Unless someones pronouns are in their username they're getting a "they" from me. Nothing against xe/xim/xir but i ain't checking every profile of every person I debate about whether Sonic would be tempted or double tempted by the One Ring.
this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2024
176 points (69.6% liked)
Blahaj Lemmy Meta
2371 readers
4 users here now
Blåhaj Lemmy is a Lemmy instance attached to blahaj.zone. This is a group for questions or discussions relevant to either instance.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
i always just use they/them as a default until i know the correct pronouns because it's the most universally genetic anyway :3
load more comments
(2 replies)
That’s a fair problem, Lemmy and the mobile apps need a feature where you can see peoples pronouns beside their names. Voyager doesn’t even let me see anything besides someones username and instance, even on the profile page so I can’t even look for their pronouns even if I wanted
We got names for that. It is hard adjusting to nonbinary people in a language that does not support nongendered pronouns but names and nicknames are sociacialy accepted and carry the same respect as a correct pronoun.
load more comments
(16 replies)
Hold on, I'm she/they.
Now can we discuss this FASCINATING topic??? Do we think the one ring would hold multiple ring value? Would Sonic turn invisible or just absorb it? How does the ring affect sonic if it is absorbed? What happens if he collects 100 One Rings? I have so many questions.
load more comments
(11 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
I love how this gets posted for community members, in a meta community, talking about how to engage with our space to not get banned, and then every loser from all comes in here like "umm actually you can't police my speech and umm pronoun bad" and promptly gets banned for being transphobic and breaking the rules that this post said will be enforced.
the mods and admins are doing a good job here, thanks for all your hard work you put in to make one of my favorite spaces on the internet as wonderful as it is.
Won't somebody think of the transphobic cishet men?
They're the real oppressed!
load more comments
(1 replies)
Ada is legit one of the best moderators I've seen in my 25 years on the internet.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Coskiis' stance on pronouns is very simple. Coskii will respect anyones pronouns up until those pronouns are more complicated than a beings name. At which point Coskii uses the beings name instead of any pronouns. Pronouns are meant to be a conversational shortcut. If a shortcut is not being made, Coskii does not feel the need to use pronouns.
Neopronouns are (generally) not more complicated than a beings name. Exceptions do exist.
Writing a message without using pronouns for explicit understanding of how and why pronouns exist in English in the first place, including personal pronouns, is certainly a mood. The flow of sentences is somewhere between legal and caveman. Not using pronouns leaves no wiggle room for any interpretation on the subject being discussed, however the lack of personal pronouns means Coskii must always refer to Coskii as Coskii. Thank goodness Coskii is not a terribly long name.
load more comments
(7 replies)
If we have to have gender-specific pronouns, sure. While well-intentioned, that approach will never be perfect, it’s STILL categorising people into smaller and smaller groupings in contexts where categorisation is unnecessary. We’re jumping through linguistic loops so complicated that we need cue-cards for, when we could just use gender-neutral pronouns universally.
Bespoke pronouns are also only a “solution” in English, which (mostly) has no gender-specific suffixes for nouns. In the spirit of inclusivity German has recently misguidedly settled on just repeating the noun with male and female suffixes, “I have to go to the hairdresser or hairdresseress”. Unarguably more quantitatively inclusive, this grammatical monstrosity is also more severely excluding people that fit in neither category. The answer isn’t “everyone should additionally specify their own suffixes so we can list off more variations” but rather to stop caring what gender cuts your hair altogether. Hairdresser can be a gender-neutral word. Here’s to them.
My only concern is that people (or one person in particular) aren't genuine, but are doing to to discredit trans people, and the concept of gender fluidity in general. Kind of an extension of the "one joke" conservatives have ("hurr durr, I identify as an attack helicopter").
Obviously I can't say for sure that's what is happening, but I've read some of their comments that set off some red flags for me that maybe this person isn't being genuine.
I personally err on the side of caution, so I'd never purposely insult this person by calling them "him" or "her," but they'll remain a "they" to me, as that is still gender-agnostic not offensive to someone with "neopronouns" (as far as I understand it).
I know a few neopronoun users and some are fine with they/them, some are just worn down into accepting they/them, and some really do not like they/them
It doesn't really matter what you think about the person, the point is to take their word for it. If making people accept neopronouns is trolling then it's not a bad thing and I am personally not upset by it. If that did somehow "discredit" me I would argue that it only reflects badly on those who think my acceptance of it is bad, they are using it as a weak excuse to attack me.
Using they may be considered misgendering if you know that that person doesn't also go by they, neo-pronouns or otherwise.
It makes a mockery of real gender issues. I fully support anyone who wants to be anywhere on the spectrum of existing genders. What I'm not sure I support is indulging people's possible mental illness by pretending it's ok that they believe they're a fictional creature that only exists in fantasy.
I'm really not trying to sound callous or offend anyone, but that's just not the same thing and I don't believe it should be treated with the same level of seriousness as actual gender fluidity.
We know that it is possible for people to be assigned one sex at birth, but then fit anywhere in the spectrum. We also know that it is not possible for someone's gender to be "unicorn." Because unicorns aren't real, and even if they were, they are not on the human gender spectrum.
I'm sure everyone will tell me how I'm wrong but whatever. This has nothing to do with transphobia. The opposite, in fact.
When people on the left legitimize these people's obviously absurd claims, it is used as a cudgel to harm the trans community. It legitimizes all of those stupid, "litter boxes in schools" things in many people's minds. It does more harm than good.
load more comments
(13 replies)
The reason people say these one or two users are trolling is not because of their pronouns. It's because they demand accommodations that go well beyond pronouns and most of their posts are playing the victim.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
i don't get why its so hard for people to use the block function and move on, i was sick of hearing about dragonfucker the second i saw dragonfucker crying victim in every thread on my feed. other comments have outlined my feelings on neopronouns so i wont get knto that
it felt trolly and disingenuous the way that dragonfucker was going about it, so i used the block function because it was exhausting to look at. shouldn't be more complicated than that
I don't care for neopronouns, but it also doesn't matter what I think. If it's REALLY a problem for me, like that person who's gender identity is divinity and the pronouns that person uses are capitalized, I just won't refer to that person. (Seriously, that does bother me, not that person's gender in general but referring to anyone, fictional or not, Like This.)
I see that case as an anomalous one because the tension I personally have there is: a person may be a god, but that doesn't make that person my god, and I shouldn't be required to behave worshipfully towards a god I don't follow. I may choose to follow other religions' conventions around how they refer to their gods and/or prophets in some contexts, but the idea of not having a choice in matters of religion makes me deeply uncomfortable. Respect between equals, which is what using a person's pronouns generally is, should be automatic, but deference to authority should be earned in my book.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
I've spent what feels like half an hour scrolling through comment threads to figure out what the hell happened to lead to this. Is there some kind of explainer somewhere? Is there a key thread that I missed somehow? Should I even be asking?
There's a user called dragonfucker whose gender is apparently "dragonfucker", who insists on the neopronoun "drag", and who eagerly takes offense whenever misgendered, whether the misgendering was intentional or not. Some people understandably believe this user is a troll.
load more comments
(17 replies)
A user called drag can sometimes rub people the wrong way. Sometimes it's drag's actions. Sometimes it's the fact drag refers to dragself with pronouns using various permutations of drag.
The former is a valid reason for contention. The latter isn't.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Your intentions are valiant. Can I ask for clarification with one section to ensure I don’t error within this instance’s rules?
A persons pronouns are to be respected. This is true when the user is using neopronouns that you’re unfamiliar with. It’s true even if you think someone is trolling.
We’ve probably all seen the “one joke” of transphobes/nonbinaryphobes attempting a parody of preferred pronouns/neopronouns by choosing arbitrary or intentionally harmful terms. This link contains some examples of what I’m referring to:
Content warning: transphobia/nonbinaryphobia/misgendering, annoying visual glitch
In cases like these in which all contextual signs point to a person being disingenuous about what their pronouns are, are we the users still expected to speak as if that person is genuine and to use the pronouns they list until they state otherwise? As an example from the linked video, if I refer to Ted Cruz on this instance, must I use the neopronouns kiss/my/ass to be within the rules? (assuming Ted Cruz had yet to state a revision of pronouns)
In a more extreme case, let’s say somebody named User1 genuinely uses [neopronoun 1]/[neopronoun 2]/[neopronoun 3], which we understand to be totally fine. If a troll account named User2 joined this instance with undisclosed malicious intent and stated that their pronouns were [neopronoun 1 isn’t real]/[neopronoun 2 isn’t real]/[neopronoun 3 isn’t real], should the users/admins/mods each take that all on face value and refer to User2 with [neopronoun 1 isn’t real]/[neopronoun 2 isn’t real]/[neopronoun 3 isn’t real]?
In short, do the rules require that we refer to someone by the neopronouns that they state even if the surrounding context strongly suggests that they are a transphobic/nonbinaryphobic troll and that their statement of their pronouns is disingenuous and intended to be a harmful ridicule to transgender and nonbinary people?
When I see that somebody uses neopronouns and they appear to be in earnest, I respect and adhere to that and I appreciate that you do too. I do worry that there may arise some trolls who misuse our benevolent intentions and who attempt to mock and insult us by taking advantage of generous good faith and ultimately make things worse for all of us. Thanks for taking the time to address this and watching out for everybody.
In cases like these in which all contextual signs point to a person being disingenuous about what their pronouns are, are we the users still expected to speak as if that person is genuine and to use the pronouns they list until they state otherwise?
If that person is trolling, then report their behaviour, not their pronouns. The contextual behaviour you refer to is the real issue, and what will get them banned. And don't interact with them in the mean time. If their goal is invalidating the idea of neopronouns, the correct response isn't for you to invalidate the use of neopronouns as a result of their actions.
But even "attack helicopter" and the like... If you're not familiar with it, look up the story of Isabel Fall. She was almost driven to suicide, she changed her name, and may even have detransitioned as a result of the fallout she received from a story she wrote about the attack helicopter pronouns. Her intentions were good, it was an honest act of reclamation, but people were so upset at the mere idea of her story, that her own community turned on her. Her story looked like the story a troll might have written. But critically, it wasn't a story written by a troll, it was a story written by a trans person trying to find power in a slur that had been levelled against her community.
So until I can sense peoples intentions with unerring accuracy, the only thing we can act on is actions. And using neopronouns, even unusual and challenging ones, isn't a trolling action by itself. If someone with challenging neopronouns is trolling, their actions will make that clear, independent of their pronouns.
The contextual behaviour you refer to is the real issue, and what will get them banned. If someone with challenging neopronouns is trolling, their actions will make that clear, independent of their pronouns.
Here are 3 users’ comments just on this post concerning the contextual behavior of a specific user whom I presume to be the impetus of this whole discussion. I obviously cannot source other comments that may have been deleted or removed:
“it felt trolly and disingenuous the way that dragonfucker was going about it”
“My only concern is that people (or one person in particular) aren’t genuine, but are doing to to discredit trans people, and the concept of gender fluidity in general… I’ve read some of their comments that set off some red flags for me that maybe this person isn’t being genuine.” Continued “(also some other red flags like about how there is clearly some sort of kink aspect to this for them and their dragon partner), and gets people banned for questioning it.”
And here are 10 modlog remarks by your instance’s mods pertaining to the contextual behavior of the same user. There are additional modlog remarks by mods of other instances to similar effect. Please do take a look through them all:
2x: Banned: reason: Trolling
Banned: reason: history of misgendering and encouraging suicide
4x Banned: reason: Encouraging suicide, bad faith accusations, moderator harassment. Not Appealable
Banned: reason: encouraging suicide
Banned: reason: History of encouraging suicide
Removed Comment: reason: Advocating violence, encouraging suicide
Many users and mods alike believe that the user’s actions have made it clear that they are trolling and intend harm upon the community, yet they remain unbanned (edit: clarification: unbanned from the instance). As admin, have you scrutinized your users’ and mods’ listed concerns over this apparent repeat offender prior to now? Does the admin team have a direct line for users to report bad actor users and their actions? I do not expect you to “sense peoples intentions with unerring accuracy”, but do you distrust the acuity of your userbase and modteams over and over again? If the user is a troll, you are doing exactly what they want you to do; if the user is not a troll, many people have taken measures to avoid hostility from them. Even if this user were genuine with their gender expression/identity/etc., is the rest of their behavior acceptable and undeserving of an instance ban?
You will get trolls on this instance. You will get trolls anywhere online. It’s naïve to assume genuineness as the default online; don’t wait for a troll to break character. If you want this instance to be hospitable and to live up to the protectiveness, the anti-bigotry, the empathy, and the inclusion that it prides itself on, the instance needs admins who take less iffiness to guess when a user is trying to take them for a ride.
I had already blocked this user who knows how long ago. Their behavior doesn’t affect me anymore. I’m also not part of a demographic that needs this instance. Go ahead and ban me for speaking out for those who do need this instance. But this user —and any other users whom the admin team shies away from calling trolls— they will affect the new people who come to this instance who do need a safe place, and those new users will be deterred from here by the hostility and unfettered trolls that are tolerated.
load more comments
(9 replies)
Love this, Ada. So nice to see another instance run by caring, respectful folk. Love from beehaw!
Before I curse my worst enemy I will ask their pronouns. Their right to identity is not based on my respect for them.
For everyone confused about neopronouns I would like you to consider what we could and could not do about them.
We could:
- Not respect them and let people bully neopronoun users
- Respect them and not let people bully neopronoun users
Doesn't really matter if you want to use the pronouns or not, clearly respecting neopronouns is the only good way to deal with the situation unless you want to give people free reign to just talk down to, misgender, and harass a group of users.
As always Ada, eloquently put ♥️♥️ thank you!
Lots of people in here who don't get pronouns or trans people, for those I recommend this article:
There's a very real chance you guys might be agender cis, which is super fascinating because it's barely looked into, due to how agender cis people usually don't even know that their experience isn't universal.
load more comments
(13 replies)
Holy shit this thread has become a prime example of why we love you so much Ada, I've literally never seen a safer place on the internet before and I'm including my own community I run outside of lemmy.
Endlessly defending trans people and banning all those who refuse to accept basic rules, it's incredible although disturbing seeing how many transphobes have come out of the woodwork.
view more: next ›