Ban Ableist Terms

[NTXUb]

 

So I was browsing the unban forums because they're usually something interesting going on there and nobody seems to post anywhere else and I saw this

 

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=864#p4023

 

That's the philosophy I've been hearing on a lot of servers with similar rules, and I love seeing it. However, I do have a problem with its scope. I do agree with the ban against racist and homophobic terms, but what about ableist terms? My suggestion is this;

 

Ban terms like 'Stupid', 'Idiot', 'Dumb', 'Lame', 'Crazy', and 'Insane', as those words are, in fact, ableist and mock the many, many people throughout the world who have lived with the crippling conditions they refer to all their lives, and makes them feel just as unwelcome as the people that post describes.

 

Not convinced that using 'Lame' as an insult is just a bad as using 'Gay'? Well, I think the easiest way to convince you would just be to compare the two terms.

 

Gay

 

• Originally created to describe homosexuals- well, originally it mean happy, but ignoring that- who make up around 3% of the entire US population.

• People colloquially start using it as a general insult to vaguely mean 'sissy', which is a stereotype that would be incredibly offensive to homosexuals.

Term is banned on server.

 

 

Lame

 

• Originally created to describe people who are unable to walk, who make up around 3% of the entire US population.

• People colloquially start using it as a general insult to vaguely mean 'pathetic and ineffective', which is a stereotype that would be incredibly offensive to cripples.

Term is... not banned on server?

 

 

Do I have to mention words like 'Dumb', 'Stupid', 'Crazy', 'Retard' and 'Insane' being used as insults frequently on this server, even though more then 1 in 10 adults in the US report suffering from the severely crippling illnesses the words refer to, who are already trying to cope with terrible mental diseases like Depression and Alzheimer Disease without having a bunch of assholes on the internet making it worse?

 

Not trying to tell you how to run your server, and I'm sorry if I came off as disrespectful, but this is an important issue for many people, so I really hope the admins consider it.

 

[Taaketa]

wut?

[Zgun]

Makes perfect sense to me, also while we're at it, anyone using autism in a derogatory manner as well.

[Sheakhan]

 

I second this motion, and submit the following terms which should be ban-worthy based on the same criteria as the currently bannable racist/sexist terms:

 

-Jerk (offensive to those suffering from narcissistic tendencies mainly, though other psychological disorders are also applicable. Psychist.)

-Sucker (offends the gullible. Psychist.)

-Dick (implies that the male anatomy, genitalia in specific, is offensive. Offensive in use to men in general. Anatomist, Biologicalist.)

-Woman, Man, Guy, Girl (used frequently to subtly imply some defect in gender, also implies a negative distinction between one gender and the next. By exclusion, minimalizes the importance of transgender persons. Sexist.)

-Ass (used in a derogatory manner, implies a portion of the human anatomy possesed by well over 99.9% of the population is something to be considered in a negative connotation. Anatomist, Biologicalist.)

-Loser, Lazy (offensive to those who may have difficulty achieving or following through with ambition. A large portion of the gaming community. Occupationalist, Psychist, Ableist.)

-Drunk (offensive to individuals suffering alcoholism. Psychist.)

-Shitcurity (implies defecation to be negative, offensive to all humans capable of such. Biologicalist.)

-Clown (when used in junction with an insult, offensive to individuals who are in fact professional entertainers in this particular sub-section of the craft. Occupationist.)

-Whore (offensive to those who may themselves, or be acquainted with those who sell their bodies for profit or favor. Occupationist.)

-Kid, Child, Baby. (offensive to those who have not yet reached adulthood, implying age based maturity model in a negative connotation. Ageist.)

 

This list can easily be expanded upon.

 

I think NTX's point here is that words are words. They are only offensive if you personally choose to interpret them as such, and banning the use of certain words just because they offend you or others is foolish, as it simultaneously implies a lack of respect for a person's ability to express themselves in a way they feel to be necessary, as well as implying that other non-banworthy words are somehow less offensive simply because they do not apply to you.

 

This issue persists in contemporary society, racist and sexist terms as well as general "curses" receive negative responses, and the common belief is that this response is due to the negativity of the word, rather than the inability of the responder to acknowledge their choice to find such a word offensive.

 

There are no bad words, only bad intentions. If you're going to continue to respond negatively to the use of racial or homophobic slurs, the only FAIR way to do so is to either learn to interpret intention and only punish the deliberately homophobic or racial uses of such terms, or to also ban ANY potentially offensive use of language, regardless of intent.

 

Currently this server only punishes racist and homophobic language (and more recently, Ponyist terms have caught flak), and in doing so is giving a huge flaming middle finger to any other group that may or may not be offended by other categories of hate.

 

[Froststahr]

 

I can see the logic, but I disagree. There are VAST amount of words that can be used to offend if you're going historically. Bad for example is believed to come from the Old English root "bæddel", which meant an effeminate man, along with a few other derogatory meanings. Evil too, once had a much more offensive meaning when applied to people. There are many more.

 

In my opinion I'd be against banning anything more than we have now. But really just banning for intent, OOC-ly people really shouldn't be insulting each-other.

 

[Sheakhan]

 

Which is why, in instances like the ban appeal NTX referenced, the ban policy seems a little less about fairness and protecting players/the server, and more about being offended and responding rashly.

 

Think of it this way:

Racist slurs are blue.

Sexist slurs are green.

Ponyist slurs are red.

Ageist slurs are purple.

Ableist slurs are yellow.

 

Currently, only Blue and Green slurs, which offend Blue and Green people are bannable. Right now a Red slur has offended a Red person, and may result in a ban. But there is no representation for Purple or Yellow people or the slurs that affect them. The very act of ignoring these colors is fostering an evironment where people of some colors get less protection than others. This is unacceptable, as the color of the person shouldn't matter, they are all being offended by the slurs that affect them.

 

The same model represents any sort of discrimination, be it color or belief. Excluding one group is discriminatory in the same exact fashion that insulting them would be. It indicates that some colors are more important than others (in this example).

 

So either treat all insults equally, or step off the high horse and stop taking insults ICly negatively. OOC insults are different, and should ALWAYS result in repercussions. But Byond Keys and jests should not be treated as anything other than that.

 

[NTXUb]

 

I can see the logic, but I disagree. There are VAST amount of words that can be used to offend if you're going historically. Bad for example is believed to come from the Old English root "bæddel", which meant an effeminate man, along with a few other derogatory meanings. Evil too, once had a much more offensive meaning when applied to people. There are many more.

 

Yes, and that's the can of worms people open when they try to ban certain terms for being offensive. Where is the line drawn? If you ban words for racism and homophobism, but not for things like sexism and ableism, could that not be considered to be a tacit admission by the admins that they consider those lesser forms of discrimination? If someone is going to ban words for potentially being offensive, and trying to call themselves an unbiased and fair admin, they must ban all slur words that could be offensive, not just those they personally find offensive because they apply to their particular groups or are hot topics in their area.

 

[Froststahr]

 

Which is why, in instances like the ban appeal NTX referenced, the ban policy seems a little less about fairness and protecting players/the server, and more about being offended and responding rashly.

 

Think of it this way:

Racist slurs are blue.

Sexist slurs are green.

Ponyist slurs are red.

Ageist slurs are purple.

Ableist slurs are yellow.

 

Currently, only Blue and Green slurs, which offend Blue and Green people are bannable. Right now a Red slur has offended a Red person, and may result in a ban. But there is no representation for Purple or Yellow people or the slurs that affect them. The very act of ignoring these colors is fostering an evironment where people of some colors get less protection than others. This is unacceptable, as the color of the person shouldn't matter, they are all being offended by the slurs that affect them.

 

The same model represents any sort of discrimination, be it color or belief. Excluding one group is discriminatory in the same exact fashion that insulting them would be. It indicates that some colors are more important than others (in this example).

 

So either treat all insults equally, or step off the high horse and stop taking insults ICly negatively. OOC insults are different, and should ALWAYS result in repercussions. But Byond Keys and jests should not be treated as anything other than that.

With this, I believe the preferable way to deal with this is to not have any term banned specifically, but just flaming in general in OOC. And even IC, the mods should easily be able to tell when somebody is insulting somebody in-character, and when they're just being a cunt.

 

[Sheakhan]

You would think, but as someone who reads and analyzes every ban appeal for shots and giggles, I can state with certainty that this is not, historically, the case. People are frequently banned for non-offenses alongside those who are intentionally derogatory. The fact that this persists is offensive to people who, like myself, believe in fairness and unbiased justice.

[MarinaRomanenko]

 

First, is this thread serious?

 

Second. There is a reason why one of 4chins(sic) rules is: "There are no girls on the internet." It doesnt mean what people think it means. It has to do with how people behave in society.

 

In reality, there are several social contracts we take as given without really questioning them. In most social situations, the fact that one is (insert social identity) gives you automatic points. People are more likely to believe you if you accuse someone of something, recount a story, get drinks bought for you. You get points for being a girl. You generally get points in some fashion for being something at all. If you are white, you get to generally not go to jail as long, get to smoke weed without being arrested more often. If you have genitals or skin, you generally get treated better in some situations and worse in others.

On the internet, none of that shit matters at all. Your skin or dong/vag does not matter here.

 

Unless you make it about your genitals. Hence why on that forum, when someone says "hey I'm a girl." the proper response is "tits or gtfo." Because you have reduced yourself to your genitals, and the go to perspective is, so will everyone else. And thats fair. Ugly, but fair.

 

You arent black on the internet, you arent female, you arent male, you arent white, you arent fat, trans, skinny, anorexic, gay, straight, able, disabled, or what the fuck ever else you are. You are the exact same as everybody else.

 

Thats why some folks hate white knights, because they reduce women to objects. As if they arent capable of defending themselves, akin to children. Its also why some people hate grrl gamers, because they reduce themselves to their genitals. Gaming isnt about your genitals.

 

In the end, try not to make this about your gender or race. None of that shit matters here.

Just play the fucking game.

 

...

 

Wait... Ponyist?

 

::slow clap::

ya got me. joke thread.

 

[Sheakhan]

 

More satire focused on a somewhat serious issue than joke.

Read the unban appeal linked in the OP if you'd like context.

 

[NTXUb]

 

First, is this thread serious?

 

kind of? the message is real, but maybe i took it a bit too far with the SJW bullshit

 

In the end, try not to make this about your gender or race. None of that shit matters here.

Just play the fucking game.

 

not exactly the issue we're talking about here. did you read this post?

 

Wait... Ponyist?

 

::slow clap::

ya got me. joke thread.

 

by 'ponyists' i'm pretty sure he means 'anti-bronies', and is referring to this thread, which interestingly enough the admins still haven't touched yet.

 

[MarinaRomanenko]

Oops. Clearly i didnt do my homework. Sorry folks. Ill read fully from now on.

[Taaketa]

Joke thread or not. This thread is moot. It is not your server it is their server and how they wish to run it simples. Accept their rules or leave. I have done it plenty of times in any online community.

[NTXUb]

 

Joke thread or not. This thread is moot. It is not your server it is their server and how they wish to run it simples. Accept their rules or leave. I have done it plenty of times in any online community.

 

what's the 'suggestions' forum supposed to be used for, then, if not for us to make suggestions?

 

[VampyrBytes]

 

Not convinced that using 'Lame' as an insult is just a bad as using 'Gay'? Well, I think the easiest way to convince you would just be to compare the two terms.

 

Gay

 

• Originally created to describe homosexuals- well, originally it mean happy, but ignoring that- who make up around 3% of the entire US population.

• People colloquially start using it as a general insult to vaguely mean 'sissy', which is a stereotype that would be incredibly offensive to homosexuals.

Term is banned on server.

 

 

Lame

 

• Originally created to describe people who are unable to walk, who make up around 3% of the entire US population.

• People colloquially start using it as a general insult to vaguely mean 'pathetic and ineffective', which is a stereotype that would be incredibly offensive to cripples.

Term is... not banned on server?

 

 

 

I guess technically you're right. The difference is language changes over time... now very few people think of lame as a word that means someone that can't, or has difficulty walking, it's predominant meaning now being the pathetic meaning, whereas gay still very much has the homosexual meaning.

 

As I'm probably the lameist (in it's original meaning) person who plays on the server, being wheelchair bound and an amputee, I feel I can put your mind to rest... if you call me lame, I'll assume you're calling me pathetic, not having a go at my disabilities

 

[Taaketa]

 

what's the 'suggestions' forum supposed to be used for, then, if not for us to make suggestions?

 

You just keep on 'suggesting'.

 

[NTXUb]

 

You just keep on 'suggesting'.

 

so?

 

if an admin came onto this thread and said 'no fuck you we will not do this' and locked it, and i just opened a new thread, then you might have a point that i'm being pushy. but that's not the case.

 

[Froststahr]

 

what's the 'suggestions' forum supposed to be used for, then, if not for us to make suggestions?

 

You just keep on 'suggesting'.

No admin has responded, so not really.

 

He's just trying to support his position.

 

[Sheakhan]

 

I was under the impression that the administration's ultimate goal was to create a gaming environment that was enjoyable for their playerbase. If a rule or policy is offensive, obsolete, or negatively impacts the playerbase, a thoughtful and fair administration would acknowledge the concerns of the players and attempt to modify their policies or rules to fit their needs without compromising the environment at large.

 

That being said, the suggestions forum exists in order to facilitate this EXACT sort of communication. Be it regarding policies and rules, or gameplay itself. In the past, these sorts of discussions have occured, and received admin responses. It is my hope, and likely that of NTX as well, that the same occurs this time around, ideally in a civil and intellectual way, as opposed to the highly offensive: "Nope, my server, fuck what you guys want.".

 

Two way communication is the healthiest practice a server staff can engage in, as it strengthens both the bonds between player and staff, but also provides an open avenue for bettering the server at large.

 

On the subject of discrimination and banning over what effectively boils down to words that someone happened to find offensive, I am strongly in favor of adjusting the policy currently in use. I am not offended by "gay", "fag", "whore", "mick", "cracker", "pansy" or any other potentially applicable slur or insult, though I understand some people may be. What offends me is people taking slurs or insults that were not intended for them, or not directed in an offensive way, and reacting with what I consider an abuse of positional authority.

 

How you feel does not and should not have any effect on how you interpret or uphold the rules. This is, and has always been my opinion. Every time I see this being done, it offends me more than any sort of slur or insult could, as it implies that my favorite SS13 server is administrated by men and women who are less mature and psychologically stable than myself... Which implies that I am at the whim of individuals whom I cannot trust implicitly to behave rationally or justly in a given situation... Which further implies that I, or someone I enjoy playing with is at constant risk of being banned without actual valid cause.

 

I hate to think that a person cannot play a game without fearing that someone might arbitrarily decide they can't any longer regardless of their adherence to the letter of the law.

 

[NTXUb]

 

You just keep on 'suggesting'.

 

so?

 

if an admin came onto this thread and said 'no fuck you we will not do this' and locked it, and i just opened a new thread, then you might have a point that i'm being pushy. but that's not the case.

 

though you might have a point that this thread is moot, as the admins don't really seem to visit this forum anyway

 

[Froststahr]

 

You just keep on 'suggesting'.

 

so?

 

if an admin came onto this thread and said 'no fuck you we will not do this' and locked it, and i just opened a new thread, then you might have a point that i'm being pushy. but that's not the case.

 

though you might have a point that this thread is moot, as the admins don't really seem to visit this forum anyway

They likely do, posting is another story.

 

[Sheakhan]

 

They likely do, posting is another story.

 

Unfortunately, the only way to really know is through admins communicating on the subject (which they rarely do), or through implementation of the suggestions made herein (which has not yet been evidenced).

 

So assuming they visit the forum is baseless speculation, there is no substantial proof that they have done so recently. In the past yes, but this thread in particular? No way of telling.

 

[Froststahr]

 

They likely do, posting is another story.

 

Unfortunately, the only way to really know is through admins communicating on the subject (which they rarely do), or through implementation of the suggestions made herein (which has not yet been evidenced).

 

So assuming they visit the forum is baseless speculation, there is no substantial proof that they have done so recently. In the past yes, but this thread in particular? No way of telling.

They likely have their own reasons for not responding. My guess would be, particularly for mods, trials, etc. is that they kind of represent the staff, so it might not be best if one replies. This is just a guess, I could be wildly wrong. They might not reply too often because unicorns.

 

[Sheakhan]

It's worse, I think, if nobody replies. There should be some private discussion to ensure a proper response of course, but the reply should still be timely. Unicorns, however, are the leading cause of delay.