NationStates

Aclion wrote:

Mystic Warriors wrote:It is still wrong.

Should womens shelters be required to allow men in?

Future Mystic Warriors wrote:but trans women aren't men, they're women.

Ah, but how are the shelter staff going to know who's a trans woman and who's a man saying they're trans so they can get in and find their ex?

Also Future Mystic Warriors wrote:but these are homeless shelters not womens shelters.

The distinction isn't meaningful, abuse is rampant in homeless shelters, hence why women's only shelters exist.

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:Who came up with the marvelous idea of single-sex homeless shelters anyway? They're homeless shelters, it's not exactly somewhere you go by choice.

They exist because of the sexual assault in homeless shelters.

He edited my posts and quoted them not as written.

He also edited my name.

I think you've misunderstood what Aclion was doing here.

He isn't changing your quotes or your name; he's predicting what your future self might say, and making counter-arguments against his prediction of what you might say.

As such, I don't believe it's actionable or against the rules as written. I haven't warned Aclion.


However, the tactic can potentially lead to misunderstandings - as has happened here - so I've politely advised him to perhaps not use this tactic again.

But I stress that it's not an issue of rulebreaking; I just think it's an inadvisable rhetorical device given the potential for misunderstandings.

Different poster, but the same thread, so I figured posting here would be best:

Sapientia Et Bellum wrote:

Necroghastia wrote:So putting the man on the bottom in a women-only shelter and the woman on the top in a men-only shelter is going to cause less disruption and confusion?

Also, y'know, it's funny, I could've sworn that every credible mental health professional agrees that trans people are the gender they identify as... mind posting your credentials? Since you're so sure about what goes on in mental hospitals and all.

I honestly couldnt give a rats ass about what politicized professionals think... Its been proven countless times that transitioning is not at all an effective treatment for gender dysphoria and frankly it never will be... I'm all for exploring alternative care that allows the individual to live healthy and happy without butchering themselves because they reject reality... We dont tell your crazy uncle the voices are real nor should we tell these people that they are actually the sex/gender that they are not....

Wallenburg wrote:Different poster, but the same thread, so I figured posting here would be best:

Sapientia Et Bellum wrote:I honestly couldnt give a rats ass about what politicized professionals think... Its been proven countless times that transitioning is not at all an effective treatment for gender dysphoria and frankly it never will be... I'm all for exploring alternative care that allows the individual to live healthy and happy without butchering themselves because they reject reality... We dont tell your crazy uncle the voices are real nor should we tell these people that they are actually the sex/gender that they are not....

I'm not seeing any rule violations there.

It's basically calling trans folk crazy, unhealthy, and mentally ill and saying they're butchering themselves.

Juristonia wrote:It's basically calling trans folk crazy, unhealthy, and mentally ill and saying they're butchering themselves.

While I understand your concern, and recognize that the player's manner in which they have expressed their opinion is not exactly tactful, simply having an opinion that many consider objectionable (or that may even be outright factually incorrect) is not actionable in and of itself. Moderation is not the arbiter of truth. If one side of the discussion is to be permitted, so must the other, insofar as each side expresses their beliefs in a manner which adheres to our rules - and yes, that does include beliefs some may find prejudicial or even personally offensive (prejudice, in and of itself, is not prohibited, insofar as such opinions are expressed beneath our threshold for actionable behavior).

What we see here is such a case: a player has rather impolitely (but not in a manner which is baiting or flaming) expressed their opinion, but has done so without crossing the line into trolling. NSG is about debate and discussion, and that includes objectionable but not actionable beliefs; feel free to debate with them, to include relevant sources; if that is not satisfactory, feel free to add them to your Foe List.