4 ms·

The policy in question appears to be affirmatively requiring moderators not to (deliberately) mis-gender trans people, or allow user content to do the same. Al

The policy in question appears to be affirmatively requiring moderators not to (deliberately) mis-gender trans people, or allow user content to do the same. All these ex-mods wrote these coy essays with discussions of free will and human rights in order to avoid discussing the issue at hand. Trans people are surely a more important part of the StackExchange community and business than a few unpaid volunteers. I am not sorry that Monica’s feelings were hurt by a demand for basic human decency.

yanderekko 7y ago
>The policy in question appears to be affirmatively requiring moderators not to (deliberately) mis-gender trans people This is either incorrect or relies on an unconventionally broad notion of "misgendering." Normally misgendering is understood to be the act of using pronouns other than a person's preferred pronouns, the point of controversy is that now simply avoiding pronouns can be considered an act of misgendering. This is new territory.
- lilyball 7y ago
  If you very conspicuously avoid using pronouns for someone, it’s pretty obvious what’s going on and that you’re deliberately avoiding gendering someone correctly. It’s not as bad as using the wrong pronouns, but it’s still very disrespectful.
  - Wowfunhappy 7y ago
    I think we need to see this policy. Particularly on a Q&A site, avoiding gendered pronouns altogether strikes me as the _most_ practical policy. It's what I (try my best to remember to) do on Hacker News. I don't know what pronouns the GP prefers, and I can't very well ask them right now, so if I have to refer to them, I'll either say "they" or "the GP".
    - dragonwriter 7y ago
      The specific complaint made by one of the mods is that avoiding pronouns for or disengaging from a specific person to avoid using is viewed as improper under the new CoC. That's not the same as avoiding pronouns generally, it's differential treatment of an individual for not conforming to your preferred gender expression.
- damnyou 7y ago
  The line is when you treat trans and nonbinary people differently from cis people.

yanderekko 7y ago

>The policy in question appears to be affirmatively requiring moderators not to (deliberately) mis-gender trans people This is either incorrect or relies on an unconventionally broad notion of "misgendering." Normally misgendering is understood to be the act of using pronouns other than a person's preferred pronouns, the point of controversy is that now simply avoiding pronouns can be considered an act of misgendering. This is new territory.

lilyball 7y ago
If you very conspicuously avoid using pronouns for someone, it’s pretty obvious what’s going on and that you’re deliberately avoiding gendering someone correctly. It’s not as bad as using the wrong pronouns, but it’s still very disrespectful.
- Wowfunhappy 7y ago
  I think we need to see this policy. Particularly on a Q&A site, avoiding gendered pronouns altogether strikes me as the _most_ practical policy. It's what I (try my best to remember to) do on Hacker News. I don't know what pronouns the GP prefers, and I can't very well ask them right now, so if I have to refer to them, I'll either say "they" or "the GP".
  - dragonwriter 7y ago
    The specific complaint made by one of the mods is that avoiding pronouns for or disengaging from a specific person to avoid using is viewed as improper under the new CoC. That's not the same as avoiding pronouns generally, it's differential treatment of an individual for not conforming to your preferred gender expression.
damnyou 7y ago
The line is when you treat trans and nonbinary people differently from cis people.