Non-LGBT posters coming into this forum and insulting us

JackTaylorFan

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

It's been quite a rollercoaster alright - But you seem to highlight the lows of the rollercoaster and not acknowledge the highs. There have been some pleasant well mannered discussions that I am happy to dig out for you.

No need. I will acknowledge I have seen a few less grating threads to do with trans issues. Mostly to do with people seeking advice, but nonetheless, they had a positive feel about them.

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Again AH yes has had a lot of transphobia but at the same time the "always" toxic is not fully accurate either. Everything is not black and white. Correct I am a cis man but I have often contributed on trans issues and stood upto transphobia on this site in general.

I'll have to take your word for it on After Hours, I'm afraid. From my experience both as a contributor to that forum in the past and as a long time spectator of what goes on there, it does not have a great record when it comes to dealing with LGBT issues - especially the T part. And seeing as it is in the category of social and fun, it's not somewhere I'd start a serious discussion about trans' rights. From my perspective, the LGBT forum is the most suitable place to have these discussions on Boards. The MODS have a better understanding of the issue, and are wise to the kind of microaggressions trans people often face when entering into any online debate.

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Respectfully JFT I can often find it difficult to detect your sarcasm or seriousness.

Yeah... Maybe I should use more emoticons or something...

Anyways, I'm bowing out of this thread. I've said my piece.

JackTaylorFan

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

Look, you haven't corrected me once. You have made wild allusions that are totally unrelated and accused me of evading the topic. But every time it suits, you ignore a point and go on another straw man offensive.

Yet the only one ignoring and dodging points is you - not me. Usually by pretending I made a point I did not.

For example when I talked about how users here conduct themselves on threads elsewhere - and I named two users but I would also add the OP of this thread to that list too as having good posts on the issue around the rest of this website - you pretended I made a comment about "how After Hours threads handle trans issues" which I did not even remotely do.

If you can not answer the points I actually make - then it is not for you to pretend others are making unrelated allusions.

SterlingArcher

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

microaggressions

I would like to discuss this aspect of your post Jack. In reference to moderation on the particular forum and in particular the microaggressions. How does one moderate a microaggression? How does one scale a microaggression.

Now I'm well aware there are people that just want to be dicks and actually aren't interested in discussion. Common sense roots them out.

Microaggressions. When broken down this essentially is another way of saying " you're saying stuff I don't like" but with the added there should be consequences.


If you were in a debate with someone and you said " you're saying stuff I don't like". You would be laughed at. Probably called immature, a child and told to grow up. Rightly so.

It is interesting to me that people that feel more vulnerable are people most likely to use language tools like "Microaggressions". Using it to unscrew a point and take away it's validity under the guise that a threat has been made. If you don't see the serious pitfalls of this you should consider it.

the reason I find it interesting is the psychology behind the term microaggressions. A term like microaggressions the underlying essence is a tool that is more likely to be used by someone who is actually reprehensibly dangerous to someone who is most likely unknowingly vulnerable in a dispute.

The same people that would subscribe to the psychology behind a term like microaggressions are 100 times more likely to resort to violence when in a position of power or dominance over someone they find alien to them in a matter when both parties disagree.

As for my opinion on making the forums safer stricter moderation or implying mods are not doing their jobs. I'm not in under the Lgbt umbrella so maybe alot would feel I shouldn't have an opinion.

Personally I wouldn't want to sit under a safe imaginary blanky. Better to make yourself stronger in any given situation.

Perhaps because mods are bound by the rules of the platform governing the discussion. And not emotional ones. They cannot act on these perceived "microaggressions" what ever they maybe. Because they are personal and may only apply to that poster. Therfore to pull that thread would unravel all discussions. eventually suffocating any form of communication.

jcd5971

JupiterKid wrote:

But it seems to me that lately on this forum, a number of non-LGBT posters (mostly males I suspect) have been coming onto threads on this forum and have been making either thinly veiled or else blatant homophobic, or more commonly, transphobic remarks. They often disguise these bigoted opinions as “reasoned†remarks. Most of you on here have a good idea of who these posters are. This is sad because we have many, many, non LGBT posters who do contribute here on this forum in a very positive/supportive manner.

Only posting here as this was on the trending page.

I have no idea what's happening in your forums, and it's a shame if some trolls are ruining threads.

But your comment about "mostly males I suspect" is a bit disappointing, can you not see the irony of castigating a whole section of people, while simultaneously decrying the treatment of a different section of people.

Good luck with your thread, but you haven't really set your self up for success here I suspect.

Ten of Swords

That's your take away from the thread? You're taking issue with the fact that op has opined that the trolls in this forum are mostly male?

Mind blown

You're here because this thread was on the trending page, which ironically proves the point I made in post #2, and your previous contributions to this forum were on a thread that got closed because it was trending and got dragged wildly off topic as a result. In response to the op of that thread saying he had overheard comments he believed were homophobic you said you 'agreed' but it could be just 'banter'

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=105151483&postcount=62

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=105151821&postcount=65

Very helpful

Sleeper12

jcd5971 wrote:

But your comment about "mostly males I suspect" is a bit disappointing, can you not see the irony of castigating a whole section of people, while simultaneously decrying the treatment of a different section of people.

I think the point is that most of the trolls on this particular forum are straight males. Most of the nasty comments are from straight men. Most women are accepting. I don't think I've ever met a homophobic woman.

I'm a straight male btw so I don't have an agenda

JackTaylorFan

SterlingArcher wrote: »

I would like to discuss this aspect of your post Jack. In reference to moderation on the particular forum and in particular the microaggressions. How does one moderate a microaggression? How does one scale a microaggression.

Now I'm well aware there are people that just want to be dicks and actually aren't interested in discussion. Common sense roots them out.

Microaggressions. When broken down this essentially is another way of saying " you're saying stuff I don't like" but with the added there should be consequences.


If you were in a debate with someone and you said " you're saying stuff I don't like". You would be laughed at. Probably called immature, a child and told to grow up. Rightly so.

It is interesting to me that people that feel more vulnerable are people most likely to use language tools like "Microaggressions". Using it to unscrew a point and take away it's validity under the guise that a threat has been made. If you don't see the serious pitfalls of this you should consider it.

the reason I find it interesting is the psychology behind the term microaggressions. A term like microaggressions the underlying essence is a tool that is more likely to be used by someone who is actually reprehensibly dangerous to someone who is most likely unknowingly vulnerable in a dispute.

The same people that would subscribe to the psychology behind a term like microaggressions are 100 times more likely to resort to violence when in a position of power or dominance over someone they find alien to them in a matter when both parties disagree.

As for my opinion on making the forums safer stricter moderation or implying mods are not doing their jobs. I'm not in under the Lgbt umbrella so maybe alot would feel I shouldn't have an opinion.

Personally I wouldn't want to sit under a safe imaginary blanky. Better to make yourself stronger in any given situation.

Perhaps because mods are bound by the rules of the platform governing the discussion. And not emotional ones. They cannot act on these perceived "microaggressions" what ever they maybe. Because they are personal and may only apply to that poster. Therfore to pull that thread would unravel all discussions. eventually suffocating any form of communication.

No, I can handle a difference of opinion.

Microaggressions are different. It's a covert little dig - in regards transpeople it's usually an attack on their identity, via a deliberate case of misgendering. To people not aware or who just don't care to know of the kind of disrespect trans people have to deal with on a regular basis, it's usually just laughed off as a typo. But it's deliberate. The MODS here get that.

Anyways, I said I was done with this thread. You can accept that explanation or you can continue to whinge about terms you don't like.

Cheers

JackTaylorFan

SterlingArcher wrote: »

Microaggressions. When broken down this essentially is another way of saying " you're saying stuff I don't like" but with the added there should be consequences.


If you were in a debate with someone and you said " you're saying stuff I don't like". You would be laughed at. Probably called immature, a child and told to grow up. Rightly so.

It is interesting to me that people that feel more vulnerable are people most likely to use language tools like "Microaggressions". Using it to unscrew a point and take away it's validity under the guise that a threat has been made. If you don't see the serious pitfalls of this you should consider it.

the reason I find it interesting is the psychology behind the term microaggressions. A term like microaggressions the underlying essence is a tool that is more likely to be used by someone who is actually reprehensibly dangerous to someone who is most likely unknowingly vulnerable in a dispute.

A microaggression is the casual degradation of any marginalized group. The term was coined by psychiatrist and Harvard University professor Chester M. Pierce in 1970 to describe insults and dismissals he regularly witnessed non-black Americans inflict on African Americans.

JackTaylorFan

Deleted User wrote: »

Yet the only one ignoring and dodging points is you - not me. Usually by pretending I made a point I did not.

For example when I talked about how users here conduct themselves on threads elsewhere - and I named two users but I would also add the OP of this thread to that list too as having good posts on the issue around the rest of this website - you pretended I made a comment about "how After Hours threads handle trans issues" which I did not even remotely do.

If you can not answer the points I actually make - then it is not for you to pretend others are making unrelated allusions.

You have already demonstrated you don't get the point of this thread or this forum in general. Which I pointed out in my last comment to you. You skip over any counter-argument and move the goalpost by introducing more irrelevant points -i.e. how one gay man posts in After Hours and then a second. Doesn't matter. It has nothing to do with this forum and you are continuously ignoring that fact.

I'm done giving you oxygen here.

Good luck.

JackTaylorFan

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

You have already demonstrated you don't get the point of this thread or this forum in general.

You making something up does not mean I demonstrated it. I have made a host of very relevant points on this thread. Pretending I said things I did not in order to pretend I am moving goal posts however is not likely to change any of that.

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

You skip over any counter-argument and move the goalpost by introducing more irrelevant points -i.e. how one gay man posts in After Hours and then a second.

Not one point I have brought up is irrelevant. And the points you are declaring to be irrelevant were to discuss the claim you were making about no one speaking out on these issues.

JackTaylorFan wrote: »

I'm done giving you oxygen here.

Yea. Right. We will see how true that is.

Annasopra

Mod

Ok folks JackTaylorFan is voluntarily stepping out of the thread so I dont think there is any point others trying to drag her back in. Can we move back a bit more on topic please?