04-16-2020, 04:06 PM
(This post was last modified: 04-16-2020, 04:07 PM by Sundance. Edited 1 time in total.
Edit Reason: one word
)
(04-16-2020, 03:43 PM)UrsulaMejor Wrote: I think that your example, sundance, is something I think should be brought to admin attention. I don't think there is such a thing as a civil discussion that has one party othering or generalizing people over their identity like that.
Civility is for discussing budgets and taxes and economics, not the validity of someone's gender/sexual/ethnic/racial identity. I wouldn't personally start a big fight over it, but deff get the admin team involved asap if that kind of thing comes up
I agree with the overall sentiment, but not with your example.
I'll steadfast with my example, if only to make a point.
That insinuation, while quite hurtful, still warrants civility. This is not turning the other cheek. This is you saying firmly, to the other individual, that you feel what that person said was incorrect and hurtful. That's not weakness, that's resolve.
And yes, in these situations an admin could be invoked. This is not mutually exclusive. You could be civil to someone and call an admin to look into something in the same instance.
Immediately launching into emotive tirade is exhausting for everyone and drags conversations into places that need not be dragged.