TW tags and bad language: A Discussion

[Eglantine]

Yeah, salted_caramel's suggestion sounds good to me: a TW is super-appropriate when someone is sharing something hurtful that was said, or that upset them, so it needs to stay literal. But if it's their own wording it'd be great to change it. However, I definitely see the point that the mods want to leave people's words be as much as possible.

Again, this might be a bunch of overhead but could mods PM posters to ask 'em to change it, perhaps noting in the thread they did so? Actually editing your own post is more of a learning experience -- a lot of us learn by doing -- and keeps people in charge of their own words. I know it might be too much work, just a thought?

Also (this is obviously something that could be happening and I haven't seen) posters could respectfully ask each other to edit out such words, so it isn't just a mod-job.

[CodaSammy]

Eglantine, we tend to steer clear of PMs as we like to keep our modding public and transparent. A PM and a post is also extra work. We could just post in the thread asking the user to change it? It does mean it could stay there quite a long time until the user logs back in, though.

I like what people are saying about the distinction between referring to -ist language and actually using -ist language. I agree that that sounds like a good one, but I'm still just talking for myself and haven't discussed it with the team.

[lilyrae]

I might suggest the following, very similar to salted_caramel's thoughts:

In a case where -ist language is used to describe life experience eg "My ex called me a {SLUR}" then the mods could

(1) Ensure the slur has been given a TW tag for the particular -ism.

(2) If the OP did not use a TW tag, make a public post to remind them to please do so in future.

In a case where -ist language is used as an expression of the poster's own thoughts/feels, eg "Today I did this really {SLUR} thing and now I feel like such a {SLUR}", the mods could do the following:

(1) Ensure the slur is TW tagged not only for the relevant -ism but also as being inappropriate, ie "TW for inappropriate expression of ableist thoughts by the poster."

(2) Make a public post to remind the OP that the way they used those words was inappropriate for this forum, and that even if they TW-tagged it, it was still not okay, and please to find other ways to express themselves in future.

This still leaves the -ist language on the board, but very much warned for and with a public 'please don't do that' below. I personally would find this okay but I absolutely welcome critique as I am not personally affected by ableist language (which seems to be at the core of the present problem as I understand it).

[Susannah]

That works. In addition, why don't we set up a post, which we could refer people to, specifically for discussing problematic language? It could have entries for various terms, nicely laid out with bolding and such, explaining why they're a problem, and discussing possible replacements. Ableist language about mental health and learning disabilities in particular is really embedded into our culture, and even as a disabled person with a fairly good awareness of this issue, I find it really hard to avoid using terms like "stupid". It definitely helps to have alternative words set up, so that you can just slot them into the discussion without having to break off and work it out. So, for instance, instead of saying that the cat was running around and pole-dancing on the table legs like crazy, I say she was doing it like a wild thing. I'm still not sure whether "bonkers" is allowable due to being more silly than anything else, I'd love to be able to discuss that.

I was really struck when a friend of mine referred to someone as "a total turnip", and explained that she has a daughter with a learning disability, she doesn't want her growing up hearing disability-related terms used as insults. I've been wanting a place to discuss good alternative insults for ages - I am quite fond of calling people noodles if they've done something silly, for instance, including myself - but realised that it would get trolled to bits within hours. This forum is the one place I've seen where we could actually do that!

(Apologies for not having a photo of my cat pole-dancing. We're trying, but they all end up a blur. It's as hilarious to watch as it sounds.)

[The_Other_Alice]

We have a great thread about problematic language already, actually! Is that what you were thinking of, or something else? It's not been active in a while, but it's a brilliant thread.

http://friendsofcaptainawkward.com/foru ... f=14&t=597

[Flightless]

I actually loved how it played out in that one thread -- OP received a mod note adding a trigger warning, but by the time I got to the thread, OP had apologized and edited the ableist word out. The mod comment was still there, so if we had seen it pre-edit, we'd know what happened -- and for me, it was a friendly little reminder (I still have trouble with my own childhood colloquial bad-words sometimes so I appreciate the reminders).

[Susannah]

It is indeed an awesome thread! However, it's nineteen pages long. Could we perhaps have a single post, to be written by a mod, kept up to date and stickied, with a list of unacceptable terms and a few suggested alternatives? I'm sure lots of us would be happy to help put it together, and once it's created it shouldn't need much care and feeding.

ETA: Or indeed written by whoever is happy to take care of this. I'm a bit into the thread (amazing how much you can read while on hold to Scottish Power), and Rose Fox sounds like they might like to do this.

[the_oddest_sock]

Huh. I would not personally make the leap from "person used ableist language" to "person has unconsciously betrayed their totes ableist secret thoughts and unconscious values" based on one usage in passing. Over time, yeah sure. But since not everyone has spent time examining the etymology of ability-related terms, not to mention that not everyone has a fluent command of the nuances of English, it seems a bit hasty to go there straight away. I like how it works now, where the problematic part is highlighted by trigger warning it, and the poster is given space to figure out why that keeps happening and what we're seeing that they're missing, without it being this whole value judgement on their moral character. With so many nervous posters (check out the "Finding it hard to post things? You're not alone!" thread to see the anxieties people are dealing with) and with the fact that this is not a space specifically for social justice education/ discussion but rather a refuge for Awkwardeers (who may not be willing or able to grok those kinds of spaces elsewhere), it would be comforting if we didn't start down the path of "you must be THIS educated/ fluent/ lingo-savvy to ride on this rollercoaster". I feel pretty confident that being exposed to the facts of where ableist language et al stems from, in a kind and non-shamey environment such as this, would inspire most people to learn for themselves why it's problematic and work out a relationship with that knowledge in their own time. In the meantime, the trigger warnings will do their thing, so that most* people can participate without fear.

*I say "most" because I'd bet there are already people too afraid of saying something wrong, too afraid of offending anyone or too afraid of being judged as a bad person to post anything at all, even here in Awkwardspace. And enforcing knowledge standards is... not going to help.

[Susannah]

I'm getting the impression that you don't think that ableist insults are that big a deal, and are more worried about the people using the insults being put off posting?

No one's suggesting getting all judgy about the person, just that we take steps to stop this particular behaviour.

[lilyrae]

+1 to Susannah's comment.