Extra Invalidation protections for The Grey Area

[Janus the Fox]

As this is to be a safe place for anyone on the asexual-sexual spectrum, invalidation of anyone's thoughts or feelings regarding their identity, or their identity itself, is not permitted and will be more stringently dealt with than might otherwise occur in other parts of the AVEN site. Such comments may be removed from view at the discretion of the moderator and the poster may be subject to further action, including but not limited to nudges or warns.

Be aware that a warning issued for these actions in the The Grey Area, Sex and Related Discussions forum and The Sex Talk subforum will result in a loss of access to both for the length of time that warning is active.

 

Janus DarkFox

Current Policy Administrator, Co-Covering Reports, Covering Tea and Sympathy/(h)AVEN, Welcome Lounge, Questions about Asexuality, Asexual Musings and Rantings, Site Comments

[A User]

Wait so this wasn't a thing,  like, 21 minutes ago?

 

I'm now curious as to what happened that sparked this.

[Snao Cone]

People often post to TGA because they're confused about something vague and ambiguous. Sometimes what they need is a direct answer. If they post here the chances are higher that their feelings and experiences are not shared with the asexual community. Is pointing this out — that they'll face difficulties in finding compatible partners or relatable experiences based on the information they've provided — enough to get me kicked out of the forum that's supposed to tackle fuzzier areas? 

[Homer]

 

[everywhere and nowhere]

What does it mean in practice? That we are obligated to say "Oh, but of course asexuality is about desiring sex without caring about appearance"?

[Janus the Fox]

This is for comments that insist a Member is or must be Asexual or Sexual while they already identify as Grey and such a member is not looking for a definition of who they are.  This is the type of comment that not only brands a member in what they are not, but also commentary that is unrequested that explains why they are another way,  invaliding their grey identity.  This is some action made from the existing Invalidation Directive.  It is up to any existing TGA Mod how this is handled in most circumstances, this only affects this Forum.

[Guest]

If we get much more unjust, iron-fisted modding, site funding won’t be an issue because there won’t be enough active members to make it worth running, let alone decent people willing to run it.

[Snao Cone]

2 hours ago, Janus DarkFox said:

This is for comments that insist a Member is or must be Asexual or Sexual while they already identify as Grey and such a member is not looking for a definition of who they are.  This is the type of comment that not only brands a member in what they are not, but also commentary that is unrequested that explains why they are another way,  invaliding their grey identity.  This is some action made from the existing Invalidation Directive.  It is up to any existing TGA Mod how this is handled in most circumstances, this only affects this Forum.

Okay, so subjectivity clearly messes this up, because nothing's ever that simple, so I don't expect a concrete list of examples; however, I know that in the past, in forums like Hot Box and PPS, advice has been given to members who seem to have a greater communication barrier behind it. Does the admod team have suggestions on safer wording? (E.g. avoid using "definitely", "textbook case", etc.) Additionally, is the issue around attempting to convince a person, or does it include any expression of personal opinion based on the facts provided? Would qualifiers like "but that's just my interpretation" dodge this rule? 

[Ceebs]

Holy crap, what. 😂😂😂
 

I... articulacy is failing me.

[Nima]

10 hours ago, Snao Cone said:

Okay, so subjectivity clearly messes this up, because nothing's ever that simple, so I don't expect a concrete list of examples; however, I know that in the past, in forums like Hot Box and PPS, advice has been given to members who seem to have a greater communication barrier behind it. Does the admod team have suggestions on safer wording? (E.g. avoid using "definitely", "textbook case", etc.) Additionally, is the issue around attempting to convince a person, or does it include any expression of personal opinion based on the facts provided? Would qualifiers like "but that's just my interpretation" dodge this rule? 

maybe an IMO sub box feature, like spoiler or TMI warning ⚠️ would do the trick. Open at own risk if you value someone else's opinion...

[Anthracite_Impreza]

Why don't you just get on with it and ban all opinions already? In fact, just ban all conversations, discussions and posting entirely, that'll solve the problem.

[Guest]

Pretty much the only difference is that warns in this forum for invalidation could result in access being taken away for the duration of the warn point.

[Snao Cone]

6 minutes ago, Mother Bread said:

Pretty much the only difference is that warns in this forum for invalidation could result in access being taken away for the duration of the warn point.

Does this apply to the TMI subforum as well? 

 

Also, is there a list somewhere of all the forums this applies to? Gender and T&S are others, but are there more?

[Sarah-Sylvia]

2 minutes ago, Snao Cone said:

Does this apply to the TMI subforum as well? 

 

Also, is there a list somewhere of all the forums this applies to? Gender and T&S are others, but are there more?

It applies to the Gray Area and its subforums (ie The Sex Talk too)

Tea and Sympathy, and Gender Discussion, are the other two that someone can get barred for some warns. (individually)

[Janus the Fox]

2 minutes ago, Snao Cone said:

Does this apply to the TMI subforum as well? 

 

Also, is there a list somewhere of all the forums this applies to? Gender and T&S are others, but are there more?

The Grey Area and it’s The Sex Talk sub forum is the only Forums affected by this, Declass on this Policy should be released sooner in the details.

[Snao Cone]

5 minutes ago, Janus DarkFox said:

The Grey Area and it’s The Sex Talk sub forum is the only Forums affected by this, Declass on this Policy should be released sooner in the details.

By this particular announcement, but aren't Gender and T&S violations handled similarly? 

[Sarah-Sylvia]

I'm not sure why the gender discussion policy didn't amount to an announcement/pin like this one. The tea & s section does have a pinned one though.

[Janus the Fox]

33 minutes ago, Snao Cone said:

By this particular announcement, but aren't Gender and T&S violations handled similarly? 

T&S Forum Bans are for any Warning made on T&S Content.

 

Gender Discussion Forum Bans are on any Transphobic content that leads to a Warning anywhere on site.

 

The Grey Area Forum Bans are on any Invalidation content that leads to a Warning made in The Grey Area.

 

So it’s in a way a derivative of the two, similar but different.  I understand why just TGA and not any other identity related forum, Declassing this policy can explain in detail the direction this took.

[Gray Watcher]

I appreciate the intent of this.  This is the second time I've joined AVEN.  The first time I was quite put off by certain users that had seemed to have purity tests for whether you were "Ace enough" to be posting here.  As someone who was still trying to figure out where they fit in the spectrum, that pushed me away.  I'm hoping it's not like that now.

[rainbowocollie]

I mean, being demi, I kinda really appreciate this?? Like.... I hear enough that demisexuality isn't a real thing from allosexuals, I don't need to hear it from this place too.
It's got nothing to do with changing the definition of asexuality..... it just means that people aren't allowed to shit on identities in the grey area

[Guest]

On 8/3/2021 at 11:45 AM, colliethefurry said:

I mean, being demi, I kinda really appreciate this?? Like.... I hear enough that demisexuality isn't a real thing from allosexuals, I don't need to hear it from this place too.
It's got nothing to do with changing the definition of asexuality..... it just means that people aren't allowed to shit on identities in the grey area

No one here is in denial that demisexuality exists, heck, many 'allo'sexual folks actually fall within the realm of demisexuality so it's absolutely a thing, regardless of whether one says it's an ace or a sexual identity.

 

Where it becomes an issue is when someone is like "I identify as a demisexual asexual sl#t because I'd be miserable without sex, I need sex in my life to be happy, and I have multiple sexual partners on the go at once, but I need to respect someone to want sex with them.. hence why I am asexual and demisexual".

 

This sort of thing is an issue we have here, because 1) it renders the ace and demi label pretty much meaningless and 2) it's saying that 'allo'sexual people don't need to respect someone to be able to desire sex with them, which is absolutely untrue for many sexual people.

 

This sort of thing needs to be able to be discussed. But to discuss it is not denying that demisexuality exists.