Page 36 of 38 [ 601 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38  Next

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,195
Location: Seattle-ish

05 Sep 2022, 1:52 pm

magz wrote:
And she won the appeal.


So what? The fact that she was arrested at all for talking smack about an online activist (who had to search out the insults in some cases) is a travesty, and proves my point about these "good manners" being codified into law. "Only" being arrested and having to deal with the legal system is kind of a big deal, it's not some little "no harm no foul" thing.


_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson


magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,750
Location: Poland

05 Sep 2022, 1:57 pm

Dox47 wrote:
magz wrote:
And she won the appeal.
So what? The fact that she was arrested at all for talking smack about an online activist (who had to search out the insults in some cases) is a travesty, and proves my point about these "good manners" being codified into law. "Only" being arrested and having to deal with the legal system is kind of a big deal, it's not some little "no harm no foul" thing.

1. The fact that she won the appeal proves it exactly not codified into the law;
2. Ignoring the pre-existing injunction seems an important contribution to justification of the arrest.

I don't find it a black-white clear-cut case either way. It's a discussion of a right to be annoying online - and I believe it should not be a case of state law but a particular board's rules. The appeal court seems to believe it, too.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,195
Location: Seattle-ish

05 Sep 2022, 1:59 pm

Mona Pereth wrote:
Personally, I've always preferred to hang out in subcultures where it was accepted that everyone is different, and where people's idiosyncrasies were accommodated to the max. Only in such spaces (with just one exception) was I ever able to find deep, lasting friendships.


What's your limit then? You have to have one, where is your line?

Mona Pereth wrote:
In order for this to work well, however, it's also necessary for people to be assertive (without being aggressive). As I see it, the big problem in today's culture is the diminishment of dialogue between people with different points of view. Too many people will just instantly ostracize anyone who doesn't 100% agree with them.


Agreed.

I will add, that as someone who has a foot in both camps, this attitude is much more prevalent in left leaning spaces for some reason, when I hang out with right wing people they might tease me about some of my more liberal positions (pro choice, pro immigration, legalize drugs, etc), but that's it, teasing, where as on the left my departures from orthodoxy are treated as heresies that need to be suppressed and purged. This is a major driving factor in my distaste for the left despite having more in common with them culturally and possibly even position wise (I'd need to tally them up, but it's close), the intolerance is bad enough on its own but becomes maddening when paired with the mantel of tolerance so many on the left claim to wear.


_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,195
Location: Seattle-ish

05 Sep 2022, 2:00 pm

magz wrote:
1. The fact that she won the appeal proves it exactly not codified into the law;
2. Ignoring the pre-existing injunction seems an important contribution to justification of the arrest.


She was arrested for mean Tweets, ipso facto it's written into law.


_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson


magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,750
Location: Poland

05 Sep 2022, 2:04 pm

Dox47 wrote:
magz wrote:
1. The fact that she won the appeal proves it exactly not codified into the law;
2. Ignoring the pre-existing injunction seems an important contribution to justification of the arrest.
She was arrested for mean Tweets, ipso facto it's written into law.

As much as I know about how law works, it's not decided by arresting policemen but by court verdicts.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,195
Location: Seattle-ish

05 Sep 2022, 2:13 pm

magz wrote:
As much as I know about how law works, it's not decided by arresting policemen but by court verdicts.


So what you're saying is, it's written into law. If it wasn't, the police would not have had grounds to make an arrest over something said online, and it wouldn't have had to go to court at all. There are also other cases, Dankula and his saluting dog, the guy just recently mocking the trans flag, the Surrey police investigation of a journalist for "misgendering", etc.


_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson


magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 14,750
Location: Poland

05 Sep 2022, 2:37 pm

That's exactly not what I'm saying.

Or are you trying to tell me that the arresting bodies make the law so walking while looking suspicious (i.e. being a Black man after two beers or a mentally ill homeless man) is forbidden by the law in some places in USA?


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.

<not moderating PPR stuff concerning East Europe>


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,195
Location: Seattle-ish

05 Sep 2022, 3:08 pm

magz wrote:
That's exactly not what I'm saying.

Or are you trying to tell me that the arresting bodies make the law so walking while looking suspicious (i.e. being a Black man after two beers or a mentally ill homeless man) is forbidden by the law in some places in USA?


In the US, our police have some leeway in making what's known as a pretextural stop or Terry stop if they have an articulable suspicion of criminal activity, but that's only for people on the street or during a traffic stop, they can't come arrest you at home for saying something mean on the internet. People in the UK are actually getting arrested for misgendering, which proves my point that this is not mere "politeness", as violation of manners don't typically lead to arrest, no matter how much you might want to quibble over it.

Do you think people should face legal or professional sanction for refusing to use preferred pronouns?


_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson


Mona Pereth
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Sep 2018
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,813
Location: New York City (Queens)

05 Sep 2022, 3:33 pm

Dox47 wrote:
People in the UK are actually getting arrested for misgendering,

Can you provide an example of someone who got arrested for misgendering and only for misgendering -- as distinct from misgendering as just one part of a much larger pattern of harassment and/or defamation?


_________________
- Autistic in NYC - Resources and new ideas for the autistic adult community in the New York City metro area.
- Autistic peer-led groups (via text-based chat, currently) led or facilitated by members of the Autistic Peer Leadership Group.
- My Twitter (new as of 2021)


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,195
Location: Seattle-ish

05 Sep 2022, 3:49 pm

Mona Pereth wrote:
Can you provide an example of someone who got arrested for misgendering and only for misgendering -- as distinct from misgendering as just one part of a much larger pattern of harassment and/or defamation?


I'm not sure such a perfectly clean case exists and why it should matter, as any government action around misgendering fulfills my claim.


_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,195
Location: Seattle-ish

05 Sep 2022, 3:54 pm

I wish I could find it, I distinctly recall a case from the UK some years back where some lady was convicted of a hate crime for calling her neighbor "Australian", when she knew the neighbor was actually from New Zealand, might have been too long ago to find a story on it.


_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson


Last edited by Dox47 on 05 Sep 2022, 4:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Mona Pereth
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Sep 2018
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,813
Location: New York City (Queens)

05 Sep 2022, 4:48 pm

Dox47 wrote:
Mona Pereth wrote:
Can you provide an example of someone who got arrested for misgendering and only for misgendering -- as distinct from misgendering as just one part of a much larger pattern of harassment and/or defamation?

I'm not sure such a perfectly clean case exists and why it should matter, as any government action around misgendering fulfills my claim.

It matters because there are lots and lots of different kinds of nasty things that people can say to each other that are not illegal in and of themselves, but a lot of them put together, over a long enough period of time, could add up to harassment, under some circumstances at least. The crime, in that case, is harassment, not any one particular thing that was said.

Do you not think there should be laws against harassment?

If someone could be arrested just for accidentally misgendering someone, that would be a truly draconian law. On the other hand, I think laws against harassment are needed.


_________________
- Autistic in NYC - Resources and new ideas for the autistic adult community in the New York City metro area.
- Autistic peer-led groups (via text-based chat, currently) led or facilitated by members of the Autistic Peer Leadership Group.
- My Twitter (new as of 2021)


Last edited by Mona Pereth on 05 Sep 2022, 4:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,195
Location: Seattle-ish

05 Sep 2022, 4:50 pm

Mona Pereth wrote:
Do you not think there should be laws against harassment?


Legally speaking, harassment requires seeking out the target and pursuing them in some way, which I'm fine having some laws prohibiting so long as they're narrowly tailored enough not to be abused.


_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 29,869

05 Sep 2022, 5:08 pm

Dox47 wrote:
Legally speaking, harassment requires seeking out the target and pursuing them in some way, which I'm fine having some laws prohibiting so long as they're narrowly tailored enough not to be abused.


Seems to be fertile ground to take a number of republican politicians to go to court over harassment.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/randi- ... s-bullying

Teachers are trying to do their job. The latest set of witch hunts launched by the republican party are making school teachers (one of the hardest working groups in your society) vulnerable to parent harrassment and a number of US teachers have already lost their jobs due to these fictional claims
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/edu ... 777032002/



DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,475
Location: Northern California

05 Sep 2022, 8:19 pm

Dox47 wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
It ends when the effort is taking from you what you don't have available to give. The line is different for everyone.


So I have to give until I'm empty? No, I reject that, I don't subordinate myself to others just because they claim some ailment, my good nature has been taken advantage of enough already.


I never said empty. I said "available to give." So you've pulled off all your own needs and priorities, including whatever excess you want for yourself, taken a layer for the beings and issues that matter most to you, and taken a look at what is left.

I'm aware that most individuals on the spectrum need to set aside a lot of time and energy for self-care, and hold back a really large reserve in case they end up having to navigate the unexpected. It shrinks the tank a lot; something my son and I have talked about frequently. But something like a pronoun use does not, for most people, cost anything at all. I find it very easily given, not much different than when I took the fraction of a section it took to realize Brictoria was male. But, if that isn't true for you, it isn't true for you.

I believe that when you invest time in people, it makes the world a better place and ends up coming around back. I invested large amounts of time with multiple members here back when I was moderator, you know I did, and it wasn't like I was sitting on extra time and energy at the time. Was I sucker for making that choice, given how many people that I dealt with did not believe in ever giving it back or paying it forward? Sometimes I felt like I was. But its about choosing the world we want to live in, the whole "do unto others as you'd have them do unto you" thing. I hope I never become so jaded I refuse to accept it is ever worth it. So. Am I a sucker?


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Nades
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jan 2017
Age: 1932
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,767
Location: wales

06 Sep 2022, 1:05 am

DW_a_mom wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
It ends when the effort is taking from you what you don't have available to give. The line is different for everyone.


So I have to give until I'm empty? No, I reject that, I don't subordinate myself to others just because they claim some ailment, my good nature has been taken advantage of enough already.


I never said empty. I said "available to give." So you've pulled off all your own needs and priorities, including whatever excess you want for yourself, taken a layer for the beings and issues that matter most to you, and taken a look at what is left.

I'm aware that most individuals on the spectrum need to set aside a lot of time and energy for self-care, and hold back a really large reserve in case they end up having to navigate the unexpected. It shrinks the tank a lot; something my son and I have talked about frequently. But something like a pronoun use does not, for most people, cost anything at all. I find it very easily given, not much different than when I took the fraction of a section it took to realize Brictoria was male. But, if that isn't true for you, it isn't true for you.

I believe that when you invest time in people, it makes the world a better place and ends up coming around back. I invested large amounts of time with multiple members here back when I was moderator, you know I did, and it wasn't like I was sitting on extra time and energy at the time. Was I sucker for making that choice, given how many people that I dealt with did not believe in ever giving it back or paying it forward? Sometimes I felt like I was. But its about choosing the world we want to live in, the whole "do unto others as you'd have them do unto you" thing. I hope I never become so jaded I refuse to accept it is ever worth it. So. Am I a sucker?


What about people who by nature of a disorder feel like using a non-standard pronoun is the equivalent of singing a little song on its level of awkwardness?