This should open the community in your favorite frontend / client: !buycooperative@midwest.social

As long as you understand that your own opinion does not dictate how language ends up being used by others. Some NB people call themselves trans, others don’t. I hope you won’t go around implying that people who identify as both trans and non-binary are wrong identifying as such. That’s arguably gatekeeping, and could make some people very uncomfortable.

I think this sounds like we’re generally in agreement? I might just put less weight on “the canon”.

like what you mentioned with Xenia, the old Linux Mascot.

To be fair, trans Xenia was sanctioned by the original artist, but my worry was along the lines of, if cathodegaytube was a “strong believer” in the Prime Egg Directive, would it have discouraged them from re-imagining this character? I don’t personally think how recent a character was created or whether it was abandoned has any relevance.

I subscribe to the idea that art is up to the viewer to interpret how they want. “Death of the author” I think it’s called. If someone looks at Felix, and sees an egg in him that has yet to crack, then that’s a valid interpretation of the art, to that person. Just as if someone were to look at a character and interpret them as trans, whether they are canonically cis or it’s left open (Spider Gwen comes to mind). I experienced a sad ending to a story? Well, too bad, author, my headcanon’s now that everything works out after all!

There may be problematic ways of doing that, and it’s in no way okay to assert one’s interpretation as the only truth. But fundamentally, that’s part of the freedom you get with art.

Would Bridget have become canonically trans if that freedom was taken away from people? (And heck, does it include the author?) Would Xenia have been reborn as a popular now-trans Linux mascot?

So there’s gotta be wiggle room in both situations. Fictional characters breaking the Prime Egg Directive, because of artists’ freedom of expression; and real people seeing fictional characters differently from the author and others, because of freedom of interpretation.

For a more concrete example, this post: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/22944727

I found this comic really heckin’ funny. Then I checked the comments. “Egg Prime Directive” Was I… supposed to be in agreement that the comic is problematic? I can’t really, no matter how I tried to twist it in my head. (Props to the mod for leaving the post up even though they criticized it though.)

Of course, nobody should do this to a real person, but this is a representation of something the artist has felt. We see comics of characters being ridiculous, or doing the impossible, and stories that involve violence or all manner of bad things. You wouldn’t take this to mean that you can or should do that in real life, right?

People can rightfully inform others to tell them not to behave like that themselves. But I worry that if they’re too blunt (figuratively) shouting “Prime Egg Directive!”, there will be people that feel discouraged about expressing themselves artistically like this, or making light of their own past in certain ways. And again, I’ve legit felt anxious myself at times when this came up before, and even now when I’m trying to talk about it.

This smells of AI. I can’t quite find the usual artifacts I expect (though I’m not that experienced), but the positioning of the legs and arms don’t make sense to me. edit: Which is weird because this seems to be an artist who has been at it for longer than AI art existed. Is this just a blunder?

Flat earth also started out as satire.

It’s innocent fun until it isn’t anymore.

I’m unsure about how I’d personally act on this? Donald really was a joke (until he wasn’t). Flat earth “conspiracy” was funny (until people took it seriously). Nazis, …?! Kinda not funny? Maybe if it’s just “shit nazis say” type stuff? Admittedly I’ve not looked at the community in question yet, not in the mood for it. So my input is just based on vibes. I originally just wanted to add the flat earth part.

edit: Sorry, it seems like I completely misread your message. Yeah that’s pretty damning if true.

Boundary pushing in what way?

Is that enough proof? Claiming that simply using someone’s pronouns is playing into their sexual fantasies and they somehow get a kick out of that is, in my opinion, pretty far fetched. It’s also entirely possible “drag” is chosen simply because it’s a shortened version of “dragonrider” or “dragonfucker”, rather than drag being a “sex pest” and “predator”. I feel like a community full of diverse folk and minorities will have the experience needed to identify such a person when they become a problem and remove them. Drag is not that.

I also feel like it’s not far away from a transphobe claiming they “don’t consent” to respecting trans people because “they don’t want men in woman’s spaces” and “it’s just a kink”.

That implies that you have absolute, undeniable proof of drag’s “sexual appetites”, and in extension that calling drag by drag’s preferred pronouns is somehow playing into their sexual fantasies, otherwise your appeal to consent doesn’t really matter. Do you have such proof?

That would be absurd and gross.

But, hypothetically, if a trans woman were to call herself that, would you then misgender her?

trucy is wondering why in the OOP it says

Edit: Image description for Brits:

I’ve read and joined a couple of discussions about this and in one of them, it turned out the people complaining about this ““pronoun issue”” were just bigots under the hood. I hope you’re not one of them.

In the end, Blåhaj Lemmy’s rules are to respect pronouns, no exceptions. You’re posting in a Blåhaj community thread. This is just to inform you that if you want to continue to not be potentially banned instance-wide, you might want to not go through with your “threat” of not using someone’s preferred pronouns.

Replace drag with a lesbian trans woman and suddenly the same argument of “not wanting to consent to playing into someone’s kink” becomes INCREDIBLY problematic. This is of course not what you’re doing. But in the end, it doesn’t matter what someone identifies with or what their supposed kink is because of their choice of name. Judge what they’re saying and doing, not who they are.

It’s a per-instance setting. Downvotes just go into the void, here.

I also think it’s a good idea. If downvotes were just used as a way for communities to self-moderate it might be nice, pushing things that are objectively not contributing anything valuable out of view. But in reality they’re used as a disagree button at best, and in harmful ways at worst.

We just use the report button if something is truly out of place.

The comments are worth a giggle but the AI voice ruins it. Also horrible choice of music.

You’re wrong. It does also mean corner.

Presumably this is because a block is different from the content being removed. It simply means the servers stop communicating with each other regarding new communities, posts and comments. This could allow the instance to be unblocked and the old content to continue existing – say for example when an instance has been acting badly, but it gets fixed some time later.

Blocked instances should probably not show up in search, but if you have a direct link to an old post, perhaps this should still be available? Not being able to block a community when its instance is already blocked makes sense, and probably doesn’t matter if you mostly check for new content, but I can see it being a bother when its shows up in other situations. One could call this a bug, or an oversight, but I suppose it depends on what the intended result is.

Politicians decide things, but to actually make stuff happen, the government needs to collect taxes to pay for services that are then provided to the public. I think the idea here is to take out the middleman. You won’t solve the problem country wide, but you’ll help some people, and that’s still worth it. Work together without like-minded people locally, be an inspiration, and show that it works. I’ve only been very briefly part of an activist group (specialized in food saving), so probably best to look elsewhere for good advice on how to do this well.

I didn’t claim there wasn’t a real person behind this. Did you check the profile you linked? They “wrote” an article titled “I asked ChatGPT how to overcome Imposter Syndrome”. That already proves they use generative AI at least for some things. How do you explain the suspicious AI-like structure of the article?

It is my opinion that any “real” creator would not touch AI with a 10-foot pole, if just out of respect for fellow creators.