Important notice: Understanding attacks on homosexuality

Post Reply New Topic

I sent this note to behind the curtain a little while ago:

In order to help facilitate a better understanding of the rules within the WP membership, and to ensure more consistent moderation of these rules, the Mods and Admins have come together and created a clarification/modification to the rules. This will be posted in several places including the rules sticky at the top of the PPR forum.

An attack against a group shall be construed as an attack against all people who fall within that group. This shall include all attacks against genders, races, nationalities, religions, philosophies and sexual preferences.

Examples of prohibited speech:

Women are whores.
Black people are lazy.
Greeks smell bad.
Catholics are bigots.
Platonists are simple minded.
Homosexuals are perverted.

Acceptable speech:

The Catholic position against homosexuality is bigoted.
The Platonic assumption of distinct reality is idiotic.
The Greek government massively blundered their tax policy.
The Homosexual agenda portrayed on Queer Eye makes me want to set myself on fire.

I am leaving this thread open so this new change can be discussed if needed but if it devolves into argument about past mistakes we will shut it down as it serves no constructive purpose that way.

Thanks everyone

@leejosepho

Cross-posting is against site rules. This is posted in 5 different places, there is no need for you to post the same thing in each location.

Yes: Guilty as presumed!

I have been ignoring this discourse rather hoping it would go away, but now I have no choice but to speak.

In light of recent postings here, is it IS or is it AIN'T:

ANYBODY can declare a locution offensive, be recognized as offended, and have the locution prohibited?

OR is it, as in academia,

Those belonging to the Scheduled Categories, and only they, may declare locutions offensive?

An example:

I was - at the time - a white apparently AngoSaxon American straight agnostic apolitical male academic (Humanities).

A colleague told me to my face that I was "data-oriented". This - while absolutely true - is felt to be a negative descriptor in my community, and in context it is clear she intended it to be seen as a criticism.

Suppose this happened on WR - let us say Awesomely Glorious labels me data-oriented - which could happen at any moment.

Have I the right to feel injured and declare data-oriented an offensive and bigoted epithet?

In fact, I consider "data-oriented" addressed to me from certain quarters both offensive and bighoted, but I would not make a big deal of it.

My best answer for you Philologos is that we have no intention of being dogmatic or butting in where no offense is being taken. That being said, the main purpose of this site is providing support for Aspies and Auties and this place should be somewhere that everyone feels safe from attack. If someone felt strongly about something they were called, and made you aware of this sensitivity, and the name-calling continued this would be bullying by any definition. Bullying has always been prohibited.