I don’t know, but this comment from @Hermes@hexbear.net has given me some stuff to think about.
People should not think less of you on the base of the amount of sex you have, and you shouldn’t either.
This is a nice thought, but insults based on amount of sex are absurdly common. I have seen quite a few people on this site who still do these insults, and it doesn’t get removed when I report it. The incel article from a while go was about how we should critique incels for their misogyny rather than them failing to have sex, I see this as pretty similar to the arguments about not body-shaming fascists in that most of the people who will get hit by the insult are not the actual target. From what I remember, that article good job explaining why these insults are harmful and how they hurt a lot of people who they really shouldn’t, unfortunately the discussion on that post was very off topic. In my experience, most people who have sex fail to recognize that not everyone who is celibate is an incel (“If so many terrible people have sex and you can’t, that must mean you are worse than they are!”).
I would say that insults based on amount of sex a person has should not be allowed, but I am very pessimistic about this actually leading to a change in site culture.
Once again, please assume good faith, even if you disagree with the take. If you think I mean something weirdly reactionairy by this post, ask me wether that is what I mean, instead of just saying that’s what I mean please.
I don’t want this to become a strugglesession, I just feel like this would be a good discussion to have. If this does become hostile, then please lock/remove it mods.
No, but we should ban using the -oid suffix since it originates from an ableist term and we’ve banned other suffixes with similar origins.
I completely disagree. It’s used in a lot of technical and scientific circumstances. Such as describing Earth not as a sphere, but as an oblate spheroid.
There’s other terms on the wordfilter list that I have issues with, such as d=ge=erate, for the same reason. “D=ge=erate matter” is a very specific term in physics used to describe a type of matter commonly found in extremely dense objects like white dwarfs and neutron stars.
I didn’t think ”in a derogative way” needed to be specified because people could figure it out from the context, but maybe it should’ve been. Obviously I’m not asking for *oid to be added to the slur filter, just that using ableist terms ending in -oid shouldn’t be allowed.
I don’t think that is true unless I’m missing some context. It’s a widely used suffix in English.
I assume you’re referring to
cw slur
schizoid
?
I think a one-off ban of that term is sufficient…
The third definition on that page describes its use as a derogative. I’m fairly sure it originates from
CW:ableism
m*****loid, an archaic ableist term.
I see, well I would support banning terms like that, when the implication is basically “lesser human”. Just not trying to get banned when talking about asteroids and hemorrhoids lol
That’s my concern as well. There are many modern scientific, engineering, and technical terms that use older slurs in whole or in part, yet in their modern context are not at all slurs.
I’m wondering if there could be some sort of “soft” word filter. Instead of instantly replacing certain words, perhaps there could be an “auto-report” to mods about certain words. They could then make their own decision on whether the word was appropriate in the context of the discussion on which it was used.
It’s not like it’s absolute, a word doesn’t have to be automatically filtered for it not to be allowed here. “Bitch” isn’t filtered, but comments using it in a misogynistic way are still removed. It’s pretty easy to determine whether a comment has an ableist insult or the word “asteroid” in it.