Reddit admins forced the mods of /r/changemyview to ban the discussion of transgender topics. Is there a version of /r/changemyview here that allows transgender topics?

  • AdaA
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    2 days ago

    Also, if you come in expecting to debate for the removal of trans rights, you won’t last long

      • AdaA
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 days ago

        What do you want changed then?

        • Sentient_Door_Hinge@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          27
          ·
          2 days ago

          That’s not the point. It’s not always about changing your view, but being able to defend and maybe refine your view to a more logically consistent position. Even as a lurker, it’s nice to be able to watch debates on positions that you almost entirely agree or entirely disagree with and read the arguments for and against it. I feel it helps solidify my logically consistent moral views of the world and makes me rethink the ones that are not.

          I agree with op that this kind of topic and I would say realistically any topic should be allowed. As long as it’s actively moderated and both sides are constructively arguing for or against the position. It’s definitely one of the few communities I missed the most from Reddit and I wish it was as big here as well.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 days ago

            I feel like Change My View is useful for topics in which reasonable minds might differ in opinion.

            Fundamental human rights are not one of those topics.

          • AdaA
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            2 days ago

            So, you’d be ok with someone arguing that maybe a discussion about racism is warranted, because sometimes, a bit of racism is warranted?

            Or is that only ok when it’s trans people?

            'cause if you want logical and consistent, that’s something you need to ask yourself. Why is it that folk are quite willing to discuss the erasure of rights of just one class of people, when it’s not something you’d even consider talking about with most other groups?

            There is no consistency in that desire, it’s not driven by a desire to be logically consistent. This is driven by political interests and think tanks trying to create social divide. It’s not a co-incidence that you just want to consider the logical merits or trans folk, right now, at this moment in history.

            Until you’re willing to face the reasons behind that, and the impact your social context has on you, you can’t be logically consistent.

            • Sentient_Door_Hinge@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              2 days ago

              Yes I would be ok with that kind of question. That argument would be torn apart pretty easily. If you’re curious, at some point some of those topics were allowed on that subreddit and you should still be able to find them.

              If your concern is that it’s possible it becomes a weakly moderated cesspool of propaganda or whatever then fine. Until that happens, I don’t understand what the issue is with allowing a moderated debate on sensitive topics by people that are genuinely arguing for or against some position.

              • AdaA
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                2 days ago

                That argument would be torn apart pretty easily

                Sure. The argument can be torn apart. But that doesn’t change anything. What changes when you make those sorts of arguments is simply that it gives a green light to pushing back against marginalised people.

                If argument being torn apart was enough, the argument against trans folk in sport wouldn’t even be an argument. But it is, because there is a political interest in creating harmful narratives about trans folk, and using exclusion from sport as a wedge to normalise exclusion in other areas. Which is exactly what is happening.

                So if you’re ok with that sort of question, I think you need to spend a bit more time looking at the context those questions exist in. Why is it now that people want to suddenly talk about trans people in sports. It’s not because the trans folk have been doing anything different. It’s because there is an explicit motivation to create a culture war, with trans folk as the targets. You shouldn’t be ok with being part of that.

        • BassTurd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          2 days ago

          To play devil’s advocate, trans in sports is a hot topic that I believe merits debate. I’m not going to do that, but it’s an example of something that’s not just black and white, and that I assume can’t be discussed at all at reddit given this post by OP.

          • AdaA
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            2 days ago

            So, you’d like to argue for the validity of excluding a vulnerable group, in the middle of a world spanning hate campaign against that exact group?

            • BassTurd@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              2 days ago

              Nope. I very specifically said I’m not arguing about that. I’m giving an example of something polarizing that someone may want to have their mind changed on.

              Maybe ease up on the hostility. There are people out there that were raised a certain way that want to change or perhaps have questions due to ignorance on the topic. By being combative, you’re doing more harm than good for something you clearly care about.

              • AdaA
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                2 days ago

                I’m not asking you to argue about it. I explicitly don’t want people arguing about it, which I was hoping my previous comment would make clear.

                There are people out there that were raised a certain way that want to change or perhaps have questions due to ignorance on the topic. By being combative, you’re doing more harm than good for something you clearly care about.

                If someone turns against all trans people because they encounter a single angry trans person, then they were just looking for an excuse to justify what they already felt.

                And it’s not my job to play nice with the people trying to erase my rights in the hope that maybe, just maybe, they’ll stop what they’re doing! That doesn’t work. That has never worked. Every single civil right gain has been made by pushing back.

                So thanks for the advice, but I’ll keep pushing back

                • BassTurd@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  You’re not pushing back against anti trans people, you’re pushing back against people trying to change and understand. You are doing more harm than good to the trans community, and if you understand that and continue to be that way, then what does that say about you?

          • amino
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            2 days ago

            i think the real debate should be whether cis people should be allowed in sports. it makes my children uncomfortable to see them pushing their lifestyle down their throats

            • BassTurd@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              2 days ago

              And that’s definitely an opinion you should be able to post and discuss in a forum like changemyview.

  • pseudo@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    Welcome but I don’t know.
    Maybe I should go answer at !nostupidanswer…

  • loopy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    2 days ago

    There are 4 on different instances when I searched, the most active one looks to be !changemyview@lemmy.world

    I personally havent tried it but “be the change” you know? I didnt see a few subs I missed so I made them (different account). Start posting on there and maybe it will inspire more.

    • pseudo@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Important Lemmy rule: don’t assume a community is dead without having posting on it. I have been answered 9 times out of 10.

        • pseudo@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          !animalswithat It was on a broken kbin instance that stop existing a few weeks later.

          I think it happened to me more than this once but every example I can remember is one or two people answering or a least a ten or a dozen upvotes. So I came up with the conclusion that on the threadiverse, small or inactive communities are not dead: they are sleeping. And a bunch of lurkers or commenters are waiting for a poster to publish anything.