how someone born "male" but identifying as "female" is unnatural. This completely undermines transsexual individuals and is a bigoted mindset, even if no ill-intent is on purpose. It's the same kind of reasoning that people used to think interracial marriage was "unnatural," or that women working rather than taking care of kids was "unnatural," or currently, that homosexuals are "unnatural."

 

Gender isn't as black-or-white (or more apt, male-or-female) as people think. The whole notion of genders, in fact, is actually pretty archaic. All I have to do to refute the author who opined that only "genetic" females are females is to tell him about androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS). People with this condition can be born "genetically" male (XY), but due to certain developmental quirks, their bodies do not respond to androgens, and have a range of female secondary sexual characteristics, ranging from a small amount to having full-blown female curvatures and fully-developed breasts.

 

This is why I am so vocal about these issues and am proud to be a SJW, a term I've only recently become aware of, thanks mostly to the GamerGate crowd (seriously, how can detractors think using such a term will be insulting? Who ISN'T for social justice? I guess homophobes and bigots in general). If people can't see why the limerick is clearly transphobic (and misogynistic), considering that things like AIS exist, then there is still much to be done to increase the awareness of the general public.

Oh, if only I could like this post more than once.

 

And that last paragraph should... kudos.

 

 

 

You took the words right out of my mouth

 

I was saying to Serdan how I spend most of my time on these forums on the Off-Topic where I try to raise issues around SJ and most of the time people aren't really that interested...so I  use to feel I was one of the few people who seemed to care. But after reading many of the comments in this  thread and others its been very reassuring to see there are many people who share my views and refuse to accept discrimination on these forums. So this entire discussion has been great

 

The only thing I do nowadays is I say " I care about SJ values " and not  " I'm a SJW ". They do basically mean the same thing but what I have noticed is  an immediate dismissive attitude if you say " SJW " because that has become a term to describe people who want to change everything that people claim to hold dear. And even though we shouldn't have to not use the term SJW its much easier to initiate dialogue if you just avoid that word. The discussion can be exactly the same and thats what matters to me, the discussion. Frankly I don't care what people want to call me, I just want to debate the issues I feel are relevant to achieve a more equitable and tolerant society 

[PrimeJunta]

"SJW" was intended as an insult. I find it's often more effective to own such attempts rather than try to fight them.

 

I have, however, started referring to the Other Side as "SIJW's." If our side is for justice, by implication the other side is for injustice. Nice and symmetrical. I can live with these terms.

[Namutree]

This completely undermines transsexual individuals and is a bigoted mindset, even if no ill-intent is on purpose.

It can't be bigoted without there being a dislike of the given characteristic. Shallow minded perhaps, but not bigoted.

 

Definition of bigotry: A state of mind where a person obstinately, irrationally, unfairly, or intolerantly DISLIKES other people, ideas, etc.

 

Bigotry carries a powerful stigma for a reason. Don't make the term weaker by applying it to people whom are simply ignorant. It won't help anyone, and just elevates the genuine bigots up to the same level as ignorant but well-meaning people.

 

 

(seriously, how can detractors think using such a term will be insulting? Who ISN'T for social justice? I guess homophobes and bigots in general).

It's a joke in the same vein as, "pc master race". It's not that SJW's are seen as actual warriors, but rather they're being mocked for the way they (supposedly) view themselves as warriors that are accomplishing great things. The fact that some SJW's would embrace the term is just confirming the joke for the people who use the term as an insult.

[Namutree]

I have, however, started referring to the Other Side as "SIJW's." If our side is for justice, by implication the other side is for injustice. Nice and symmetrical. I can live with these terms.

Despite not being a fan of SJW's; I like the SIJW term. It's the "W" part of SJW that is annoying. When people are actively fighting something just because it's progressive (see the limerick threads) it's actually even more annoying than SJW's.

[PrimeJunta]

Of course it's annoying, it was intended as an insult.

 

And as you say, if the "W" is the problem, for every social justice militant I'll raise you two militating for social injustice. That part at least is definitely pot, kettle.

[Psychevore]

Most awesome video I've seen in a while:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oj52Mmi5530

[achaye]

 

This completely undermines transsexual individuals and is a bigoted mindset, even if no ill-intent is on purpose.

It can't be bigoted without there being a dislike of the given characteristic. Shallow minded perhaps, but not bigoted.

 

Definition of bigotry: A state of mind where a person obstinately, irrationally, unfairly, or intolerantly DISLIKES other people, ideas, etc.

 

Bigotry carries a powerful stigma for a reason. Don't make the term weaker by applying it to people whom are simply ignorant. It won't help anyone, and just elevates the genuine bigots up to the same level as ignorant but well-meaning people.

 

(seriously, how can detractors think using such a term will be insulting? Who ISN'T for social justice? I guess homophobes and bigots in general).

It's a joke in the same vein as, "pc master race". It's not that SJW's are seen as actual warriors, but rather they're being mocked for the way they (supposedly) view themselves as warriors that are accomplishing great things. The fact that some SJW's would embrace the term is just confirming the joke for the people who use the term as an insult.

 

I maintain my assertion that the author's view on trans females is bigoted, regardless of a lack of ill-intent. Not all bigotry is defined by dislike. Bigotry can simply be irrational, narrow-minded intolerance of creed, belief, opinion, etc, different from one's own. Meriam-Webster's full definition is along the same vein: "..intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices."

 

The author to which I refer does not even acknowledge the identified gender of trans individuals. How is this different than a person from the 1700s saying that black people weren't people, they're property? Even if that person harbored zero ill-will towards black people, it would still amount to 100% bigotry, because said person is completely intolerant to the idea that a black person can actually be a person, and not property. Back to the author, he is completely intolerant to the fact that a person born "genetically" as a male can still identify as a female, and vice versa.

 

That's bigotry.

 

Also, I completely agree with you PrimeJunta to just own the term SJW. It loses its effectiveness as an insult to anyone save the hardcore misogynistic crowd and the like. Like seriously Namutree, when was the last time an actual PC user was insulted by the term "PC master race?" Maybe the person who made the crack in the first place may get a giggle or two in and virtual high-five a like-minded buddy, but I can't imagine anyone else would even find that as anywhere close to being as insulting as you say it is.

[BruceVC]

"SJW" was intended as an insult. I find it's often more effective to own such attempts rather than try to fight them.

 

I have, however, started referring to the Other Side as "SIJW's." If our side is for justice, by implication the other side is for injustice. Nice and symmetrical. I can live with these terms.

 

 

I wasn't sure what  "SIJW " actually meant, now I do. I'll remember that 

[Namutree]

And as you say, if the "W" is the problem, for every social justice militant I'll raise you two militating for social injustice.

That was certainly the case with the limerick situation. Far too many users were frothing at the mouth that Obsidian would care that the limerick offended a trans woman (maybe others too? I dunno.) and wanted to rectify it.

 

Truth be told, I'm of the opinion that Obsidian should have just ignored Erika (not that Obsidian did anything morally wrong; just unwise.), but the reaction from some users to Obsidian removing it was obnoxious as heck. As bad as any SJW.

Edited April 14, 2015 by Namutree

[achaye]

Most awesome video I've seen in a while:

 

Wow Psychevore, that guy nailed it on so many levels it's unbelievable. I wonder what the transformative experience was for him to change his mind...

 

 

I was saying to Serdan how I spend most of my time on these forums on the Off-Topic where I try to raise issues around SJ and most of the time people aren't really that interested...so I  use to feel I was one of the few people who seemed to care. But after reading many of the comments in this  thread and others its been very reassuring to see there are many people who share my views and refuse to accept discrimination on these forums. So this entire discussion has been great

 

The only thing I do nowadays is I say " I care about SJ values " and not  " I'm a SJW ". They do basically mean the same thing but what I have noticed is  an immediate dismissive attitude if you say " SJW " because that has become a term to describe people who want to change everything that people claim to hold dear. And even though we shouldn't have to not use the term SJW its much easier to initiate dialogue if you just avoid that word. The discussion can be exactly the same and thats what matters to me, the discussion. Frankly I don't care what people want to call me, I just want to debate the issues I feel are relevant to achieve a more equitable and tolerant society 

 

I can empathize with you completely, it definitely takes a certain mindset to wade in the mud against numerous, extremely vocal "social injustice warriors", as PrimeJunta would call them, and stick around despite all the childish insults like "lunatic" or "loon" being tossed around, so it feels really nice to see others who care about the same cause. Like the guy in the video, I won't back down to intolerance if I see it, no matter how uncomfortable it may be. That the SIJWs would label people like us "babies" and "whiners" with no backbone, whilst hanging around in the relative safety of a game forum (which surely has far more like-minded SIJWs than other subgroups), is pure irony. I wonder how long they would last making comments at Jezebel or something like that, before they're viciously tore apart by the denizens that reside there.

 

EDIT: Regarding the insults, I find that if I simply engage them without lashing back with insults, they eventually back down and become more civil, and we can perhaps even get a conversation going. I mean, the start of this thread had a WHOLE lot of "feminazi," "idiot," "lunatic," and "crazy f***" thrown at anyone making any comment about social justice. Now, it's essentially gone, and I think part of it, besides perhaps threats by moderators to keep it civil, is that they know how ridiculous it looks when one side is making arguments that are mostly personal-insult-free, while the other side regurgitates tons of vitriol.

Edited April 14, 2015 by achaye

[Namutree]

Like seriously Namutree, when was the last time an actual PC user was insulted by the term "PC master race?" Maybe the person who made the crack in the first place may get a giggle or two in and virtual high-five a like-minded buddy, but I can't imagine anyone else would even find that as anywhere close to being as insulting as you say it is.

 

Being a console gamer (mostly nintendo) as well as a pc gamer I use term against those I am greatly disrespecting. 

 

 

"..intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices."

 

They're not being intolerant.

 

 

 

The author to which I refer does not even acknowledge the identified gender of trans individuals. How is this different than a person from the 1700s saying that black people weren't people, they're property? Even if that person harbored zero ill-will towards black people, it would still amount to 100% bigotry,

 

The notion that black people (or any people really) are property has severe legal consequences. The notion that homosexuality is "unnatural" does not have legal consequences.

 

 

because said person is completely intolerant to the idea that a black person can actually be a person, and not property. Back to the author, he is completely intolerant to the fact that a person born "genetically" as a male can still identify as a female, and vice versa.

Said person is not intolerant to the idea. They just don't accept it. Big difference.

Edited April 14, 2015 by Namutree

[jools1980]

 If people can't see why the limerick is clearly transphobic (and misogynistic),

 

So, you're saying a fictional character in a fictional game isn't even fictionally free to prefer fictional women to fictional men. Duly (fictionally) noted.

 

Seriously, it looks to me that it is you who can't see why the limerick isn't either transphobic nor misogynistic, but just, in fact, a limerick. If anything, it is your stance who is being heterophobic. You claim you're a SJW, and yet here you are, advocating that anyone who doesn't share your views is (and I quote) a homophobe or a bigot: you shouldn't really use the word "Justice" at all, if these are the foundations of your philosophy.

[achaye]

"..intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices."

 

They're not being intolerant.

 

 

The author to which I refer does not even acknowledge the identified gender of trans individuals. How is this different than a person from the 1700s saying that black people weren't people, they're property? Even if that person harbored zero ill-will towards black people, it would still amount to 100% bigotry,

The notion that black people (or any people really) are property has severe legal consequences. The notion that homosexuality is "unnatural" does not have legal consequences.

 

 

because said person is completely intolerant to the idea that a black person can actually be a person, and not property. Back to the author, he is completely intolerant to the fact that a person born "genetically" as a male can still identify as a female, and vice versa.

Said person is not intolerant to the idea. They just don't accept it. Big difference.

 

Said person not even acknowledging the trans individual's identified female gender is.... not intolerance? That's news to me. How can you be tolerant of something that you do not even believe can exist? Not tolerating the fact that a XY trans individual can be considered female is the textbook definition of intolerance.

 

And something cannot be considered bigoted if there's no legal frameworks around it? You should tell that to the police officer during the Ferguson protests who called the protestors "f***cking animals."

[Psychevore]

This is remarkably alike to discussing racism.

 

White people (for the record, I am one) will just dismiss it altogether, acting as if bring it up is the problem.

 

And here we are having dudes ignoring somebody can be transgender just so they can have a *BLEEPING* limerick in the game. 'It's not intolerance'. Puhlease.

[achaye]

 If people can't see why the limerick is clearly transphobic (and misogynistic),

 

So, you're saying a fictional character in a fictional game isn't even fictionally free to prefer fictional women to fictional men.

 

... said absolutely no-one in the history of ever. Nice straw-man though.

 

I'll just repeat what has been repeated probably a million times by now, it's trans-misogynistic because it unfairly maligns an already historically-oppressed group, because it has absolutely no context other than to offend, that somehow, a "genetic" woman turned into a man is somehow shameful.

[Malcador]

Why forbid discussion ? It allows so many of you to show how concerned you are about the oppressed.

 

That and this poll is ridiculous, what should the forum moderators care what you people think ?