Should racist/bigots in the fandom be exposed?

[ShadowSJG 62]

So lately, I've come across bigots in the fandom such as a certain person who have expressed racist views. Due to this, I was wondering, should bigots be exposed for who they are in the fandom? I know someone who wants to get him banned from cons due to this.

Edited April 5, 2018 by ShadowSJG

[Mesme Rize 15,682]

if anything, people should be a bit more tolerant towards someones opinions.

I talked with Aleximus a few times and he is a very nice guy. Just because he has right views, dosen't make him a racist. People these days are just too quick when it comes to judging somebody.

 

[Nyactis Mewcis Catlum 670]

I want you to seriously think over this desire to punish someone in a real world context for something they have said on the internet. This isn't something to take lightly - you should be well aware that if you intend on spreading the idea that someone is racist, sexist, etc., that a lot of people on the internet are going to buy into your word without any proof of such behavior. These people could be your average bystanders who have no effect on it, or they could be business owners and group leaders. It will seriously damage this person's reputation, and it's something that will stick around with them even long after they've made the comments you're accusing them of being racist for saying.

Imagine you said something misguided or outright terrible at one point in your life. Someone else took that one thing you said, took it out of context, and slapped a label on you for that. Now you're unable to attend cons. Hell, you might not even be able to get jobs in certain locations. And your internet presence will be dogged with people who just believed this person. Even years after you made the comment, you coming back could start an uprising again.

Is this really something you would want to do to someone else?

I'm not preventing you from "exposing" someone like this. I'm just suggesting that you better have a damn good reason for it if your plan is to get that person banned from cons, of all things. Those views and comments that you're referring to better be incredibly radical... Or else the consequences will be way too severe for the crime committed. A "crime" which, mind you, might not even be against the law, and in fact protected by it.

I'm also seriously skeptical of your sincerity with this, too, given that you didn't actually show examples of this individual espousing these views. Well? Are you serious about this, or are you just attempting to start a lynch mob against a random person whose word you didn't like on the internet?

[ShadowSJG 62]

13 minutes ago, Scootaloved said:

I want you to seriously think over this desire to punish someone in a real world context for something they have said on the internet. This isn't something to take lightly - you should be well aware that if you intend on spreading the idea that someone is racist, sexist, etc., that a lot of people on the internet are going to buy into your word without any proof of such behavior. These people could be your average bystanders who have no effect on it, or they could be business owners and group leaders. It will seriously damage this person's reputation, and it's something that will stick around with them even long after they've made the comments you're accusing them of being racist for saying.

Imagine you said something misguided or outright terrible at one point in your life. Someone else took that one thing you said, took it out of context, and slapped a label on you for that. Now you're unable to attend cons. Hell, you might not even be able to get jobs in certain locations. And your internet presence will be dogged with people who just believed this person. Even years after you made the comment, you coming back could start an uprising again.

Is this really something you would want to do to someone else?

I'm not preventing you from "exposing" someone like this. I'm just suggesting that you better have a damn good reason for it if your plan is to get that person banned from cons, of all things. Those views and comments that you're referring to better be incredibly radical... Or else the consequences will be way too severe for the crime committed. A "crime" which, mind you, might not even be against the law, and in fact protected by it.

I'm also seriously skeptical of your sincerity with this, too, given that you didn't actually show examples of this individual espousing these views. Well? Are you serious about this, or are you just attempting to start a lynch mob against a random person whose word you didn't like on the internet?

I'll PM you as I want to think this over like you said. That is why I started this thread. I said someone wanted to get him banned, not me.

27 minutes ago, Mesme Rize said:

if anything, people should be a bit more tolerant towards someones opinions.

I talked with Aleximus a few times and he is a very nice guy. Just because he has right views, dosen't make him a racist. People these days are just too quick when it comes to judging somebody.

 

I've Pm'd you evidence. Also, we should tolerate opinions as long as they are not toxic or harmful.

Edited April 5, 2018 by ShadowSJG

[Nyactis Mewcis Catlum 670]

19 minutes ago, ShadowSJG said:

I said someone wanted to get him banned, not me.

My mistake. I still think you should consider the potential consequences behind attempting to expose someone.

20 minutes ago, ShadowSJG said:

Also, we should tolerate opinions as long as they are not toxic or harmful.

Having toxic or harmful opinions is not illegal in the U.S. and it shouldn't be treated as such. It is better to have an open dialogue with someone with a toxic or harmful opinion than it is to punish them socially and financially.

[Clod 8,293]

1 hour ago, Mesme Rize said:

if anything, people should be a bit more tolerant towards someones opinions.

This depends. Truly racist opinions should not be tolerated. Now, I'm not saying they need to be attacked or anything. But you shouldn't just say "yeah, this is okay." But having some right-leaning views doesn't make someone racist.

Freedom of speech does go both ways, btw. If someone's allowed to be racist, then people are allowed to call them out on it. Also, it doesn't mean a website has to tolerate it. For example, MLPF is allowed to ban anyone they want for any reason they want.

[Mesme Rize 15,682]

18 minutes ago, meme said:

Freedom of speech does go both ways, btw. If someone's allowed to be racist, then people are allowed to call them out on it. Also, it doesn't mean a website has to tolerate it. For example, MLPF is allowed to ban anyone they want for any reason they want.

I am not saying that racism should be tolerated.

I am just saying that whenever someone says something that is bad about another country (especially african ones or muslim ones), it's automatically racist. I just wanna have a normal conversation without someone pulling the race card, which people do too much these days.

[Brony Number 42 10,045]

A test of a free society is to allow people with racist views. You don't have to like them, but they should not be banned. They are the canary in the coal mine. Meaning that if person X is allowed to say something racist, then I know my views, which are not racist but maybe unpopular, will be protected. Who decides what a racist view is? 

It is a slippery slope to start punishing people for unpopular views. I would rather err on the side of allowing it. Besides, making someone angry will reinforce their views. But by allowing them to speak you have a chance of changing their mind. 

Also keep in mind that a person can survive for libel if you falsify accuse them of something.

[Goat-kun 2,516]

You don't need to tolerate anything as far as my interpretation of tolerance goes. That said, it would be appreciated that you stop plastering "toxic", "harmful" and "racist" to things without further explanation. You come across as just another triggered leftist. Impartially describe the situation so that people can draw their own conclusions.

 

It is also my opinion that those who present no danger to others should be allowed to cons regardless of their views. I'd rather see Richard Spencer creeping around than pedophiles.

 

P.S: Let's isolate racists to decrease the chances for them to change their worldview! Boy how progressive and virtuous we are! Now we'll surely get some from the problem glasses ladies!

[Hierok 11,829]

2 hours ago, Mesme Rize said:

if anything, people should be a bit more tolerant towards someones opinions.

I talked with Aleximus a few times and he is a very nice guy. Just because he has right views, dosen't make him a racist. People these days are just too quick when it comes to judging somebody.

 

People these days are complaining about everything, and only thinking about themselfs and not about others or the world. 

[Anonymous Old User Who Has Left 599]

With great power (freedom of speech) comes great responsibility (being respectful polite, concerning, all that positive jazz).

[ShadowSJG 62]

Come on, should racist views really be tolerated?

[Quadropus 171]

You can if you want, but its not like exposing or witch hunting bigots is gonna help, it would probably just start more arguments and flame wars. Then again this could go the other way and stop more arguments and flame wars, either one you choose it probably won't end well. I don't like getting into controversial stuff like this so i'm out.

[ShadowSJG 62]

Here is racist example. Ben shapiro said this:

Israelis like to build. Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage. This is not a difficult issue. #settlementsrock

And this guy said this:

THat first one was just him pointing out the cultural differences. In Saudi Arabia, that is one of the countries that has slavery and where women are treated terribly. He probably should have pointed out that there are some good things about Saudi Arabia, but if you are offended by that tweet, then you clearly didn't know the context already and need to get educated on it.
 

My response:

Shapiro was talking about Israel and Palestine. Saudi has nothing to do with this.  It's deliberate obfuscation. They know what he said was racist,  But they've already decided that Ben Shapiro isn't racist.  so nothing will convince them otherwise. The "I was talking about their culture I mean I was taken out of context" is blatantly someone tying themselves into knots to defend the indefensible. nowhere does Ben Shapiro say it's Palestinian or Arabic culture to do those things, because it isn't. Not all Arabs are from Saudi.

[Libra 11,691]

27 minutes ago, ShadowSJG said:

Come on, should racist views really be tolerated?

No, but they shouldnt be banned.

just because you dont agree with someones opinion doesnt mean they should be removed. We can't just go around censoring everything we don't want to see.

[Guest]

If they are truly racist then they will expose themselves over time. Attempting to preemptively condemn anyone who ever may or may not have done or said something racist is the work of a moral busybody and will earn you nothing. 

[Hollow Wing 51]

The appropriate response to a person expressing bigoted views on a forum, I think, is to warn them off at first, have a moderator come in and say something like "hey, we don't allow these kinds of topics here, please don't bring this up in the future" then ban the person if they continue making hurtful remarks in spite of this warning. We need to make sure that the forum remains a fun and inviting place for all users, but we also need to make sure that we don't impose permanent consequences on people without a very solid reason. 

[Gernia 690]

I don't think it's that bad if they're very blatant bigots like an actual Nazi, so long as there's no doxxing involved. For people who are not as controversial or extreme, I'm not so sure. I believe it's good to be clear and in-depth as to why a person is considered a bigot before anyone gets called out or banned, or whatever. There are too many negatives to risk if things like that are not done delicately. Plus, I think when things like this happen some people may not change from their bigoted views and not share them, and that sort of invisible bigotry is IMO the worst kind of bigotry.

[Black Sabbath 2,485]

4 hours ago, ShadowSJG said:

 Due to this, I was wondering, should bigots be exposed for who they are in the fandom? I know someone who wants to get him banned from cons due to this.

As long as you provide proof of them being a bigot and don't go too far (i.e doxx him and the like), I don't see why not.

[Goat-kun 2,516]

1 hour ago, ShadowSJG said:

Here is racist example. Ben shapiro said this:

Israelis like to build. Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage. This is not a difficult issue. #settlementsrock

And this guy said this:

THat first one was just him pointing out the cultural differences. In Saudi Arabia, that is one of the countries that has slavery and where women are treated terribly. He probably should have pointed out that there are some good things about Saudi Arabia, but if you are offended by that tweet, then you clearly didn't know the context already and need to get educated on it.
 

My response:

Shapiro was talking about Israel and Palestine. Saudi has nothing to do with this.  It's deliberate obfuscation. They know what he said was racist,  But they've already decided that Ben Shapiro isn't racist.  so nothing will convince them otherwise. The "I was talking about their culture I mean I was taken out of context" is blatantly someone tying themselves into knots to defend the indefensible. nowhere does Ben Shapiro say it's Palestinian or Arabic culture to do those things, because it isn't. Not all Arabs are from Saudi.

Arab cultures are backwards in many a department from my point of view and attacking a culture has nothing to do with human biology since a person of Arab descent can belong to my own culture and vice versa. White people who abide by backwards principles should be shown no leniency. Heck, many a western person thinks Slav cultures are backwards and they will express it with similar statements that address Slavs themselves. Is that racist? A nu chiki briki i v damki!

[MickeyAdaptus 2,209]

While racism is not a good thing, exposing somebody is a tad bit extreme don't you think? I mean, like others had already stated, you could ruin someone's life by just *exposing* them, the internet is a place where if you say something, some people will actually believe it regardless of it being false.

Because let's look at it this way via an example.

You would see somebody doing something that might be wrong or something that you could seriously hate, but would it really be necessary to act as the Executioners axe when you wouldn't be involved yourself in this?

I get that people sometimes want to do something in which they think is right, but doing things such as exposing, most of the time you will end up doing the exact thing that you are trying to stop.

Calling somebody out on something is completely fine, but it really shouldn't go much further than that.

 

This is just my personal view on it, so please forgive me if I said things that are inaccurate.

[ShadowSJG 62]

14 minutes ago, Yamet said:

As long as you provide proof of them being a bigot and don't go too far (i.e doxx him and the like), I don't see why not.

Here is racist example. Ben shapiro said this:

  3 hours ago, ShadowSJG said:

Israelis like to build. Arabs like to bomb crap and live in open sewage. This is not a difficult issue. #settlementsrock

And this guy said this:

THat first one was just him pointing out the cultural differences. In Saudi Arabia, that is one of the countries that has slavery and where women are treated terribly. He probably should have pointed out that there are some good things about Saudi Arabia, but if you are offended by that tweet, then you clearly didn't know the context already and need to get educated on it.
 

My response:

Shapiro was talking about Israel and Palestine. Saudi has nothing to do with this.  It's deliberate obfuscation. They know what he said was racist,  But they've already decided that Ben Shapiro isn't racist.  so nothing will convince them otherwise. The "I was talking about their culture I mean I was taken out of context" is blatantly someone tying themselves into knots to defend the indefensible. nowhere does Ben Shapiro say it's Palestinian or Arabic culture to do those things, because it isn't. Not all Arabs are from Saudi.

[GrimGrimoire 4,970]

I dunno. Seems like a dangerous game to me. I mean are they an actual racist or bigot, or did they just say stuff people disagree with. Just about anything that come out of someones mouth these days is offensive to somebody, and if you happen to mention a color you can tack on bigotry to that apparent crime.

If someone is a bigot, I feel they will work themselves out of public acceptance without any help from somebody pointing at them talking about how all of a countries problems mainly stem from them making offensive slurs or vulgar comments. I do not think racism should be tolerated, but there is a big leap between tolerating something and then trying to crusade against freedom of speech, expression and thought. If you are trying to stifle and censor everyone and everything in every way, we might as well sew all of our mouths shut that way no words can be spoken, and no offense can be taken.

[Cwanky 17,484]

This is a very dicey and complex issue with no solid answers. On a whole, forums, unless they are political in nature, should avoid taking ideological stances and sides. At the same time hateful rhetoric and harmful extremist views should be tolerated like all other views, but to a limited and controlled extent. 

My general rule is "racist" or "prejudiced" rhetoric can and should be tolerated, so as long as their rhetoric doesn't lead to promoting abuse and harm of others. Our forum most definitely does NOT tolerate promotion of crime, suicide or rape, so why should we promote ideas of harming or hating others? Discussion of these ideas is fine in a general setting, but by their nature many of them are toxic and harmful. Thus they should be more restricted and limited.

The "brony" or MLP fandom rightfully complains about harassment and abuse from haters outside, and we have seen the tragic consequences that can occur when abuse happens. Why should the same standard not be applied for discussion of prejudice and race? Bear in mind we also tend to ban Nazi symbols on the site, even when they are used ironically, sarcastically, and in a manner not promoting Nazism.

[ShadOBabe 18,988]

Words, thoughts, and other intangibles shouldn’t be banned. Just let people say whatever they like. Within reason of course. Yelling “bomb” in an airport when there’s not one should still get you arrested.

And on the flip side, if what comes out of their mouth makes others avoid them, then that is the risk they took.

But going out of your way to hurt or deface someone who said a nasty thing makes YOU nasty as well. Be better than the people you dislike.

Edited April 5, 2018 by ShadOBabe