Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

An Update to Our Community and an Apology

meta.stackexchange.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 424 posts

Re: An Update to Our Community and an Apology

#231

Post by damnyou »

tmp20191006cars wrote: post #190

I've never seen a code of conduct that makes calling someone by the wrong first name a bannable offense. So why is it so with pronouns? IMHO it's because this issue is politically unsettled -- it is not universally resolved across society. A fair percentage of people do not accept the concept of transgenderism, and instead see a transgender woman as a mentally ill man (and vice versa). While this issue is politically…

It is completely appropriate to enforce a trans-affirming policy. A view that considers a group of people -- other people that participate on the site -- mentally ill, has no place in workplaces, large-scale online forums and polite society in general.

Re: An Update to Our Community and an Apology

#232

Post by damnyou »

Invictus0 wrote: post #230
tmp20191006cars wrote: post #190

I've never seen a code of conduct that makes calling someone by the wrong first name a bannable offense. So why is it so with pronouns? IMHO it's because this issue is politically unsettled -- it is not universally resolved across society. A fair percentage of people do not accept the concept of transgenderism, and instead see a transgender woman as a mentally ill man (and vice versa). While this issue is politically…

Truth and falsehood and opinion are all points on the same spectrum. Typically, facts and falsehoods are mutually agreed upon by both sides, and opinion is what falls in between as cannot-yet-be-determined stuff. But we live in a world where opinion has exceeded its bounds and encompassed fact. Evolution and climate change are still hotly contested. And it is the same with transgenderism: both sides hold different "f…

This is not a both sides issue. The medical fields moved to complete affirmation of trans identities a while ago because the scientific evidence for trans affirmation is overwhelming -- literally everything from mental health outcomes to surgery regret rates indicates that.

The other side is both bigoted and factually wrong.

Re: An Update to Our Community and an Apology

#233

Post by MauranKilom »

michannne wrote: post #217
MauranKilom wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether one think it's valid or not, people are hurt and suffer from the actions you suggest. Even if no harm is intended, harm is actively being done. At the same time, there is a limit to the linguistic, religious and/or philosophical concessions that pronoun users can reasonably make. It appears to me that that there is not always a middle ground that satisfies both sides. I (as someone who has no horse in this ra…

Empathy and courtesy have nothing to do with referring someone by generic pronouns. No one is being unempathetic by refusing to call "Joey", Joe, or not referring to Nat by their full name, Natalie. These are all personal issues that one must deal with on their own, either by disengaging from the situation or escalating however they desire and finding a resolution amongst themselves. Pronouns are no different - if yo…

> because they will be misgendered day in and day out for the rest of their life. If someone believes they are being gangstalked, society doesn't modify itself to ensure no one within 500 meters of them has a predictable schedule.

That's no good reason to go out of your way to misgender someone or pretend to stalk someone who has that phobia. Yes, there will be problems interacting with society overall, I have no good answer for that. But I do know that knowingly and actively hurting people "because society does it too" when you could trivially avoid it is reprehensible.

Re: An Update to Our Community and an Apology

#234

Post by humanrebar »

tmp20191006cars wrote: post #190

I've never seen a code of conduct that makes calling someone by the wrong first name a bannable offense. So why is it so with pronouns? IMHO it's because this issue is politically unsettled -- it is not universally resolved across society. A fair percentage of people do not accept the concept of transgenderism, and instead see a transgender woman as a mentally ill man (and vice versa). While this issue is politically…

> A fair percentage of people do not accept the concept of transgenderism, and instead see a transgender woman as a mentally ill man

A not trivial amount of the objection is because of the singular 'they' and 'their'. I'll cop to being confused by sentences leveraging those formations. One can appeal to etymology, but even knowing the etymology didn't prevent my confusion.

"Be kind" is a good rule. And now there are also practical concerns to be sensitive to.

Point being, it's more complicated than accepting new gender models. And whatever peaceful solution is possible, I don't see any that don't involve decades of patience as folks get comfortable with new grammatical constructs: gender agnostic singular pronouns other than 'it', sentences containing 'their' not implying plurality, or something along those lines.

Keep in mind that the U.S. still uses imperial measurements.

Re: An Update to Our Community and an Apology

#235

Post by chiefalchemist »

Causality1 wrote: post #228
chiefalchemist wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Understood. But for simplicity and consistency maybe we should just use first names. No he or she, etc. Just use the first name. Wouldn't that do it?

It seems that was the issue. The moderator in question, as best as I've been able to ascertain, decided to avoid gendered pronouns entirely and in doing so violated the rules.

So someone got sacked for using a person's name instead of a pronoun?

Re: An Update to Our Community and an Apology

#236

Post by P_I_Staker »

yourbandsucks wrote: post #162
P_I_Staker wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what really irritates me about moderating in general. The whole thing is an exercise in power tripping. Considering whether a decision was misguided is forbidden. You must always be dictator. Mistakes are never made.

Devil's advocate: sports referees never admit a mistake, either. There's a calculus where the upsides of correcting a mistake are outweighed by the downsides of inviting more gamesmanship of your decisions. (I know nothing about the SO situation, purely talking generalities here.)

I'm not sure about that, of course In a game they don't once the cards fall; but there's video review and officials do admit to mistakes after the fact. It's not quite so bad as the situation with moderators IMO. I don't see the same level of power tripping, but maybe that's because I'm not on the field

Re: An Update to Our Community and an Apology

#237

Post by damnyou »

humanrebar wrote: post #234
tmp20191006cars wrote: post #190

I've never seen a code of conduct that makes calling someone by the wrong first name a bannable offense. So why is it so with pronouns? IMHO it's because this issue is politically unsettled -- it is not universally resolved across society. A fair percentage of people do not accept the concept of transgenderism, and instead see a transgender woman as a mentally ill man (and vice versa). While this issue is politically…

> A fair percentage of people do not accept the concept of transgenderism, and instead see a transgender woman as a mentally ill man A not trivial amount of the objection is because of the singular 'they' and 'their'. I'll cop to being confused by sentences leveraging those formations. One can appeal to etymology, but even knowing the etymology didn't prevent my confusion. "Be kind" is a good rule. And now there are…

Do any of your friends use they/them pronouns? Most people get used to them with a tiny bit of practice. I've seen Italian, Mandarin, Spanish and Hindi native speakers use them fluently.

Re: An Update to Our Community and an Apology

#239

Post by detaro »

michannne wrote: post #217
MauranKilom wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether one think it's valid or not, people are hurt and suffer from the actions you suggest. Even if no harm is intended, harm is actively being done. At the same time, there is a limit to the linguistic, religious and/or philosophical concessions that pronoun users can reasonably make. It appears to me that that there is not always a middle ground that satisfies both sides. I (as someone who has no horse in this ra…

Empathy and courtesy have nothing to do with referring someone by generic pronouns. No one is being unempathetic by refusing to call "Joey", Joe, or not referring to Nat by their full name, Natalie. These are all personal issues that one must deal with on their own, either by disengaging from the situation or escalating however they desire and finding a resolution amongst themselves. Pronouns are no different - if yo…

> No one is being unempathetic by refusing to call "Joey", Joe, or not referring to Nat by their full name, Natalie.

I thought not calling people nicknames they dislike had something to do with courtesy and empathy. (I'll also note that you picked very mild nicknames for your example)

> if you want me to refer to you as her, and I don't, then you and I will have a problem, not you, me, the mods, my boss, the government, etc.

Insisting on some level of courtesy is the moderators and the bosses job. As is enforcement if insistence isn't enough. What that level is, and what's appropriate enforcement, that's the tricky part.

Re: An Update to Our Community and an Apology

#240

Post by Invictus0 »

damnyou wrote: post #232
Invictus0 wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Truth and falsehood and opinion are all points on the same spectrum. Typically, facts and falsehoods are mutually agreed upon by both sides, and opinion is what falls in between as cannot-yet-be-determined stuff. But we live in a world where opinion has exceeded its bounds and encompassed fact. Evolution and climate change are still hotly contested. And it is the same with transgenderism: both sides hold different "f…

This is not a both sides issue. The medical fields moved to complete affirmation of trans identities a while ago because the scientific evidence for trans affirmation is overwhelming -- literally everything from mental health outcomes to surgery regret rates indicates that. The other side is both bigoted and factually wrong .

This is exactly my point. The other side looks at you and says you're wrong with equal conviction and their own bevy of justifications. Since you and the other side can't mutually agree on some set of axioms of worldview, both sides' "facts" just become opinions.
Post reply on HN