Gender identity thread

There has been quite the clampdown on the gender identity discussion thread which has been heavily one sided.

It seems that holding and voicing the opinion that a biological man isn't a woman and vice versa is forbidden.

If that is the stance of boards, then it was a little ridiculous for a mod to open the thread. While it is possible to have this discussion civilly, when posters with an opposing point of view consistently dodge answering questions and accuse you of being a phobe or a bigot, it tends to end up going to the base line that some people agree that a trans person is the sex they believe and others definitely do not.

It's unfair that one end of the argument are able to freely post their views and the opposite side are left walking on eggshells to avoid infractions.

I have pmd the mod regarding my thread ban and haven't heard back

Numerous posters have been infracted, all of which were on a specific side of the discussion. It's not a balanced discussion and frankly a bit of a joke.

I'd am hoping that I could be reinstated, along with others, and allow the conversation to continue. Otherwise I think it would be best for all concerned if you were to close the thread or move it to the lgbt forum where a robust discourse is prohibited to allow for a safe space.

Shield

I believe the moderator in question is in a different time zone, so please allow some extra time for them to get back to you.

Thanks.

Shield

Shield wrote: »

I believe the moderator in question is in a different time zone, so please allow some extra time for them to get back to you.

Thanks.

Absolutely. No problem at all.

Please don't think that I am trying to cause an issue. I'm just looking for clarification and hoping to help other posters avoid infractions.

Gatling

From the start of this thread it seems to have been decided to tie posters hands behind their backs ,
And the mods were heavy handed with their approach to the thread but not evenly modded which is one of my issues we had an unusual mod warning on page one from my experience ,ok everyone was fine and off we went into the discussion ,
I was infracted early on for next to nothing ,yet another poster broke multiples of the warning issued on the front page .no apparent action taken not even a warning ,
I was banned for posting it's a funny day today - apparently this was discussion mod actions on thread , which in no way was discussing mod actions on the page ,
A particular poster was labelling anyone who didn't agree with them a homophobic bigot as well as transpobic and calling people terfs all because they didn't like a particular opinion or they challenged this poster to answer any questions ,
A discussion came out how a child or vunerable person could be groomed or manipulated into believing they were the wrong gender and even doctors could be manipulated into giving treatments and drugs unnecessarily .
Two posters claimed that we were trying to link transgender to Child sex abuse despite it clearly being stated the discussion at the time had zero to with linking child abuse to gender identity ,
Mod action we were not allowed to discuss grooming yet very recently laws were passed to protect people and Children from being groomed for criminal activities ( not sexual abuse ) ,
We've seen a mod make a post about someone apparently closing their account which had nothing to do the the discussion and was unnecessary action for the thread ,
People close their accounts in the hundreds , actually thousands have left over the near 15 years I've been here , never have I seen a mod come into a thread to confirm a poster left despite no mention of any particular poster bar a claim from another well known mod ,
Very recently we found another mod warning added by a admin no less dictating what they want discussions of ended , which again was unneeded ,
Another poster made a post about an apparent trans person and a poem and one particular poster decided to attack citing discussing a childs genitals in public despite the person being in public life ,there was no discussion about anyones genitals except where the effects of puberty blocker's were talked about,
A mod stepped in and yet the same supposedly offended was still discussing it off their own bat ,and demanding the other poster delete or edit the post ,
I reported that and no actions was seen to be taken.

For the majority of the thread there has been no real flash points or abuse posted (we had a few recent regs post ****e) out of posters c control ,
And yes I'm no angel I get infractions here and there and the odd bans,
But whats happening on this thread is very unfair it's not a discussion where people are free to voice an opinion ,it's been steered to only allowed one opinion and nothing else .

Someone suggested this be moved to the LGBT forum but I believe they don't want anything to do with it , considering the previous threads in that particular barely lasted a few pages with several very familiar names involved ,
Another poster suggested only gay men should be allowed to discuss the topic ,but the majority of trans people apparently are not gay,the same posters claims women who voice an opinion are hysterical biddies who are nothing but terfs ( a slur being used as a slur )no less .

All I want to see is a fair discussion and not one heavily controlled to force it down a one way street ,the same should apply to actions by mods or admins ,it's creating a situation that will only encourage more extreme prejudices become more apparent .

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Deleted User wrote: »

There has been quite the clampdown on the gender identity discussion thread which has been heavily one sided.

It seems that holding and voicing the opinion that a biological man isn't a woman and vice versa is forbidden.

If that is the stance of boards, then it was a little ridiculous for a mod to open the thread. While it is possible to have this discussion civilly, when posters with an opposing point of view consistently dodge answering questions and accuse you of being a phobe or a bigot, it tends to end up going to the base line that some people agree that a trans person is the sex they believe and others definitely do not.

It's unfair that one end of the argument are able to freely post their views and the opposite side are left walking on eggshells to avoid infractions.

I have pmd the mod regarding my thread ban and haven't heard back

Numerous posters have been infracted, all of which were on a specific side of the discussion. It's not a balanced discussion and frankly a bit of a joke.

I'd am hoping that I could be reinstated, along with others, and allow the conversation to continue. Otherwise I think it would be best for all concerned if you were to close the thread or move it to the lgbt forum where a robust discourse is prohibited to allow for a safe space.

It’s pretty clear that the goal is to have the thread closed or have it drop down the pages once one side has been successfully depleted. So, no, I don’t think the thread should be closed. But it probably will be, now that the bias is apparent. The remaining people still there should endeavour to not let it disappear from view.

GreeBo

I don't think it helps the optics when a mod from another forum gets away with dropping a flame bomb and running away, only to return a few days later.
The fact that their post, that says anyone who questions transgenderism sympathises with nutjobs who burn people, is left unmoderated while others get carded, banned and edited is very hard to accept and makes it kinda impossible to have a balanced discussion.

If only one view is supported then make a transgender forum and be done with it, like A&A, biscuits for believers.

Tokyo

As pointed out, I am in a different timezone to most of you here. Compounding that, I'm also working around severe internet restrictions and today in particular there's a lot going on at my location right now that is taking away from me responding to this thread properly right now, but I'll endeavor to do so later on today.

km991148

Tokyo wrote: »

As pointed out, I am in a different timezone to most of you here. Compounding that, I'm also working around severe internet restrictions and today in particular there's a lot going on at my location right now that is taking away from me responding to this thread properly right now, but I'll endeavor to do so later on today.

I'm just going to attempt to add a bit if balance.
It's been implied multiple times there is some sort of campaign to shut this thread down and control conversation. I don't believe this to be the case at all (except the very obvious one going in now). It's not one I have been privy to.

The idea of fair discussion is spoken about but from my point of view, after a bumpy entrance to the thread, I've tried to listen and understand other peoples point of view and got a lot of grief, accusations of not being genuine and even being told to f off at one point (didn't even report that one, but an apology would have been the decent thing to do - not that I care, just highlighting the hypocrisy). I think if the thread is to continue (which I hope it can) a lot of people need to take a good look at their posting style.

Some of the crap that has appeared recently has been very obviously been taken from very transphobic parts of the internet which is unfortunate as it makes it much more difficult to have conversations with those that are trying to understand each other (It's obviously a very complex subject matter and their is no definitive right or wrong at times).

I'm referring specifically to, for example, the out of context quotes in an obvious attempt to trivialise and fetishist all trans people Vs serious discussion about what it actually means to be trans. Labeling people freaks and mentally unwell is obviously going to then bring in rules that make it hard to ask about mental health - never mind the fact you are not going to engage any actual trans people, as has been requested on occasion.

Everyone, and I mean everyone, I think needs to calm down a bit and try and do more understanding and make fewer assumptions about other peoples view point. This also includes moderation in my opinion. Don't like something, or off topic? Report it and let the mods moderate. Don't drag the thread off in another tangent, it's hard enough to read.

Thanks Tokyo.

chopperbyrne

Current Affairs should probably only have mods in the same time zone as the majority of posters.

Tokyo

chopperbyrne wrote: »

Current Affairs should probably only have mods in the same time zone as the majority of posters.

I'll look into getting a flight home right now. :rolleyes:

Having mods across different timezones is very useful in my opinion. Much of what needs to be dealt with in contentious forums like CA happens in the small hours of the morning.

Beasty

chopperbyrne wrote: »

Current Affairs should probably only have mods in the same time zone as the majority of posters.

What a ridiculous suggestion. It is a massive benefit to have Tokyo as a mod in a different timezone. The internet does not close down overnight and we find many of the issues we do have can be started in the very early hours

Regardless of all of that, this really is not a 24 hour service to have all hands on deck at all times. Whether it's Help Desk, Dispute Resolution, Feedback, Site Development or even Prison queries will be addressed, but given we are all volunteers you may sometimes have to wait a day or two for a response

Hi guys,

I know you are working over different time zones but I was wondering if you had a chance to reconsider my thread ban on this topic?

Thanks,

Gatling

Can we get full review of the thread please , again today actions were taken yet one poster has posted made up claims under the guise of asking and question and then saying if they were mistaken about what they claim was posted they apologise ,just asking an honest question ,
Post was reported with the made up claim and I came away with a warning and ban almost straight way...

Several times I've reported posts and came away banned yet posters who are clearly trolling under oh I miss read something laugh away

Tokyo

Good morning the dunne,

real-life constraints prevented me from replying yesterday, but I have given your stance on this, and your request much thought.

First and foremost, I think everyone can agree that discussions of transgender issues are often fraught and opinions tend to be polarized. This thread has been no different in that regard. But being blunt, I think your post above is at best, an oversimplification of the forum, the topic of discussion, and opinions (including your own) expressed within that thread.

It seems that holding and voicing the opinion that a biological man isn't a woman and vice versa is forbidden.

Unfortunate as it may be, the validity of trans identities seems to be a major topic of political and social debate, and one of the functions of the CA forum is to provide a place for people to discuss issues of the day. In the almost three years since we opened the CA forum, I can't think of an instance where I shut down a thread based on the subject matter encompassed in the thread title. My personal belief is that frank conversation reflecting a wide diversity of views is the surest way to establish common ground and I try to facilitate that where possible and within the confines of common decency. Threads are steered by the posters contained within, mods are there to try and keep the thread in the middle lane, but if a thread gets steered over the embankment, then that is solely on the posters as far as I'm concerned.

In the case of your contributions to the Gender Identity in Modern Ireland thread, consider the following small sample of posts:

Deleted User wrote:

A man is a man because of their biology. A woman is a woman because of their biology.

It's not an opinion. It's a fact.

The fact that you think it's an opinion is laughable and pitiful in equal measures.

Deleted User wrote:

.........

What?

Your understanding of science says that biological men can be women?

And to change sex you just need to declare it?

Honestly?

Deleted User wrote:

LLMMLL wrote: »

You call those with XX chromosomes female. I don't. So you're incorrect to say "we".

That's pathetic. Especially from someone who uses the word cis

Ignoring the direction in which you took the topic of discussion for just a second, your tone alone was worthy of sanction. We encourage posters to be proactive with their passion and to support their arguments with zeal. But we also encourage posters to be polite when criticizing an argument they oppose. Your posts (of which the above is just a small sample) in that thread fell well short of what I'd consider civil discourse or even debate.

To the topic itself. Gender Identity.

Deleted User wrote: »

A man is a man because of their biology. A woman is a woman because of their biology.

It's not an opinion. It's a fact.

In the words of Daniel Patrick Moynihan, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”

We currently live in an age of gender fluidity. Progressive countries, including Ireland, have passed various forms of the Gender Recognition Act, enabling trans people to achieve full legal recognition of their preferred gender. These are the facts. Thus, your claim otherwise becomes the extraordinary claim, and an extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence. In layman's terms, you have a steeper hill to climb.

The line you took was that transwomen (misgendering them) are not real men and that transmen (misgendering them again) are not real women. Your view is that gender identity is immutably defined by biological sex. I could see allowing it in the context of an actual debate about gender, but such is not the context here. Boards ethos has always been to be as inclusive as possible. This is no different.

If you want to take this into the field of beliefs, rather than logic, then we get to point out that not all beliefs are equal. Some are informed, and some aren’t. Personally, I’d rather stick with the logic of explaining why these things are problematic, but such arguments have been dismissed in the past as simply “different beliefs,” so again, here we are.

I see no reason to revoke your threadban in this instance. But I think the opportunity is here to remind you and others, posting on similar topics, that for most of you the passion is high because the stakes are small. For those of you looking for 'bright line' rules, you're not going to find them. This is intentional on our part from the inception of the forum as we believe such bright lines encourage poor behavior in some posters. It is not difficult to follow the rules - the vast majority of posters have no problems working inside the hazy confines we set - and if you find you need to know exactly where that line might be, you should look at why this is so meaningful to you.

bewareofthedog

Tokyo wrote: »

We currently live in an age of gender fluidity. Progressive countries, including Ireland, have passed various forms of the Gender Recognition Act, enabling trans people to achieve full legal recognition of their preferred gender. These are the facts. Thus, your claim otherwise becomes the extraordinary claim, and an extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence. In layman's terms, you have a steeper hill to climb.

Legally different gender recognition yes but just like legally we can change our name. That doesn't discredit his point that biology at birth defines sex/gender, something which I agree with.

If I wanted to prove this point I could walk into my doctors office tomorrow morning a man walk out with a piece of paper proclaiming to be a Woman. Would you then believe I'm a woman even though I did it to prove a point? I could go back later and change it back it again.

There's no checks and bounds stopping anyone doing this - anyone can do this for selfish reasons, mental health issues or for honest reasons, human nature is a thing and it cannot be blindly trusted.

I concur it's a touchy subject but imo this whole subject is flooded with cowardice to the point it's become taboo to question things at all - I'm not sure how it got to the point of being banned for holding the view biology has more weight in defining our sex than a piece of paper.

And just so I'm clear - I do believe there's people who believe they are the wrong sex and are happier living their lives making such changes and we should be inclusive to such people, I just fall a lot shorter off the track than the dozens of genders certain people would have you believe exist, we are talking about "facts" after all.

km991148

Gatling wrote: »

Can we get full review of the thread please , again today actions were taken yet one poster has posted made up claims under the guise of asking and question and then saying if they were mistaken about what they claim was posted they apologise ,just asking an honest question ,
Post was reported with the made up claim and I came away with a warning and ban almost straight way...

Several times I've reported posts and came away banned yet posters who are clearly trolling under oh I miss read something laugh away

I second a full review of the thread (if mods have time!) as I wholeheartedly think think it should remain open.

Whether or not I would continue myself is another question as it's just not worth the crap and the accusations that I need to keep putting up with. It's constant and I'm pretty sure if you look at my usual posting style I try to understand all sides.

EDIT:
I believe we are talking about this post:

km991148 wrote: »

Why would there be 10pc when it's estimated closer to 2 in the general population?

Also weren't you recently arguing that there is an aggressive cohort of trans people trying to convert children en masse or something similar (maybe it wasn't you, sorry if I'm mistaken)?.

I'm genuinely sorry if I've missed the point here, I find the stream of consciousness style of posting hard to follow.
Don't take that as passive aggressive please.

Where I quite delicately asked if you were the same poster.

I checked back on the thread. There have been several discussions around teenagers been encouraged in groups.
Here is a flavour of the posts from Gatling. You will notice that he/she is right that they didnt directly say this, but did often compare trans to a celeb craze:

Gatling wrote: »

That is an interesting question , to me it's seems to be a way of dealing with awkward situations , look the celeb craze oh hi everyone I'm now part of the LGBT community ,oh really which part of the community are you exactly ,the B part so your bisexual ahh ok ,then it's I'm fully gay ie come out as lesbian who's trans inclusive and then I'm trans .
Much to applause and fanfare of oh your so amazing and so brave but what exactly have do for the praise nothing really just posted on social media , while showing pictures of their lesbian other halfs ,
In this day and age I didn't think girls felt any shame in being lesbian that they would use the excuse they are really a boy who's straight who only dates lesbians .

As well as several points about impressionable young children changing their minds (There could of course be some merit in the protecting the children argument, but it hasn't been phrased in a coherent manner).

Gatling wrote: »

The absolute majority of children that people claim to be trans actually grow out of it ,
The few who don't need to be cared for under the supervision of a psychology team ,till they are adults and capable physically and mentally to make the decision to transition,

...

Gatling wrote: »

Hetrosexual ideology yeaaah naaaaa .

Children first .


Keep your ideological believes to the adults who are mentally compitent to discuss whether they are the wrong gender, keep your puberty blocker's , followed mastectomies and hysterectomies to those who actually need them , rather than suggesting it to very valuable children who could easily influenced by quacks using them experiments and funding.

Case and point
I'm not transgender -but I'll tell you this, being forced to wear a dress as a girl was a living hell for me. Thankfully I had parents who were ideology free and allowed me to be me..

See you were left alone to become the woman you are today ,no drugs ,no surgeries ,no quackery,
Your now a happy healthy woman ?

etc



I am sure you will forgive me for getting my wires slightly crossed. I got that a little bit wrong, but wasn't setting out to offend.

I didn't really have the time to check all of your posts last night, hence the reason I asked if you were making the argument regarding teenagers encouraging other children to "go trans". A simple "It wasn't me" would suffice in future.

Tokyo

Tokyo wrote: »

Good morning the dunne,

real-life constraints prevented me from replying yesterday, but I have given your stance on this, and your request much thought.

First and foremost, I think everyone can agree that discussions of transgender issues are often fraught and opinions tend to be polarized. This thread has been no different in that regard. But being blunt, I think your post above is at best, an oversimplification of the forum, the topic of discussion, and opinions (including your own) expressed within that thread.



Unfortunate as it may be, the validity of trans identities seems to be a major topic of political and social debate, and one of the functions of the CA forum is to provide a place for people to discuss issues of the day. In the almost three years since we opened the CA forum, I can't think of an instance where I shut down a thread based on the subject matter encompassed in the thread title. My personal belief is that frank conversation reflecting a wide diversity of views is the surest way to establish common ground and I try to facilitate that where possible and within the confines of common decency. Threads are steered by the posters contained within, mods are there to try and keep the thread in the middle lane, but if a thread gets steered over the embankment, then that is solely on the posters as far as I'm concerned.

In the case of your contributions to the Gender Identity in Modern Ireland thread, consider the following small sample of posts:







Ignoring the direction in which you took the topic of discussion for just a second, your tone alone was worthy of sanction. We encourage posters to be proactive with their passion and to support their arguments with zeal. But we also encourage posters to be polite when criticizing an argument they oppose. Your posts (of which the above is just a small sample) in that thread fell well short of what I'd consider civil discourse or even debate.

To the topic itself. Gender Identity.



In the words of Daniel Patrick Moynihan, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”

We currently live in an age of gender fluidity. Progressive countries, including Ireland, have passed various forms of the Gender Recognition Act, enabling trans people to achieve full legal recognition of their preferred gender. These are the facts. Thus, your claim otherwise becomes the extraordinary claim, and an extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence. In layman's terms, you have a steeper hill to climb.

The line you took was that transwomen (misgendering them) are not real men and that transmen (misgendering them again) are not real women. Your view is that gender identity is immutably defined by biological sex. I could see allowing it in the context of an actual debate about gender, but such is not the context here. Boards ethos has always been to be as inclusive as possible. This is no different.

If you want to take this into the field of beliefs, rather than logic, then we get to point out that not all beliefs are equal. Some are informed, and some aren’t. Personally, I’d rather stick with the logic of explaining why these things are problematic, but such arguments have been dismissed in the past as simply “different beliefs,” so again, here we are.

I see no reason to revoke your threadban in this instance. But I think the opportunity is here to remind you and others, posting on similar topics, that for most of you the passion is high because the stakes are small. For those of you looking for 'bright line' rules, you're not going to find them. This is intentional on our part from the inception of the forum as we believe such bright lines encourage poor behavior in some posters. It is not difficult to follow the rules - the vast majority of posters have no problems working inside the hazy confines we set - and if you find you need to know exactly where that line might be, you should look at why this is so meaningful to you.

Thanks Tokyo, I appreciate you taking the time to respond.

I have to say I am a little surprised and disagree with you on many points. I consistently asked the posters I was in disagreement with, if gender and sex were the same thing. It seemed to be so.

So I ask you, is woman a gender? Or is it the sex? If gender is biological then I never misgendered anyone. Calling a biological man a woman is the actual definition of misgendering.

If it's not biological, then nothing I said was incorrect.

I don't feel it's a fair thread ban because the premise of my ban is so nebulous you are unable to decipher between sex and gender and what the gender recognition act actually defines. There is a law that they can choose their gender, but there is no law that says a man can be a woman.

In the words of Daniel Patrick Moynihan, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”

Again, I would ask you to please reverse the thread ban or move the thread to the lgbt forum where people have their safe space. If you are trying to keep the thread in the "middle lane" but only will allow one point of view, the CA forum isn't the place for it in my opinion. It's not my thread ban that's the issue (I sometimes do get hotheaded and rightfully infracted) but it's the fact that multiple posters who hold a similar position were also threadbanned.

It can't be a discussion about gender identity in modern Ireland if you can't discuss it without being banned.

GreeBo

Any comment on why the baiting and flaming post lumping anyone who disagrees with transgenderism as supporting people who burn them is unmoderated and considered acceptable yet posts containing tweets from various trans people were moderated and descriptions of the same trans people resulted in cards?

It doesn't seem condusive to the frank, open discussion you are going for if different standards on what is acceptable are used depending on the beliefs of the poster involved.

Bannasidhe

GreeBo wrote: »

Any comment on why the baiting and flaming post lumping anyone who disagrees with transgenderism as supporting people who burn them is unmoderated and considered acceptable yet posts containing tweets from various trans people were moderated and descriptions of the same trans people resulted in cards?

It doesn't seem condusive to the frank, open discussion you are going for if different standards on what is acceptable are used depending on the beliefs of the poster involved.

I made that post in the heat of the moment and what I said was "being on the same side of the debate" which is not the same as "supporting" as you are claiming here.


It is a matter of record that transgendered people have been murdered for being transgendered, including by being burned alive.
The 'anti-trans' side is a broad spectrum but still one side in a heated for/against split between those who will never accept transgender people as being of their preferred identity and those who support and accept them.
Having said that I fully acknowledge my heat of the moment post was potentially inflammatory and I have since tried to edit it but was unable to do so - I would have no issue with a forum mod snipping the section where I refer to people being on the same side of the debate in the interests of not inflaming matters.

And I apologise for any upset I have caused people who are genuinely struggling with the issue but wish no harm to transgender people.

I accept you apology Bannasidhe, but can't reconcile how your comment didn't warrant an infraction yet I, along with others, have been banned for statements of fact.

I have been reasonable and respectful and believe people can present themselves how they wish. I will not accept however that a biological man can be a woman. If a trans person represents themselves as a woman, more power to them. That is their issue and I will treat them as I treat anyone else.

If that is a stance which is disallowed, again, I ask that the thread is moved to an appropriate forum where sensibilities are protected. Current affairs was created to allow frank, honest and sometimes uncomfortable truths to be aired.

Tokyo

GreeBo wrote: »

Any comment on why the baiting and flaming post lumping anyone who disagrees with transgenderism as supporting people who burn them is unmoderated and considered acceptable yet posts containing tweets from various trans people were moderated and descriptions of the same trans people resulted in cards?

No - you don't get a running commentary on every post actioned or not, or why. You have the same options as everyone else here - to report the post and let the mods deal with it.

That being said, that post slipped through in the sea of reported posts that thread was generating on that particular day and has now been actioned.

GreeBo

Thanks, I wasn't looking for a running commentary, more trying to understand how it could be considered acceptable. I figured this feedback thread was the appropriate place to ask?

I did report it at the time and PMd the mod directly so was confused as to why it didn't seem to cross any lines whereas those on the other side of the debate seemed to frequently cross them.

Bannasidhe

Just to confirm I will not be appealing my thread ban.


My post was intemperate and below the standard I set for myself as a Boards user. It is, as far as I remember, my first thread ban and the last time I had to be admonished on this site was about 6 years ago.



As I said, I did try and edit it but was unable to so as it stands the post while made in anger was, at the time, heartfelt and made in good faith, albeit ill advised.


My one hope is that the thread is civil on all sides going forward and continually monitored by the mod team - which in all honesty hadn't been happening and it became a car crash.

AllForIt

I'm sorry but the cat is out of the bag as regards 'attitudes'. It's all very well saying one couldn't edit their posts (for fear of breaking boards rules as an afterthought), but the attitude is there for all to see.

I have always thought there is quite the militant attitude when it comes transgenderism and I think that is part of the problem. And I think that is a very big problem.

Yes, I have made some 'exploratory' statements. I don't really see why anyone would think that's a problem on a cyber discussion forum. Or that I have to do my 'research' before I post. Boards is my 'research'. Why not.

To go back to the thread, I think many of the threadbans were handed out in complaint of moderation. I think maybe we should have a reset about those.

As I said in my last post on the thread, the transgender issue is a developing issue. It's not done re legal rights and with all the emerging gender identities as well, so there is plenty left to discuss. It is certainly not a case of "self-id" is here so what's to discuss.

CtevenSrowder

Tokyo wrote: »

In the words of Daniel Patrick Moynihan, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”

We currently live in an age of gender fluidity. Progressive countries, including Ireland, have passed various forms of the Gender Recognition Act, enabling trans people to achieve full legal recognition of their preferred gender. These are the facts. Thus, your claim otherwise becomes the extraordinary claim, and an extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence. In layman's terms, you have a steeper hill to climb.

The 'extra-ordinary' evidence is ofcourse scientific fact. The law has been wrong in the past, it can be wrong in the future, and it can be wrong now. The law doesn't make biological facts incorrect. There has clearly been a conceited effort to ban a raft of posters from the thread from one 'side' of the debate. It is blatantly obvious. Endless, literally endless, claims of one being a TERF, transphobe, anti-trans, a bigot etc. go completely unsanctioned. Funnily, your 'extraordinary' claims point seems to desert you when such claims are made. Culminating, ofcourse, in a poster proclaiming those that correctly state that a trans-women isn't a women because they are not female is 'on the side' of those that burn people alive. This post ofcourse escapes any punishment (now seen it has been punished).

Tokyo wrote: »

The line you took was that transwomen (misgendering them) are not real men and that transmen (misgendering them again) are not real women. Your view is that gender identity is immutably defined by biological sex. I could see allowing it in the context of an actual debate about gender, but such is not the context here. Boards ethos has always been to be as inclusive as possible. This is no different.

How is stating someone is a trans-women misgendering them?

Tokyo wrote: »

If you want to take this into the field of beliefs, rather than logic, then we get to point out that not all beliefs are equal. Some are informed, and some aren’t. Personally, I’d rather stick with the logic of explaining why these things are problematic, but such arguments have been dismissed in the past as simply “different beliefs,” so again, here we are.

So, essentially, you are accepting that the reasons for the numerous bans by yourself are down to ideological reasons? How is suggesting, in a genuine debate about the issue, that a trans-women is not a literal women is 'problematic' is a bit beyond me. I think you should state the case.

Tokyo wrote: »

I see no reason to revoke your threadban in this instance. But I think the opportunity is here to remind you and others, posting on similar topics, that for most of you the passion is high because the stakes are small. For those of you looking for 'bright line' rules, you're not going to find them. This is intentional on our part from the inception of the forum as we believe such bright lines encourage poor behavior in some posters. It is not difficult to follow the rules - the vast majority of posters have no problems working inside the hazy confines we set - and if you find you need to know exactly where that line might be, you should look at why this is so meaningful to you.

When the rules of a thread continuously change up to the point that one cannot suggest that a biological male is not a women as they are not a female, it is evident that it is a clear intention of shutting down the debate.

Mods should be able to work past their ideological beliefs. Evidently, on your response to the thedunne, on this issue, you cannot.

Boards.ie: Mark

To add to Tokyo's post above, misgendering is the act of labeling others with a gender that does not match their gender identity. We have been over this before and it is not permitted, simple as.

With regards to your questioning about using Boards as a platform for research, AllForIt, please bear in mind that there are real people behind the usernames that engage on thread (and those that don't), each with their own challenges and experiences. Some may be more willing to share their own personal experiences and you may get to see the world through their eyes briefly. I wouldn't say that Boards is necessarily the best platform for research (where you ask a question and get an answer), but instead is a place where you can share time with people from all sorts of backgrounds and walks of life and perhaps gain a greater understanding of what it is like to be that person.

To anyone interested in participating within the thread in question, if there are posts that contravene the rules of the forum and/or site, please report them. There are some rules set out in the opening post and Tokyo has indicated that opinions can be discussed civilly.

Boards.ie: Mark

Boards.ie: Mark wrote: »

To add to Tokyo's post above, misgendering is the act of labeling others with a gender that does not match their gender identity. We have been over this before and it is not permitted, simple as.

With regards to your questioning about using Boards as a platform for research, AllForIt, please bear in mind that there are real people behind the usernames that engage on thread (and those that don't), each with their own challenges and experiences. Some may be more willing to share their own personal experiences and you may get to see the world through their eyes briefly. I wouldn't say that Boards is necessarily the best platform for research (where you ask a question and get an answer), but instead is a place where you can share time with people from all sorts of backgrounds and walks of life and perhaps gain a greater understanding of what it is like to be that person.

To anyone interested in participating within the thread in question, if there are posts that contravene the rules of the forum and/or site, please report them. There are some rules set out in the opening post and Tokyo has indicated that opinions can be discussed civilly.

Hi mark,

That's not necessarily true.

You (boards.ie) constantly allow the label "cis" to be used even though some people find it offensive.

I understand that being unnecessarily cruel and singling people out shouldn't be allowed but a blanket statement saying "I believe that anyone should live how they want as long as I am not compelled to deny biology or agree that sex is interchangeable" has been my stance since the start and I honestly don't see a reason why I can't contribute to the discussion any more.

GreeBo

Tokyo wrote: »

Your view is that gender identity is immutably defined by biological sex. I could see allowing it in the context of an actual debate about gender, but such is not the context here. Boards ethos has always been to be as inclusive as possible. This is no different.

Can I get clarification on whether or not the above quote means that its acceptable to voice the opinion that gender is tied to biology on boards.ie?

Its seems contradictory that this is allowed but that misgendering someone isn't, considering that tying gender to biology will obviously misgender any trans person?

Is the thread in question considered "an actual debate", and if not, why not?

Cheers.

Gatling

Boards.ie: Mark wrote: »

To anyone interested in participating within the thread in question, if there are posts that contravene the rules of the forum and/or site, please report them. There are some rules set out in the opening post and Tokyo has indicated that opinions can be discussed civilly.

That was tried only too see posts unactioned while cards and bans were handed out to posters on one side of the discussion ,
The poster who kept calling people terfs despite being not to calls people that , repeatedly this was brought to mods attention ,and guess what the outcome was ,
A mod warning saying they will not action the word being used despite it being used as a slur and a dig repeatedly ,a UK judge recently ruled it was a slur used to label people ,
When that got questioned bans were handed out .
Personalised posts have been made including calling people transpobic when replying to a question being asked ,


So report reposts to who because it's more than apparent that the mod are not being nutrual in this case

LLMMLL

Gatling wrote: »

That was tried only too see posts unactioned while cards and bans were handed out to posters on one side of the discussion ,
The poster who kept calling people terfs despite being not to calls people that , repeatedly this was brought to mods attention ,and guess what the outcome was ,
A mod warning saying they will not action the word being used despite it being used as a slur and a dig repeatedly ,a UK judge recently ruled it was a slur used to label people ,
When that got questioned bans were handed out .
Personalised posts have been made including calling people transpobic when replying to a question being asked ,


So report reposts to who because it's more than apparent that the mod are not being nutrual in this case

Just to clarify something:

It is NOT true that a UK judge ruled TERF to be a slur. This is misinformation.