Ada @ ada @lemmy.blahaj.zone

Admin of lemmy.blahaj.zone

---

Read more

Posts

267

Comments

2,702

Joined

2 yr. ago

Moderating

---

Let's say a troll comes along and uses neopronouns to undermine trans rights.

If your response to that is "You're a troll, I don't give a fuck about your pronouns", then you've given the troll exactly the thing they're trying to achieve, whilst also telling any trans people reading your posts that you only think their identity applies as long as they're well behaved. Which is to say, you don't hurt the troll, but actively encourage them, whilst also hurting the acceptance of gender diverse folk.

The only correct response to a troll in that scenario is to respect their professed identity, whilst banning them for trolling. Respecting someone's identity isn't a green light for ignoring anything else they do. But they sure are easy to conflate if you want to stir up a bit of drama at the trans communities expense.

Instance bans automatically issue community bans to all local communities a user has been active in

The policy came from me. It's an instance level policy that you were never banned for.

I did remove some of your comments, and I will do that again if I become aware of misgendering, even if it's accidental. But it didn't get you banned then, and unless you start deliberately misgendering folk, it won't get you banned now either.

I'm an instance admin. I don't issue community bans. I issue instance bans. If someone community banned you, it wasn't me.

It's client dependent, but generally if you see it on the profile, it means they're banned from your instance

I'm trans. Cis people literally can never truly understand my experience or why the things that are important to me are important. Acceptance can't be contingent on understanding they can never have.

Neopronouns are the same. You can work on your own understanding to reduce your discomfort but your discomfort should be your problem, not something you get to force on to others

Your comments were removed. You aren't instance banned

Drag does not use he/him.

Was it dismissing or just not understanding?

Some folk require understanding before they offer acceptance. Those folk will frame it as “just not understanding”. I frame that as lack of acceptance. Acceptance isn’t contingent on understanding. You or I not understanding an aspect of someone elses identity has nothing to do with the validity of their identity.

If you wish to ask someone questions about their pronouns and identity, you’re welcome to do so, but remember they don’t owe you an answer, and whether they offer you an answer or not, and whether you understand their perspective or not, either way, gatekeeping and invalidating their identity is not on.

they are so uncomfortable to use that it just makes me not want to address someone who uses them

That was the other option I offered folk. If someone has stated their pronouns, either use them, or if you can’t bring yourself to use them, don’t engage with the person.

If the person is trolling, report them. But even if they’re trolling, the above statement still stands. Respect their pronouns or don’t engage with them as you report them.

That's an instance ban. Instance bans automatically issue community bans for local communities the user has been active in.

No one was banned for not rembering drags pronouns or for accidentally getting them wrong.

People were banned for dismissing the validity of neopronouns or for deliberately and repeatedly getting pronouns wrong.

I told drag I would have a word, as at the time, I incorrectly believed spujb had a blahaj account. I was going to advise them to block you drag. However, spujb isn’t on blahaj, so this isn’t something that involves me or other blahaj staff.

Notably, I haven’t given drag permission to share our DMs

Only 8.5km. I left that bit out deliberately :P

It's 222-2222. I got an answering machine that can talk to you

Otherwise, you can reach me on 867-5309. Ask for Jenny

Downvotes aren’t how you address racists and bigots. Banning them is.

Downvoting is a tool that racists and bigots use when they’re trying to avoid getting banned though. On top of that, most targetted groups are minorities, which by definition, have small numbers. All off which means that the impact of downvotes hits vulnerable minorities harder than it hits bigots.

To you, this is some sort of hypothetical ideal that you’d like to see. In your mind, if things “worked the way they should”, downvoting would be a useful tool. But things don’t work the way the should. They work they way they are used, and in this case, that means they often hurt vulnerable groups more than they help them, despite how it ‘should be”

In your analogy, downvotes aren't the tool. Social media is the tool. And turning off downvotes is how we use that tool to match our needs.

Well, that article succesfully turned me off even trying the game… It’s a list of immersion breaking stuff that makes it impossible to forget it’s just a computer game…

But you surely agree that both of your statements to be are at odds with each other.

You can’t simultaneously claim that an increase in diversity leads to a “reduction in richness” of a work, whilst also claiming that the work itself is the problem if it lacks diversity.

First, you are claiming that good works are diminished by after the fact alterations, but then you also claim that after the fact alterations are a bad idea, because the work was never good in the first place if it lacked diversity.

It more looks like you are finding post hoc validation to support something you already believe, rather than explaining the actual reasons you believe it, because those reasons contradict each other

Same with b.zone

My phone number. She bought us both pre-paid phone numbers over 20 years ago, and it’s the simplest number to remember because it has two sets of 3 matching numbers.

We broke up long ago, but I still have that phone number!