Comment

Comment on Is there a formalized ban appeal process for the fediverse? Do I just direct message a mod?

curbstickle@anarchist.nexus ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

Just to mention, your comments (that got you banned) were also deeply flawed logically.

Cis-gendered men and women can be unable to have children. Your statement says that they are not men and are not women by the (incredibly flawed) definition you provided.

I’d also note that the wording of your message was irrelevant, the meaning behind it was straight out of terftown, whether you recognized that then or now, it is what it is.

What you consider yourself and what you’ve considered in the past is honestly irrelevant to me, and I hope you realize that my comments are not made in anger or frustration, but just as an explanation and a hope that you can do better going forward.

source

Sort:hotnew top

GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
It’s worth noting that there are (shitty) people in the world who consider cis people who are unable to, or merely choose not to, have children as lesser or not Real men/women. It’s a distinction that has relevance in some limited ways, but has no logical bearing on your identity.

source
unknownuserunknownlocation@kbin.earth ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
Honestly, I've read through his comments, and I'm surprised at how much bad faith is being assumed here.

He never actually defined anything. He essentially said that trans women cannot get pregnant and trans men cannot impregnate someone - at least not naturally (although I am curious to see what science will come up with in the next couple of decades). That's just a fact, unless you have some evidence otherwise.

Yes, of course there are cis people that can't have kids, he never said anything to the opposite effect. Just because there are people with eyes who can't see doesn't mean that the statement "people without eyes can't see" is false.

And OK, people from "terftown" apparently say similar things - honestly, I don't hang out there specifically because I don't like the transphobia, how the hell should I or anyone else who doesn't hang out there know? Can we please just judge people by what they say, and not by what other people say? Because this is turning into a "Hitler also drank water" argument.

source
- curbstickle@anarchist.nexus ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  
  Can we please just judge people by what they say
  
  That is precisely what I’ve done. Just because youre unfamiliar with the rhetoric doesnt mean trans folks aren’t, since they’ve seen these same lines of comments again and again and again…. And again, and again, and again.
  
  For you to say I’m applying bad faith here just tells me you aren’t actually reading my comments.
  
  source
  - snooggums@piefed.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    You should judge people by what they say without an assumption of 'what they really mean' unless there is more context from them, because they might be oblivious of some other context as well.
    
    Not everyone can keep up with all the dumb shit that transphobes use to imply trans women are not women.
    
    source
    curbstickle@anarchist.nexus ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    Yoi realize they kept expanding on the comment, right? And doubling down on it?
    
    Well intentioned or not isnt really relevant. I’m not calling them a bad person, I pointed out the problem with what they said, and that the wording wasn’t relevant.
    
    When it comes to the ban though, it wouldn’t matter anyway. They were in violation of both site-wide and community rules.
    
    There is no other context that matters here. They could be trans and it still wouldn’t matter. The comment created an arbitrary (and altogether meaningless) distinction on how to define women, specifically separating trans women from women.
    
    A rule violation on both counts.
    
    So what exactly is your point here?
    
    source
    -> View More Comments