I find getting a post that wasn’t in and of itself sexist deleted by reporting it as sexist offensive and irritating.
I don’t even think it was all that great a post but neither do I think it was all that bad a post. It certainly wasn’t worthy of being deleted. Meanwhile Corey still hasn’t fixed the incorrect title of the OP, a correction that I think would be better for the forum than deleting posts over non sexist comments.
I’m sorry, but why do you get to decide that’s irritating but the rest of us get no say in what we consider sexist?
The whole point is that it is not possible to start a company to fake social media accounts without the NSA giving the whole list of fake accounts to US customs.
Actually, I don’t think it is possible to make a fake social account that would pass US customs, point. Social sites like facebook are really, really good at spying on you. They correlate the time and location of your posts to where you are supposed to live, know about your family and friends, read the metadata and recognise the people on your photographs, etc… And because most people use the facebook app on their phones, facebook knows your gps position by the minute and has saved it for years. They know where you live, they know where you work, they know where you spend your evenings, by correlation they probably even know whom you ever slept with. And they know when you leave your phone at home.
I said I found it irritating and offensive that the post was deleted - I didn’t declare that a universal truth. I didn’t report your post as offensive or try to get it deleted or get you banned. I will say that I think the conformist dogpile thing here in the forum has gotten a bit out of hand, but that is just, like, my opinion.
Look, I really want to know why YOU find that it’s not offensive or sexist, especially since I asked that question to thrower and they had a melt down. I’m not being sarcastic or trying to be rude here – I really want an answer to this question, since lately there have been a fair amount of people who seem to believe that almost anything SOME of us deem as sexist (which is usually women) is deemed as unfair, conformist dogpiling.
I’d rather lose the sexism myself. It’s a boring, offensive distraction and makes the discussion less inviting to interesting people who might otherwise participate.
Conformist dogpile thing. So you’re basically asserting that people who are in agreement don’t actually have free agency to think about an issue, they’re just conforming to some sort of group think or herd mentality. Am I following you correctly?
I’m saying that there is a definite in-group vs. out-group vibe when it comes to certain topics here in the forums, with hair trigger “I’m reporting you!” response.
I find the idea that the objectors didn’t get that the poster was just using the clearly “opposite” of Cory’s correct title to make a rhetorical point rather dumbfounding. I’d say that nimelennar’s unavailing attempt to create a better, “nonsexist” title switch - “Mister Misterow” - shows that none of the objectors can actually think of simple, more clearly wrong title for Cory than the one the poster used.
Several people (Including myself) have stated that they got the rhetorical point, but found it offensive anyway. Mr Misterow isn’t bad. I personally like Dr. Doctorow, but that’s one I suggested so I’m showing my bias there.
I don’t think that “simple” and “more clearly wrong” are really good defenses, as they are really just matters of opinion.
I’m sorry, we’re not stupid. I’d appreciate if you’d maybe not assume that anyone who disagrees is not intelligent. But again, why is the fact that YOU don’t find it offensive mean it’s somehow “objectively” not offensive? Why are you the arbiter here? I’m not trying to be rude to you, but I’d like an answer that doesn’t assume I’m somehow beneath you.
Except doesn’t really work. One would have to know whether or not Cory has a doctorate or not. And, in fact, he does have an honorary doctorate. And while it might still be in appropriate to call him “Dr.” on that basis, it is not as obviously to everybody wrong as “Ms.”
That really isn’t the point, or the topic others here are objecting to.
I don’t think anything is “objectively” offensive.
But again, can you please explain why YOU THINK this isn’t sexist or worth calling out as sexist, at least? If you have a working definition of such or you have an idea about when it’s appropriate to call such out, I honestly want to hear it.
[ETA] I’m not trying to attack you or dogpile here. I want an honest answer and this is an honest question.
It ain’t the crime, it’s the coverup.
The original mildly obnoxious rhetorical device drew some mild critique; it was the sustained doubling-down afterwards that escalated the issue.
At a level above this instance, where the poster wasn’t making a sexist comment about women, but, rather, just a comment about using the correct title in post.
So, how about we call out sexism where there is actual sexism?
I can’t comment on that since all the evidence has been deleted.
If nothing is objectively offensive, then, conversely, nothing is objectively inoffensive. If that is the case, why are you calling people out for pointing out something that they think is offensive?
Seriously, I don’t see how you can point out that offensiveness is subjective, while at the same time saying that people should not find something offensive.
ETA: I find you calling my Mr. Mr.ow suggestion “unavailing” offensive. You are now on double-secret probation.
How is it not sexist, though? If there is sexism and this doesn’t measure up, how did you come to that conclusion? What is the line for actual sexism, in your view?
That is a great philosophical discussion to bring up in an thread of its own. 
