First Admendment - Freedom of Speech

[Beauty]

Hi,

I'm sorry I thought I'd said it in first line of my post, but I guess I wasn't too clear. Since two people asked I think there could be more who have the same question.

I changed the M word to "pleasuring yourself" and as I always do, I notify user of the change.

Beauty

[Jamie Ann]

No crossdressing conference, forum, or anything else more encompassing than a particular thread is meant solely for support. That is a legitimate objective, but it is not the whole ball of wax. There are other legitimate CDing topics, too. Arguably, some of the areas of this forum could be cut, because they are not about CDing — in any of its aspects. But that is a different issue.

A few of the statements above must be addressed.

I am well aware of the fact that there is censorship here. Posts will get moved to Mordor that are written by those who are not interested in finding better ways of communicating. There is a reason that many of us do not have access to Mordor.

That is an interesting admission, but it does not address the question it supposedly was tackling. When a post is moved to Mordor (which does not occur by majority vote), this largely determines the flow of communication. Mordor seems to be for the board’s second-class citizens—a sort of purgatory for those wishing to discuss certain issues that are in fact quite central to the real experience of real CD’s.

There is another kind of censorship being attempted here. An example is that any time someone posts a religious post we have those who rudely jump in....

Oh how awful! More seriously, rudeness may be in the eye of the beholder. If someone says, “God hates gays!” it stands to reason that some crossdressers might jump in with a differing point of view. I do not see that as a problem. Such a response would be relevant to the experience of many crossdressers.

There are those here who are threatened by the opinions others have that don't align with theirs, and would like to control any input contrary to what they believe....

Yes, that is the essence of the post that began this thread. Needless to add, only the monitors have any control over anyone else’s input.

This is not a censorship issue as much as it is a control issue.... If you can not learn how to post your opinions in such a way that it keeps you out of Mordor then that is simply [your own problem] ….

Many of your own posts are quite abrasive. I think it is the opinions themselves, not the artfulness with which they are expressed, which affects where the posts are sent. Your concept of “control” would be difficult to distinguish from censorship.

I think Mordor is great it allows some to stay here who might otherwise have been booted out.

Beauty partially recues Darlene on this one, but the rest of Darlene’s post suggests that she meant what she seemed to be saying. (See above.) By this logic, racial segregation in the former Union of South Africa was wonderful, because it allowed some people to live in slums who otherwise might have met a different fate. In my judgment, content that has nothing to do with CDing would be grounds for deleting a post, but a particular opinion on a legitimate CDing issue would not.

By homogenizing the allowable discussion topics and points of view, we do more harm than good, even to those seeking nothing beyond support. One is reminded of Amy Bloom’s article in the Atlantic Monthly, “Conservative Men in Conservative Dresses,” in which she gave a generally favorable account of crossdressing, but pointed out a flaw in the logic of the group she observed. The socially conservative men she wrote about liked to say, “We are just like everyone else — except for that one little thing.” By homogenizing their views of reality, they were blinded to what an outsider could easily see. Contrary to the conventional wisdom among that portion of the CD community, “that one little thing” is not wearing a dress; it is a mixture of shame and compulsion. For the SO’s of such men, the objective should be dealing constructively with that shame and compulsion, not getting upset because someone else thinks CD’s should not be denied promotions or who has some other social justice concern. The social conservatives who dominate this forum have blind spots, and could benefit by being more open to others’ opinions.

[Alexandra]

I cannot see the value of, say, a political discussion in a forum on crossdressing.

. . . until one day you get busted for driving while in drag. While in jail you'll kick yourself for not staying up-to-date politically and taken some action earlier to stop our rights from being slowly taken from us, little by little.


Your views UNDERLINE the problems with this forum. Politics is something to be buried, not discussed. Let others deal with it elsewhere. A bit selfish if you ask me.

Folks need to take off the CD-F rose-colored glasses at least once in a while just for the sake of remembering we're still being shafted by the man.

[Loretta Ann]

Many of your own posts are quite abrasive.

I will concur that some of my posts are rather abrasive, I am glad you see them that way as that is how they are intended to be. I take full responsibility for that.

Darlene.

[Estefania]

First thing first... this is not a public forum. It is not founded with taxes or anything like it.

A club? Yeah, I would think it is a lot like a club, since it requires registration and is password protected.

Who gives the admin (Beauty) the right to censor whatever she thinks convenient to censor? The owners of the site. They make the rules for the place. I'm sure they be open to suggestions, from not forced to take any of them.

Gaby

[Danielle La Belle]

May I point out:

"One woman's trash, another woman's treasure."

What one finds offensive, another may not. It has still not been suggested as to how this can be safely and reasonably defined? With the exception of, "it's my sandbox, if you don't like it, go home," I have not seen anyone suggest even in a remote way, a fair solution to choosing the words and phrases for the "no-no" list. Something my dear Mother, age 87, invented for me as a child.

Hugs

Danielle Marie....

[Danielle La Belle]

I just heard a popular phrase on televison.

"You suck," the actor shouted. Now, what do you think that means?

We hear it all the time. Can we use such a two word phrase or is it too sexual? How do I know?

Hmmmmm?

Hugs

Danielle Marie

[Alexandra]

this is not a public forum.

Ahem, its not? Look at the top of your screen on the left. It says its a "friendly place for all". The KEY words in that phrase is "for all".

There comes a time after the discovery of secret sections and secret societies where one begins to ponder the accuracy of . . . "for all?"

Yes, you're correct. The owners can make any rule they want -- but by doing so they risk the health of their forum. The question you gotta ask is this: will enough people still come here if it becomes a choir?

[Beauty]

Hi,

"... a place for all" is not being used the way you've implied it to reinforce your point. It is not meant to be taken the way you used it. "A Friendly Place For All" is an open acceptance statement to let everyone know that they are welcome in a world where everyone else excludes them. It's more for the person who needs acceptance, when there seems to be none anywhere. It does not cover details of every given situation. What you're talking about is taking apart Jamaica's campaign "Come to Jamaica"

Also I do not think it's fair to take apart Gaby's words to try to make a point that's not cut and dry, unlike her statement that this is not a public forum. She said it's not owned by the goverment. It's privately owned and she's right. We do our best to be fair and that's all we can do. You do not have the right to free experession here, you have to right to stay a member if you respect that we use our own discretion to decide what will be removed or edited.

We accept that we may lose members because of rules we impose and that's a sorrowful realization when you have rules. If people decide to leave and this place becomes a wasteland, then it served it's purpose for it's time. This is not a place we want to keep open forever if no one has any use for it.

Regardless, what Gaby said is still valid and "...a place for all" was meant to be taken the way I clarified above. If you'd like to continue this debate please create a thread in Mordor. This topic is borderline Mordor enough. Any deviation for the topic will most likely be moved there going forward as this thread is the complete opposite of the reason we have a support forum.

Beauty

[Estefania]

Different words can mean very different things, depending on the context they are used. I can really insult somebody using only "lady-like" words, while at the same time, in the right context, I can praise somebody with words that could be taken as an insult in a different context. That's why there is a human in charge of deciding what has to go and what can stay. Because she can understand that difference. And she has already said that she will notify the author of the post when she decides to remove some posting/change a word, so the author can justify her use of the word, if that was the case.

It is not about a list of words. It is about the right that the owners of the site have to decide what will be allowed and what will not be allowed. It is not anti-constitutional. It is not against the law. Again, this is a private forum, and even though nobody is asking anybody to leave, we all are asked to follow the rules of the place. The "First Ammendment" doesn't apply here.

Alexandra, yes, Beauty got the exact meaning of my words. It is not a government funded (public) or owned site. It is a private club. And like in real life, even among people who have things in common, there is discent and there are differences. But staying within topic, that discent and those differences can be expressed in a way that is allowed by the rules of the place.

Gaby

[Jamie Ann]

It is not about a list of words. It is about the right that the owners of the site have to decide what will be allowed and what will not be allowed. It is not anti-constitutional. It is not against the law. Again, this is a private forum, and even though nobody is asking anybody to leave, we all are asked to follow the rules of the place. The "First Ammendment" doesn't apply here.

Gaby

Number one, you are right. Number two, you are not addressing anything that was in dispute. No one was debating the Constitution or anyone else’s legal rights. By taking that narrow legalistic tack, you are avoiding the more significant issue of what would make this a more appealing and valuable forum.

If the slant of this forum, intentionally or otherwise, is toward socially conservative CD’s, whose main issues derive from their psychological discomfort about wearing feminine clothing, then the appeal of the site could be enhanced by recognizing this group as legitimate, but also permitting other parts of the CD community to debate their concerns. If that were the policy, the value of this site would be enhanced, in my judgment, even for the first group. Facing reality is better than putting one’s head in the sand. If CD’s and SO’s are striving for a better understanding, honesty is a top priority. If would be best for John/Joan to tell his/her SO, “The TG population is diverse, as you can plainly see, but you and I are two individual people, not representatives of our categories, and I am willing to work with you to achieve an understanding.”

As for the choice of language, I agree with you that words have to be evaluated in context.

[Jamie Ann]

I just heard a popular phrase on televison. "You suck," the actor shouted. Now, what do you think that means?

Well, it probably was not intended as social support....

I think the general understanding in the entertainment industry is that gratuitous sex or violence is more objectionable than the same words or events when there is some reason or cause. If the actor in your example shouted, “You make me upset!” that might mean the same thing, but it would not be as credible to the viewer — it would suggest rules imposed by the network management for reasons other than realism.

[Alexandra]

It is a private club.

ding!

[Lorna]

I have to go with the mods on this one. And I think that the concept of the Mordor thread is in fact beneficial to all of us. Each one of us has the choice as to whether or not we want to participate. We can choose to have access to the Mordor thread, or we can choose not to. Having the freedom of choice is one of the greatest freedoms of all.

As for whether this is a public or a private forum, I have to agree with Gaby. As much as I will defend a person’s First Amendment rights to death, I know that within an internet message board, the rules change, much like they do when you enter someone's home. There's a certain way to conduct yourself, and certain things you just don't say or do.

Now we may have every Constitutional right to say the F word or start preaching hateful speech, but by that same token the homeowners have every right to throw us out.

However, I agree with Alexandra that the life of a CD about more than just shopping trips and fun nights out. There are a lot of political issues that do affect us directly or indirectly that many of us do like to address and discuss. But is Mordor under any danger of dying out? I think not!

Those of us who don’t want to discuss politics don’t have to have it shoved down their throats, and those of us who do choose to partake will always have access to it.

[Beauty]

You rock Lorna.