But seriously, for the sake of ending this horse shit, we can agree to disagree about whether or not there is any significance to the term "manland". We can agree to disagree on whether or not using gender neutral language makes people feel more included. We can even agree to disagree on whether queer people are worth trying to include for all the islandwalking fucks I give right now. I am really tired, as demonstrated by my forgetting that creatures have power and toughness, and can't even keep up with this shitstorm. I'm chillaxing and going to bed.
Card/Deck Creature lands
- Thread starter Eric Chan
- Start date
Have you read any articles on feminism? Check out everydayfeminism.com if you haven't. Literally every last article is meant to be educational and is aimed at people who disagree with or don't understand a certain point/topic. It isn't the circlejerk people think it is. If anything its a group of people trying to educate themselves and each other by sharing and understanding each other's stories and trying to discover their own prejudices. If anything we spend almost all of our "sjw" time debating with people and each other over human rights issues. We challenge each other plenty. It feels a lot like constantly being in a philosophy class. I will admit I was over a year into this before I realized how much hate I had for disabled people. I've honestly gone through a few cycles of "ew, that isn't my worldview at all" to "ugh the logic is so flawless" to "thanks Obama" to "how was I that clueless again?". And that is why I love it. (Some of the articles are going to assume you're already up to speed with issues X and Y to teach you about problem Z, but the point stands.)
There's nothing wrong with getting along well with specific people with specific personalities or whatever. Your words did come off as though you don't want to associate or get along with other people. If that wasn't your intention, that's fine, but from the perspective of someone who knows people who would purge the world of queers if they could, the sentiment comes off as utterly terrifying. Sorry if I did read too much into it though. You don't really seem particularly dangerous.
Most humans in every country right now will need a lot to get to a point where they can accept the LGBT+ community as a group of humans who deserve rights. Mostly they just need to actually listen and try to understand us. Nobody would be afraid that trans women are predators if they actually got to know some. Once you understand them, you stop fearing. Once fear is gone, the tower of anger, hate and suffering topples and our politicians stop trying to impose genital inspections for public bathroom use. The biggest barrier to overcome is the reaction of people to strongly oppose changes to their worldview even when it clearly doesn't hurt them at all. Its the reason everything from marriage equality to women voting to blacks being allowed in schools take so many years. Its something I'm still working on frankly.
No. Sleep is unnecessary! The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak! Pain is just a construct of the mind!
Fine... I'll just go cry in my corner.
I'm not sure everyday feminism is the best bet, I'm a feminist and I sometimes cruise everyday feminism mainly just to frustrate myself. I think I have a similar relationship with salon.com, spiritscience and the music of Lana Del Rey. Reading that feels kinda like sinking into quicksand but instead of sand it's down-blankets.Have you read any articles on feminism? Check out everydayfeminism.com if you haven't. Literally every last article is meant to be educational and is aimed at people who disagree with or don't understand a certain point/topic. It isn't the circlejerk people think it is. If anything its a group of people trying to educate themselves and each other by sharing and understanding each other's stories and trying to discover their own prejudices. If anything we spend almost all of our "sjw" time debating with people and each other over human rights issues. We challenge each other plenty. It feels a lot like constantly being in a philosophy class. I will admit I was over a year into this before I realized how much hate I had for disabled people. I've honestly gone through a few cycles of "ew, that isn't my worldview at all" to "ugh the logic is so flawless" to "thanks Obama" to "how was I that clueless again?". And that is why I love it. (Some of the articles are going to assume you're already up to speed with issues X and Y to teach you about problem Z, but the point stands.)
There's nothing wrong with getting along well with specific people with specific personalities or whatever. Your words did come off as though you don't want to associate or get along with other people. If that wasn't your intention, that's fine, but from the perspective of someone who knows people who would purge the world of queers if they could, the sentiment comes off as utterly terrifying. Sorry if I did read too much into it though. You don't really seem particularly dangerous.
Most humans in every country right now will need a lot to get to a point where they can accept the LGBT+ community as a group of humans who deserve rights. Mostly they just need to actually listen and try to understand us. Nobody would be afraid that trans women are predators if they actually got to know some. Once you understand them, you stop fearing. Once fear is gone, the tower of anger, hate and suffering topples and our politicians stop trying to impose genital inspections for public bathroom use. The biggest barrier to overcome is the reaction of people to strongly oppose changes to their worldview even when it clearly doesn't hurt them at all. Its the reason everything from marriage equality to women voting to blacks being allowed in schools take so many years. Its something I'm still working on frankly.
I've read a lot of articles, including scholarly articles in feminism. I take the good stuff and leave the bad. Feminism is not for me, any explanation I could give stands a very large risk of reseting this whole thing. I'm happy to lurk back to my cave respectfully agreeing to disagree concerning the lands and ideology. But most importantly without breaking riptide labs.
Laz
Developer
I have been following this thread for a couple of days now, but have felt a little hesitant to add my voice to the discussion, as I fear a phone keyboard would do nothing to improve my ability to express myself. Firstly, I feel it important to note how positive the overall discourse has been. Too often moral displeasure leads to moral outrage, and from there, shrill cries for punishment; while the overall tone has come close, the fact that the conversation has remained mostly constructive speaks volumes of the level of consideration that those who have been responding have afforded the issue.
The overall impact of the posts here have certainly resulting in me reflecting upon the issue, where previously I didn't feel there was any harm in a gender-oriented term, I am hardly so linguistically invested that using a term like 'creaturelands' or 'factories' is unthinkable. If using such a term helps to allow one or more people to feel more included, then I will gladly do my best to do so. However, linguistic inertia is a difficult thing, and so what I am asking in return is that if I do slip up, no one will call for my immediate lynching; I refuse to accept that the term 'manland' is so disenfranchising as to warrant such moral outrage. Moral displeasure? Sure, and tell me so, such that I can ensure I am building up a habit which promotes greater inclusiveness, but issues such as this are hardly worth blinding anger.
The overall impact of the posts here have certainly resulting in me reflecting upon the issue, where previously I didn't feel there was any harm in a gender-oriented term, I am hardly so linguistically invested that using a term like 'creaturelands' or 'factories' is unthinkable. If using such a term helps to allow one or more people to feel more included, then I will gladly do my best to do so. However, linguistic inertia is a difficult thing, and so what I am asking in return is that if I do slip up, no one will call for my immediate lynching; I refuse to accept that the term 'manland' is so disenfranchising as to warrant such moral outrage. Moral displeasure? Sure, and tell me so, such that I can ensure I am building up a habit which promotes greater inclusiveness, but issues such as this are hardly worth blinding anger.
This is a great expression
My issue with factory-land is that it evokes thoughts of this card:
It feels like a land that produces creatures. Like a factory.
Foglio-lands, while cool, is a bit unintuitive for those not in the know. I am also unsure on how to pronounce it.
I am happy enough with creature land.
Obligatory discussion on the off-topic:
I love this forum. I feel it is my second home. We all get along so well. I don't want to live in a broken home. <3
It feels like a land that produces creatures. Like a factory.
Foglio-lands, while cool, is a bit unintuitive for those not in the know. I am also unsure on how to pronounce it.
I am happy enough with creature land.
Obligatory discussion on the off-topic:
I love this forum. I feel it is my second home. We all get along so well. I don't want to live in a broken home. <3
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
I kinda dislike creature lands because there's also creatures and lands, so it's a bit confusing, but that word is on the mtgsalvation wiki as an alternative for manland, so I guess it has some pedigree. Notably, Reid Duke used the term creature land in his preview article of Lumbering Falls on the mothership as well. I'll resign myself to creature land then
Its a land creature if they're always a creature and a creature land if they turn into one clearly.
Unblockable panda. Flying vigilance panda. Panda bear (Mishra's Factory, Mutavault)
This one I actually like!
Back on topic (sorry about that), I currently don't play any of them. I am considering them, but I don't think I'd play the full cycle. It feels like favouring some colour combinations over others, because the cycle is so unbalanced. But I hate to break cycles and I don't like custom cards, so... I decided that if I end up running any of them I would probably go for all the green ones (including Treetop Village). This way the best and worst ones get cut and it still feels like there is a full cycle, justified by the fact that green is the colour that interacts the most with lands.
I was gonna respond to a lot more here but as I've said I didn't come here looking for trouble (but apparently you really don't need to when you bring up anything even brushing on social issues in a gaming forum) but I ended up feeling like the more I responded the more it felt like descending a spiral staircase of people talking around the issue or my contributions or talking at some generic complainant. As I've said I'm not into changing the narrative of this forum or really police anyone but I figured I'd call boot man out on the weird language and priorities while we were on the subject.
I don't wana push you guys away but you guys can understand it can be kinda frustrating discussing this stuff with a bunch of people of different education levels and coming at it with their own preconceptions and agendas (as we know all magic players have). But like the last thing I wana do is push you guys further away and create another smirking oh-so-removed quanta in here by extending this folly and encouraging everyone to continue to crack jokes and write this off while forum members, your pals, continue to be coolly frustrated in the background.
And that's the point I'm getting at, they are. at the start of this funny business people had approached me about the way the discussion had been turning in pm and more have piped up since its been going on. And I know I'm the best candidate to stand out and make an ass of myself by being kinda polarizing here because I've tested a lot of my relationships quite a bit over the years and I know where I stand but not everyone is up to that and believe it or not getting along is more important to most lab members than addressing discomfort we experience here from time to time that some are already beyond used to.
I just felt like I should get that off my chest, felt like I was leaving it unresolved to just be content that the debate had cooled. I know it's easy to see us identity warrior pc types as our most ridiculous or suppressive examples but it's really not fair to compare the zaniest progressives to the most normal examples of the status quo. I'm gonna make an effort to be less rough around the edges despite my love of drinking and I'm hoping that my beloved labrats (TM) can try being conscious and compassionate because we all admit it's a goal in this community to be more inclusive right lads?
I don't wana push you guys away but you guys can understand it can be kinda frustrating discussing this stuff with a bunch of people of different education levels and coming at it with their own preconceptions and agendas (as we know all magic players have). But like the last thing I wana do is push you guys further away and create another smirking oh-so-removed quanta in here by extending this folly and encouraging everyone to continue to crack jokes and write this off while forum members, your pals, continue to be coolly frustrated in the background.
And that's the point I'm getting at, they are. at the start of this funny business people had approached me about the way the discussion had been turning in pm and more have piped up since its been going on. And I know I'm the best candidate to stand out and make an ass of myself by being kinda polarizing here because I've tested a lot of my relationships quite a bit over the years and I know where I stand but not everyone is up to that and believe it or not getting along is more important to most lab members than addressing discomfort we experience here from time to time that some are already beyond used to.
I just felt like I should get that off my chest, felt like I was leaving it unresolved to just be content that the debate had cooled. I know it's easy to see us identity warrior pc types as our most ridiculous or suppressive examples but it's really not fair to compare the zaniest progressives to the most normal examples of the status quo. I'm gonna make an effort to be less rough around the edges despite my love of drinking and I'm hoping that my beloved labrats (TM) can try being conscious and compassionate because we all admit it's a goal in this community to be more inclusive right lads?
Thanks for taking point, Lucre. It's a tough job and I couldn't have done it
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
For what it's worth, I don't feel like you owe me an apology or anything Lucre. You're a veritable gold mine when it comes to new expressions for me, and that's awesome (because I really like language), but sometimes I interpret it the wrong way because I'm just not as fluent in English as you are. And sometimes your words trip me over because they are used in another way than in my mother tongue. Like, for example, starting a sentence with "darling" is pretty condescending in Dutch (unless you're adressing your boo), whereas I get the feeling you're just being sassy when you use that word. Anyway, don't worry
I am going to toss my hat into this, but only for a moment. And it is explicitly against what I wanted to do, mind. But, here I am, joining in. Because I feel guilty, for putting all of this burden on Lucre, and because I want all of you to count me among those who have been put off by this debate.
When Lucre proposed renaming manlands, there was, for me, an "I see you" moment. It's a very nice moment, to feel that someone understands how I come at the world, and in this instance, it felt like Lucre had signaled that he shared my perspective that any step towards being more inclusive is an acceptable step if it does not do harm in and of itself, whether or not that step has real, measurable results or not. "Manlands" is not a question of oppression for me, or a question of "social justice" in a truly meaningful sense; it was, for me, literally a question about making the language friendlier in a very easy way, which has no cost to me and potentially some upside for someone else (and certainly I did not expect to start policing anyone over it). Super low-impact, though, for sure.
I reiterate: No, I don't think that homophobia and transphobia and misogyny is all perfectly being maintained by the term "manlands", and I don't think that was ever some express connection being proposed here; it's that it's another small thing that might amount to nothing much, or might amount to something nice, if it was done away with. That's what a lot of steps towards being more inclusive with language are really about: making an effort at something that might improve things for a few people, maybe, and at no real cost.
However, that's something I feel is being strongly hinted at by some of the posts I've seen that are “trying to interrogate social justice and its utility” or whatever over-intellectualized horseshit I'm seeing: this implication that changing the term must serve some explicit purpose (ideally ending the wage gap, apparently) or else it's just “another sign of PC culture going too far, the outrage ever-spiraling, the abysmal tumblr hordes making inroads upon Riptide...” or at least, that's certainly how many of you are making your cases, as if this is part of some wider movement, and you're out to Expose Yet Another Progressive Folly or something. For me though, it was never about Ending Homophobia, Ending Misogyny, or Ending Transphobia, or anything else; I knew, as did everyone else in favor of re-terming, that it was low-impact (Tzenmoroth got at this in earlier posts).
Don't get me wrong: a lot of the early comments, they were perfectly fine and fair. I think all of the directly-on-topic stuff was completely acceptable. Stuff like "it's not about gender", "manlands is nice cuz it rhymes", "the new term would have to be really catchy...", "I don't see the need", etc. All of those were fine things to say. I respect opinions, even if I don't agree with them. That's tolerable - for me. Your opinion is none of my business.
But did it really need to devolve into the slugfest it did over what social justice is about or what it should mean or what's going too far or not going far enough or the dangers of censorship? I'm sure some of you are patting yourselves on the back for a debate well done, but this forum feels off now for me.
Again, don't mistake me here: if you want to poo-poo on the concept of coming up with a new term for "manlands", that's fine.
But it would have been great if we could have just had those opinions expressed and shared without really going into a full-on storm about why social justice is or isn't good, what is or isn't necessary, or whatever. This is not a call-out post, but you who have posted should be smart enough to figure out who was actively engaging in a discussion about manlands, and who was crapping out of their mouths as hard as they could, going off on tangents about the Woes of Modern Culture and What's Appropriate to Social Justice About.
It's surprising to see it handled so casually; I'd think you'd be a bit more courteous to your fellow posters, who might have to deal with some of these issues you're all debating so candidly, who don't come to card game forums to deal with this bullshit that pollutes every other social sphere, who would maybe like to come to a card game forum to feel positive and nerd out, and not have social justice be the main course in today's intellectual roasting. Most hobbyist forums are quite courteous in that regard; if they think a topic might be personal to other posters, they avoid it, because it's supposed to be a place to enjoy and share in a hobby, not potentially spoil someone's time by heavy debate about topics which may have personal meaning to community members.
But a lot of you were apparently quite unaware that you could be stepping on the toes of your community members with this, toes that were never extended in your way and only happened to be here because the person attached to them wanted to nerd out about cards.
I'm sure that unawareness feels nice.
Nerd culture is at its core very toxic because it's about intellectual one-upmanship oftentimes (Lucre got at this point in one of his posts), which makes it prone to this snooty, intelligentsia finger-wagging about "the troubles of censorship" and how "all ideas should be interrogated". I read John Stuart Mill too and I gotta say, I'm generally compelled but I think he'd have had a whole new take after seeing internet forums.
I'm not offended by how this thread has gone. I'm not outraged. But I feel uninvited by it.
And that's all I really have to say.
When Lucre proposed renaming manlands, there was, for me, an "I see you" moment. It's a very nice moment, to feel that someone understands how I come at the world, and in this instance, it felt like Lucre had signaled that he shared my perspective that any step towards being more inclusive is an acceptable step if it does not do harm in and of itself, whether or not that step has real, measurable results or not. "Manlands" is not a question of oppression for me, or a question of "social justice" in a truly meaningful sense; it was, for me, literally a question about making the language friendlier in a very easy way, which has no cost to me and potentially some upside for someone else (and certainly I did not expect to start policing anyone over it). Super low-impact, though, for sure.
I reiterate: No, I don't think that homophobia and transphobia and misogyny is all perfectly being maintained by the term "manlands", and I don't think that was ever some express connection being proposed here; it's that it's another small thing that might amount to nothing much, or might amount to something nice, if it was done away with. That's what a lot of steps towards being more inclusive with language are really about: making an effort at something that might improve things for a few people, maybe, and at no real cost.
However, that's something I feel is being strongly hinted at by some of the posts I've seen that are “trying to interrogate social justice and its utility” or whatever over-intellectualized horseshit I'm seeing: this implication that changing the term must serve some explicit purpose (ideally ending the wage gap, apparently) or else it's just “another sign of PC culture going too far, the outrage ever-spiraling, the abysmal tumblr hordes making inroads upon Riptide...” or at least, that's certainly how many of you are making your cases, as if this is part of some wider movement, and you're out to Expose Yet Another Progressive Folly or something. For me though, it was never about Ending Homophobia, Ending Misogyny, or Ending Transphobia, or anything else; I knew, as did everyone else in favor of re-terming, that it was low-impact (Tzenmoroth got at this in earlier posts).
Don't get me wrong: a lot of the early comments, they were perfectly fine and fair. I think all of the directly-on-topic stuff was completely acceptable. Stuff like "it's not about gender", "manlands is nice cuz it rhymes", "the new term would have to be really catchy...", "I don't see the need", etc. All of those were fine things to say. I respect opinions, even if I don't agree with them. That's tolerable - for me. Your opinion is none of my business.
But did it really need to devolve into the slugfest it did over what social justice is about or what it should mean or what's going too far or not going far enough or the dangers of censorship? I'm sure some of you are patting yourselves on the back for a debate well done, but this forum feels off now for me.
Again, don't mistake me here: if you want to poo-poo on the concept of coming up with a new term for "manlands", that's fine.
But it would have been great if we could have just had those opinions expressed and shared without really going into a full-on storm about why social justice is or isn't good, what is or isn't necessary, or whatever. This is not a call-out post, but you who have posted should be smart enough to figure out who was actively engaging in a discussion about manlands, and who was crapping out of their mouths as hard as they could, going off on tangents about the Woes of Modern Culture and What's Appropriate to Social Justice About.
It's surprising to see it handled so casually; I'd think you'd be a bit more courteous to your fellow posters, who might have to deal with some of these issues you're all debating so candidly, who don't come to card game forums to deal with this bullshit that pollutes every other social sphere, who would maybe like to come to a card game forum to feel positive and nerd out, and not have social justice be the main course in today's intellectual roasting. Most hobbyist forums are quite courteous in that regard; if they think a topic might be personal to other posters, they avoid it, because it's supposed to be a place to enjoy and share in a hobby, not potentially spoil someone's time by heavy debate about topics which may have personal meaning to community members.
But a lot of you were apparently quite unaware that you could be stepping on the toes of your community members with this, toes that were never extended in your way and only happened to be here because the person attached to them wanted to nerd out about cards.
I'm sure that unawareness feels nice.
Nerd culture is at its core very toxic because it's about intellectual one-upmanship oftentimes (Lucre got at this point in one of his posts), which makes it prone to this snooty, intelligentsia finger-wagging about "the troubles of censorship" and how "all ideas should be interrogated". I read John Stuart Mill too and I gotta say, I'm generally compelled but I think he'd have had a whole new take after seeing internet forums.
I'm not offended by how this thread has gone. I'm not outraged. But I feel uninvited by it.
And that's all I really have to say.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
I'm sorry if I made you feel uninvited anywhere RavebornMuse, I don't think that's the intention of any side in this debate. Personally I'm glad RiptideLab is a place where things like this occasionally pop up, because as Lucre says "believe it or not getting along is more important to most lab members than addressing discomfort we experience here from time to time". Yes, this is a heady topic, but I strongly agree with him that it's better to address discomfort than to shut up and play nice (even though I will always try to put it in the nicest words possible, I really don't like a fight, even if it's verbal), and that discomfort obviously extended beyond the word manland. If I am ignorant I want to be enlightened. It's impossible to shake your world view if it doesn't get challenged. Obviously this is an extremely heady topic, but I'm glad people who obviously feel very strong about the topic took the time to argue it out in a civilized manner so I could reassess my beliefs. So no, that unawareness doesn't feel nice :/
I think that several of us were coming at this issue from a more universal perspective outside of Riptide Lab (I was, at least). I say this because it was pointed out early on that this was a larger issue alive on the internet.
I do believe that nobody here would intend to call anyone out on continuing to say “manland.” However, I can easily imagine parts of the internet where this isn’t true, where a nasty flame war begins because someone accuses someone else of being sexist. This is where I believe that certain good-intentioned steps towards being more inclusive could actually be more damaging and counterproductive. If it turns out to be true that the step has no real, measurable results, and a viewer of that flame war perceives this, it could cause the viewer to lose some amount of faith in the seriousness of the cause.
I truly believe in the liberal, progressive agenda when it comes to social issues, and I feel that most of Riptide feels the same. The main dissent I was seeing in this thread (originally, at least) was about the strategic importance of changing the word, objectively, when considering the consequences it might have in the larger, more volatile world outside of Riptide. In places less tolerant than here, it would be inextricably linked to the progressive movement, and there is a potential cost attached. For Riptide specifically, I really don’t think this is a concern.
FWIW, I don't personally have anything against changing the term "manland," and I am happy to use another term if it means that friends on this forum will feel more welcome. I will be calling them pandalands now.
I’m very sorry, Raveborn, if I’ve contributed to making you feel unwelcome. I did not mean to do so, and I apologize.
I am sorry as well, you are one of my favorite posters and my cube design is much inspired by your writing RBM. I do however feel genuine concern about attitudes like “any step towards being more inclusive is an acceptable step if it does not do harm in and of itself,”. And I do not agree about what merits an acceptable cultural loss. I’m not sure how to phrase these concerns in a way that does not come across as offensive or “overly intellectual”. I am giving it my best trying to address this respectfully. I do understand that you come from a place of goodwill, and I agree with most other things you and other riptide warriors have written on this subject. Trying to create an alternative to manland is a-okey in my book (and I initially tried to guide this exploration because I think we can do better than creature-land), trying to replace manland is what I do not agree with. And as Diakonov said we all carry baggage from elsewhere on internet, and for some of us real life. With this in mind, want to repeat that I do not mean any ill with any of my writing even if it might look stingy somehow, I was just trying to share me with you and I apologize if I sometimes look like overly complicated spunk, that's equally part of me as anyone's gender, sex or skin. I can't really escape that, though I can try to soften it.
I understand however if the sort of dominant discourse that should be abided by in everything outside of cubing on here was more specialized than I thought; if that’s the case I will stick to purely cube-related topics from now on. But I kind of hoped that we could carry over the kind of interphilosophical, wacky, explorative, accepting dialogue that is carried on everywhere else on this site. Which in the context of this conversation means that I believed that I could give meaningful, constructive input and critique and share my perspective on a subject I believe can be approached from many different angles.
I understand however if the sort of dominant discourse that should be abided by in everything outside of cubing on here was more specialized than I thought; if that’s the case I will stick to purely cube-related topics from now on. But I kind of hoped that we could carry over the kind of interphilosophical, wacky, explorative, accepting dialogue that is carried on everywhere else on this site. Which in the context of this conversation means that I believed that I could give meaningful, constructive input and critique and share my perspective on a subject I believe can be approached from many different angles.
Lucre said:
Seriously? I'm not even the person who brought up the relationship between overarching issues. It's unclear to me why you single me out in particular. I entered like two pages after the discussion had already started. I responded to someone else's claim that there was necessarily a connection. And I dunno why you think I'm smirking and removed. I am serious and was trying to make myself as clear as possible. I was trying to add some lightness (which probably failed) but the first thing I said in this thread was
me said:
I said when I was diverging from the topic even further as well to make it clear that I wasn't making a specific critique of the primary issue at hand (i.e. what to call creaturelands). You don't have to read my or like my posts if you don't want to, but it seems silly to me that you can start a divergence about what to call lands and that's totally fine but somehow it's not cool for me to diverge a bit more to respond to someone who already delved way further into the topic.
Lucre said:
Allow me to bold one of my previous sentences to perhaps change the emphasis of something I said. I was trying to be clear when I was speaking that I'm not saying the people here are ridiculous or suppressive. Clearly I failed to communicate this.
me said:
To try to explain why I diverged into talking about universities, I was responding to this claim that adjusting language is part and parcel with other things.
Tzenmoroth said:
I'm mostly just disagreeing with this claim. I think adjusting language and other things are more separate issues to consider than united ones. That's all. I did not mean to give the impression that I thought changing language was necessarily wrong.
I am trying, but I can't tell what would count in your mind as being conscious and compassionate (about this set of topics, which I did not bring up or start the next level of divergence into) other than just never substantively disagreeing. I have seen people essentially give this response before, but if that's the case I also expect them to not bring the topic up in the first place. Which is essentially the tacit agreement I'm used to in real life, but one I find disappointing sometimes.
I like that this community is civil, but I also liked that people seemed to feel free to disagree, derail topics, and respect differences in opinion. Inevitably, this may sometimes cause some friction, but I liked it because I like talking to people who don't agree with me. If we're only going to be that open when it comes to discussing magic that's fine since this is primarily a cube forum. It just seems like a bummer to me because I learned something about some people here and I liked reading some people's posts (Grillo, Tzenmoroth, Goblinspy).
Its interesting that you feel like you need to put effort into not saying things that hurt people. I can't even remember the last time I've felt like that. On a related note, as much as people like to say the "sjw"/feminist/LGBT/[insert race/religion] crowd is too irrational and sensitive, people really are impressively rational in what gets them upset even when their behavior can be written off as irrational due to showing emotions. Even if a "flame war" as Diakonov puts it does break out, if you actually try to understand what angered people rather than assuming that anyone you disagree with must be irrational, its amazing how much you can learn. From a strictly philosophical standpoint, the principle of charity, as well as the principle of humanity, are powerful tools for understanding people you disagree with. Honestly, If you can't make someone's argument for them, you don't understand it enough to debate it effectively. You don't seem to be there yet with this issue. You're coming off as not really understanding the other side and dismissing other views as closed minded. At least that's how it sounds when you say that you want us to be open to philosophical, accepting, etc discussion on this after all these pages of doing exactly that.
Honestly, when people insist on using words like manland, it feels the same as insisting on casually using gay as an insult. The similarities include: You mean no harm, you consider it part of who you are, you believe nobody is hurt because you feel nothing, you make some people feel crappy and uncomfortable around you. No, I'm not going to censor you or make you change. I get where you're coming from in that you want to preserve certain aspects of yourself. I'm just helping you understand my thoughts and where I'm coming from, which frankly isn't different than any of the countless debates over cardboard crack this forum has seen. I think we have done well at approaching this issue from a lot of different angles.