[Necro]Posthuman Studios 'fires' MRA fans and won't have MRA discussion on forums

[Holden]

No one who claims tolerance actually has to tolerate intolerance. It's a self-evidently idiotic idea that plays bait-and-switch with the definition of "tolerance". It furthermore asks one side of a discussion to practice something the other side is not willing to, which undermines the social contract of civil discussion; either both people cooperate, or the conversation isn't happening. If you want (or worse, demand) the benefit of someone tolerating you, but you don't want to extend that benefit back, then no one will want to talk with you.

And even if we don't approach it from a speech-act level, it's a ludicrous idea if examined for more than five seconds: Nothing must intrinsically support its antithesis. If I support truth, I do not also have to support lies. If I support human rights, I don't also have to support human slavery. And if I support tolerance, I do not have to "tolerate intolerance"; being tolerant means being opposed to intolerance. They are not equal positions.

It sort of points to what a shoddy word "tolerance" is for civil rights, anyway. I think we've moved far enough along as a culture to understand that civil rights are more about acceptance that people are who/what they are, even if it's not what you are or would want to be, rather than some kind of white-knuckle "this is absolutely terrible but I'll put up with it for civility's sake" attitude.

[Chikahiro]

.And even if we don't approach it from a speech-act level, it's a ludicrous idea if examined for more than five seconds: Nothing must intrinsically support its antithesis. If I support truth, I do not also have to support lies. If I support human rights, I don't also have to support human slavery. And if I support tolerance, I do not have to "tolerate intolerance"; being tolerant means being opposed to intolerance. They are not equal positions.

That's actually a way of explaining it that I've never heard before, and is pretty good. Thank you

Posthuman is an RPG publisher, so this is in TRO's wheelhouse.

Groovy.

Here's hoping there is no red font needed

[Ettin]

In other words, the next act of "tolerance" may be againgst one of your opinions.

First they came for the MRAs, and I didn't say anything because I didn't have issues with women.

[Anu]

I don't follow Posthuman studios, so this seemed mostly pointless to me, but since they've apparently been having issues with MRAs for a while, good for them. MRAs are free to spout off whatever misogyny they want, but Posthuman studios is under no obligation to accommodate or associate themselves with a hate group, either from a moral or a business perspective.

I haven't met a lot of masculinist scholars, but the ones I have met were all also involved with feminism in one way or another. On the other hand, my experience with MRAs is that they spend more time and effort on hating women than on promoting positive masculine identities.

[Critias]

In other words, the next act of "tolerance" may be againgst one of your opinions.

I guess that's the dangerous game you play when you hold vile opinions that dehumanize and alienate the majority of the human race.

[Libertad]

First they came for the MRAs, and I didn't say anything because I didn't have issues with women.

Then they came for the Red Pillers, and I didn't say anything because I like living in the Matrix.

[David J Prokopetz]

First they came for the MRAs, and I didn't say anything because I didn't have issues with women.

I think it's important to keep this in context: we are talking about people who openly cheer when men murder women. Every MRA forum I've had the misfortune of being exposed to is lionising Elliot Rodgers as some sort of counterculture hero as we speak. These are not good people.

[The Unshaven]

In other words, the next act of "tolerance" may be againgst one of your opinions.

One day, you might actually respond to any of a large number of people who have explained that what you are saying is total bullshit, rather than just continuing to mouth/type aforementioned bullshit.

I'm guessing today is not that day.

- The Unshaven

[eggdropsoap]

It's not hard really. IF your tolerant of other opinions you respect the right of the individual to have the opinion and express it. If you don't want that on your private forum that is fine - but to claim at the same time that you want tolerance and openness at the exact time you are banning said opinion, that is the opposite of tolerance. The danger of not understanding this distinction is that you leave the definition of what tolerance is in the hands of the majority who then decide what can and cannot be discussed. In other words, the next act of "tolerance" may be againgst one of your opinions.

If the best thing you can say about a view is "it exists", that's tantamount to conceding the argument.

Not all opinions are equal, and there is zero in the principle of tolerance that requires them to treat opinions equally. People have to be tolerated. Their having opinions has to be tolerated. Their opinions do not have to be tolerated when voiced.

Unlike people, opinions have to prove their right to exist. Welcome to the marketplace of ideas.

[Wields-Rulebook-Heavily]

Where the "tolerate intolerance" thing crops up a lot is when tolerant people try to convince intolerant people of the benefits of tolerance. Obviously you have to extend effort and willingness to put up with arguments you don't believe in when talking about them; it's called in one form the cooperative principle. What it does not mean is having to support intolerance itself, indefinitely or otherwise; it just means tolerating the conversation on intolerance long enough to have that conversation. And once it's clear that no more conversation is being had, it doesn't have to be tolerated anymore because cooperation is gone.

The quickest way to accomplish this is to demand that other people extend benefits you are not willing to reciprocate. Congratulations, now you now why MRAs tend to get kicked out of places really quickly.

If only a less shoddy word were available, as Holden puts it.