A true champion of free speech. 🙄

“A copy of the UN application says his refugee claim was denied because the adjudicator did not find Mwangi, who is married and has two children, to be a credible bisexual man“

Bi erasure strikes yet again. Bi and pan folks in supposedly “straight” relationships are still LGBTQ+, the letter “B” is right effing there. Bi and pan folks absolutely face discrimination and oppression, even if it doesn’t necessarily manifest in the same ways other queer folks experience.

I’m glad he has a temporary reprieve from deportation, at least.

I love the idea, but I can’t see it actually working. Developers would just sell even more games as subscriptions instead of selling licenses, regardless of any interactive online content or lack thereof. (Think of EA’s 2013 release of SimCity with always-on DRM, for example.) Then when they want to shut their servers down, they just stop selling subscriptions and wait until the last one expires.

Thank you for sharing this. I was absolutely FURIOUS with news outlets who thought her name change (and ESPECIALLY her deadname) was “newsworthy” in 2022, because she made it crystal clear that she wanted NOTHING to do with this man. She is NOT a public figure. It was nothing but gossip. And having myself been outed against my wishes in a well-known publication for the sake of gossip (albeit with WAY less publicity) I can tell you that can REALLY fuck someone up for a long time.

And now that manbaby Elon is publicly and explicitly dragging her through the mud, deadnaming and misgendering her to millions, and blaming her for his right-wing shitlording. She shouldn’t have to give an interview like this, though I certainly understand why she opted to. She should just be able to live her damn life in quiet peace. I feel for her so much.

After reading the community’s pinned “Rules Breakdown” post, I can easily see how Your post violated their rules. 🤷‍♀️ And as another poster in this thread points out, it appears You’re just on a time-out, not a perma-ban.

Also, I will capitalize “you” for You as an act of politeness, but I very strongly disagree with characterizing this as “misgendering”, even after reading Your “Introduction to capitalised pronouns” post. Yes, grammar is socially defined and arbitrary. For example, the only reason African-American Vernacular English is labelled “improper” is because so many (white) people with power say so — there’s nothing inherently worse or better about it. However, it’s still necessary to reach consensus on the meaning of words, else no one could be understood.

Capitalization of Your pronoun is clearly very important to You, and it would be thus be unkind of me to refuse to accommodate You when it’s pointed out, but English is not a language where every pronoun is gendered. The capitalized version is an honorific form of the same pronoun, not a different pronoun altogether. And generally speaking, the use of honorifics (“sir” and “ma’am” being the most common ones) is becoming far less common these days. Perhaps it’s because honorifics are most frequently used to establish dominance and subservience roles, whether that be in customer service roles (“yes, sir”) or governing roles (“yes, Your Honour” or “yes, Your Majesty”). To borrow Your own example, even many Christians now refer to their god as “he” rather than “He” in written language. And of course, those of us who totally reject the notion of gods certainly don’t. Your insistence on capitalization as respect for Your divinity makes me genuinely uncomfortable as someone who doesn’t believe in divinity at all and certainly shouldn’t feel subservient to You.

So you can legally beat us up there as long as you don’t “injure” us. A word which is subject to interpretation (at least in English, I don’t know how similar it is in Spanish) but I’m going to guess they mean “doesn’t require professional medical care”. And they label this as human rights being just “partially revoked”.

🤬

I don’t know anything about gnomes and barely anything about TTRPGs, but this question makes me think about social vs. medical models of disability. In our modern-day society, the social model would mean that autism is only a “disorder” because society doesn’t accommodate our needs well enough (or, sometimes, at all). It isn’t a disorder to be allistic because it’s “normal”, “the default”, nothing more than that. For example, in a hypothetical society where people widely use language very literally, the behaviour of not taking things literally could be labelled a disorder. Or if the vast majority of people had sound sensitivity, then someone without it who often forgets to keep their voice down might be seen as disordered. So if you do decide to go with this idea, I think there might be something to explore there when gnomes are interacting amongst themselves vs. with other groups.

If you’re concerned about “game author compares autistic people to gnomes”, is there a different class to use that might be a better choice? (I have no idea, but it sounds like maybe gnomes have a negative stereotype?)

I’ll second the recommendation for the Braun Silk Epil 9, though noting I never used one pre-HRT. If battery runtime is a concern, there are also several corded models which work well.

I’d love to have this feature, too. I typically use the in-app browser (web view), but sometimes would rather open a link in Safari proper. Probably so I can leave the tab open for two months until I finally admit I’ll never read it. 😅 But seriously, I’d use this feature, too. Even just a “Copy URL” to clipboard option would be helpful!

Sometimes they go together, sometimes they don’t.

Oh nooooooes, a disaster!!!

🙄🙄🙄

Yeah, see, it’s that conflation of “emotional” and “not thinking clearly” that bothers me. Those aren’t the same thing, despite the dominant cultural narrative to the contrary. Sometimes they go together, sometimes they don’t.

I am very disheartened by the number of people replying here who read “a community skirting the line trying to look like CSAM” and felt the need to go purposefully seek out that community to look through its images.

is this concern based in fact, or emotion?

Ada was clear in another comment thread that yes, emotion was absolutely involved in her decision. That isn’t a bad thing. Why is there a social attitude that decision-making is only valid if it’s cold and unfeeling?

Personally I’m in the camp of “let consenting adults do adult things”

Me too. I don’t think anyone is arguing against that. Anyone can still access LemmyNSFW’s content elsewhere, Blahaj Zone simply isn’t going to relay it anymore because some of it is incompatible with Ada’s goals in nurturing this community.

But if it is in fact legal, and well moderated, then is there a problem?

Yes. Legality has nothing to do with acceptability. This instance already bans lots of content that doesn’t actually violate any laws. It’s a judgment call.

Congrats!! 🥳

No, really, I used to end with negative scores all. the. time. 😅

Good question! Whether it’s actually infringement is a legal judgment I’m certainly not qualified to make. 🙂 But my understanding is that it hinges on whether a court thinks a “reasonable person” could be confused. For example, a clothing brand called “Firefoxy” would probably be in the clear since Mozilla isn’t in the clothing business. And maybe even a clothing brand named “Firefox” might be okay! For example, Apple Computer and Apple Records (founded by The Beatles) coexisted nicely for a long time until Apple Computer started getting into the music-selling business. I forget how it got resolved (maybe a licensing agreement?) but The Beatles’ music wasn’t available on the iTunes Music Store for a looooong time while that dispute was going on.

Firefish is an online service and software package, the very space Mozilla operates in, so there’s at least a case to be made that reasonable people might incorrectly assume it’s from Mozilla. It’s come up many times in this discussion already, and we as active Fediverse users are already pretty well informed about this!

The name is way too similar to the Firefox trademark and could create the impression that Firefish is associated with Mozilla. I suspect some lawyers are currently in a huddle trying to figure out how to send a Cease and Desist letter that won’t completely piss off the community.

(Trademark law, at least in the US where Mozilla is headquartered, requires organizations to actively defend their trademarks. So just ignoring Firefish would be risky, even if they don’t actually mind the similarity.)

That’s quite the drama. I wonder why one of the parties in the dispute seems a lot more believable than the other…?

The pride icons rock. 🏳️‍⚧️ Rest well!