Intolerance on BPL [serious thread]

[Franco Darioli]

[just keeping the conversation on track – MK]

[James Marco]

Some language is simply inflammatory or personally degrading. Fine. Free speech and all that. Sexist terms, racist names, homophobic terms, etc are all targeting a class of people, often based on something they really have no control over. But, other words can also be slurs. For example, writing “John Doe is a woman for not toughing it out” is using “woman” as a sexist term. Yet “woman” is descriptive when writing about the physiology of pack fitting. Writing “John Doe is a wimp for not toughing it out” conveys the same meaning with NO sexist overtones. The burden of transgression is on the user of the term and the way he/she uses it. A clear list of slurs, as suggested, will not cover all cases, but is probably a good idea. But, this does NOT mean you will catch everything.

Clearly some form of guideline is needed. I do not agree with letting it stand. As was said, this is effectively a tacit approval of the attitude behind the slur, and by extension, the whole site and all users can be labeled “bigoted.” User censorship is NOT enough. A clear written policy is needed.

[Gabe P]

[keeping this on track – MK]

[Franco Darioli]

NM

[Diane “Piper” Soini]

As someone who used to have a forum on my own website, I decided that my website was my personal Queendom and that there was no principle of freedom of speech in my Queendom. I maintained the right to delete anything, edit anything and ban anyone I wanted. I managed to tamp down what used to be a lot of really hateful stuff about mountain biking that way. Once these hateful mountain bikers who weren’t even locals went away, everything returned to normal (and there were still mountain bikers but they were local, cared about our trails and they were not trying to stir up trouble just to be hateful.) But I didn’t care really that much about growing the audience or making money.

[Gabe P]

Several days ago I made clear to someone here that they had use a racial slur and should delete it immediately. I have since been accused up of being unforgiving, taking myself too seriously, being unpersuasive and more. Meanwhile, I have asked several questions of BPL leadership, such as why they do not allow cuss words, but seem okay with racial slurs. I even cited their own forum rules questioning why the existing rules do not apply to racial slurs and have received no response to those questions. I just wish The term had been taken off some time ago nearer to when the racial slur was first published on this site. My point is that I don’t understand why the BPL “community” is being polled here when this website is a business with an owner and leadership team. What is their role here? Do they not feel a sense of responsibility? Do they only make articles and delete cuss words? They provide to members (I.e., customers) a megaphone (I.e., the forums) and I just believe that doing such a thing, especially nowadays when megaphones likes this are being abused for really nefarious purposes, comes with responsibility.  Consider Twitter, Facebook and The like and how Russian trolls, hate groups and others have brought their divisive messages to the forefront of our society and yet no one seems able to put a stop to it – and I would say this is true precisely because the owners of those companies will not take responsibility for the megaphones that they provide. Am I alone in this belief?

[DAN-Y/FANCEE FEEST]

Read this thread at bplite.com and see how the thread drifted into talk about a current event that had been an issue at the time. The issue talked about ( gangs in USA) was interesting and so I started a thread in a forum that was similar to the “chaff” forum here. The discussion became heated and caused discontentment. The thread was deleted eventually. It happens everywhere. Discontents

http://bplite.com/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=1521&p==Failure%21+V8+Cobalt&sid

[Bruce Tolley]

@ Matt: The draft policy states” “I want other people to see it and respond to it.”

No please, that is the path to the chaos. Daily social media experience as well as research at MIT and Google shows that the most emotive threads, last the longest with multiple posts and larger number of user engagement.

Please delete a post with offensive language as soon as it is flagged and let the poster know, and allow them to edit and repost.

BTW I thought the policy was that tone of all posts was supposed to be respectful, courteous, and kind and evangelical about lightweight backpacking.

[AK Granola]

It seems to me that in this particular example, there was pretty rapid condemnation of the use of the racial term in question. The OP apologized, which seemed sincere. Let it stand as an example for all posters that the readers of this forum disapprove of such language. And good to substitute the XXXX  so it’s not searchable. However if no objections had been raised, then time for moderators to step in and speak out.

I find myself a little bit sympathetic to the OP only because I have also put foot in mouth before, offending others without meaning to. In fact, I just learned another word that was in common use when I was a child, is actually a racist term too, “gypped.” I had no idea! I’ll never use it again in everyday speech, and I’m glad someone told me what it meant. Feel free to X it out. The Op is not a hater, just made a mistake.

Allowing prejudiced language to remain without any commentary would drive some people, including me, away from the forum. I come here to relax, learn, be entertained. I won’t spend my free time on a website frequented by hateful, prejudiced people. Fortunately there seem to be few or none here, ime.

[Matthew / BPL]

<p style=”text-align: left;”>Gabe,</p>
Cuss words are easy and beyond offending the more polite members of our crowd have little social implication.

Intolerance is a much more complicated issue.

You mention that the thread you identified has received no response. That is not true at all. That thread (and truthfully, a couple of others) has provoked this conversation as well as an upcoming update/clarification to the forum guidelines. I’ve been in intermittent contact with Ryan (he’s traveling) and we plan to update the guidelines this weekend.

[Matthew / BPL]

I’m going to speak personally for a moment. I’m afraid that some people here might not have a clear idea of how I feel about intolerant speech and attitudes.

I hate intolerance. 

Hate is a word I don’t use much. I don’t casually throw the word around. I hate intolerance. 

My reluctance to remove intolerant speech is in no way meant to condone it. I hate it and personally I think everyone should know that it occurred so that many voices can speak out about it. It is clear from this conversation that the majority of the forum members who have responded to this thread do not agree with me.

BPL will clarify it’s guidelines.

I will moderate intolerant speech differently in the future.

[Gabe P]

Mathew, you wrote: “You mention that the thread you identified has received no response. That is not true at all.”

I meant my questions addressed to BPL leadership have not been answered. I had first tried to connect with BPL staff by contacting the help desk, but got no response. I also emailed the address for forum moderation (I.e.,

mailto:[email protected]) but the email address doesn’t seem to work. I would not have posted my questions on the forums had I known a way to communicate directly with a BPL representatives.

Thanks

[James Marco]

Thank you.

[Kattt]

He apologized, he will not use it again. Now as far as this incident, move on ffs.

[Matthew / BPL]

Gabe, I just tested the [email protected] alias and did not receive an email. I agree that it appears to be down. I’ve alerted BPL staff via Slack.

[JCH]

I am intrigued by this discussion, and was totally unaware of the thread that spurred this discussion, so I had to look it up.

Matthew – since you asked, here his my take:  Honestly, I’m a little surprised at all the commotion.  The “offending post” was from a long time member and well respected BPL’er whose character and good intentions have been obvious (to me at least) for some time…his posts have always been valuable, thoughtful, and he has shown a genuine concern for others and a desire to help.

A word was used that the poster seemed to be genuinely unaware was offensive….these things happen. Older folks (especially those of us who were raised in the South) heard and were taught things back in the day that would never be said, taught or tolerated today.  Further, the poster offered a seemingly genuine apology for his ignorance of the word’s interpretation in modern society.

To me that should be the end of the story.  If someone repeatedly posts offensive, aggressive or disrespectful things then yes, obviously, it must be addressed and I suspect that Reddit’s rules and procedures would be good ones to emulate.  For me, this particular event does’t seem to even come close to requiring intervention…rather the poster should be commended for his contrition and civility.

[Monte Masterson]

What makes me feel so bad about the word I used is the fact that I so greatly admire the Japanese people. I don’t want to make any excuses and I’ll own up to my mistake, yet I genuinely wasn’t aware the term was offensive. As you can see by the link Matthew provided, there are literally hundreds of terms which aren’t acceptable. I’m glad he posted the link because it’s enlightening to people like me who aren’t so hip about such things. The word “Brits” is often used to describe the British and I thought the deleted term I used was merely short for Nipponese.

I became all the more enamored with the Japanese during the 2018 World Cup. The Japan vs Belgium matchup in the knockout round was hands down the best game of the tournament. The Belgians were heavily favored to win with their superior size and lineup of superstars. Japan on the other hand were the smallest players of any team in the knockout round, not ranked very high and with few big stars. Yet they had the Belgians down 2-0 until about two thirds though the match. The Belgians were able to use their superior size and skill to eventually win, but only with a major effort and some luck. When Kagawa makes the spike at 0:26 to put the Japanese team up 2-0, me and a couple of billion other viewers about hit the floor. I was ready to go out and buy a Japanese football jersey right then.

 

 

[Gabe P]

Monte, mistakes happen and you’ve been clear that this was an accident. I only want the word removed from BPL. To me, it does not belong on the site. I wish I’d been able to make that clear through direct communication with BPL leadership. I’m so sorry this accident has become so public. If BPL staff do respond to me directly at some point, I will ask them how I can, in the future, make an appeal to them with more grace. Thank you Sir

[Jerry Adams]

That word is still there, and then XXX used in in parentheses so that’s there too

That’s pretty simple to not allow slur words

The word in question is not as common as some other slur words but the fact that someone mentioned it is good enough.  Post WWII is was used offensively as almost anyone alive then in the U.S. would know.  In my experience.

 

[W I S N E R !]

I think much of the issue at hand has to do with BPL’s somewhat haphazard moderation history.  Deleting a four letter word used in casual conversation for fear of “the children” seeing it yet leaving up a racial slur, even if it is in the spirit of trying to create a “teachable moment”, is somewhat baffling. It can (and likely will, as we can see here) be construed as BPL finding a simple four letter cuss word somehow more offensive than a racial slur, regardless of intent.

If I were making my money running a business and a brand based upon sharing backpacking information, I’d likely delete the comments and warn the poster about anything questionable pretty quickly.  I’d encourage people to have there First Amendment debates and teachable moments somewhere else. And then we would quickly move on.  And this being my business and my livelihood, I wouldn’t ask for permission or advice.

But that’s me.

On the user end, I’ve participated in a ton of ridiculous debate on Chaff and I’ve enjoyed it.  But on the business end, it strikes me that allowing all the non-backpacking political talk has probably been far more trouble than it’s worth.  Maybe I’m wrong.  But if at any point throughout the years BPL pulled the plug on Chaff I would’ve totally understood and wouldn’t have said a thing.

[JCH]

I’ve never once looked at Chaff…not something I’m interested in.  I prefer to think of all BPL’ers as nice people who don’t harbor ugly biases, prejudices or edge-case political views.  I know that’s not true, but it makes for better BACKPACKING conversations :)

I would support the removal of any political, religious or otherwise non-backpacking/outdoors/nature discussion forums on this site.

Let’s just talk Backpacking Light y’all.

[Matthew / BPL]

FYI all instances of the word have been removed from the thread.

[Matthew / BPL]

Monte,

I want to apologize publicly for how I handled the thread and this thread as well. I definitely didn’t intend for you to get any attention about this. I don’t think you intended any harm or offense.

Also, just so you know: your post is not the sole focus of this conversation about tolerance. We have been discussing the topic for a while related to other posts. You didn’t cause this.

[Jerry Adams]

I don’t think anyone has anything to apologize for : )

Just my opinion

[Jacob]

Is censorship a solution to bigotry?

I’ve tried to find sources for arguments/ideas in favor of censoring bigotry. So far I’ve found Plato and Joel Feinberg. I’ve seen some news editorials by professors, but I can’t find any of their papers or books. Even in America with the first amendment we have FCC regulations for TV and radio, so there must have been arguments made in favor of censorship in the 19th and 20th centuries…

On the flip side its easy to find reasons not to censor bigotry via google.
http://media.okstate.edu/faculty/jsenat/censorship/philosophers.html
John Milton, “Areopagitica” (1644)
John Locke, “A Letter Concerning Toleration” (1689)
Alexis de Tocqueville, “Democracy in America” (1835)
John Stuart Mill, “On Liberty” (1859)

Interestingly, a few of the above, while explaining that you shouldn’t censor the most heinous of speech, made exceptions for peoples of different races; “…we may leave out of consideration those backward states of society in which the race itself may be considered as in its nonage. Despotism is a legitimate mode of government in dealing with barbarians, provided the end be their improvement and the means justified by actually effecting that end”-John Stuart Mill “On Liberty”.

This is a concise read of multiple perspectives:
https://www.utm.edu/staff/jfieser/class/160/4-censorship.htm

There are also historical examples.
“In Weimar Germany, insulting communities of faith –– Protestant, Catholic or Jew –– was a punishable offence commanding up to three years’ imprisonment… Leading Nazis such as Joseph Goebbels, Theodor Fritsch and Julius Streicher were all prosecuted for their anti-Semitic utterances. Streicher served two prison sentences.”-Flemming Rose “Words and Deeds” http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2012/04/words-and-deeds/ The takeaway being that the Nazi party formed in a time and place where religious hate speech was censored.

Addressing the thread being discussed specifically and based on my reading of the UTM link above I don’t think there was moral grounds for censorship. Given Feinberg’s criteria, while it jumped out as kind of mean and out of place, the swift apology lowered the magnitude of the offense. Switching to Plato’s reasoning and still focusing on the case being discussed, the apology and concession of wrongdoing sets a good example. Susceptible youth and society as a whole implicitly learns from this that if you use racist slurs you get called out (don’t use slurs) and the correct way to respond is to apologize, admit you were wrong, and accept the shame. Its like a PSA. Leaving it up is not condoning it. The ‘talk it out policy’ is also known as ‘public shaming’. Censorship deprives susceptible youth and society the opportunity to learn these lessons from others’ mistakes, thereby allowing/causing more people to learn these lessons first hand (more people expressing bigotry). If Monte’s original post was meaner/more intentional or had he posted a racist manifesto instead of apologizing and accepting the shame then censorship would not only be justified but recommended by Plato’s reasoning as either would have made it an example of bad behavior.

“Be the change you want to see in the world” -Gandhi
Tattling is not productive in a situation like the one being discussed. When the solution is a thoughtful conversation, then the moderator is in the same position as the user. Gabe, you saw an injustice in the world, asked someone else to deal with it, then complained about how they dealt with it. I understand you believe censorship is the solution, hence your actions. But why not also try to pick up the megaphone and fight the injustice yourself? Instead of scrubbing one slur off the face of the universe you could have silenced a source of slurs. Think about how many other people could have seen this interaction and been positively effected. Maybe your words would have encouraged and empowered other people to stand up and say similar things elsewhere. Maybe you could have caused people to realize that other words and mannerisms they use are similarly offensive. Think about all the people Monte interacts with who may be positively effected by his more sensitive word choice in the future. There is so much more to be gained by taking the time to thoughtfully engage with others than there is by simply telling someone to delete a post like Monte’s, tantamount to telling them to shut-up, while tattling on them.

Addressing the issue of intolerance on the site in general, I have to join the chorus of people saying how posts are censored is a business decision just as much as it is a moral one. To that end having a clear cut list of what not to say, perhaps even automatically enforced by the website, would probably avoid as many user complaints as possible. I think having Chaff is an important part of this, as everyone knows its off topic and thus off topic discussions can get moved there without having to delete them and stop the user interaction taking place, assuming its civil.

[Author]

Posts