No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
view the rest of the comments
Also, if you come in expecting to debate for the removal of trans rights, you won't last long
uhh. where did you get that idea from? I support trans rights.
Welcome to lemmy. To help you get settled, the comment you are replying to is from the admin of a/the dedicated trans instance. And a "little" combative about it.
Ohhhhh that's what Blahaj zone is? I learned something today.
Yep, called after a Blahaj, an IKEA shark and a trans mascot
May I ask why the shark is a trans mascot? I'm genuinly curious.
It may have originated with trans people getting kicked out, shopping for cheap furniture, and then being pleasantly surprised to find a big soft friend at the furniture store - out of nowhere something fun and comforting appears just as they begin a new life.
However, that's speculation, nobody knows for sure. It just sort of became a meme.
It's light blue, white, and pink, which happens to match the colors of the trans flag.
https://www.newsweek.com/how-ikea-shark-became-trans-icon-1753400
What do you want changed then?
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.
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?
Ada, chill the fuck out.
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.
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.
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
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?
This is all an interesting hypothetical to you. To me, it's my lived life. Trust me, I've done what you're talking about. I was active in /r/changemyview, and I've spent a lot of time having this discussion with people on social media.
And in that time, not a single person has changed their perspective or view on the topic. Because they already had a view, and despite the ostensible goal of the sub, they're largely not open to changing their view. They may want to, but they're not actually willing to change it. Because ultimately, people arrived at their "concerns" through emotional manipulation, and that can't be undone by "rational discussion". Like sure, maybe you're the single exception, and in my 5+ years of having this discussion, you might be the first to genuinely change your opinion. But even then, after 5 years of normalising the idea that my rights are up for discussion, as if it's actually ok for people to want them removed because of their "concerns", I'd have a single changed mind in 5 years.
But you know what else I've done in those 5 years? I've told every other person that I've had this discussion with that it's actually ok to debate my rights, that whether or not I deserve rights is based on how well I can debate and argue. And I've given the bigots driving this whole discussion exactly what they wanted, which is to make myself a target.
Fuck that.
So what does it say about me? It says I've got more lived experience in navigating this topic than you ever will, and I'm no longer willing to see "civil discussion" on the erasure of peoples rights, in the pointless hope that it will actually help us. Because it doesn't.
Ok.
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
And that's definitely an opinion you should be able to post and discuss in a forum like changemyview.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Add a turbocharger and intercooler for better performance.