3 ms·
I understand your scepticism, and was thinking hard about this before I published the linked post. Anti-trans and anti-CoC sentiment are certainly part of the
by latk 7y ago
I understand your scepticism, and was thinking hard about this before I published the linked post.
Anti-trans and anti-CoC sentiment are certainly part of the issue at hand, but likely not by Monica. Some of the resignations may be partially motivated by hate, many of the responses definitely are. However, there are many other aspects of the firing that are problematic by themselves, regardless of the reason for the firing.
It doesn't matter what Monica believes, only how she acts and speaks. It is my understanding (based on hearsay) that at no point in this incident did she make statements that would be considered transphobic by a reasonable person. While she was uncomfortable with upcoming CoC changes, she was also asking for clarification and guidance in good faith. Definitely not in that “I'm just asking a question!” trolling style. Asking sincere questions would be the sign of a potential ally, it is illogical to shut those down. However, some of the relevant correspondence is in personal emails, so we'll never know the truth.
I'm confident that she didn't say or do anything that would violate the current or upcoming SE CoC, but that the director firing her felt that Monica's questions were evidence that she would not uphold the upcoming CoC. This is silly: if a mod feels they are unable to fulfil their position they can just resign, no need to boot them in advance. I dislike the “thoughtcrime” meme, but here it might actually fit.
There's also an aspect that I find more troubling, which is the legitimacy of CoCs. They only protect the community when violations are investigated fairly. Normally the problem is that the CoC is not enforced enough. Here, a CoC was enforced without there being a violation, and that gives ammunition to the idiots who think the sole purpose of a CoC is to silence insufficiently progressive speech.
Edit 1: the first resignation is in that explicitly lists the CoC as reason for resignation [1]. The CoC will apparently require that correct pronouns are used.
Edit 2: the new CoC will allegedly require pronouns, i.e. will not allow the avoidance of pronouns. As a person who prefers non-standard pronouns, such a requirement is counterproductive because it requires some people to act against their conscience, whereas avoiding pronouns still avoids misgendering and lets everyone save face.
[1]: https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/brothers-i-must-go https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/b...
- Dobbs 7y agoThanks. I do appreciate the details, and the discussion around this. As I said I don't know what Monica said so I'm trying to reserve judgement, but I am sceptical because of how I've seen many of these arguments play out. I would be interested in seeing the details of the particular conversation, because this is one of those situations where details really truly matter.
- compuguy 7y agoI'm not perfect, but I understand the need to use the correct pronouns. Ultimately Stack Exchange needs to make this new CoC public. People should know the guidelines to post on a site and not unintentionally break rules that one can't read...