Amendment to the University of the Revolution Act

[Delfos]

Even if you were not consciously behaving in a sexist fashion (which seems likely), sexism clearly colored your aforementioned two responses to me. It is perfectly possible to treat people differently based on gender without realizing it.

Whether you are willing to acknowledge it or not, you disregarded my questions and instead posted rude things... that you would not have if I were a man. Claim the opposite all you want. Based on the arguments from today and on many comments you've made in IRC in the past, I can no longer believe that you lack sexist attitudes.

Well, you keep hammering that same key. I think you're the one not conscious of your prejudice.

Maybe the confusion was that I announced a drawing could be required in another topic, I'm sorry that you missed that reference and instead got enraged by misinterpreting the drawing I posted.

Maybe a drawing is required.

Same thing with the "marriage counseling", I say the same thing to my male friends when they exaggerate someone's behavior negatively, what possibly could it have about sexism besides your own intake on the matter?

Here I was discussing we should have more options to vote for, yet I'm the one that doesn't make proposals and is apparently sexist just because you want me to be. No, neither one of my comments were sexist, I actually campaign in RL for feminism, against domestic violence, against gender roles, against chauvinism (I even called a friend chauvinist yesterday haha), recently I've positively changed an all 5 male member jury on a contest to a 3 male 2 female jury, I wouldn't consider anybody could ever insult me being sexist.

Again, this thread as any other are perfect places for discussion, trying to devalue any input isn't what I think it should be done, for either this issue or the others being discussed.

[Khem]

I am pretty sure you both have viewed each others posts with a cloud of hostility and would ask you both take a break from this discussion to get your perspectives aligned with their true lens.

[Delfos]

true lens:
upon talking about new girls in our community I told in Taijitu chat while talking almost directly to Allama:

[22:15] <@Delfos> we should be like Portugal and gently ask all companies listed in stock exchange to have at least a third of women...or else we'll make an imperative quota
[22:15] <@Delfos> and do that for our government

How can you gather the complete opposite from that?

and if anything was sexist about that "drawing" was Google for only showing women shopping when searched:
"supermarket shelf shopping cart drawing" <  I would definitely post a drawing of supermarket shelf and a gorilla shopping, alas none have came up from my quick search. If I knew you'd be pissed off about this I'd probably post this:

[Allama]

I stopped posting.

I let it go.

I figured it wasn't worth continuing to argue and be upset.

But you just can't leave it alone, even after having the last word. So fine, here we go again.

These threads are perfect places for discussion, indeed. My issue is not with you discussing things: it's the vehemence with which you regularly oppose others' ideas without proposing any legislation yourself. You have never done this, despite your protestations. No community enjoys seeing someone tear down others' work without bothering to be constructive as well. It's a toxic attitude. If you aren't good at legal writing, that's fine, simply post precisely what you want the law to do and someone else can help with the legalese.

And once again, you are using the word "prejudice" where it does not apply. Check the dictionary definition. It's not only me saying I'm not prejudiced in this situation; you are the only one making that claim.

You can say you're not sexist until you're blue in the face. Posts made today visibly and openly counter those statements. It is possible to both work for equality consciously and to carry unconscious bias, to treat someone poorly because of their gender without intending to. Your comments to me have been demeaning. Nothing you do IRL is relevant to that. Saying or doing a nice thing does not cancel out saying or doing a shitty thing.

You can also attempt to color me as some enraged woman finding offense in unoffensive things if you wish to continue doing so. It is not believable. Admittedly I was quite furious during parts of this "discussion" but I found your behavior offensive well before I hit that point emotionally.

In fact, the picture you posted was so obviously not germane to the subject at hand that it was reported to the moderators (not by me, nor did I do anything to moderate the post myself as I knew I'd end up accused of further "prejudice").

[Delfos]

[Eluvatar]

This is not a constructive post.

I would go further, and say it is so nonconstructive as to be inflammatory.

I would earnestly ask you to please reconsider whether that is what you want to be your reply.

[Delfos]

On the contrary to what I did which was to actually give proof she was factually wrong, I keep being insulted and my post got edited. My shaking head response is most fitting.

What I want to be my reply is that I actually said why I wanted to post a drawing, what it meant, and offered an alternative to the picture she thought it was sexist, so it would skewer what I meant, which I now modified to redirect the discussion back to where I always intended it to be:

Would it make sense we would actually explore which options are best and, only after, vote on them? It does to me.

[Myroria]

The rhetoric in this thread has become toxic. Delfos, your responses to Allama are flamebait. While the Ecclesia has always been accepting of open, candid debate, your condescension, playing victim, and utter disregard for people's personal feelings is inappropriate for this legislature, and the forum's terms of service.

I am locking this thread, and consider this a warning.