SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
"We will not ban questionable subreddits," Reddit's then-CEO, Yishan Wong, wrote mere months ago. "You choose what to post. You choose what to read. You choose what kind of subreddit to create."
But in an apparent reversal of that policy, and in an unprecedented effort to clean up its long-suffering image, Reddit has just banned five "questionable subreddits."
The site permanently removed the forums Wednesday afternoon for harassing specific, named individuals, a spokesperson said. Of the five, two were dedicated to fat-shaming, one to transphobia, one to racism and one to harassing members of a progressive video game site.
Unsurprisingly, a vocal contingent of Redditors aren't taking the changes well: "Reddit increases censorship," read one post on r/freespeech, while forums like r/mensrights and r/opieandanthony theorized they would be next.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2015, @02:10PM
Except that there is no specific, objective definition of these terms.
Feminism - the ideology of advancing pro-female agenda with the explicit goal of securing equal standing of women in society. When people act to give women special privileges or take away men's privileges then this explicitly contradicts the mission statement.
$RELIGION_DENOMINATION - the belief and effort to adhere to the creed of a given religion. Note, that adherence needs not be complete, as religious is not a boolean state.
The people in the WBC probably believe others aren't "true Christians", and other Christians believe the WBC aren't "true Christians". Well, at least the WBC more closely follows their holy book, I guess.
Yes, and that would be fallacious. However, it's also not relevant here because that would be discriminating based on arbitrary non-indicative criteria. Strictly speaking each form of Christianity is it's own sect and should be considered a separate religion in the same religious family, but that's not relevant in casual discussion.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2015, @02:15PM
men's privileges
That was poorly worded of me, it should have read "equal rights for men". An example would be the legal statue of protection against genitalia mutilation, which is total for women, and yet male circumcision is permitted. A while back, there was a strong backlash from self-identified feminists against outlawing the practice for boys.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Saturday June 13 2015, @04:27PM
Feminism - the ideology of advancing pro-female agenda with the explicit goal of securing equal standing of women in society. When people act to give women special privileges or take away men's privileges then this explicitly contradicts the mission statement.
That's not an objective definition; there is plenty of vague and subjective terminology there. Someone doesn't like how someone is trying to achieve their goals, so they say they're not "true feminists"; it's nonsense.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 13 2015, @05:50PM
There's no such thing as a perfectly objective, non-vague, non-general definition for any word. "Mutually agreed-upon by the majority" is the closest you can get.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Sunday June 14 2015, @11:00AM
There's no such thing as a perfectly objective, non-vague, non-general definition for any word.
But some are more vague than others. Some people have essentially arbitrarily decided that certain people aren't True Feminists because they go about trying to accomplish their goals in ways they don't like.
"Mutually agreed-upon by the majority" is the closest you can get.
That's not too convincing. Within subcultures, the majority can agree on a definition. Maybe these feminist 'extremists' have their own definitions.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 14 2015, @05:19PM
The goal of feminism is gender equality, it is not to make women superior to men or to have men subservient to women. The so-called feminists who aren't working for equality but instead are working to make men subservient to women or otherwise make men inferior are not, by definition, feminists.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 14 2015, @05:34PM
To clarify, think of corporate espionage. A worker from company B goes to work for company A; the spy is labeled as a worker for company A, but he's not, he's working for entirely different goals than the rest of the workers of company A. He's really not a Company A worker, he only appears to be one on the surface. So-called feminist who have taken the label but are working for entirely different goals are just like corporate spies, working within a group and calling themselves a member, but working to accomplish something entirely different. Pointing out that they're working for entirely different goals and thus not a member is different from the fallacy because the fallacy is based on trying to redefine the group to exclude unpleasant acts or traits, but there's no attempted redefinition going on when the people weren't part of the group except to use it as camouflage or to smear the group's name.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Sunday June 14 2015, @06:05PM
Only if they agree with your definition of "equality", "subservient", "inferior", etc.