2024-AT-09: Staff and Mandemon - Upheld

Status
Not open for further replies.
imya t'loak

imya t'loak

forums.sufficientvelocity.com

2024-AT-09: Staff and Mandemon Upheld

I received Rule 2 infraction from @Ori due to following two posts: Explanation provided is: I would disagree here. As I explained in my second post, I was trying to be mindful by acknowledging that gender is not tied to physical properties, but matter of identification. And since...
forums.sufficientvelocity.com forums.sufficientvelocity.com

Have read - Outcome was not a surprise.
 
Last edited:
Seems pretty open and shut. I would've infracted that even if it didn't come from someone with Mandemon's history.
 
This episode of the Infraction Files rates a 4/10, primarily for the unexpected voices for leniency rather than the content or the like.
 
"Spirited denial of systemic misogyny and toxic masculinity" is a pretty ridiculous way to characterize Mandemon's post, even if the constant use of "self-identified" was enough for him to get bopped on its own.
 
SerGregness said:
"Spirited denial of systemic misogyny and toxic masculinity" is a pretty ridiculous way to characterize Mandemon's post, even if the constant use of "self-identified" was enough for him to get bopped on its own.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I used the term in three posts, one on page 2 that was exclusively referring to me, one on page 5 that caused this infraction and one on page 6 to respond to accusation.

I am not sure how that can be counted as "constant use".
 
SerGregness said:
"constant" was probably a sloppy word choice. I was referring to using it several times in each of those posts.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Still not really case in my view. In the first post, it was used once. Second time it was used twice, to refer to both sides, and final was response objecting to idea that someone can deny ones self-identification.
 
I don't recall ever interacting with Mandemon, so I've no read on their character, but even in isolation that phrasing definitely makes me uncomfortable- and I'm not trans, so I can guarantee that I'm less sensitive to and aware of the ways language and dogwhistles can be used against trans people. I'm willing to believe that it was unintentional in this instance (as I have no knowledge of Mandemon prior to this I kinda have to give the benefit of the doubt), but I would strongly advise against using this sort of phrasing in future.
 
I'm kinda surprised that none of the Councilors recused themselves given the people in the original discussion. It wasn't extremely common, but it wasn't super rare during the earlier days of the forum and it seems to have entirely disappeared.
 
The simple solution, I suppose, would have been to not repeatedly use a transphobic dogwhistle. Considering Mandemon's other views I am heavily sceptical it was done at all in good faith.
 
theorion said:
I'm kinda surprised that none of the Councilors recused themselves given the people in the original discussion. It wasn't extremely common, but it wasn't super rare during the earlier days of the forum and it seems to have entirely disappeared.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It's my understanding that SV doesn't require or expect Councilors to recuse themselves -- if they have direct knowledge of the incident at hand, all the better, especially when contrasted with the others. And if they do end up using their position to hammer people they disagree with, they can be voted out next term!
 
There was no reason to say self-identified women instead of just women. It's not inclusive and it's not polite lol.
 
Yeah, 'self identified' just reads as a longwinded way to say 'so called' or 'alleged'. Not a good look.
 
The mitigating circumstances (him opening with being self-identified male on page 2, his attempts to 'clarify', etc) seem to validate it not being a 50-pointer, but like ... the fact he compares calling someone a self-identified woman with the concept of being able to self-identify is a pretty epic missing of the point and a full overturn would have been entirely unjustified, IMO.
 
Mandemon, saying something wildly out of pocket and then obstinately doubling down when pressed?

Surely not
 
If the first infracted post was mandemon's only usage of "self-identified men"/"self-identified women" in that thread, then I might have been willing to defend it with 'the intended meaning was obviously "you aren't even men, who are you to claim to be an expert on men?"'

But the second infracted post definitely isn't using it that way, and definitely looks like it's dismissing the validity of trans folks' genders.

It also sounds a bit incoherent, but a lot of bad stuff people say is fundamentally incoherent.

I feel like it wasn't malicious (probably more defensive flailing with things the poster wasn't used to having to articulate), but a lot of harm can be done without malice.

I'm still thinking about how I feel about the ruling.
 
Last edited:
I am wondering if I should express how much actual dog whistling I am hearing with the arguments here.
 
Mandemon said:
I am wondering if I should express how much actual dog whistling I am hearing with the arguments here.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Mandemon, we're not dog whistling in this thread, we're referencing your past behavior of staking weird odd maximalist positions or using language that badly conceals/attempts to conceal said weird maximalist positions, and how when people push back and say "Hey Mandemon that's a weird maximalist position maybe you should rethink or rephrase that?" you inevitably double down and insist you're right and that everyone else is a malicious moron for refusing to agree with you.

A dog whistle refers to a very specific rhetorical trick, where someone uses a euphemism or phrase that appears innocuous (like "self-identified female") that's actually eliding a much more sinister meaning and intention ("trans people are just fooling themselves and we are, at best, humoring them"). Even if you didn't intend any offense or to devalue trans people's perspectives, the council does a very good job explaining how your words still come off as poorly thought out and how your refusal to concede that someone could be offended by your words disrupted the conversation.

If you want to stop people from commenting on this behavior, you should consider changing your behavior. If people are saying things like "Mandemon is often obstinate about odd and oftentimes wrong beliefs", maybe stop being obstinate and reconsider your frankly odd and oftentimes wrong beliefs.
 
Last edited:
Well, I am now glad to know that this board holds gender is assigned on birth, instead of persons of own feelings.

Because that is how all this reads to me. That if if you are assigned gender on birth, but later in life experience gender dysphoria, you are not allowed to identify with the gender you feel comfortable with.

Because that would be self-identification, and self-identification is a dog whistle. You need doctors statement to be able to express or identify other gender(s).

Essentially, denial of self-identification reeks to me "gender = sex"
 
You can't possibly really be this dense.
 
Last edited:
Mandemon said:
Well, I am now glad to know that this board holds gender is assigned on birth, instead of persons of own feelings.

Because that is how all this reads to me. That if if you are assigned gender on birth, but later in life experience gender dysphoria, you are not allowed to identify with the gender you feel comfortable with.

Because that would be self-identification, and self-identification is a dog whistle. You need doctors statement to be able to express or identify other gender(s).

Essentially, denial of self-identification reeks to me "gender = sex"
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Mandemon, Mandemon, Mandemon

Did it ever occur to you to just listen to what transpeople say to you? Just take the L my guy. I'm being generous here by not assuming this is just the worlds worst deflection tactic to justify use of a dogwhistle.

Seriously just take the L and be better next time.
 
Mandemon said:
Well, I am now glad to know that this board holds gender is assigned on birth, instead of persons of own feelings.

Because that is how all this reads to me. That if if you are assigned gender on birth, but later in life experience gender dysphoria, you are not allowed to identify with the gender you feel comfortable with.

Because that would be self-identification, and self-identification is a dog whistle. You need doctors statement to be able to express or identify other gender(s).

Essentially, denial of self-identification reeks to me "gender = sex"
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I believe the general consensus on this board is that whether someone is a man or woman is defined by self-identification, therefore "self-identified" does not need to be said, because no other definition of "man" or "woman" besides self-identification is valid.
 
46 more messages…
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top