Rule 8 Announcement

[CrossyCross]

Right, but this wouldn't seem to affect anyone like that, aside from maybe adding to the amount of conversation they skip past. This isn't a 'must use requested pronouns' thing.

Click to shrink...

Actually thinking about this, most interactions on this forum tend to use "you" when discussing with someone anyway. So it probably won't affect me much.

And if I haven't 'known' a trans poster in all my time here (or interact with them little enough I have forgotten they exist), I probably don't have to worry about referring some trans poster and misgendering them or whatever.


So yeah, this likely won't affect me much. And my quests aren't concerned with filling out progressive quotas anyways (I follow the "if they're cute/sexy, it's okay" rule), so there's no reason for anyone to throw up a stink about this western political crap.
And other quests I do follow trend more towards "cute traps who may be gay but are still male" than having to deal with the furball that is trans.

Yeah, no need to worry about having to give a fuck about randos I don't care about. I'm out of this thread. Have fun y'all.

 

[Queen Fiona]

Just because you don't see them doesn't mean trans posters don't exist, despite people's best efforts (mods included) to drive them off the board over the years.

Mind you, these days Rule 1 seems to be at the point of no enforcement where even writing the male-dominant het doesn't seem to be a safe bet, and it's not uncommon for friends of mine to look for a thread they saw a while back or remembered from earlier only to find out the author has abandoned QQ entirely, to speak nothing of the friends and friends of friends who have done it. Even my friends who write here and are still sticking around are feeling the strain.

Fuck, the only reason I'm still here is sheer stubbornness and creative differences with other options. It may not be the mods' job to protect everyone from everything, but

Is not misgendering people or kinkshaming anyone who isn't a Catalog Man really that controversial? That's basically what this is saying. People have outright told me/the mods Rule 8 means you can ignore someone's gender identity or requested pronouns because those things are political, ergo this is an explicit statement that this will not fly anymore. End of line.

 

[Darrenb209]

People have outright told me/the mods Rule 8 means you can ignore someone's gender identity or requested pronouns because those things are political, ergo this is an explicit statement that this will not fly anymore. End of line.

Click to shrink...

I have never seen Rule 8 enforced that way in all my years on this forum.

Did a mod tell you that, or did you pick that up from other people complaining on a different forum?

Because frankly? That reads very much like what you see in the rants section SB or SV threads regarding bans. "I got banned for X bad reason, ignore my long list of other behaviour and the brawl I took part in."

If a mod said it, fair enough but it really does read like that.

 

[Queen Fiona]

I have never seen Rule 8 enforced that way in all my years on this forum.

Did a mod tell you that, or did you pick that up from other people complaining on a different forum?

Because frankly? That reads very much like what you see in the rants section SB or SV thread regarding bans. "I got banned for X bad reason, ignore my long list of other behaviour and the brawl I took part in."

If a mod said it, fair enough but it really does read like that.

Click to shrink...

Read carefully. I said users think Rule 8 means this, not mods. In fact, mods have specifically said it does not mean that, but enforcement has been spotty and a public statement is warranted. Big part of this thread, then this thread over here. Or various bits in Rants.

Separate issue. People's perception of the board as a safe space for being assholes about various things, basically, as opposed to moderation actions.

That's not to say there haven't been issues with moderation - which are part of what's being addressed in this thread, per the OP itself and mod clarification - re: queer members getting bonked for Rule 8 violations when defending themselves from other people (most prominently Thief of Words or helnae), or Rule 1 being enforced extremely poorly outside of a certain very specific band of story and/or user. But what you said is different than how I intended it.

I post on QQ because I enjoy the freedom. I've been writing here since 2018, and fairly extensively too. I don't like SV at all, and only started posting there because of friends and readers who are uncomfortable posting here on QQ because they believe it's a hostile environment - a number which keeps growing. I've got an extensive collection of fiction and quests on here which should amply demonstrate that I'm paying attention to what happens here and not just going off of what other people are telling me...or at least that these people are actually on QQ and have experience with it.

But yes, I have heard a few things from mods here and there, too, with various statements and suspicions corroborated, and situations they felt something could be done better in. And they have basically said yes, the things I'm talking about here are an issue of concern that should probably be fixed at some point. But various behind the scenes problems with things like the XF2 update and a lack of manpower have prevented implementation. So my statements aren't simply my own opinion or someone else's second-hand testimony.

 

[LurkingInTheDeceit]

kinkshaming anyone who isn't a Catalog Man really that controversial?

Click to shrink...

This is very much, uncontroversially, against the rules; report all* instances. Like, some rules have detractors, like rules 7, 8 or 9, but I've never seen anyone argue against the 'no kinkshaming' part of rule 1.

*Though, keep in mind the difference between stating a preference and shaming.

Thief of Words or helnae

Click to shrink...

Was trying to remember this, ty.

 

[Cherry Lover]

Just because you don't see them doesn't mean trans posters don't exist, despite people's best efforts (mods included) to drive them off the board over the years.

Click to shrink...

Unless someone openly states that they're trans or transitions whilst on the forum and asks people to use different pronouns, how would anyone even know that they're trans in the first place? That's the benefit of anonymous/pseduonymous posting, no-one has any information on your gender beyond what you tell them.

Is not misgendering people or kinkshaming anyone who isn't a Catalog Man really that controversial? That's basically what this is saying. People have outright told me/the mods Rule 8 means you can ignore someone's gender identity or requested pronouns because those things are political, ergo this is an explicit statement that this will not fly anymore. End of line.

Click to shrink...

I don't think that's the intention at all. The intention is to allow people to discuss trans characters and why they've given their character a certain gender identity without falling foul of Rule 8. Intentionally misgendering someone is a clear Rule 1 violation.

 

[nick012000]

I don't think that's the intention at all. The intention is to allow people to discuss trans characters and why they've given their character a certain gender identity without falling foul of Rule 8. Intentionally misgendering someone is a clear Rule 1 violation.

Click to shrink...

Devil's advocate: is it really misgendering if they're using the wrong gender terms for themselves, because their biological gender is clearly the only one that matters - whether that's male, female, or eunuch?

(Not politics! The mods said so in the OP!)

 

[RageKnight]

Devil's advocate: is it really misgendering if they're using the wrong gender terms for themselves, because their biological gender is clearly the only one that matters - whether that's male, female, or eunuch?

(Not politics! The mods said so in the OP!)

Click to shrink...

fuck if i know. your question sounds just as confusing as trans man/woman for someone that doesn't know or care about trans stuff.

 

[magic9mushroom]

Devil's advocate: is it really misgendering if they're using the wrong gender terms for themselves, because their biological gender is clearly the only one that matters - whether that's male, female, or eunuch?

(Not politics! The mods said so in the OP!)

Click to shrink...

If you'd feel uncomfortable if you used someone's preferred pronouns, you do have the option of not using pronouns for that person at all. It's what I generally do if someone asks for a singular pronoun other than "he", "she", or "it" (yes, I have had someone request "it"). It's not exactly the most conciliatory option, but it's at the very least less confrontational while still allowing you to preserve your dignity.

 

[Cherry Lover]

Devil's advocate: is it really misgendering if they're using the wrong gender terms for themselves, because their biological gender is clearly the only one that matters - whether that's male, female, or eunuch?

(Not politics! The mods said so in the OP!)

Click to shrink...

Regardless of what you call it, you're being deliberately offensive towards someone to prove a point. So, yes, it's absolutely, 100% a Rule 1 violation.

 

[Nicodemus]

I know it's not hard to just call someone their preferred pronouns.

However, at the same time not everyone is going to notice a they/them tag under an avatar (font size thing), and mobile users (At least for Andriod users I think) don't see signatures unless they rotate their screens or their settings are set to Desktop mode. (Desktop mode? On this small screen? In this economy?)

I would hope that those that use such pronouns keep that in mind because this isn't twitter. It really is easy to miss, so don't get upset and just politely correct it.

I suspect that 9/10 times people will just use the correct pronounes when told. Sometimes people forget, and may need reminding at a later date. That's fine, no one is perfect. (Unless they are a cute and fluffy animal with a chill personality.)

 

[FeepingCreature]

How does this affect, for instance, authors misgendering their own characters in the text of an update? I'm thinking specifically of what got Mr. Zoat banned from SV. Does it only apply to behavior towards members?

I continue to have a hard time getting a handle on what this change allows and what it forbids. Some examples would go a long way.

 

[........]

When in doubt, just use the singular They. Quick. Simple. Predates modern English.

 

[Reece]

This seems very uncontroversial? Like, to me a man is a man, a woman is a woman, your sex is your chromosomes, nothing else matters. But realistically, who cares? If someone wants to be called 'she' or 'he;. It's a webforum? How could you tell anything else. I could be a three armed, pansexual midget with a parasitic gnostic shaman twin attached to my spine that writes dinosaur erotica and no one on here would know unless I provided documentation. EDIT: and as far as stories go. Don't like it, don't read it? Someone is either writing because they want to and it entertains them, or they're being paid for it by someone else.

 

[Generic_Generica]

There seems to be a few folks who're confused about what this all means.

Lemme clarify for you. There's not going to be any real changes to how you're posting on this site, we're just not going to be handling sexuality/sexual identity topics with the rule 8 banhammer anymore.

So I'm going to take some time out of my day while I still can to break all of this down for y'all to explain why this rule change was posted, how it'll probably affect you in the future, and some other shit that I'll probably touch on tangentially.

Let's start from the top.

Part 1: Why this change?

We've been talking about this in staffcomms for, god, a little over a year actually. This change should've been implemented a long time ago, and we've actually been operating off of this change for a bit even before this announcement went into effect.

The logic is as follows.

QQ is a place where you can generally post almost whatever you want as long as it doesn't break our site rules. It's a place for folks to post stories. There's a lot of site features that facilitate posting stories and there're a lot of site features that facilitate talking about stories. The purpose of the rules are to make QQ a good place to post stories and maybe talk about stories, everything else is ancillary.

This means that the instant the rules make it difficult to talk about someone's fics, we're going to have a problem.

And rule 8 made talking about any sexuality/sexual identity related kink a massive fucking problem for pretty obvious reasons.

Hence, the rule change.

Part 2: But why this specific change to rule 8?

Rule 8's the anti shitstorm rule. It's supposed to be an extension of rule 1. It says no current politics but in practice that's what it is.

The point of this site is to post stories. The point of the rules are to help facilitate posting stories and talking about stories. The point of rule 8 is to try to avoid a lot of shitstorms on this site.

The obvious problem with rule 8 is that it does make talking about an assload of topics hella difficult.

And for this particular topic, the detriments of rule 8 have long since outweighed its benefits. I'm going to be blunt, sexual identity/sexuality isn't a topic that inherently generates shitstorms on its own. It's not political inherently, it's political because a lot of folks insist on making this topic in particular political.

We were getting reports for this topic that were being made in bad faith to stifle discussion. We were getting reports that were being made to shut down specific users. We weren't getting reports on people who were baiting other people into toeing the rule 8 line. For this particular topic rule 8 has been a gigantic clusterfuck and it had gotten to the point where folks were actively avoiding posting on this site because rule 8 was that oppressive when it really, really shouldn't have been.

So there, that's why rule 8's being relaxed for sexuality/sexual identity in particular, so some of the rest of us who're willing to write and talk about this crap in our stories have a bit more room to work with.

Part 3: How drastic is this change?

It's not drastic at all.

I'm going to be blunt again, anyone who's complaining about this change is making a mountain out of a molehill. You'll note that we really aren't asking anything extra from any of you. The change's literally just a statement that yeah, we're not going to be treating sexuality/sexual identity related topics with the oppressive rule 8 banhammer anymore.

We're not asking you to go build rainbow-colored shrines. We're not asking you to kowtow to some newfangled ideology. We're not asking you to go donate more to the site.

What you see is what you get.

And this change has already been in effect for the past few months internally. For a few reasons, most of them exasperating, an announcement's only just been posted publicly. That is that announcement.

So if you're worried about this change and what it means to how you post regularly, don't be.

Part 4: TL;DR

> The point of QQ is to post fics and quests.
> It's also nice to talk about fics and quests.
> Our rules are here to make it nicer to do these things.
> Rule 8's supposed to be here to help do these things.
> For sexuality/sexual identity topics, Rule 8 was making it exponentially harder to do these things.
> Therefore, Rule 8 got changed in a very minor way.
> This change has actually been in effect internally for a while now.
> We're just posting this now to let you all know. It's long overdue. We're sorry.

Also, just a general notice, anyone who posts complaints after this post will be summarily removed from this thread.

I'm posting this bit in modtext for a reason. This should've happened in other rule change announcements. Here I am, rectifying that mistake. Topic's not actually up for debate. It's here, it's done, it's overdue, and honestly, it is like, the most minor of minor changes in the grand scheme of things.

You have been duly warned.

We're also going to be going back over this thread. Just for safety's sake, to make sure we aren't missing anyone.

 

[FeepingCreature]

Well that does sound pretty good!

It is amusing that people's first reaction (myself included) is "I wonder how this change will be used to ban people." The idea of a rule change that relaxes things and means people need to be less worried about the things they say is ... certainly welcome, but in a similar way of "well, I wish for a sparkly unicorn" and then actually receiving one.

(No shade on the mods, just weighing in why people might be being paranoid.)

 

[john764]

I mean I agree that it shouldn't be political. the unfortunate truth though is that it has been made one in a way by the media. This led to many others kind of following suit.
I personally believe there should be more discussion about these kinds of topics, maybe not here, but more discussion in general. However because it gets politicized people get too serious about it and can't just have a discussion.

 

[Cherry Lover]

I know it's not hard to just call someone their preferred pronouns.

However, at the same time not everyone is going to notice a they/them tag under an avatar (font size thing), and mobile users (At least for Andriod users I think) don't see signatures unless they rotate their screens or their settings are set to Desktop mode. (Desktop mode? On this small screen? In this economy?)

I would hope that those that use such pronouns keep that in mind because this isn't twitter. It really is easy to miss, so don't get upset and just politely correct it.

I suspect that 9/10 times people will just use the correct pronounes when told. Sometimes people forget, and may need reminding at a later date. That's fine, no one is perfect. (Unless they are a cute and fluffy animal with a chill personality.)

Click to shrink...

Accidentally misusing someone's pronouns on a forum is not an issue. It happens all the time. Not only to trans people, either, since it's not like you can necessarily tell someone's gender from their username or avatar. It's just something you have to live with on a forum where people are pseudonymous.

The problem is people deliberately doing it and then trying to justify it with "trans men are just women" or the like. Because that is being a deliberate asshole, and thus falls foul of Rule 1.

How does this affect, for instance, authors misgendering their own characters in the text of an update? I'm thinking specifically of what got Mr. Zoat banned from SV. Does it only apply to behavior towards members?

I continue to have a hard time getting a handle on what this change allows and what it forbids. Some examples would go a long way.

Click to shrink...

If anything, it would make it more acceptable, since it's not a violation of other rules, so the only rule it could violate is Rule 8, which no longer applies.

I mean I agree that it shouldn't be political. the unfortunate truth though is that it has been made one in a way by the media. This led to many others kind of following suit.
I personally believe there should be more discussion about these kinds of topics, maybe not here, but more discussion in general. However because it gets politicized people get too serious about it and can't just have a discussion.

Click to shrink...

Whether it's "political" or not is irrelevant. The reason it causes so many issues is that, fundamentally, one side is telling the other side "we're not going to accept your identity". That's always going to result in an emotional reaction from the side having their identity denied.

 

[john764]

Whether it's "political" or not is irrelevant. The reason it causes so many issues is that, fundamentally, one side is telling the other side "we're not going to accept your identity". That's always going to result in an emotional reaction from the side having their identity denied.

Click to shrink...

I mean I could get into a whole debate on what I think about this subject, but I don't think that would be appreciated on this forum. But I don't inherently disagree with what you're saying, however I think you misunderstood what I meant.

Discussion isn't often done on this subject and that is what causes these reactions in my opinion. Some people are going to be dicks regardless. However, everybody in between gets shoved aside because a blanket of not being allowed to talk about it or have a differing opinion gets viewed as being dickish sometimes.

 

[Queen Fiona]

Ahem. I'd like to speak for myself, as a trans woman, in this regard. Since a lot of people in the thread have been speaking for me, or just treating me like I don't exist at all. Therefore, this is my statement:

My life and identity are not political unless hateful motherfuckers make it so.

Friends of mine breaking down in tears, losing their faith in writing, and quitting this website because people are invariably shit to them in every single story that isn't a guy doing a girl with absolutely no butt stuff is not about your goddamned feelings about ~Western political correctness~.

People I care about, and friends of people I care about, have been hurt because Rule 8 declared defending our identities and desires political. Or because every single time a fetish that touched this stuff came up, Rule 1 was not enforced. People have been dinged for asking readers to be respectful of people's identities as stated in stories or asking them not to use a certain word with the letter T in reference to their characters, even after previous clarification on the subject. It's shit.

(That's straight from the mods planning this shit out, by the way, which is why this is happening in the first place.)

Honestly, after seeing this thread before GG showed up, I now know why they quit - assuming they weren't banned first. I'm tired of this willful ignorance and hatefulness, and hope this change will actually see this happen and make me not feel so uncomfortable about posting here.

Although making a moderator application is now a bit tempting...

 

[Tortoise]

The problem is people deliberately doing it and then trying to justify it with "trans men are just women" or the like. Because that is being a deliberate asshole, and thus falls foul of Rule 1.

Click to shrink...

What if they're doing it because they use pronouns according to how they perceive someone / that someone's biological sex? That's how language has long been used. That's not "being a deliberate asshole".

That someone is offended by it is not a reason to call it a rule 1 violation, unless the only intent of the post was clearly intentionally trying to get a rise out of someone.

Saying that anyone who disagrees is some kind of evil person (something-phobe, racist, ableist and so on) who must be motivated by hatred and desires harm for others has been a popular argumentation style lately. But that style is in reality little more than ad hominem attacks and is essentially just saying "if you don't agree with me, you're bad!". Such argumentation should not be accepted. There are completely valid reasons to disagree with the way some people insist in dictating how others must use pronouns, and that someone does disagree (and refuses to follow such demands) does not automatically mean that they must be a Horribly Evil Person.

Whether it's "political" or not is irrelevant. The reason it causes so many issues is that, fundamentally, one side is telling the other side "we're not going to accept your identity". That's always going to result in an emotional reaction from the side having their identity denied.

Click to shrink...

What exactly are they accepting or not? If someone uses pronouns according to biological sex, can you really claim their use of language is "wrong"? Or if they define what is "man" or "woman" according to biological sex?

If you claim that you get to dictate what is the "right" definition for those, that's at the very least a thoroughly political issue. If you don't claim that, and accept that it's valid to talk about "men" and "women" according to biological sex, then how the person views themselves in their head does not change their sex any more than it would make them the pope (or whatever other example of "identity" that everyone would clearly reject).

TL;DR That someone expresses disagreement does not mean they must be an evil person who obviously sees the correctness of your views but deliberately goes against what is right due to a desire to cause harm out of pure hatred. The standard for rule 1 violations should not be that someone is (or chooses to be) offended by something.

 

[sinereal]

I'm tired of this willful ignorance and hatefulness, and hope this change will actually see this happen and make me not feel so uncomfortable about posting here.

Click to shrink...

That's fair enough. Everyone wants to be respected and treated as a person, with inalienable rights.
But those inalienable rights are actually very specifically defined in most places. For instance:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Click to shrink...

Put another way, you (*sigh* the general 'you,' not you specifically​) have the right to say whatever you like about yourself.
I (*le sigh again* The general 'everyone else,' not I as in me specifically​) have the right to ignore it, because you don't have the right to force me to acknowledge it.
And most especially because generally, in conventional speech, using a pronoun to describe someone only comes up when talking about that person to other people, not when talking to that person, and any attempt to enforce using someone's preferred words in descriptions of themselves is, in legal actuality, a breech of the other party's freedom of speech.
That being said, I don't know if QQ is hosted on American servers and thus falls under American law, Canadian, Australian, etc.
Likewise, rules != laws.
My question to the mods:
Just how nitpicky strict are you going to get on the rules, for Rule 1 here?
Specifically, for example (And I'm going to get real silly with this just so no one can say I'm pointing to anyone specifically.​):
Suppose I come out and identity as an Apache attack helicopter and my pronouns are now helicopter, chopper, and brrt.
I put this in my bio, my signature, even make a general thread for it.
Are other people required by the rules to use my pronouns when referring to me in conversation with others when not doing so directly by name/nick?
If I come in and say
>Hey, look, I'm an attack helicopter now. I put up a thread [here], it's in my bio, and it's even in my sig. Could you please use my pronouns?
And someone refuses to do so, are they going to get Rule 1'd for it?
If I try to force the issue, is that crybullying?
Whose side do the rules fall on, when it's not actively malicious but it's definitely polite non-compliance with someone else's wishes?
I.e.,
>I respect your right to call yourself whatever you like, but you need to respect my right to refuse to acknowledge it.

Generica's post was great,

We're not asking you to go build rainbow-colored shrines. We're not asking you to kowtow to some newfangled ideology.

Click to shrink...

was a real nice touch especially.
But...
It's going to come up and it wasn't mentioned.
I figured I'd ask for clarification.
I'm not trying to shit-stir. As one of the posters who tends to toe the Rule 8 line, I'd like to know where the boundaries are in order to avoid it.​

 

[infinityDivided]

Want to be sure before I start causing problems, but does the rule change mean we can now report anyone deliberately (and not in a narrative context) acting transphobic or using transphobic slurs (such as trap, sissy, the Attack Helicopter meme, etc)?

 

[FeepingCreature]

Want to be sure before I start causing problems, but does the rule change mean we can now report anyone deliberately (and not in a narrative context) acting transphobic or using transphobic slurs (such as trap, sissy, the Attack Helicopter meme, etc)?

Click to shrink...

There are people who genuinely identify as those. (Maybe not attack helicopters.)
Similarly, not everyone who has genitalia that don't match their gender identity is a trans person.

At any rate, as I understand the rule change, I don't think that something that wasn't a rule 1 violation before is a rule 1 violation now. Rule 1 has not expanded. (Nor shrunk.) From a pro-trans perspective, as I see it, the change is just that people can now respond to those situations in-thread.

 

[Reece]

What if they're doing it because they use pronouns according to how they perceive someone / that someone's biological sex? That's how language has long been used. That's not "being a deliberate asshole".

That someone is offended by it is not a reason to call it a rule 1 violation, unless the only intent of the post was clearly intentionally trying to get a rise out of someone.

Saying that anyone who disagrees is some kind of evil person (something-phobe, racist, ableist and so on) who must be motivated by hatred and desires harm for others has been a popular argumentation style lately. But that style is in reality little more than ad hominem attacks and is essentially just saying "if you don't agree with me, you're bad!". Such argumentation should not be accepted. There are completely valid reasons to disagree with the way some people insist in dictating how others must use pronouns, and that someone does disagree (and refuses to follow such demands) does not automatically mean that they must be a Horribly Evil Person.


What exactly are they accepting or not? If someone uses pronouns according to biological sex, can you really claim their use of language is "wrong"? Or if they define what is "man" or "woman" according to biological sex?

If you claim that you get to dictate what is the "right" definition for those, that's at the very least a thoroughly political issue. If you don't claim that, and accept that it's valid to talk about "men" and "women" according to biological sex, then how the person views themselves in their head does not change their sex any more than it would make them the pope (or whatever other example of "identity" that everyone would clearly reject).

TL;DR That someone expresses disagreement does not mean they must be an evil person who obviously sees the correctness of your views but deliberately goes against what is right due to a desire to cause harm out of pure hatred. The standard for rule 1 violations should not be that someone is (or chooses to be) offended by something.

Click to shrink...

I think the main issue is less 'person is offended' and more 'I wrote this character this way' and the author getting dinged for having to explain that. I'm not even sure how an individual pronoun issue would arise unless both parties are trying to engage in an argument. Like:
"I am actually a transexual man, so you need to X" is pretty much the same as "Begone Tranny!" in that it's just goading. We're online, completely anonymous. Any person that thinks they're actually a woman would probably just call themselves a woman, unless they're discussing something pertinent to RL politics, or an RL situation. In which case, it's not probably not relevant to any given story or quest thread?

Saying 'Women are purely XX, and men are purely XY, and anything else is delusion', or saying 'I'm actually a pansexual enbie!' are kind of both blatantly not relevant to anything other than politics. I don't think that's changed, at all. What seems to have changed is a writer can now write 'Taylor Hebert is actually a boy on HRT' in a story about Taylor getting chokeslammed by a giant black dude with a ten inch penis whilst wearing a dress, and when someone goes 'that's retarded, Taylor is a girl', the author can go 'No, in my story they're a tranny.' without being dinged. Deliberately calling someone who has identified online as something opposite to their identified sex isn't a rule 8 issue as I understand; it's a rule 1 issue of 'don't be an arsehole'. Which, ultimately, is a mod discretionary thing anyway.

Plus, if all else fails: How is cyberdisagreement even a thing, like, hahahaha, homie just put them on ignore, hahaha, like, close your eyes!' is still the be all, and end all of histrionics online. If you can't get along with another use, ignore them.

 

[infinityDivided]

There are people who genuinely identify as those.

Click to shrink...

Wait, seriously? That seems kind of messed up.

Similarly, not everyone who has genitalia that don't match their gender identity is a trans person.

Click to shrink...

Isn't that literally the definition of being trans, though?

 

[FeepingCreature]

Wait, seriously? That seems kind of messed up.

Isn't that literally the definition of being trans, though?

Click to shrink...

There's a long history of people taking slurs and owning them in various ways.
As I understand it, trans is about taking steps to be perceived or treated as a different gender. For instance, I identify as autogynephilic/AGP. (Another "slur" to some trans people.) That means that I'm a man, I have a male body, but I often fantasize about having a female one, usually sexually. But I still identify as a man, and even if I had another body I'd still view myself, mentally, behaviorally and socially, as a guy. As I understand it, that's the core of what makes something trans vs not; the focus on social gender and perception.

I suspect these sorts of identities are common with people on the autistic spectrum, who start out with a really simple body-based pattern of "who is a man" and "who is a woman", and the idea of trying to end up in a different classification feels like lying to them - something abhorrent. There might also be a connection with "weakgender"; if gender perception can be differently strong, then in people where it's unusually weak, something like social/psychological gender wouldn't even rise to the level of perceptual relevance.

In summary, people are weird and wonderful.

edit: About traps specifically: think about the connection to it as a porn term. If people think of it as "something hot" they will sometimes start to think "I want to be like that." Anything enticing can form the basis of an identity.

edit: Really, anything can form the basis of an identity, but enticing things doubly so.

edit: Regarding divergent sexual organs: even IRL, trans and intersex are different categories! But this is a fiction board, and in fiction a much larger spectrum can exist, because you're not limited to IRL sociology. Consider for instance, futa as a "third gender."

 

[ultima333]

How does this affect, for instance, authors misgendering their own characters in the text of an update? I'm thinking specifically of what got Mr. Zoat banned from SV. Does it only apply to behavior towards members?

Click to shrink...

Characters in stories are unaffected. So long as it stays in story.
For example, Worm fics- some characters in Worm are literal neo-Nazis. They are allowed to be characters in stories.

If peeps start espousing that rhetoric outside of stories, however, THEN we have real problems.

What if they're doing it because they use pronouns according to how they perceive someone / that someone's biological sex? That's how language has long been used. That's not "being a deliberate asshole".

Click to shrink...

This is the Internet, you don't really have knowledge of someone else's biological sex. So rather a moot point.

Are other people required by the rules to use my pronouns when referring to me in conversation with others when not doing so directly by name/nick?
If I come in and say
>Hey, look, I'm an attack helicopter now. I put up a thread [here], it's in my bio, and it's even in my sig. Could you please use my pronouns?
And someone refuses to do so, are they going to get Rule 1'd for it?

Click to shrink...

Look, not everyone has Titles or Signatures visible at all times (such as on mobile). We get that.

Just... make at least a minimal effort, and don't be an asshole.
If you're interacting with someone, and they mention "hey, please use masculine instead of feminine" and you do the reverse, then that's a Rule 1 issue.

If you know what they are, use 'em.

The neutral 'they' can be used in singular as well, that's always another option.


To reiterate, this has already been in practice for a while, it's just being officially codified as policy now.

"I am actually a transexual man, so you need to X" is pretty much the same as "Begone Tranny!" in that it's just goading.

Click to shrink...

Nnnnnot quite true?
"I am a human being and fellow forum user, I ask that you treat me with basic decency" is basically just reaffirming Rule 1.

See above- there's no reason for either side to be assholes about it.

Any person that thinks they're actually a woman would probably just call themselves a woman, unless they're discussing something pertinent to RL politics, or an RL situation. In which case, it's not probably not relevant to any given story or quest thread?

Saying 'Women are purely XX, and men are purely XY, and anything else is delusion', or saying 'I'm actually a pansexual enbie!' are kind of both blatantly not relevant to anything other than politics. I don't think that's changed, at all. What seems to have changed is a writer can now write 'Taylor Hebert is actually a boy on HRT' in a story about Taylor getting chokeslammed by a giant black dude with a ten inch penis whilst wearing a dress, and when someone goes 'that's retarded, Taylor is a girl', the author can go 'No, in my story they're a tranny.' without being dinged.

Click to shrink...

Both examples are now allowed, but don't be an asshole to other users remains in effect (don't say other users don't deserve to exist, or say they're all mentally ill, or imply they're sub-human, fucking hell).

Freely discussing sexual identity and bringing that up as points when discussing say, character identity, are kinda important to be able to do when talking about sexual-focused stories. This change is to allow those, rather than going "only talk about orgasms, not about character narratives"

 

[sinereal]

There are people who genuinely identify as those. (Maybe not attack helicopters.)

Click to shrink...

Attack helicopter-phobe. /s
There are people who identify as dinosaurs, animals, dragons, aliens, and more.
At this point, I'm not going to put it past someone to, in all seriousness, identify as a literal attack helicopter. Or get real creative and identify as a transformer robotkin/helicopter.
Welcome to the internet! Where 'that can't possibly be a thing' has since evolved into 'sweet, manmade horrors beyond our comprehension!'
For sport, fun, and profit.

Plus, if all else fails: How is cyberdisagreement even a thing, like, hahahaha, homie just put them on ignore, hahaha, like, close your eyes!' is still the be all, and end all of histrionics online. If you can't get along with another use, ignore them.

Click to shrink...

The problem comes in when people don't want to do this, and would instead rather attempt to leverage moderation to get someone removed for having opposing viewpoints.
Which is most definitely a thing.
Which is why I asked about attempting to weaponize moderation against the non-compliant.

Isn't that literally the definition of being trans, though?

Click to shrink...

No.
Not anymore.
People can now be trans-sexual, trans-age, trans-race, trans-species, and so on.
Literally anything you could build an identity around, you can claim to be a trans- of.
I wish I were joking. I'm not.​

Just... make at least a minimal effort, and don't be an asshole.
If you're interacting with someone, and they mention "hey, please use masculine instead of feminine" and you do the reverse, then that's a Rule 1 issue.

The neutral 'they' can be used in singular as well, that's always another option.

Click to shrink...

10-4.
Thanks for the answer.

 

[Verik]

As a guy who dated a pre-trans woman before while she was in the setup phase I don't see why the issue has to be political at all. Then again I grew up seeing all the sides of that particular coin (die/dice?) as I had Baptist grandparents, a Roman Catholic father, a practicing Wiccan mother, and a second cousin who married her high-school girlfriend under common law before it became legal when I was a kid.

Freedom of choice and identity has always been a strong issue in my family but it was never with malice or politics. End of story.