Iā€™m gonna get real with you folks, weā€™ve had way too many of these posts recently. Iā€™ve been reflecting on this topic a lot the past few days. For me personally, I couldnā€™t care less about my gender identity. But just because thatā€™s true for me, doesnā€™t make that true for everyone.

The beauty of the fediverse is that if you donā€™t like the way a particular instance or community is moderated you can simply choose another to hang out on, or create your own.

Blajah has made it pretty clear by now they will ban anyone who argues against the validity of xenogenders, in order to create a safe space for those folks. Thatā€™s fair enough imo.

Safe spaces should be respected, and Blajahā€™s admins/mods do not deserve abuse for creating and maintaining those spaces.

I can completely understand why Blajah users donā€™t want to have to constantly argue with external users about the validity of their chosen identities. Bans are one way Blajah has decided to manage that problem so that their users can experience lemmy in relative peace and safety. While it is a blunt tool and I have my reservations about preemptive bans, there are not many other options for @[email protected], other than defederation from most instances. That would be a terrible outcome for the fediverse as a whole.

In order to help Blajah to maintain their safe space, I would like to propose, if @[email protected] agrees and community sentiment is positive:

  • that we no longer accept posts about this topic in this community; and
  • we also remove previous posts on this topic from the community.

Thatā€™s all folks, have at 'er.

  • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    3
    Ā·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    Like if this kind of shit arguing against a queer friendly instance for being queer friendly

    Nobody is arguing against blahaj for being queer friendly. People are arguing against some of their members for being unfriendly to people, including queer people, among them LittleRatInALittleHat. Thatā€™s the only reason people are caring about this.

    The type of mentality ā€œyouā€™re not allowed to criticize me, because I am X, and so unless you agree with me youā€™re being anti-Xā€ is tempting but it is wrong. You might think dragon is a gender, or you might not, it is fine, but refusing to agree that dragon is a gender is not and has never been ā€œtransphobiaā€ or in any way anti-queer.

    • OccultIconoclast@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      Ā·
      25 minutes ago

      but refusing to agree that dragon is a gender is not and has never been ā€œtransphobiaā€ or in any way anti-queer.

      Well I think queer people can have any gender they want, and you just have to deal with it because itā€™s none of your business.

    • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      6
      Ā·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      You might think dragon is a gender, or you might not, it is fine, but refusing to agree that dragon is a gender ā€¦

      Well, Iā€™m gonna chime in again, because itā€™s a nice jumping off point.

      That argument, that anyone is actually saying dragon is a gender, is simply misrepresenting all of the subject.

      Regardless of oneā€™s view on xenopronouns in specific, or neopronouns one general, the claim hasnā€™t been that dragon is a gender.

      The rule, and the argument behind it, is about pronouns. And it isnā€™t really about the pronouns themselves, as much as it is about who gets to decide when someone is deserving of being respected as an individual.

      Weā€™re not biking being asked to share a belief that a person is a dragon, or fucks dragons, or that humans can be part dragon.

      What weā€™re being asked to do is to respect pronouns or just not talk to someone. Thatā€™s it. Thatā€™s what itā€™s about.

      The rule simply lays out what will happen if people donā€™t do one of those two things.

      You donā€™t have to agree with the word being used as a pronoun meaning anything other than that it replaces traditional pronouns and makes them happy. Does it matter if they think theyā€™re a dragon, or a tiger? No. It doesnā€™t matter. If the cognitive dissonance of using a word in an unconventional way is so high that you simply canā€™t do it, thatā€™s okay. You have multiple options at that point.

      One, you can ignore the request, and accept the consequences as they come. Fair or not, those consequences are known.

      Two, you can use them anyway, and roll your eyes while you do it. Nobody will know youā€™re rolling your eyes.

      Three, you can use them anyway, and complain about it, which may also have consequences, depending on how you complain.

      Four, you can block the individual and never interact with them again, thus preventing cognitive dissonance entirely.

      Five, you can choose to just not interact with them at all.

      Six, you choose to not interact, but complain about it elsewhere, with possible consequences (as these posts have shown).

      Thereā€™s even other options, but theyā€™re absurdist stuff like juggling oranges while singing ā€œIā€™m a little teapotā€. So, you know, only entertaining to me.

      Now, thatā€™s separate from anything else, Iā€™m only talking about the idea that one has to share a belief to be able to use someoneā€™s pronouns. Like, my pronouns are he/him, they/them, and Iā€™ll accept any gender neutral neopronouns as well. But Iā€™ll accept she/her in a pinch, though I may correct those if itā€™s relevant. Itā€™s why I never list my pronouns, Iā€™m cool with almost anything, up to and including ā€œthat assholeā€. Thatā€™s not even a joke, Iā€™m fine being referred to that way as a replacement for a pronoun, or in general.

      You donā€™t have to agree with my belief that Iā€™m not obligated to behave in the way a pronoun implies to use any of those. You donā€™t have to agree with my belief that by accepting almost any pronoun that I improve myself by challenging my own concepts of gender in order to use he/him, or any of the rest.

      So, why would you have to believe in anything at all to use any pronoun? You arenā€™t expected to log off and tell your roommate or whatever, ā€œjeez, this cat I was talking to was a real weirdo, heā€™s just nutsā€ and you arenā€™t expected to log off and tell the same person ā€œI was talking to this cat from blahaj and drag sure did annoy meā€ you can use any pronoun you want when you arenā€™t in the presence of the person requesting an individual pronoun, or any neopronouns, or a xenopronoun.

      You donā€™t need to believe anything except that the person, the human being with their own life and needs and pains, is made a little happier by the use of it. Thatā€™s it. Thatā€™s all you have to believe.

      • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        Ā·
        2 hours ago

        Regardless of oneā€™s view on xenopronouns in specific, or neopronouns one general, the claim hasnā€™t been that dragon is a gender.

        PugJesus already covered it. Just to clarify, though, because your point is perfectly fair:

        I get the policy about using pronouns when youā€™re talking to people. It makes some amount of sense to me, I already talked elsewhere in these comments about why I can completely understand just needing to set a clear, consistent policy on using peopleā€™s pronouns regardless of anything else. Makes sense. I kind of think that when someoneā€™s clearly exploiting that policy to mock queer people to their faces, there maybe needs to be a commonsense exception instead of going to bat for the anti-queer troll, but itā€™s whatever. As people have pointed out, that problem has already been solved and dealt with.

        When I say ā€œdragon is a gender,ā€ I am talking about people who are screaming that anyone who doesnā€™t agree with the policy is ā€œmisgenderingā€ or ā€œtransphobicā€ or a fascist or secretly yearns to start calling all these LGBTQ people slurs. Itā€™s super weird, and dishonest. Itā€™s divisive and stupid. And using the word ā€œmisgenderingā€ in reference to it, which a ton of people are doing, is predicated on the assumption (never started explicitly) that dragon is a gender. And people are getting banned (PugJesus is one, LittleRatInALittleHat is one) not for ever refusing to use the pronouns to anybody in particular, but just by talking about the policy or saying their opinion on it or pointing out that dragon is not, in fact, a gender.

        Your list of multiple options doesnā€™t really apply, since neither PugJesus nor LittleRatInALittleHat were interacting directly with anybody at all, just talking about the issue in general terms. Theyā€™ve got a right to do that, I think. Again, I get the reason for the original policy. Whatā€™s ridiculous is using that as a jumping-off point to say ā€œIf you have any disagreement with this policy, even if youā€™re not expressing it to me but just talking with other people about it in general, you are bad and transphobic and you need to be banned and youā€™re a fascist and you hate queer people and youā€™re not allowed to disagree with me because I have X identity and if you do, you are anti-X.ā€

      • PugJesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        5
        Ā·
        7 hours ago

        Regardless of oneā€™s view on xenopronouns in specific, or neopronouns one general, the claim hasnā€™t been that dragon is a gender.

        [heavy sigh]

        Dragā€™s gender is dragon rider

        • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          Ā·
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          Iā€™m speaking in the general, with dragon as the example used because drag is largely the focus of contention.

          The next paragraph, ā€œThe rule, and the argument behind it, is about pronouns. And it isnā€™t really about the pronouns themselves, as much as it is about who gets to decide when someone is deserving of being respected as an individual.ā€ covers that. I was addressing the rule, and blahaj, not drag.

          It hasnā€™t been blahaj policy that Iā€™ve seen that dragon is a gender, only that you have to treat peopleā€™s pronouns and genders with respect.

          Itā€™s one of those where we donā€™t have to agree, we just have to be nice.

          Or have the admins specifically addressed the issue as a declarative, and I missed it? I do miss things ;)

            • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              Ā·
              6 hours ago

              Ehhh, what that screenshot shows is admins deciding that you didnā€™t treat pronouns with respect.

              Obviously, you disagree with their assessment. I do too, really, though I have seen their argument about it somewhere to and down the various threads.

              That is a different thing.

              I definitely get why you donā€™t think itā€™s different, but, looking at it from this side of the screen, thatā€™s not a statement of policy, itā€™s a reaction to their interpretation of what you said.

              • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                Ā·
                edit-2
                5 hours ago

                Against my better judgement, I went into Blahaj back around the time of The Event.

                Gender was always meant to help identify where in the spectrum of sex one is. Whether that be male, female, both, neither, slightly female, etc. Yā€™all are free to say your gender is goth, or as one user on Lemmy is becoming infamous for, Dragon; but youā€™ll likely not be taken seriously, and ultimately youā€™ll be setting back both progression for oppressed minorities as well as already existing accomplishments. PS: op should say what neopronouns are for those who may not know.

                Removed: Gatekeeping

                If gender means anything then some things are not gender. Thatā€™s not ā€œgatekeeping.ā€ Itā€™s a tautology. A word with no meaning is meaningless.

                Removed: Gatekeeping

                Just as I donā€™t acknowledge ā€œdragonfuckerā€ as a gender I donā€™t acknowledge ā€œgodā€ as a gender type. Thereā€™s a person around here who insists that theyā€™re a god and that theyā€™re pronouns need to be capitalized. No one is a god. And no one gets to go around demanding that theyā€™re a god and that they should be acknowledged as one. I mostly linger here on blah as a habit really. If I eventually get banned so be it. I have my line in the sand for what will make me leave but until that happens Iā€™ll keep lingering like a fart.

                Removed, no note

                Trans women are women. Nobody is a dragon. Dragons arenā€™t real.

                Removed: Gatekeeping

                No, I mean Iā€™m no longer going to be on Blahaj, and those are the communities Iā€™ll miss. Hence ā€œbutā€¦ well, Blahaj isnā€™t for me, since I donā€™t acknowledge ā€˜dragonfuckerā€™ as a gender.ā€

                Removed: Gatekeeping (that oneā€™s literally me)

                A lot of people say a lot of things, who cares? I donā€™t think itā€™s an unfair line to draw at all. We draw it at whatā€™s real and whatā€™s not. Gender as a spectrum is real. We know this. We also know that the person posting comments on Lemmy isnā€™t a fucking dragon because dragons arenā€™t real. Line drawn.

                Removed: Gatekeeping

                Neopronouns are fine, but not all neopronouns are part of gender identity. Not all identity expressions are gender related. The entire spectrum of gender has a biological basis, and anything which doesnā€™t have a biological basis is an expression of identity, which is also valid, but not always related to gender. Like, no one can get a medical cocktail to transform into a dragon or cat. Please donā€™t confuse gender identity with other types of identity expressions.

                Removed: Transmed stuff

                All of that points pretty firmly to disagreement with dragon as a gender as gatekeeping, not a matter of respecting pronouns.

                • southsamurai@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  Ā·
                  5 hours ago

                  I think where the disconnect is, is that youā€™re continuously, in those quotes, making declarations about what it and isnā€™t gender, what is and isnā€™t trans.

                  Thatā€™s what the comments were removed for.

                  In those quotes, you arenā€™t seeking understanding, you arenā€™t discussing the subject, you arenā€™t expressing an interest, youā€™re saying, directly ā€œthis is my opinion on the matter, and I refuse to consider any alternativesā€

                  You literally say youā€™re drawing a line in the sand.

                  Thatā€™s gatekeeping, 100%

                  Does it make you a transphobe? Hell no. Does it make you a bad person? Not in any way whatsoever.

                  But it is you doing exactly what the rule is about: telling other people that they and their gender/pronouns are yours to decide the validity of

                  And thatā€™s okay, you have a right to have that opinion and draw that line. We all do.

                  You do see that though, right? That every quote you chose, itā€™s you declaring other peopleā€™s genders and pronouns invalid. It doesnā€™t matter whether or not it was drag. It doesnā€™t matter who you were talking about, you donā€™t very to make that decision for others

                  You donā€™t, I donā€™t, nobody does.

                  We can all have great discussions about the semantics of gender, of how pronouns function, what their role in language, philosophy, and society are. We can even make declarative statements like that if we want to. But it doesnā€™t change that if we expect our opinions on the matter to hold sway, weā€™d be assholes.

                  I mean, cā€™mon you directly brought in the whole biological argument. Like, the worst possible way to address the subject matter, the claim to have a inherently superior ownership of transness because it has to be biological, and only biology matters? You have to see that thatā€™s the exact bullshit being weaponized against trans people. Even if you didnā€™t mean it the same way (and I know you didnā€™t, I know youā€™re not a bigot), itā€™s the exact worst possible argument to use.

                  Itā€™s so arrogant, claiming to have not only the ability to know what is and isnā€™t biological, but whether or not it has validity. You directly say that youā€™re deciding what is and isnā€™t valid, for other people. I mean, are you even a doctor? Of any stripe at all. Can you back up the claim that thereā€™s no biological mechanism at play that leads a person to have a connection to an animal that can serve the same role as gender identity?

                  Because thereā€™s a ton of information about neurodivergence out there, and some of it points to there being a high correlation between trans identities and neurological differences from cis brains. The overlap between a huge range of neuroatypicality and not just trans identity, but the very otherkin related identities being objected to is there, and neurology is biology. It just is. You canā€™t have a brain that operates independently of its underlying biological imperatives. Itā€™s built by DNA, RNA, and epigenetics into this network of complicated nerves that run through a meat suit, interacting with it chemically and electrically.

                  Thatā€™s biology. Now, Iā€™m with you, thereā€™s no actual dragons that arenā€™t komodo. And a cat isnā€™t a human, nor is a human a cat. But I am not confident in saying that someoneā€™s inner self finding expression by identifying with or as a cat isnā€™t biological. To the contrary, unless it only appears after disease or injury, I would say that it has to be biological in origin, even though the specific expression may be a psychological development as opposed to purely anatomical or physiological one.

                  While you are definitely not an enemy, not a transphobe, not a bigot, you definitely broke the rule, multiple times, and you picked your own quotes about it. If this was still about whether or not a mod action was justified, it would be totally YDI with that list of quotes.

                  At every step, you laid claim to the authority to decide for others whether their identity is valid.

                  Iā€™m kinda beating a dead horse here because Iā€™m a little flummoxed that you canā€™t see all those comments and notice that youā€™re doing exactly what they were removed for.

                  After all that, it really doesnā€™t matter what the specific target was, it doesnā€™t even matter that they are, defacto, making it clear that they accept xenogenders as valid genders within blahaj and that the rule applies to them. What matters at that point is that you had multiple comment removals and kept doing the same thing. Iā€™d have banned you too, even preemptively because it looks like youā€™re making it a fight.

                  • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    Ā·
                    1 hour ago

                    youā€™re saying, directly ā€œthis is my opinion on the matter, and I refuse to consider any alternativesā€

                    You literally say youā€™re drawing a line in the sand.

                    When did he say the second part?

                    It sounds like he said the first part only. That, to me, is okay. It sounds like the other people in the conversation are going beyond just stating their opinion to drawing a line in the sand, that there are absolutely no alternatives to their chosen point of view, and in fact any attempted alternatives are specifically forbidden.

                  • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    Ā·
                    4 hours ago

                    I think where the disconnect is, is that youā€™re continuously, in those quotes, making declarations about what it and isnā€™t gender, what is and isnā€™t trans.

                    Only one of them is me, the one tagged with ā€˜literally meā€™.

                    In those quotes, you arenā€™t seeking understanding, you arenā€™t discussing the subject, you arenā€™t expressing an interest, youā€™re saying, directly ā€œthis is my opinion on the matter, and I refuse to consider any alternativesā€

                    In which case my original point is correct - that dragon being a gender is mandated by Blahaj policy or actions. Stating an opinion to the contrary is ā€˜gatekeepingā€™.

                    And thatā€™s okay, you have a right to have that opinion and draw that line. We all do.

                    Apparently not, considering the removals.

                    You do see that though, right? That every quote you chose, itā€™s you declaring other peopleā€™s genders and pronouns invalid. It doesnā€™t matter whether or not it was drag. It doesnā€™t matter who you were talking about, you donā€™t very to make that decision for others

                    Then you do agree that Blahaj policy is that dragon must be treated as a gender.

                    While you are definitely not an enemy, not a transphobe, not a bigot, you definitely broke the rule, multiple times, and you picked your own quotes about it. If this was still about whether or not a mod action was justified, it would be totally YDI with that list of quotes.

                    Again, most of them are not me, I picked them not as examples of what I believe, but as examples of objections that were fundamentally or exclusively to ā€˜dragonā€™ as a gender, without significant hostility which were removed as gatekeeping - ie me attempting to prove my point that dragon as a gender is absolutely core to this whole debacle.

              • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                Ā·
                5 hours ago

                Ehhh, what that screenshot shows is admins deciding that you didnā€™t treat pronouns with respect.

                Obviously, you disagree with their assessment. I do too, really, though I have seen their argument about it somewhere to and down the various threads.

                That is a different thing.

                I definitely get why you donā€™t think itā€™s different, but, looking at it from this side of the screen, thatā€™s not a statement of policy, itā€™s a reaction to their interpretation of what you said.

                Legitimately, I donā€™t see how that can be reasonably interpreted to be about pronouns at all. My objection was to dragon as a gender. I was banned for ā€˜gatekeepingā€™. Redirecting that to a pronoun dispute requires a reading that I literally cannot see, not simply one I disagree with.