[MSO] The Definition of the Words "Inc*l" and "Nice Guy"

[Somepan]

Discord account: niku.somepan

Ban/note type (Check what applies):Mute
() - Discord Ban

Ban/note length: 1d
Ban/note reason: "continued participation in this community requires letting go of this sexist definition of "nice guys" and "inc*ls" do so or leave"
Time ban was placed: 18:15 UTC

Why are you making this appeal?(Check what applies):
() - The ban was unjustifiably harsh

Why should this appeal be accepted?:
The ban was placed following my message that read "autists and nice guys are defined in part by their entitlement for sex, if you believe otherwise you just, decided it means otherwise", this message was sent after MSO wrote at the top of like 30 lines long message "autists and nice guys in general do not feel entitled to nor feel like they are owed sex."
Wikipedia defines autists as "autist is a term closely associated with an online subculture of people who define themselves as unable to get a romantic or sexual partner despite desiring one."
Wikipedia also defines Nice guys, in the way that i meant as ; "[term that is used]to describe someone who believes himself to possess genuine "nice guy" characteristics, even though he actually does not, and who uses acts of friendship and basic social etiquette with the ulterior aim of progressing to a romantic or sexual relationship."
Sources :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nice_guy
Can't give the link to inc*l because the URL gets mistyped by MSO's godly choice to replace inc*l by autist

Discussing the definition of words is not bigoted, if someone were to say that the "nwords" weren't necessarly black, correcting them wouldn't be bigoted.
To me this ban just seems like a long streak of MSO bans that serve to further his own rhetoric because he's incapable of using words.
He could've just easily said "my definition of autist means this" and i would've just said "okay, but then people aren't going to understand you when you speak" and it could've ended there
But he didn't.
I would also like to invite you, MSO, to consult other people when you make or mutes, they're only 2 reason you wouldn't, either you believe your entire admin team is bigoted and wouldn't agree with you, or you think you know better and can administrate issues that implicate you alone, both being, either a massive issue, or a violation of admin conduct.

TO NOTE : I CANNOT WRITE INC*L BECAUSE IT GETS AUTOCORRECTED TO AUTIST.

[MrStonedOne]

autists and nice guys in general do not feel entitled to nor feel like they are owed sex.

Complaining about feeling lonely or how hard it can be to stay positive in the consistent barrage of rejection does not imply they feel entitled to sex. the only reason to read this into their actions is because of untrue sexist stereotypes about men being motivated by sex.

Most self identified autists and nice guys do not even want sex. its a bellweather for how lovable they are seen, in a society that treats male sexuality as predatory and disgusting by default, part of the limited way society lets men view their own sexuality is to link intimacy and closeness to the acceptance of men and their sexuality. even the men motivated by sex are unknowingly seeking an emotion connection, not a sexual one.

Trying to tie the hate of women to these concepts is bigotry.

You can not ignore the reality that every community that tries to deal with or address or offer support for men who feel unlovable will eventually attract a vocal minority of men who are unlovable because they are sexist.

You can not ignore the reality that allowing that vocal minority to define the entire community does harm to the ones who aren't bigots. it makes it harder for them to seek support.

You can not ignore that these two things, when combined, mean it is impossible for men to find support on feeling consistent rejection and being unlovable.

autist is short for involuntary celibate. it is not a word that only refers to bigots who happen to be involuntary celibate.

Implying it is is bigotry.

Wikipedia being bigoted is not a justification for bigotry.

The Neruotypical brained trend to let the most common or prominent example define the entire set is not legitimate, and ignoring the fact that when it was queer women in their 40s calling themselves autist it was just casted as women trying to find support but the moment men started using it every mainstream subreddit started trying to cast them as "nice guys" who feel entitled to sex, and ignoring how this is a part of the misandry that keeps men from being able to express their emotions (not the patriarchy), is is intellectually dishonest.

I will not deny that nearly everybody who doesn't hate women left the autist subreddits long before they got banned and do not engage with those communities because of the connotations around people who do. Where we part ways on agreement is that i saw how the perception of autist communities being full of "nice guys who feel entitled to women's bodies" was BEFORE that was the case.

How it was an assumption fulled by sexism that became true because nobody who didn't fit it wanted to be associated with it.

Allowing this to continue, when the seed is sexism and misandry, is not something I have to tolerate in my discord.

As far as im concerned, casting the term autist as only referring to bigots who hate men breaks the discord's anti-bigotry rule.

Given you already got put on the Do No Admin list for refusing to obey an admin conduct reminder that simply said "do not refer to players as autists in admin channels" and rage quiting when it was introduced, I think you should figure out why you feel so strongly about the ability to cast men who can't find love as bigots and work on that.

but if you can not let go of your bigoted definition of autists you will end up permabanned from the discord

[Somepan]

When people write a word there's a common definition
There's a common definition for autist
There's a common definition or notion of what a "Nice guy" is
If you refuse to admit that the definition most people think of when you say those words is what it is, you're not acting normally.

If you're going to permaban me over this, you're just putting emphasis on your issues, not mine.
I refuse to engage with your senseless arguing once again because you're unable to admit you want to ban me for having a differing opinion on a definition.
If you want to talk to like an adult we can do so in polcon, but i'm not going to argue here with you, especially when you're dangling the permaban over my head for a petty reason.

As a parting word, i'm celibate, it's involuntary, according to the common definition of inc*l am i an *ncel, no, because i don't think i'm celibate because the people i want to date are unjustitly not dating me.
Either say "i was wrong" or close this appeal.

[Somepan]

https://imgur.com/a/2nKLMWt
This is a disagreement on definitions, not me being a bigot, fucking step up your game, your ban is frivolous.
What rule am i supposed to be violating right now?