My recent appalling behaviour on this list.

My recent appalling behaviour on this list.

[John Darrington]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2449 bytes --]

Occasionally one makes mistakes.  On this occasion I have made an
enormous one.   I hope this post will go some small way to put it
right and explain how it came about.  I don't seek to excuse anything
I said or did.

The entire ugly thread started last week when I replied to this
message from ng0:

 https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2017-03/msg00482.html

Unfortunately, I replied having read only ng0's postscript and not the
context in which it was written.

I erroneously thought ng0 was telling us that one should ALWAYS use
singular-they when referring to ANY indefinite individual in the third
person.  It never occured to me (as is obvious when I now read it
properly) that this was a request from ng0 to refer to themselves that
way.  I assumed the context was some patch to the Guix user-manual.
I did not read the mail properly and I shouted off before I was in
possession of the facts.

In my mistaken belief that ng0 was trying to impose upon the world new
rules of English grammar, I considered this to be an assault on
freedom of speech.   I told ng0 I would refuse to comply, having
completely misunderstood (and failed to clarify) the request.

Ng0's angry response, I attributed to wounded pride, an over-inflated
ego and a childish temperament on ng0's part.   I now see that this was
totally unfounded.  Under the circumstances, ng0 had every right to
feel extremely insulted and very angry at what I said.   The people who
sprang to his defence are commendable.

In the very long flame-war which followed I thought I was acting in
the interests of freedom of speech (and saving the English language at
the same time).  Had I taken the time to check the facts before
opening my mouth, this entire unpleasant episode would have been
avoided.  I did not do so, and that was inexcusable. 

I apologise to ng0 without reservation.

If I ever have cause to discuss ng0 in the third person, I will of course
do so using their pronoun of choice.

I apologise too, to the rest of this list for wasting time and resources,
on a completely unnecessary flame-war, which could have been avoided
if only I had fully read a post before replying.

J'

-- 
Avoid eavesdropping.  Send strong encrypted email.
PGP Public key ID: 1024D/2DE827B3 
fingerprint = 8797 A26D 0854 2EAB 0285  A290 8A67 719C 2DE8 27B3
See http://sks-keyservers.net or any PGP keyserver for public key.


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

Re: My recent appalling behaviour on this list.

[Catonano]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2741 bytes --]

John,

2017-03-23 6:46 GMT+01:00 John Darrington <john@darrington.wattle.id.au>:

>
> In my mistaken belief that ng0 was trying to impose upon the world new
> rules of English grammar, I considered this to be an assault on
> freedom of speech.   I told ng0 I would refuse to comply, having
> completely misunderstood (and failed to clarify) the request.
>
> Ng0's angry response, I attributed to wounded pride, an over-inflated
> ego and a childish temperament on ng0's part.   I now see that this was
> totally unfounded.  Under the circumstances, ng0 had every right to
> feel extremely insulted and very angry at what I said.   The people who
> sprang to his defence are commendable.
>
>
[...]


I apologise to ng0 without reservation.
>

as far as I'm concerned, I appreciate the apology and the clarification.

Admittedly, I also had misunderstood your motivations. Knowing that I was
wrong about those is a relief.

In this regard, I'd like to point out that you observed how these gender
based objections are often raised by male cisgender people about
mislabeling transgender women but not as often by cisgender women about
mislabeling transgender men.

Was that just an unfortunate rhetoric tool ?

Or did you already run in such clashes in the past, maybe in different
communities ?

If it was a rhetoric accident, then ok

But if you already run into this this kind of misunderstanding before, my
suggestion is to go to those people and clarify your motivation to them too

In fact, mistaking your motivations for political ones can turn out to be
bitter to lgbt people.

Some say that this could hurt software projects in keeping some people
away, but I prefer to focus on feelings and moods.

Life is what it is, there's no need to let badly formulated sentences to
leave back more sour than it is necessary

If I ever have cause to discuss ng0 in the third person, I will of course
> do so using their pronoun of choice.
>

Please, remember not offering alternative views when ng0 asks people to use
the singular they/them for them ;-)


>
> I apologise too, to the rest of this list for wasting time and resources,
> on a completely unnecessary flame-war, which could have been avoided
> if only I had fully read a post before replying.
>

The good part of this is that the community as a whole had an opportunity
to elaborate the issue and some important points were made in the process.

The appropriateness of the discussion for the mailing list, the invitation
to read about the subject, the statement of priorities for this project.

I want to thank Ludo and Ricardo. Their position is not easy, managing
conflicts is a thankless job, probably more so than reviewing patches ;-)

But in my view they did the right thing.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3821 bytes --]

Gender politics

[Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer]

Catonano <catonano@gmail.com> writes:

> [...]
> In this regard, I'd like to point out that you observed how these
> gender based objections are often raised by male cisgender people
> about mislabeling transgender women but not as often by cisgender
> women about mislabeling transgender men.
> [...]

I've only very briefly skimmed some parts of the original thread and am
not interested in it per se, but since the word "cisgender" has come up
I'd like to raise a certain concern.

Many ideals put forth in contemporary mainstream leftist discourse in
relation to transgender politics, such as the concept of "gender
identity" and in particular "cisgender" (or at least, particular
interpretations of these words) are in fact found to be regressive and
harmful by many women (and some men) who feel strongly about liberation
from systems of male supremacy.

It is a relatively involved topic, in which some extreme emotions and
enmity tend to surface, so I'll try to avoid talking about it as much as
possible on this ML.  I will give a brief explanation of the problem
with "cisgender" as a concrete example, name a few authors and activists
who have elaborated on the perspective I'm speaking of so anyone
interested can read up, and provide a trivial data point on the topic.

The concept of "cisgender" normalizes male people's identification with
maleness.  In fact, a male person actively identifying with maleness
(rather than merely acknowledging their sexual anatomy as an arbitrary
medical aspect of their body, which grants them privileges in society
due to a system of sexism) is likely to be doing so as part of a male
supremacist mindset, akin to how a white person actively identifying
with whiteness (rather than merely acknowledging their skin pigmentation
as an arbitrary medical aspect of their body, which grants them
privileges in society due to a system of racism) is likely to be doing
so as part of a white supremacist mindset.

Authors and activists who have criticized recent turns in mainstream
leftist politics with regard to transgender politics, whose works will
help understand this position, include: Julie Bindel, Meghan E. Murphy,
Penny White, Sarah Ditum, Glosswitch, Claire Heuchan (Sister Outrider),
Miranda Yardley, Lierre Keith, Sheila Jeffreys, Magdalen Berns, and in
part Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie.  Also, the Women's Liberation Front.

Understanding basic (radical) feminist social analysis and ideology
should be a great help in understanding the position as well, if not in
fact being a prerequisite to understanding the on-topic works of the
above listed people.  Standard, classical literature on radical feminism
can be found at http://radfem.org/.  I can vouch for the works of Andrea
Dworkin in particular, all of which are available for free in PDF format
at the linked website.  (Side-note: "radical feminism" does not mean
"extremist feminism" or "militant feminism", it refers to a specific
group of feminist ideologies which are more radical [as in "going to the
roots"] in their analysis and ideals than some others.)

Lastly, a trivial data point about possible effects of inclusivity or
exclusivity, should our Code of Conduct mandate obeying a certain
position on this ideological split: using a social media account with a
few hundred followers consisting primarily of women who feel strongly
about women's liberation including the mentioned topic, I've run a poll
asking women how willing they would be to contribute to a project whose
code of conduct disallows the use of sex-based pronouns for people who
disidentify with them (i.e. they may use "she" or "they", but not "he",
for a male person who does not identify as a man); the outcome was as
follows:

Votes: 61

- 48% Would "never" contribute to such a project
- 37% "Depends but rather not"
- 8% "Depends but probably yes"
- 7% "Sure"

I can provide a link to the poll in private upon request, as I've
preemptively began dissociating the social media account in question
from my personal identity after some minor e-stalking incidents.

I'm also happy to provide further elaborations on the topic in private.
However, I will not debate it in private and especially not on the ML.
("Debate" meaning an exchange with a party that already has their mind
made up on the topic and wishes to change others'.  I wish to debate it
only on public forums dedicated to the topic.)

- - -

As for what my concrete proposal is in dealing with this issue: force
neutrality.  If you ban language that invalidates male-born people's
self-identification as women (such as through use of 'he'), also ban
language that validates it, forcing use of gender agnostic language
instead (such as singular 'they').

It's far from perfect, but I think it's the least bad thing that can be
done if you wish to be inclusive of all women and other people who feel
strongly about liberation from male supremacy.

Sorry about touching such a difficult topic,
Taylan

Re: Gender politics

[ng0]

Just a few things:

1. We were done with this topic. For real. Don't throw gasoline at the
fire.

2. Looking at the past commits of your taylanub.github.io blog adds
just to what I thought when I read your very long reply.

3. You could've just written the last paragraph, that you agree with
neutral.. but that wouldn't add up to your views you moved 21 days ago
somewhere else.

So everybody.. please stop pushing this topic. If you keep pushing it
there's reason to rethink the outcome whole topic. If that's your goal,
please keep pushing and you'll see where it leads.

Staying on-topic

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hello Taylan,

This is guix-devel and this discussion is off-topic.  Furthermore:

taylanbayirli@gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich "Bayırlı/Kammer") skribis:

> Lastly, a trivial data point about possible effects of inclusivity or
> exclusivity, should our Code of Conduct mandate obeying a certain
> position on this ideological split: [...] I've run a poll
> asking women how willing they would be to contribute to a project whose
> code of conduct disallows the use of sex-based pronouns

This is obviously far from the reality of the project’s code of conduct:

  https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/CODE-OF-CONDUCT

So please let’s stop it and get back on topic.

Thanks in advance,
Ludo’.

Re: Staying on-topic

[Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer]

ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> Hello Taylan,
>
> This is guix-devel and this discussion is off-topic.

Just to be clear: should Code of Conduct related discussions happen on
guix-devel or some other place?  I assumed guix-devel was the place.

> Furthermore:
>
> taylanbayirli@gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich "Bayırlı/Kammer") skribis:
>
>> Lastly, a trivial data point about possible effects of inclusivity or
>> exclusivity, should our Code of Conduct mandate obeying a certain
>> position on this ideological split: [...] I've run a poll asking
>> women how willing they would be to contribute to a project whose code
>> of conduct disallows the use of sex-based pronouns
>
> This is obviously far from the reality of the project’s code of conduct:
>
>   https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/tree/CODE-OF-CONDUCT

Sorry, I think there's a misunderstanding:

The COC rightfully says that harassment based on gender identity is
unacceptable.  And "the use of sex-based pronouns *for people who
disidentify with them*" (emphasized part is important; was truncated
where you quoted me), otherwise called "misgendering", is often
experienced as harassment.  So as I understand the COC, it does in fact
disallow the use of sex-based pronouns for people who disidentify with
them.

That's why I was worrying.  I think it's fine to ban misgendering, on
the condition that, should a female-born person feel insulted at the use
of feminine pronouns for a male-born person, that too should be banned,
effectively forcing neutral pronouns so the project takes no sides.

I hope this clarifies what I meant.  It's effectively all I wanted to
say; the intention of the longer mail was to clarify the background of
the position, so people don't get the misconception that the issue is
neatly split between "tolerant people" and "intolerant people".

Taylan

Re: Staying on-topic

[Christopher Allan Webber]

Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer writes:

> That's why I was worrying.  I think it's fine to ban misgendering, on
> the condition that, should a female-born person feel insulted at the use
> of feminine pronouns for a male-born person, that too should be banned,
> effectively forcing neutral pronouns so the project takes no sides.

The Code of Conduct's reflection of gendering, and how it applies to
(mis)gendering is referring to this type of thing:

  https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Transphobia&oldid=773143601#Misgendering_and_exclusion

I think the code of conduct is pretty clear about it:

  We are committed to making participation in this project a
  harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of
  [...] gender, gender identity and expression [...]

"Gender identity and expression" is pretty clear: trans-exclusionary
behavior doesn't belong here.

It's very simple: respect peoples' preferred pronouns and *drop this
subject*.  This topic is over, and that's been signaled as such from the
maintainers and many other people in this community.  Please don't
reopen it.

Re: Staying on-topic

[Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer]

Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org> writes:

> Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer writes:
>
>> That's why I was worrying.  I think it's fine to ban misgendering, on
>> the condition that, should a female-born person feel insulted at the use
>> of feminine pronouns for a male-born person, that too should be banned,
>> effectively forcing neutral pronouns so the project takes no sides.
>
> The Code of Conduct's reflection of gendering, and how it applies to
> (mis)gendering is referring to this type of thing:
>
>   https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Transphobia&oldid=773143601#Misgendering_and_exclusion
>
> I think the code of conduct is pretty clear about it:
>
>   We are committed to making participation in this project a
>   harassment-free experience for everyone, regardless of
>   [...] gender, gender identity and expression [...]
>
> "Gender identity and expression" is pretty clear: trans-exclusionary
> behavior doesn't belong here.
>
> It's very simple: respect peoples' preferred pronouns and *drop this
> subject*.  This topic is over, and that's been signaled as such from
> the maintainers and many other people in this community.  Please don't
> reopen it.

If the project takes this ideological side, then it effectively excludes
some women who find this to be sexist.

Are the Guix maintainers fine with that?

Taylan

Re: Staying on-topic

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi Taylan,

taylanbayirli@gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich "Bayırlı/Kammer") skribis:

> If the project takes this ideological side, then it effectively excludes
> some women who find this to be sexist.

The code of conduct is here because “we pledge to respect all people who
contribute”; that’s all it’s about, period.  It is *explicitly* not
about excluding anyone because of their gender.

Discussions of the code of conduct should indeed take place here, but
what you’re talking about is simply off-topic: it has nothing to do with
the development of Guix nor with the project’s code of conduct.

Please, take this discussion elsewhere.

Thanks in advance,
Ludo’.