[Withano]

Originally Posted by Maru

Why the need to control so much how others writes and speak? It's their words, in their personal manner of speech. Anyone can speak however they'd like... if you mean, that that people should shift their words away from what may cause offense. Well, that's pretty much how life works isn't it... we live and breath and sometimes that may cause offense to others. We have to all make compromises with each other on a daily basis to coexist. This is how we get on in a multicultural society...

I think, tolerance is a two way street. Vicky's been giving folk her time and ample respect to answer these questions, some of them quite personal and offensive at various points, and to continue to have patient dialogue... that's quite a bit of patience if I may say... I think the best way to encourage non-superficial tolerance actually is to show it back when it is given to you.

Forcing people to agree with us or speak the way we'd like is not a way to go on carrying about our existence. If we carry on this way, then our intents would lose their original meaning, because then what is honesty if we can't even use the words the way we feel suits our feelings the best...

I don't know what to say about the moderation, because I don't really see deletions being handled (I'm in a different time zone), so maybe there are things there to be improved... but I think bringing in Vicky's personal writings, not just how she carries on about her moderating... that's too far. She is a human being and I think entitled to not only her beliefs, but her own method of speech.

Umm. Cause if you use the f word to describe a gay person it would be homophobic and you will be infracted. If you use the n word to describe a black person you will be infracted. That's entirely logical. However calling a transwoman a man is transphobia. Why is tibb tolerating transphobia but not other prejudices. The answer seems to be, because the moderating staff are ok with it and even use it themselves. Several people have brought up this transphobia before, and although I'm relieved that Vicky doesn't see it as transphobia, it just is. That is something she's understands incorrectly.

[Cherry Christmas]

Originally Posted by Withano

Umm. Cause if you use the f word to describe a gay person it would be homophobic and you will be infracted. If you use the n word to describe a black person you will be infracted. That's entirely logical. However calling a transwoman a man is transphobia. Why is tibb tolerating transphobia but not other prejudices. The answer seems to be, because the moderating staff are ok with it and even use it themselves. Several people have brought up this transphobia before, and although I'm relieved that Vicky doesn't see it as transphobia, it just is. That is something she's understands incorrectly.

It's not coming across that way to me

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Withano

Umm. Cause if you use the f word to describe a gay person it would be homophobic and you will be infracted. If you use the n word to describe a black person you will be infracted. That's entirely logical. However calling a transwoman a man is transphobia. Why is tibb tolerating transphobia but not other prejudices. The answer seems to be, because the moderating staff are ok with it and even use it themselves. Several people have brought up this transphobia before, and although I'm relieved that Vicky doesn't see it as transphobia, it just is. That is something she's understands incorrectly.

..but then if it’s being understood incorrectly, Withano...surely that would be the need for tolerance on the forum../...in discussions...because if these discussions couldn’t happen in the same way...’correct’ understandings would not be achieved...?...it is quite a complex topic...whereas f words and n words are not complex at all in their intolerance by staff...and it’s a fairly ‘new’ topic in terms of progression of understandings etc...’stifling’ will only surely...well stifle and hinder....

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Ammi

..but then if it’s being understood incorrectly, Withano...surely that would be the need for tolerance on the forum../...in discussions...because if these discussions couldn’t happen in the same way...’correct’ understandings would not be achieved...?...it is quite a complex topic...whereas f words and n words are not complex at all in their intolerance by staff...and it’s a fairly ‘new’ topic in terms of progression of understandings etc...’stifling’ will only surely...well stifle and hinder....

I would call it controlling behaviour myself - it is trying to not only control what people can say, when the words they use are not abusive, but apparently not PC enough for them, but about trying to control peoples' thoughts.

Personally, the more controlling some people try to be the more I rebel. By behaving that way they just create an adverse effect and even more negative thoughts on the subject. PC point scoring, nothing else in my book, that has the opposite effect to what they claim they are trying to achieve. Withano and others like him will never control my thoughts or words and I have no doubt many others feel the same.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Withano

Umm. Cause if you use the f word to describe a gay person it would be homophobic and you will be infracted. If you use the n word to describe a black person you will be infracted. That's entirely logical. However calling a transwoman a man is transphobia. Why is tibb tolerating transphobia but not other prejudices. The answer seems to be, because the moderating staff are ok with it and even use it themselves. Several people have brought up this transphobia before, and although I'm relieved that Vicky doesn't see it as transphobia, it just is. That is something she's understands incorrectly.

What about male posters on here who call women love, darling, sweetheart etc in a mocking way, which is blatant sexism, and don't get infracted. You don't seem to have a problem with that. When it suits hey!

[Ammi]

...I just don’t feel that TiBB is ‘tolerating transphobia’...but tolerating discussions which help ‘correct understanding’...from all perspectives of a complex topic in our own individual understandings....

[Yuki Maru Hoshi]

Originally Posted by Withano

Umm. Cause if you use the f word to describe a gay person it would be homophobic and you will be infracted. If you use the n word to describe a black person you will be infracted. That's entirely logical. However calling a transwoman a man is transphobia. Why is tibb tolerating transphobia but not other prejudices. The answer seems to be, because the moderating staff are ok with it and even use it themselves. Several people have brought up this transphobia before, and although I'm relieved that Vicky doesn't see it as transphobia, it just is. That is something she's understands incorrectly.

Vicky is either transphobic or she's not. It's been established already she is not. The penchant to then pull up on her personal wording and to suggest well let's fix this too, shift a word here and there... except this is what freedom of expression comes down to. It's in our words, on our own terms, when discussing our beliefs and how we frame logic in our own minds... it can't be restrictive if it's necessary to talk about certain topics and not impose a sort of cognitive dissonance on ourselves... it's shifting discomfort from one person to another is the way I see it.. is what this feels like in my mind, because let's be honest... she and the mods are being beat like a pinata for candy when they have no control over what others feel or believe. It's not just her mind, it's all our minds. We all have different views on this... and she personally is not trying to win anyone's affection for those beliefs or to change even their minds, that I can see? I even think some people just agree with this on their own terms? But supposedly some sin here is being committed here, although she is not transphobic, that makes her moderating intolerant? I think it's tolerant of her to not target people's thoughts over small things like out-of-context semantics when it comes to wording... something TiBB has never been all that sensitive to anyway when it comes to moderation. In fact the poster is given more benefit of doubt than not I'd say on most forums, and this isn't just related to trans discussions, but a lot of stealth trolling stays up, not just these particular lambs...we are arguing over virtue after this point, whether one action is more virtuous versus another.... but I think that her words and her courage to say what she actually means with conviction and to do this with tolerance of counter-arguments, that as well can be regarded as a virtue... and I don't know what to say to current or future transfolk, except, that this is the real world... one person's transphobia is another person's virtue, when we are being honest with ourselves and others and not mincing our words to suit the agenda of the day... we all think and come to different conclusions about what sex constitutes, the meaning of gender, the meaning of life even and to be fair, just about everything now is a moral contention ... I mean if it's not this, it'll be another. As if we are all virtue signaling and microaggressing the **** out of society.. and I do mean this, the oversensitive penchants do absolutely go both directions.

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Maru

Vicky is either transphobic or she's not. It's been established already she is not. The penchant to then pull up on her personal wording and to suggest well let's fix this too, shift a word here and there... except this is what freedom of expression comes down to. It's in our words, on our own terms, when discussing our beliefs and how we frame logic in our own minds... it can't be restrictive if it's necessary to talk about certain topics and not impose a sort of cognitive dissonance on ourselves... it's shifting discomfort from one person to another is the way I see it.. is what this feels like in my mind, because let's be honest... she and the mods are being beat like a pinata for candy when they have no control over what others feel or believe. It's not just her mind, it's all our minds. We all have different views on this... and she personally is not trying to win anyone's affection for those beliefs or to change even their minds, that I can see? I even think some people just agree with this on their own terms? But supposedly some sin here is being committed here, although she is not transphobic, that makes her moderating intolerant? I think it's tolerant of her to not target people's thoughts over small things like out-of-context semantics when it comes to wording... something TiBB has never been all that sensitive to anyway when it comes to moderation. In fact the poster is given more benefit of doubt than not I'd say on most forums, and this isn't just related to trans discussions, but a lot of stealth trolling stays up, not just these particular lambs...we are arguing over virtue after this point, whether one action is more virtuous versus another.... but I think that her words and her courage to say what she actually means with conviction and to do this with tolerance of counter-arguments, that as well can be regarded as a virtue... and I don't know what to say to current or future transfolk, except, that this is the real world... one person's transphobia is another person's virtue, when we are being honest with ourselves and others and not mincing our words to suit the agenda of the day... we all think and come to different conclusions about what sex constitutes, the meaning of gender, the meaning of life even and to be fair, just about everything now is a moral contention ... I mean if it's not this, it'll be another. As if we are all virtue signaling and microaggressing the **** out of society.. and I do mean this, the oversensitive penchants do absolutely go both directions.

Excellent post!