What White Posters Can Do

[noodleskooze]

That's why I wondered if we could delete the comeback thread. It was truly more of the same. We know who she is--I'd rather not have any of her participation here.

[Deleted]

Further, nobody should be asking "what can we doooo?". We've already received countless thoughtful suggestions about what we can do.

[aspentosh]

I agree that would be ideal. My worry is that I have no memory for who says what, so how would we track this so it can be effective? If we could figure out a way to do that I think it would make a huge difference.

[noodleskooze]

Sept 2, 2016 14:03:34 GMT -5 aspentosh said:

I agree that would be ideal. My worry is that I have no memory for who says what, so how would we track this so it can be effective? If we could figure out a way to do that I think it would make a huge difference.

No need to track. Zero tolerance for racism.

[aspentosh]

Sept 2, 2016 14:08:28 GMT -5 noodleskooze said:

Sept 2, 2016 14:03:34 GMT -5 aspentosh said:

I agree that would be ideal. My worry is that I have no memory for who says what, so how would we track this so it can be effective? If we could figure out a way to do that I think it would make a huge difference.

No need to track. Zero tolerance for racism.

Like, being banned? Obviously that would make it very easy! And should be allowed.

I was just asking because I thought jenny said it's not a bannable offense.

[AmyRI]

I'm not going to defend her in any way, so if people feel strongly for banning her, go ahead.

But this excerpt from the white fragility article posted is stuck in my mind:

The good/bad binary is also what leads to the very unhelpful phenomenon of un-friending on Facebook.
SAB: Right, because the instinct is to un-friend, to dissociate from those bad white people, so that I’m not implicated in their badness.
RD: When I’m doing a workshop with white people, I’ll often say, “If we don’t work with each other, if we give in to that pull to separate, who have we left to deal with the white person that we’ve given up on and won’t address?
SAB: A person of color.

I truly don't know what the right answer is, if there is one. But this is why I'm not 100% on the ban bandwagon.

[redheadk]

Sept 2, 2016 14:24:27 GMT -5 AmyRI said:

I'm not going to defend her in any way, so if people feel strongly for banning her, go ahead.

But this excerpt from the white fragility article posted is stuck in my mind:

The good/bad binary is also what leads to the very unhelpful phenomenon of un-friending on Facebook.
SAB: Right, because the instinct is to un-friend, to dissociate from those bad white people, so that I’m not implicated in their badness.
RD: When I’m doing a workshop with white people, I’ll often say, “If we don’t work with each other, if we give in to that pull to separate, who have we left to deal with the white person that we’ve given up on and won’t address?
SAB: A person of color.

I truly don't know what the right answer is, if there is one. But this is why I'm not 100% on the ban bandwagon.

Except that in your example, this is removing and sort of hiding racism from yourself. On the board, it's saying that it's not tolerated or allowed. By allowing people to continue to post racist things, especially when they double down on it, and letting them stay under the guise of "but they are learning!," we are saying that we value their feelings more so than those that are discriminated against.

ETA: In other words, whose feelings are the most important? SaveSaveSaveSave

[bex]

My concern with this week is how many micro aggressions do we let slip by, that a statement like that ("extra points") can be considered acceptable by a regular in our community. Does that make sense?

I think the comment from Cookie in some ways says more about MMM than it does about Cookie.

We are definitely a board comprised of mostly white, upper middle class, educated, mostly liberal women. So what does it say about us that we let these microaggressions happen again and again?

[residentdj]

I've only caught bits and pieces of this whole thing, so please excuse me if I miss anything. I def think there should be zero tolerance policy towards racism because it's something that goes beyond having a difference of opinion. Whether or not it should be a bannable offense - I think that might depend. Some people say shit without truly thinking of the consequences or realizing that what they said was out of line. Then there's the ones that say stuff because this is truly who they are - I feel like those are a lost cause. That all depends on the person though - some of you guys have been posting on here for quite a while so you would maybe know better which people are 'repeat offenders' of this stuff. So maybe some kind of ground rules like 3 strikes and you're out would work? A warning with the expectation of a sincere apology from the offender before banning them? Or whatever you deem appropriate? Or just ban them outright. That's up to whoever runs this board to decide.

[TamiTaylor]

Sept 2, 2016 14:09:29 GMT -5 jenny1980 said:

Sept 2, 2016 14:08:28 GMT -5 noodleskooze said:

No need to track. Zero tolerance for racism.

I would like to know why racism isn't considered a bannable offense here. 

I brought that up when CM got (quickly banned). How come hers was so quick yet Booby and V were not banned.

[spunkarella]

I don't agree with banning posters for a single racist remark, assuming it's not ill-intended, malicious hate speech. Learning is a process.

To me the bigger problem is the poster's response, the doubling down and AW-ing and making it all about them. I would like community standards on how to respond when someone brings a racist remark to your attention, including a consequence of banning if the response isn't appropriate.

[TamiTaylor]

Look, if you're fucking making racist remarks I'm not going to give you hairpats or help you come up with a bedtime routine. If we can't ban them then we need to collectively ignore them.

[satsuma]

Sept 2, 2016 15:05:29 GMT -5 TamiTaylor said:

Sept 2, 2016 14:09:29 GMT -5 jenny1980 said:

I would like to know why racism isn't considered a bannable offense here. 

I brought that up when CM got (quickly banned). How come hers was so quick yet Booby and V were not banned.

I thought she just deactivated. Sandsonik was banned only from CEP and she had a longer history of saying heinous stuff. 

[satsuma]

I think we need to move past the "I'm here listening and absorbing" responses. MMM doesn't exist to teach people proper race relations. There are a plenty of sites from people who want to take the time (and may receive financial compensation) to explain this shit to you. I don't really care if people are banned from the get go, especially if their gut response is to be overly defensive.

[Susie]

Sept 2, 2016 15:06:47 GMT -5 spunkarella said:

To me the bigger problem is the poster's response, the doubling down and AW-ing and making it all about them. I would like community standards on how to respond when someone brings a racist remark to your attention, including a consequence of banning if the response isn't appropriate.

I agree this was gross.  But -- and I brought this up in that thread too -- what bothers me even more than the overt posts and threads where people show their true colors, is the cowardly acquiescence going on, and the pervasiveness of it.

It's easy to identify posts like kamehameha's as unacceptable, and the unanimity of responses shooting down her bid to be welcomed back under a new name was deserved. But what about the FREAKING ONE THIRD of clicky poll respondents who thought we should accept her back with open arms? They are complicit, and I think just as offensive as she was.  And we don't even know who they are to address it.

[peggy]

I think in a way it is easier to call someone out IRL, at least for me. I'm not sure why that is and need to reflect on it. It's almost like that psychological phenomenon where you assume someone else is going to do it - bystander effect.

I am vocal IRL about calling people out on their biases, as we live in a very diverse district and get flack about not moving to a "better" (whiter) district regularly.

Here, it seems like a lot of posters (myself included) don't immediately confront these terrible (even "unknowingly" terrible) comments since I (we?) figure someone more active on the board will do so. That is not okay and I agree the board culture needs to change. We should not let some members feel unsafe here. They should not need to defend themselves, their race, their culture, their families, etc. over and over and over.

[pizzapizza]

See E below in the ProBoards terms of service.  WE just need to act on it. 

18. OBJECTIONABLE CONTENT

You represent and warrant that you shall not use the Website or Services to upload, post, transmit, display, perform or distribute any content, information or materials that: (a) are libelous, defamatory, abusive, or threatening, excessively violent, harassing, obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or pornographic; (b) constitute child pornography; (c) solicit personal information from or exploit in a sexual or violent manner anyone under the age of 18; (d) incite, encourage or threaten physical harm against another; (e) promote or glorify racial intolerance, use hate and/or racist terms, or signify hate towards any person or group of people; (f) glamorize the use of hard core illegal substances and drugs; (g) violate any provision of this Agreement or any other ProBoards agreement or policy, including without limitation ProBoards' Community Guidelines; or (h) is generally offensive or in bad taste, as determined by ProBoards (collectively, "Objectionable Content"). PROBOARDS DISCLAIMS ANY PERCEIVED, IMPLIED OR ACTUAL DUTY TO MONITOR THE CONTENTS OF THE WEBSITE AND SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS ANY RESPONSIBILITY OR LIABILITY FOR INFORMATION PROVIDED HEREON. Without limiting any of its other remedies, ProBoards reserves the right to terminate Your use of the Website and Services or Your uploading, posting, transmission, display, performance or distribution of Objectionable Content. ProBoards, in its sole discretion, may delete any Objectionable Content from its servers. ProBoards intends to cooperate fully with any law enforcement officials or agencies in the investigation of any violation of this Agreement or of any applicable laws.

[spunkarella]

Susie I agree, that was really telling of the group as a whole, and the anonymity just made it more gross. I'm just not sure banning posters after a single remark is the answer. I don't know what the answer is, really, but immediate banning does sound like it to me.

[pizzapizza]

Sept 2, 2016 15:23:14 GMT -5 Susie said:

Sept 2, 2016 15:06:47 GMT -5 spunkarella said:

To me the bigger problem is the poster's response, the doubling down and AW-ing and making it all about them. I would like community standards on how to respond when someone brings a racist remark to your attention, including a consequence of banning if the response isn't appropriate.

I agree this was gross.  But -- and I brought this up in that thread too -- what bothers me even more than the overt posts and threads where people show their true colors, is the cowardly acquiescence going on, and the pervasiveness of it.

It's easy to identify posts like kamehameha's as unacceptable, and the unanimity of responses shooting down her bid to be welcomed back under a new name was deserved. But what about the FREAKING ONE THIRD of clicky poll respondents who thought we should accept her back with open arms? They are complicit, and I think just as offensive as she was.  And we don't even know who they are to address it.

Bolding above in agreement.  

[TamiTaylor]

Sept 2, 2016 15:17:13 GMT -5 satsuma said:

Sept 2, 2016 15:05:29 GMT -5 TamiTaylor said:

I brought that up when CM got (quickly banned). How come hers was so quick yet Booby and V were not banned.

I thought she just deactivated. Sandsonik was banned only from CEP and she had a longer history of saying heinous stuff. 

She was ip banned.

[mishy]

Oh this is kind of like the policy we already have in place for when men show up and spew sexist bs.

Wait. You guys think we should change that? Because I'm sure they don't have bad intent! How else will they learn? We should really give them another chance I suppose, huh? They really are trying!





(Not directed at anyone in particular; I'm guilty myself of being too lenient and I'm pushing myself to understand more. When I think of how I'd feel if men were given this kind of pass, it makes me sick to think of how this discussion likely feels to the WOC here)

[TamiTaylor]

Sept 2, 2016 15:49:47 GMT -5 Jennyanydots said:

Sept 2, 2016 15:46:32 GMT -5 TamiTaylor said:

She was ip banned.

Are we talking about Celiacmom or Cookiemonster?

Celiac.

[satsuma]

Sept 2, 2016 15:50:57 GMT -5 TamiTaylor said:

Sept 2, 2016 15:49:47 GMT -5 Jennyanydots said:

Are we talking about Celiacmom or Cookiemonster?

Celiac.

Ohhhh, ok. Sorry.

[spunkarella]

Sept 2, 2016 15:36:56 GMT -5 jenny1980 said:

Sept 2, 2016 15:06:47 GMT -5 spunkarella said:

I don't agree with banning posters for a single racist remark, assuming it's not ill-intended, malicious hate speech. Learning is a process.

To me the bigger problem is the poster's response, the doubling down and AW-ing and making it all about them. I would like community standards on how to respond when someone brings a racist remark to your attention, including a consequence of banning if the response isn't appropriate.

This is how we got where we are, IMO. Way too much "I'm sure she didn't mean anything by it!!!" responses. 

That's very fair. But there's a lot of room between always assuming the best and instantly banning.

[rex]

I agree with a zero tolerance policy.

I am SO sick of seeing "tell me how to be better" bullshit. if you don't know, then be quiet and leave until you figure it out. there is no excuse.

[pantsparty]

I personally don't think intent matters. Because then anyone can say, "Oh, I didn't MEAN IT!" and it's swept under the rug like nothing.

Words have meaning. Words have consequences. Maybe it's time people stopped being so goddamn thoughtless.

I mean, who's going to be the intent police? Like really?

[anna7602]

Sept 2, 2016 15:26:38 GMT -5 pizzapizza said:

See E below in the ProBoards terms of service.  WE just need to act on it. 

18. OBJECTIONABLE CONTENT

You represent and warrant that you shall not use the Website or Services to upload, post, transmit, display, perform or distribute any content, information or materials that: (a) are libelous, defamatory, abusive, or threatening, excessively violent, harassing, obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or pornographic; (b) constitute child pornography; (c) solicit personal information from or exploit in a sexual or violent manner anyone under the age of 18; (d) incite, encourage or threaten physical harm against another; (e) promote or glorify racial intolerance, use hate and/or racist terms, or signify hate towards any person or group of people; (f) glamorize the use of hard core illegal substances and drugs; (g) violate any provision of this Agreement or any other ProBoards agreement or policy, including without limitation ProBoards' Community Guidelines; or (h) is generally offensive or in bad taste, as determined by ProBoards (collectively, "Objectionable Content"). PROBOARDS DISCLAIMS ANY PERCEIVED, IMPLIED OR ACTUAL DUTY TO MONITOR THE CONTENTS OF THE WEBSITE AND SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS ANY RESPONSIBILITY OR LIABILITY FOR INFORMATION PROVIDED HEREON. Without limiting any of its other remedies, ProBoards reserves the right to terminate Your use of the Website and Services or Your uploading, posting, transmission, display, performance or distribution of Objectionable Content. ProBoards, in its sole discretion, may delete any Objectionable Content from its servers. ProBoards intends to cooperate fully with any law enforcement officials or agencies in the investigation of any violation of this Agreement or of any applicable laws.

Allow me to butt in here as someone who did 1st Amendment work in the past (but I am not a lawyer). The issue with guidelines like these is that they are subject to interpretation. Note that it does not specify what constitutes promoting or glorifying racial intolerance. In America, you can sell Nazi memorabilia on the internet. In Europe, you can't. The KKK can march in U.S. cities, as hateful as they are. I don't think a similar group would be able to march publicly in Europe. Etc., etc., etc.

I'm just giving these examples to say that Proboards listing "objectionable content" is pretty broad and it's up to the board, IMO, to be more specific if that's what we choose to do. I, personally, would feel like my neighbor was a racist asshole if he/she posted a Trump sign in the front yard, but that kind of activity is actually protected in the real world. But, for example, if someone waltzes in here and says, "I actually agree with most of what Trump has to say. That wall, especially, is a brilliant idea!" and I have my own private aneurysm, is that enough to get someone banned? Do I want that person banned? 

[bex]

I don't necessarily think we need to actually ban posters. We do a good job of excluding people and running them off the board without banning.....when we want to.

The issue is it takes us too long to realize that "hey that was a shitty comment."

Someone makes a comment about poor people, or overweight people (thinking of missussbee) etc and the board gets pretty "wtf" pretty fast.

For some reason the racist comments take us a lot longer to act.

[pizzapizza]

anna7602, I agree with you. We just need to do SOMETHING, which really is calling people out if they say racist shit. If it is continued egregious behavior then it should be banned. But the issue is someone has to police it and as I have learned myself it is not up to the mods to do this. It is up to us.

[pantsparty]

Sept 2, 2016 16:36:13 GMT -5 bex said:

I don't necessarily think we need to actually ban posters. We do a good job of excluding people and running them off the board without banning.....when we want to.

The issue is it takes us too long to realize that "hey that was a shitty comment."

Someone makes a comment about poor people, or overweight people (thinking of missussbee) etc and the board gets pretty "wtf" pretty fast.

For some reason the racist comments take us a lot longer to act.

I'm curious to hear if that's really how POC feel. I don't necessarily agree that simply jumping on a poster faster is going to make anyone feel better about a shitty, racist comment. But I guess I shouldn't speak for anyone.