Thread:Sannse/@comment-8-20150719161728/@comment-8-20150723225523

Okay, so on to the meat of the topic.

My intention here is not to find fault with you. It's to try and explain why I believe your ban was valid, even if we set aside Wikia staff's policy of non-intervention in cases like this.

The first thing I want to point out is that you seem to sometimes "hear" things that aren't said. For example, you have said "[Kelcat] admitted that I did not sockpuppet". From what I see, she didn't say that. She did say that the reason she changed the ban reason was that she didn't believe you were going to change... but that doesn't mean she couldn't also believe you socked.

I've also seen you take a complicated statement and reduce it to one point. For example, your talk page and the ban notice give a range of complex problems (as the admins see them), but I have seen you describe your ban as being for just one of those things, or a re-phrasing of one of those things. So I hope you will take both of these into account when you read my thoughts below.

I would state your ban as being because you displayed a number of opinions that others on the wikia found offensive and saw as attacks against certain groups (woman, transgender people, gay people, bisexual people). It seems you dispute that on two grounds: that what you were stating was fact, and that you did not say specifically the words in the examples.

You once said "If it's just opinion then you should be able to refute it", where really the opposite is true. If I say red is the best color, and you say that green is, neither of us has a way to persuade the other. But if I say "that rose is red", you either except that as a fact, or claim I'm wrong (preferably with proof). So when an opinion is stated as a fact, the process is broken.

You saying that "a woman can command, but almost ALWAYS at the cost of her femininity" is an opinion. It is based in your understanding of what femininity is - which may be different from mine, and your belief that a woman cannot (or can only rarely) express the attributes of femininity and the ability to command simultaneously. It is an opinion, and one that is going to be seen by many as offensive and an attack on women - even if you didn't mean it to be

There's a slightly different slant to your statements on gay people. There you acknowledge that what you said was an opinion, but reject that it is offensive and attacking to gay people. A good way to demonstrate the offence is to change the group: "I don't hate Christians, but I detest all that Jesus stuff". That's not a perfect analogy of course, because it suggests I am saying that sex is the defining element of being gay, which I'm not. But it does explain my point that stating that you hate is going to be read as an attack on that group.

And on the specificity side, you challenged the accusation that you said "bisexuals are incapable of having real relationships". It's true that you didn't say those exact words, however you did say things that could be summed up that way, or that clearly imply the point. So, in practical terms, the same thing.

So, I understand that you did not mean to cause offense. And that you were interested to talk about some controversial topics, not meaning to include elements that others would regard as sexist, transphobic, biphobic and homophobic. But the fact is that what you said did feel offensive and attacking to others. So for the overall good of the wikia, the admins removed you from the community.