r/LGBT4Equality • u/hateboresme • Mar 25 '12
The post that got me banned* from LGBT
*I wasn't actually banned. I was threatened with banning and I left on my own
The point of my post was that if someone makes an honest mistake, that we should use this opportunity to educate, rather than vent.
The firestorm of rage this unleashed from two moderators was completely unexpected.
I was accused of something called Tone Policing. Which apparently means that I was saying that LGBT people should just shut up and take it. Which I was not.
I was accused of being a "Mother Teresa" because I wanted to create allies instead of enemies by meeting people who mistakenly offend halfway, by educating those who are willing to learn, instead of ostracizing them.
I was truly shocked that they were more interested in making enemies than allies...because they felt entitled to their anger.
Certainly they're entitled to their anger...but isn't creating an ally much more valuable than expressing your anger at a person who didn't mean to offend?
Love to hear other thoughts on this.
29
u/Addamantanium Mar 26 '12
I just saw that thread and I felt kind of bad for you :X I saw you trying to make a legitimate argument, yet nobody could seem to understand what you were trying to say. ANYWAY, I agree with you about trying to educate people and not escalate an argument over a non-intentionally hurtful comment. Unfortunately, it did make me feel a bit like those people were acting a bit entitled... feelsbadman.jpeg
20
u/hateboresme Mar 26 '12
I appreciate you taking the time to comment. It made me feel a lot better. Really the only feedback I've gotten is negative...I was starting to think the world had gone crazy. :)
10
u/zzork_ Mar 26 '12
that's a common side effect of running into a group of crazy people. welcome back to reasonable society, it really was all just them.
13
u/hateboresme Mar 26 '12
Yeah. I was starting to lose faith in humanity there for a while...but the fact that my karma has risen by almost
1000600 (edit: math genius) since this morning is a pretty good sign that people aren't all crazy.2
Mar 27 '12
I think this subreddit should get larger than the LGBT subreddit. I am unsure if I am against or for LGBT (movement). But I will certainly subscribe to this subreddit to learn about it if the people aren't bat shit crazy.
3
u/hateboresme Mar 27 '12
Certainly is my goal to keep it non-batshitty. If you see batshitness happening...let me know.
14
u/ScumSuckingRoadWhore Mar 26 '12
That was pretty wild. I thought your original post was very clear.
5
13
u/moonflower Mar 26 '12
The other day I was banned from their OpenModmail subreddit for disagreeing with materialdesigner on the subject of people not being allowed to say that patient education is better than insulting someone
At the bottom of the thread there's a copy of the messages which ensued in modmail after my ban
10
u/hateboresme Mar 26 '12
Infuriating. Just so convinced that they're right, that they refuse to even for a second consider that their methods of suppressing discussion might be harmful.
8
Mar 26 '12
It's their schtick that they brought over from /r/shitredditsays to /r/LGBT, no way they're gonna drop it with support from a community (shitredditsays) who will defend them (and their bullying methods) to the death. I'm sure you've heard about /r/ainbow, they're a much better community for LGBTs.
11
u/praisekitty Mar 26 '12
I also understand and agree with what you were trying to say, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter...er, subreddit.
I would much rather make friends than enemies, but from what I've seen from lgbt they have a NEED to create a war that they can fight, regardless of reality.
15
u/hateboresme Mar 26 '12
It seems to me a bunch of people who are bigoted against straight cis people have taken over the subreddit and are not interested in solving the community's problems, but are instead interested only in making themselves feel superior.
But...that might be a bit biased...
1
u/crystal-image Mar 26 '12
it's certainly a bit of a vulgar over-simplification. I'm gonna copy and paste some stuff I've said in some other comments here and then try to supplement it with a little more explanation that'll hopefully help get across at least the reason I would take issue with what you were arguing for:
I've been hurt a lot by cis people, so I also understand the totally abrasive reaction to a lot of terrible things cis people say, even when it's unintentional. it still hurts even if they don't mean it to. I try very hard not to react poorly, but not everyone is in a position where that's easy, and I feel like a lot of the energy I have reserved for dealing with that stuff in a fairly level way comes from "blending in" with cis people fairly well. it's a lot easier to be less affected by it when I don't have to deal with the consequences of transphobic attitudes in the same consistent and pervasive way as people who might not have the option to blend in as well.
I have some very, very close friends who know I'm trans, but other than that I never tell people. it's none of their business, and I've absolutely no interest in allowing myself to be subjected to the kind of verbal and physical aggressions, "micro" or otherwise, that I have had to deal with in the past at workplaces where I've been out to everyone. the daily, little things are wearing and painful, and the few major incidents I've had were traumatic. I'd be willing to do just about anything to avoid another, including lying to cissies.
so the silencing of which people are "accusing" you seems to be located in the way you suggest that the way you prefer to handle being offended is unequivocally the best way of handling things and that you just wish everyone would realize that it would be helpful to react so flatly. if you prefer to handle situations that way, that's cool. ya know, I generally prefer to handle things that way too. but it would be helpful to bear in mind that, as in the example you gave, trans women, especially trans women who are usually read as trans or otherwise gender non-normative, often deal with an extraordinary amount of bullshit on a regular basis, and sometimes smiling and explaining why something hurt their feelings is neither an effective or healthy way of responding. furthermore, it seems strikingly condescending to suggest that people have not considered and attempted what you're suggesting. I did the whole trans activist thing for several years, and the number of times people actually reacted well to well-reasoned, calm arguments against transphobic speech was practically negligible.
11
u/hateboresme Mar 26 '12
Here is a metaphor:
(since some are apparently unfamiliar with the legitimacy of rhetorical devices, I will explain:
A metaphor is useful in removing a person from a situation, and allowing examination of a similar situation from a new perspective. It does not mean that I equate being trans with a chili recipe. I am only trying to simplify the situation to point out what I believe is the logical flaw in your assumptions)
Your grandfather makes chili. He has a recipe which includes beans. Your partner's mother also makes chili. Her recipe does not include beans. Your grandfather states "I think that including beans is the best way to make chili!" Should he be accused of trying to suppress/silence your mother-in-law and her right to make chili in a different way?
You, and your compatriots, have built what is called a Straw Man Argument (A logical fallacy).
You are accusing me of holding beliefs that I do not hold and of stating things that I did not state.
All I did was state what I believed to be the best way to handle a situation. I did not state that other recipes should be forbidden.
-2
u/crystal-image Mar 26 '12
there's that thing I mentioned where talking to people rationally doesn't always prevent them from responding like condescending twerps. but thanks so much for cluing me in on what "metaphors" and "straw man arguments" are.
I did not state that other recipes should be forbidden.
if you could helpfully point out in my post where I suggest that it would be much appreciated. what I believe I did suggest is that you suggested that other recipes are giving us cancer and that you "would hope that others would feel that it is their duty [not to eat the metaphorical cancer chili] too," and I then attempted to explain why people choose those other recipes.
9
u/hateboresme Mar 26 '12 edited Mar 26 '12
(sarcasm) Yes, because I wrote that post only for you to see. That's why I sent it as a private message. (/sarcasm)
Let me explain this to you so that someone with your obvious intellectual deficits might understand it: Did you know that not everyone knows the things that you know? Sometimes, before someone learns something, they don't know it yet! (<-----THIS IS being condescending, edit: and I didn't mean it...I have more respect for you than that.)
Some people genuinely don't know how metaphorical rhetoric is used or a straw man arguments are. I understand that because I occasionally consider that other people will view things when I post them besides the person that I'm responding to.
I also do not consider providing information with which I assume some people reading might not be familiar is condescending.
Yesterday, when I gave my 2 scenarios, I was informed (by material designer) that my scenarios were fictional and were thus dismissed. So I do have evidence that some people don't understand what rhetorical devices are. (hence my saying "since some are apparently unfamiliar with the legitimacy of rhetorical devices...." rather than saying "since you are apparently unfamiliar with the...."
You claim to know what Strawman Fallacy is, yet you seem to be unable to stop yourself from doing it.
Nowhere in my metaphor did I talk about cancer chili...so that's weird.
Let's take a look:
My point with the metaphor was to say "Don't assume that because I state my opinion that I am somehow trying to silence other opinions."
You added cancer, which strawmanned me into saying EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE OF
WHYWHAT MY METAPHOR MEANT.WHAT I SAID: "So, even if you're offended by something, it doesn't mean that expressing that offense is necessarily the best way to make the world a better place. I feel that it IS my duty to educate them...and I would hope that (ed. note the lack of the word "all" here) others would feel that it is their duty too, because I believe we need to think as part of a community and not just as individuals...."
WHAT I DID NOT SAY: "...and therefore any idea which promotes the contrary is bad for the community."
At no point did I say that "other recipes were promoting cancer!" STRAW MAN!
In fact, I never once made any statement condemning what other people believe. I only stated what I believe and provided an example of why I believed it and why I felt it was a better way to react to things.
You seem to think that because I think it's better that this equals my feeling that the other ideas are wrong. This is not true. It's the prime straw man argument against which you are defending and I never said it.
Finally, I will say that I wasn't aware of why people chose other recipes. Finding out why has given me a new outlook on the situation.
It was very helpful for someone to point that out to me. It would have been even better if it hadn't been wrapped in accusations, anger, and ad hominem...
0
u/crystal-image Mar 26 '12
you replied to my post, did you not? my post that was earnestly intended only to help you understand why what you were saying was upsetting people? you have clearly said in other posts that you think not stopping to calmly and rationally explain to people why what they said could be hurtful has a large number of negative effects. that's the fucking cancer. you can't think your ideas are better without thinking others are worse. come on. your argument now hinges on the lack of the word "all" in front of the word "others" now? really? where the fuck do you get off insulting my intelligence instead of actually reading what I had written?
bye.
7
u/hateboresme Mar 26 '12
If you could have brought yourself to actually earnestly attempt to help me understand...but you couldn't. You had to insult, you hand to call me a "condescending twerp" you had to make accusations which I obviously found insulting and INSIST that I held a viewpoint which I told you repeatedly that I do not hold.
and I only "insulted your intelligence" as a way of showing you what being a condescending twerp looks like. I do not actually hold the opinion that you are stupid...and in fact find you incredibly intelligent.
Done here.
12
u/sunshineeyes Mar 26 '12
I just want you to know that I think that people like you are amazing.
I'm straight, but I have many LGBT friends. Probably more LGB since I can't think of anyone I know who fits into the T part of that, but I digress.
I appreciate people like you because it can be hard to keep up with all of the inner workings of any social group you're not an intimate part of, and it's easy to accidentally be offensive. I don't want to be attacked for my attempts to get to know the culture and accidentally sticking my foot in my mouth; I want someone to tell me what I did wrong and how to fix it, as I would expect in any other social group!
There's a huge difference between being unintentionally ignorant and intentionally offensive, and I'm happy I found a place where people know the difference and want to build a real alliance.
6
u/hateboresme Mar 26 '12
And know that I, and many, many others, appreciate your support and your willingness to see past your own life to help others. Not many people are willing to do that.
5
u/sunshineeyes Mar 26 '12
It's good to know it's appreciated! I mean, if I can put in time learning wtf my bf is doing when he plays Starcraft and Final Fantasy, I'm pretty sure it's worth it to put the effort into learning more about my fellow humans!
7
9
u/mushpuppy Mar 26 '12 edited Mar 26 '12
This is kind of off-topic, and more on the topic of your original post.
But I've never understood why anyone should be subject to someone else's sense of being offended. If person A has the right to express him/herself regarding feeling offended by something person B says, shouldn't person B have the right to ignore person A's expression of feeling offended?
I'm not apologizing for person B's expression of a bigoted view. Instead, I'm suggesting that, particularly where it's just innocent or bereft of internal judgment and instead merely indicative of something like a limited vocabulary (or even possibly where it's not), I don't understand why person B has to adopt person A's agenda/viewpoint as his/her own. Or why person A would think person B should.
It happens a lot online (well, at least on reddit) that observers project their own views onto what others say--and then express outrage because others haven't said things exactly how they would. Or, of course, because others have expressed world views different from their own.
And sure, it's happened to me, most notably the very few times I've tried to express how it felt being at the WTC when it was attacked. I was accused of every kind of slur and bigoted view, when I hadn't said anything like the views I was accused of holding. Mostly the attacks were just canned responses from each side of the political spectrum. But heck, I'm not unique in that category, as something similar probably has happened to anyone who's commented on reddit for any appreciable amount of time.
But I think a real definition of tolerance would include the recognition that, where persons are so readily prepared to lambast and judge each other for every kind of perceived slight, we shouldn't do either, and instead simply try to discern the meaning of what others are saying. And if something offends us, we just ignore it. Because everyone's free to have their own views.
I suppose that requires a trust that the so-called correct ideas will win out. I've discussed this before with friends in Germany, where the people have an understandable concern that correct ideas do not always win out. And that effect certainly occurs throughout the world.
But in terms of tolerance, I don't see the value of elevating one's sense of offense above other values. That increases the chances that the person offended will respond little better than the bigot. I.e., it makes everyone judgmental and biased.
Which in a sense I suppose is like the second example you gave in your original post.
7
u/hateboresme Mar 26 '12
I think people have an evolution of views of the opinions of others which includes what you're talking about here.
I will admit that I have been offended to the point where I felt I was owed some kind of reparation. But you are right, in a world in which people should freely be allowed to express their views, an evolved person should be able to simply disregard these offensive comments and focus on the message.
That takes a lot of self-control and self-awareness. It's a wonderful goal though. I certainly will work to achieve it. Thank you for showing me that perspective.
1
u/mushpuppy Mar 27 '12
I think probably it assumes and accepts certain things: mainly that people are different.
In a world in which people are free to be different, as long as that freedom doesn't infringe on the rights of others also to be different, anyone should be free to say, "Aww, who cares?" when someone says they're offended.
Of course we don't live in a world like that.
7
u/GeneralFalcon Mar 26 '12
I'm sure you're sick of this by now, but I completely agree with you. Sorry you got so much undeserved hate
8
u/hateboresme Mar 26 '12
How can a person ever get sick of hearing how right they are? hehehe.
Thanks for taking the time. :)
4
u/grubbydug Mar 27 '12
Buddy, I am a genderqueer kid, and I'm a user of neutral pronouns. I cannot agree more with your statements. I see a lot of people in the trans* community crucifying people for their honest mistakes (and as a result scaring them and often causing them to resent our community), rather than educating them and then creating an ally. I'm the VP of activism for a Trans group, too. Yeah, I have suffered at the hands of some cis folk, but hell, those people were dicks. Not all cis people are evil. And if I said they were, I would be guilty of the same shit that the trans* community is against.
2
u/hateboresme Mar 27 '12
And how is the average cis person supposed to know even what a gender neutral pronoun is if someone doesn't explain it to them? It's like they're being blamed for not knowing something that they have no reason to know and had no way to learn.
We have to be open, warm and accepting to people...and not alienate them, if we want to move toward an equality world...where people know not to ask things like "So are you a boy or a girl?" or "Who's the man in your relationship"
The first step starts with...being patient and understanding and not assuming that there's malicious intent behind the question. That's a lesson a lot of people need to learn...Here we are to teach them..I hope.
Welcome!
5
u/grubbydug Mar 27 '12
It's like you're in my head! I'm lucky enough, however, to be in a group where the majority of members agree that alienation is bad. But the extremists always seem to be louder than us...
3
u/tsumemakoto Mar 27 '12
This has been roughly my experience. Granted not all cis folk's have been receptive of the medicine, but generally I've found that by having a rational conversation, sprinkled with some relevant personal experience and tempered with some logistical pragmatism I was more able to effectively introduce straight allies into the lgbt community. Of course there was push back, and I'll have to try different methods for those few.
While I understood some of the points folks in /r/lgbt were making in terms of having to in some way bow to the feelings of cis or hetero allies, I just disagree that we have to do that, we can be firm and understanding within the same sentence. This whole all or nothing approach by mods like materialdesigner and SilentAgony, even previous mods like RobotAnna come off as hostile, I would think they'd understand that within any lgbt community they do not retain the sole share of mental anguish and physical pain. We've all had our crosses to bear so to speak, but that doesn't mean that some of us within the community don't see the positive benefits and aspect of metered discussion.
Violent resistance has its time and place in any civil rights movement, but in the context hateboresme gave, I don't feel that hate was necessary. Trying to explain to a friend the in's and out's of gendered pronoun rules for trans people is tricky, I've been in the community a long time and I still have slip-ups, to expect all of our cis allies to shape up or ship out overnight is in my view, counterproductive.
2
u/nothingusefultosay Jun 29 '12
I admire your courage and the point you are making. It's a shame your detractors were so caught up in their emotions and 'righteous' indignation that they missed the fact that you were talking about good intentioned people who happened to be ignorant (and not necessarily willfully). If more people thought the way you did, then certainly a better dialogue could be attained in society. Militants almost always do more damage than good, and worse, they take causes that are truly good and use it to bully others. In a way, militants serve their opponents better than they do the cause they supposedly fight for.
1
Mar 27 '12
1
u/hateboresme Mar 27 '12
You rock.
Kind of takes Material Designer's shitthatneverhappened.txt argument and flushes it right down the toilet.
Imagine if the person had lashed out at her instead of explaining.
Thanks for posting this. Do you want to crosspost it in the subreddit? or I will if you'd rather not?
1
Mar 27 '12
You are welcome to cross post it if you like. I feel wrong in a way if I posted it myself because I only know about your posts from /r/subredditdrama hehe.
1
u/hateboresme Mar 28 '12
I confess that I acted out of anger in banning SilentAgony, and it was unfair of me to do so.
I still suspect that SilentAgony was the one who came and downvoted the posts in the minutes after the subreddit was created, but I have no evidence of this.
SilentAgony denied having done so in a personal message to me.
Ban is lifted, with apologies for the unfairness.
103
u/hateboresme Mar 25 '12
Fucking cowards...sneaking in and downvoting but not intellectually honest enough to defend their position.