Can you please tell me why they Ban me in ResetEra for posting a Game about Dating Helicopters?

Mothro

New member
Jun 10, 2017
101
0
0
Kyle Gaddo said:
Mothro said:
...or any of the other countless genders that are everything except attack helicopters? That is what the meme is about, the absurdity of countless genders so people can identify as whatever they want (except obviously attack helicopters). You know what Resetera does? They say 'this is the acceptable opinion and all other opinions are hate speech and will be silenced one way or another'. Is that what the Escapist is these days?
Gender is a spectrum, but thank you for your input.

You can consider it like this: male, female, neither, or a combination of both in whatever measurements the person chooses. Doesn't have to be hard, doesn't have to be contentious. The nice thing about it all is that you can just leave them alone. Nothing about their existence affects you in any way.

As far as what's acceptable and what isn't, there's a difference between genuinely misunderstanding someone's existence because you haven't been exposed to it and vehemently opposing their existence because you think it's invalid. The former is fine. Questions are good. Learning is good. The latter isn't something that falls within our community guidelines and will not be tolerated.
Making a joke about identifying as an attack helicopter isn't vehemently opposing anyone's existence, that has to be one of the worst justifications for censorship that I've ever seen. It's mocking the idea that people can identify as anything they want resulting in a countless number of genders and if that opinion is unapproved on this forum then be brave enough to come out and say so. Don't dance around it, just tell us what kind of speech you intend to censor directly. For example, if we don't automatically believe rape accusations on social media without evidence, will we be silenced or will discussion be allowed?

Do you want a place for discussion or an echo chamber?
 

Mothro

New member
Jun 10, 2017
101
0
0
Kyle Gaddo said:
Making a joke about someone's identity is essentially an attack on their personhood.
...but identifying as an attack helicopter isn't a making a joke about someone's identity, it's mocking the entire idea. It's not an attack on an individual, it's an attack on an idea. Attack ideas, not people. Is attacking the pro life idea the same as attacking pro life people?

I already explained that it is a spectrum, which means that there are not "countless genders," but instead that they exist on something resembling a color spectrum where you have black at one end, white at the other, and a series of grays in between. Some people just choose to be one of the grays, because that's how they feel inside. Please remove the idea that there are "countless genders," because this persistent thought is detrimental to you understanding gender as a spectrum.
Ok, tell me how many there are?

To really explain it in a very basic concept: if someone introduces themselves as "James" and you insist on calling them "Jim," that's something of a dick move. Respecting people is a pretty cool thing to do. Not respecting them, unsurprisingly, is not that cool.
This example has nothing to do with the attack helicopter meme.

As far as there being a "place for discussion" versus an "echo chamber," that tired argument only arises when individuals see themselves as consistent dissenters for the sake of dissenting.
Actually is arises when people in places of authority make it clear that they intend to censor discussion that they don't like.

Nobody wants an echo chamber. In fact, points of view that are outside of our understanding help us build our own abilities to logic and reason. But what you need to understand is that taking away from an individual's personhood isn't something that will be tolerated.
Once again the attack helicopter meme is attacking an idea, not a person. It's attacking the idea that being able to identify as anything you want is absurd. What you call the gray area makes room for countless genders.

Here's the deal: just say you don't understand gender and choose not to understand it as its definition has evolved. That's fine. Simply don't partake in these discussions. These subjects clearly don't concern you.

If you need a time out from Escapist Magazine, please just say so and I'll be happy to provide.

...and there it is. You are asking me to self censor with a threat attached.
 

Addendum_Forthcoming

Queen of the Edit
Feb 4, 2009
3,647
0
0
Mothro said:
...but identifying as an attack helicopter isn't a making a joke about someone's identity, it's mocking the entire idea. It's not an attack on an individual, it's an attack on an idea. Attack ideas, not people. Is attacking the pro life idea the same as attacking pro life people?
Precisely because prolife seeks to be injurious, and a person's self-construction and sense of self is at heart the reason why we seek ideas of self-expression and its presentation.

Funnily enough the hypocrisy at the core of your sentiments. See, I can argue why the prolife standpoint is injurious to people. But seeking to injure people because their sense of self is at odds with the normative prescriptivism of the sentiments as that 'joke' is making is not only hypocritical about what it means to have freedom of expression, but hypocritical in the worst possible way of also seeking to be injurious to that self-expression.

What were you saying about censorship?

Ok, tell me how many there are?
As many as there are people. No one can tell you what it means to be a man and actually have it be an accurate depiction of man throughout history and cultures.

Actually is arises when people in places of authority make it clear that they intend to censor discussion that they don't like.
How is it censorship? Since when does a private platform open itself up to ownership by another person? If I ask you to leave my apartment after running your mouth, am I censoring you?

Once again the attack helicopter meme is attacking an idea, not a person. It's attacking the idea that being able to identify as anything you want is absurd. What you call the gray area makes room for countless genders.
Clearly that's untrue. It's attacking a group of people for no other reason than their gender identity. It's personally injurious in the same way as racism is.
 

Mothro

New member
Jun 10, 2017
101
0
0
Addendum_Forthcoming said:
Precisely because prolife seeks to be injurious, and a person's self-construction and sense of self is at heart the reason why we seek ideas of self-expression and its presentation.

Funnily enough the hypocrisy at the core of your sentiments. See, I can argue why the prolife standpoint is injurious to people. But seeking to injure people because their sense of self is at odds with the normative prescriptivism of the sentiments as that 'joke' is making is not only hypocritical about what it means to have freedom of expression, but hypocritical in the worst possible way of also seeking to be injurious to that self-expression.

What were you saying about censorship?
So you do attack pro life people instead of pro life ideas?

As many as there are people. No one can tell you what it means to be a man and actually have it be an accurate depiction of man throughout history and cultures.
So it's as I said, countless.

How is it censorship? Since when does a private platform open itself up to ownership by another person? If I ask you to leave my apartment after running your mouth, am I censoring you?
Censorship doesn't only apply to the government. Would you say the Facebook censors people, YouTube, Twitter, Resetera?

Clearly that's untrue. It's attacking a group of people for no other reason than their gender identity. It's personally injurious in the same way as racism is.
It's not attacking people, it's attacking the idea that there should be countless genders because people can identify as whatever they want.
 

Asita

Answer Hazy, Ask Again Later
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
2,849
469
88
Country
USA
Gender
Male
Mothro said:
Is attacking the pro life idea the same as attacking pro life people?
Depending on the nature of the attack, yes. If I were, for instance, to dismiss the pro-life ideology as nothing more than a smokescreen for what is ultimately misogyny, then it is not functionally different than calling any and all adherents of that ideology misogynists. If I were to say that a given ideology is one that only a fool would accept, it is no different than me telling an adherent that they are an idiot. Similarly, by mocking creationist arguments, Pastafarianism and Last Thursdayism are as much mocking the creationists who champion them as they are the mocking the arguments themselves.

If, by contrast, I 'attack' the idea in the sense of arguing its merits, that is not an indictment of the people who believe that idea.

To bring it around again, let's say, purely for the sake of argument, that I think transgender doesn't meaningfully exist. There is a profound difference between arguing that it is less a core identity than it is a rebellion against societal pressure to act in a perceived masculine/feminine manner, and satirically saying that you identify as royalty (eg, "My preferred pronouns are King, Kings, Kingself...") to make a point that such identifications were idiotic. The former is perhaps wrong, but the latter is nothing more than petty mockery of not just sexual identity but anyone who uses it, implicitly suggesting that anyone doing so deserves nothing more than derision if not contempt.
 

Addendum_Forthcoming

Queen of the Edit
Feb 4, 2009
3,647
0
0
Mothro said:
So you do attack pro life people instead of pro life ideas?
Where the hell was that written? I expressly wrote that their ideas should be ignored precisely because prolife ideals seek to injure people. That the prolife stance is actively injurious to concepts of autonomy of the body and basic ideas of justice. For instance making it next to impossible for a person to terminate pregnancy due to rape, or child abuse and incest, or simply by accident.

That there is nothing socially positive to pretending that abortion is wrong on its own and that to entertain such an argument seeks merely to injure innocent people.

Seriously, are you illiterate?

So it's as I said, countless.
More accurate to say 'it's a spectrum'. I mean, we can count humans. It's actually pretty easy to get a rough figure of how many humans are out there. After all if there were zero humans, it would be hard to make the argument.

Censorship doesn't only apply to the government. Would you say the Facebook censors people, YouTube, Twitter, Resetera?
So are you saying there are countless definitions of censorship? I'm supposed to meaningfully believe property rights are trumped by simply wanting to have an opinion? And people accuse me of being a communist ...

It's not attacking people, it's attacking the idea that there should be countless genders because people can identify as whatever they want.
It totally is ... it's taking a known instance of people simply being human and dehumanizing an aspect of their social interaction and their instance of their own humanity for the sake of a 'joke'. The ontological basis is that trans people do exist (because regardless of social evolution, there continues to be instances of it), and various cultures around the world don't even have a binary assessment of gender to begin with... the 'joke' pretends that all gender non-conformity in the eyes of the beholder and the beholder only is up for public derision.
 

ebalosus

New member
Mar 14, 2011
56
0
0
Kyle Gaddo said:
Hi, friends, your CM here.

Good discussion all around, but as people have pointed out, the whole "identifying as an attack helicopter" is definitely some bullshit transphobic meme that's used to invalidate people who are just trying to find their place in the world.

I'm gonna leave the thread open, so hopefully everyone can use this as a learning experience. Please don't let me catch you making jokes at the expense of trans people. Thanks!
No. It. Isn't!

The Attack Helicopter meme was created to mock otherkin, not transpeople. Back when it was created, transpeople didn't identify themselves with "I identify as 'x'", they identified themselves with "I am a 'x'". Some of the transpeople I know have even said that the whole "I identify as" thing actually denigrates them and their struggles for acceptance.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 12, 2020
3,625
1,387
118
Country
United States
ebalosus said:
Kyle Gaddo said:
Hi, friends, your CM here.

Good discussion all around, but as people have pointed out, the whole "identifying as an attack helicopter" is definitely some bullshit transphobic meme that's used to invalidate people who are just trying to find their place in the world.

I'm gonna leave the thread open, so hopefully everyone can use this as a learning experience. Please don't let me catch you making jokes at the expense of trans people. Thanks!
No. It. Isn't!

The Attack Helicopter meme was created to mock otherkin, not transpeople. Back when it was created, transpeople didn't identify themselves with "I identify as 'x'", they identified themselves with "I am a 'x'". Some of the transpeople I know have even said that the whole "I identify as" thing actually denigrates them and their struggles for acceptance.
How it was created and how it's currently used are two separate things.