There’s no removed comments. I looked through my profile cause like sometimes I just be saying shit so I was okay maybe. But I can’t find any comments on that community. Just the old 196.
Idk if this is where to post this but I just wanted to rant. It’s my first time ever being banned so it felt ouch.
the biggest poster on 196 was banned for saying “i respect neopronouns BUT your policy of not allowing harassment for neopronouns isn’t for me and so i am preemptively leaving” while screaming stuff about how dragons aren’t real instead of just blocking and reporting offensive users as the mods explicitly asked.
to clarify. it’s a bit worse than you express. :)
Wait, that was it?
nope, clarified some other details in an edit thanks for holding me accountable
You were quite clear that you regarded a cis person daring to express disagreement with someone who is trans as ‘entitlement’, that saying “dragons aren’t real” is “invalidating behavior”, and that thinking that dragons aren’t real is a form of thoughtcrime which expresses intent to not use neopronouns in the future
Question: If we found the skeletal remains of a dragon in east asia somewhere, would you then be fine with ‘dragon’ as a neo-pronoun?
You seem to think this is self-evidently obvious.
At no point have I fought anyone on neopronouns.
But no, dragons not being real is compounded by the fact that human beings, by definition, are not dragons, in the same way that human beings are not attack helicopters. But apparently at some point that turned from “Attack Helicopter Gender is conservative talking point nonsense” to “You must respect Attack Helicopter Gender”
Jesus fucking Christ. Yes, it is obvious that dragons are not real. Thank you for reinforcing the utter disconnect from reality.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komodo_dragon
Why are you even choosing to engage in that point it’s a worthless argument considering that whether a dragon is real or not they have tremendous cultural symbolism and nearly universal recognition. It’s a worthless argument to say dragons aren’t real so identification with a dragon is invalid. And really this is just one of those “is it offensive to say a trans woman doesn’t have a cervix arguments” that you see transphobes try and do to test if it’s taken transphobic or not and claim they’re just playing around with facts and logic. In reality this kind of thing is just being testy to see how much people will tolerate, the answer is they don’t tolerate it when they see what the person is doing.
Good point
Don’t you think this kind of disrespectful to trans people when they actually experience real oppression for wanting to be who they are?
Do you think it’s at all disrespectful to try and determine if another person’s trans identity is valid or not? Oppression Olympics gatekeeping is still gatekeeping. TL;DR what you’re doing is incredibly disrespectful to trans people and isn’t appreciated in the majority of trans spaces.
@ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone Think I found another one of those unaccounted gatekeepers.
If we are assuming that ‘dragon’ here, against all context and everything Drag actually said, actually meant “a specific species of monitor lizard”, that wouldn’t change the fact that human beings are not and cannot be monitor lizards.
Ohhh, so it doesn’t matter. I see.
You should just say “human beings are not lizards,” then. Your focus on them being real or not is sleight of hand. It’s dishonest. It suggests you’re insecure about your real ideas not being very likeable.
[edit] They got deleted. xD Oof.
My real idea that… human beings are… human beings…?
you’d be funny if you weren’t so sadly acerbic about this.
ftfy.*
in this context, yes it absolutely was. i and the vast majority of 196 users stand by this.
ftfy
*edited this to address your goalpost moving regarding expressing disagreement ~> disputing rights because i don’t care enough to merit you with a reply
Ah, too cowardly to put this as a response, I see - I might have seen it, after all. “about how to run a space” implies that I was at all disputing the rule. I wasn’t, and I’ve pointed this out before, as your disingenuous ass knows. At no point did I say “Blahaj shouldn’t be run like this!”; in fact, in the immediate aftermath, I said I understood the rationale, but it wasn’t for me. This, however, was far too direct a contradiction for the Blahaj administration to handle, and they removed it for ‘gatekeeping’.
And you continue to lick their boots for doing so. Bravissima.
Hey, you’re demonstrating the same level of illiteracy you did the first time! Remember when I pointed out that at no point did I dispute her right to run her instance the way she wanted? Good times!
But this level of disingenuity is par for the course for you.
As seen elsewhere in this thread, the position of many Blahaj supporters likewise seems to be that the old conservative attack helicopter canard had a good idea going, actually, and we should be all-in on attack helicopter gender too.
“Dragons aren’t real is a form of toxicity” isn’t really a better look. You do understand that, right?
… right…?