3 ms·

This kind of rhetoric is why we can't have civil discussions on this topic and why articles like this get flagged. No, the reason why we can't have civil discu

This kind of rhetoric is why we can't have civil discussions on this topic and why articles like this get flagged. No, the reason why we can't have civil discussions is mostly that the same sorts of people who commit disgusting gendered harassment also feel a need to deny that they do so (and that anyone else does so), and attempt to nit-pick apart anyone who asserts a patently obvious fact about our society. There's not really room for debate on "is gendered harassment of women, as a qualitatively distinct thing from generic bullying, a real thing that exists".

belorn 9y ago
You will then continue to see articles like this getting flagged. Either one accept that other people may have a different views, or civil discussions breaks down and you get a polarized society such as current political climate. Also, don't accuse people of committing gendered harassment with nothing to support it. This is exactly the 7th circle of hell comments that sctb mentions above. Just because some disagree with you it don't mean they are racist, sexist, or spawn of Satan. Name calling is just an other form of harassment. Just because homophobic comments are mostly directed at male players don't make homophobia a "gendered harassment of men, as a qualitatively distinct thing from generic bullying". People are allowed to a different view if something is a gendered harassment of women, gendered harassment of men, and what the cause of it. The use of facts and supportive statements is how civil discussion handles it.
- ubernostrum 9y ago
  Either one accept that other people may have a different views People are entitled to their own views, but not to their own facts. Denial of facts that can be openly verified by any person is clear and convincing evidence of bad faith, and I have no rhetorical obligation to be charitable to someone who does so. When you can acknowledge verifiable reality, though, perhaps we can discuss it.

belorn 9y ago

You will then continue to see articles like this getting flagged. Either one accept that other people may have a different views, or civil discussions breaks down and you get a polarized society such as current political climate. Also, don't accuse people of committing gendered harassment with nothing to support it. This is exactly the 7th circle of hell comments that sctb mentions above. Just because some disagree with you it don't mean they are racist, sexist, or spawn of Satan. Name calling is just an other form of harassment. Just because homophobic comments are mostly directed at male players don't make homophobia a "gendered harassment of men, as a qualitatively distinct thing from generic bullying". People are allowed to a different view if something is a gendered harassment of women, gendered harassment of men, and what the cause of it. The use of facts and supportive statements is how civil discussion handles it.

ubernostrum 9y ago
Either one accept that other people may have a different views People are entitled to their own views, but not to their own facts. Denial of facts that can be openly verified by any person is clear and convincing evidence of bad faith, and I have no rhetorical obligation to be charitable to someone who does so. When you can acknowledge verifiable reality, though, perhaps we can discuss it.