Blåhaj Lemmy is a Lemmy instance attached to blahaj.zone. This is a group for questions or discussions relevant to either instance.
i bite my thumb at anyone who complains about drag. the most drag has ever done is correct people and VERY OCCASIONALLY call out when someone is actively belligerent about it.
reckon how folks treat our dearest dragonfucker is pretty good insight into how they’d react to myriad other similar social situations. this heavily contributes to why i have very little patience for folks “just asking (bad faith) questions” about it.
Thank you. it is mindboggling that supposed trans allies can tell people they aren't valid without seeing their hypocrisy.
I've spent what feels like half an hour scrolling through comment threads to figure out what the hell happened to lead to this. Is there some kind of explainer somewhere? Is there a key thread that I missed somehow? Should I even be asking?
There's a user called dragonfucker whose gender is apparently "dragonfucker", who insists on the neopronoun "drag", and who eagerly takes offense whenever misgendered, whether the misgendering was intentional or not. Some people understandably believe this user is a troll.
This is more of a public service announcement style of post than a deeply intentioned 'after incident response' post.
While I'm sure there have been plenty of incidents based on some of the other comments, there hasn't been some singular massive event to cause this to happen. If anything it's more of a reminder that one purpose of blahaj.zone is for inclusivity and acceptance. Excluding people because of some indirect words is not the goal.
Thanks for clarifying.
Love this, Ada. So nice to see another instance run by caring, respectful folk. Love from beehaw!
Before I curse my worst enemy I will ask their pronouns. Their right to identity is not based on my respect for them.
Your intentions are valiant. Can I ask for clarification with one section to ensure I don’t error within this instance’s rules?
A persons pronouns are to be respected. This is true when the user is using neopronouns that you’re unfamiliar with. It’s true even if you think someone is trolling.
We’ve probably all seen the “one joke” of transphobes/nonbinaryphobes attempting a parody of preferred pronouns/neopronouns by choosing arbitrary or intentionally harmful terms. This link contains some examples of what I’m referring to:
Content warning: transphobia/nonbinaryphobia/misgendering, annoying visual glitch
In cases like these in which all contextual signs point to a person being disingenuous about what their pronouns are, are we the users still expected to speak as if that person is genuine and to use the pronouns they list until they state otherwise? As an example from the linked video, if I refer to Ted Cruz on this instance, must I use the neopronouns kiss/my/ass to be within the rules? (assuming Ted Cruz had yet to state a revision of pronouns)
In a more extreme case, let’s say somebody named User1 genuinely uses [neopronoun 1]/[neopronoun 2]/[neopronoun 3], which we understand to be totally fine. If a troll account named User2 joined this instance with undisclosed malicious intent and stated that their pronouns were [neopronoun 1 isn’t real]/[neopronoun 2 isn’t real]/[neopronoun 3 isn’t real], should the users/admins/mods each take that all on face value and refer to User2 with [neopronoun 1 isn’t real]/[neopronoun 2 isn’t real]/[neopronoun 3 isn’t real]?
In short, do the rules require that we refer to someone by the neopronouns that they state even if the surrounding context strongly suggests that they are a transphobic/nonbinaryphobic troll and that their statement of their pronouns is disingenuous and intended to be a harmful ridicule to transgender and nonbinary people?
When I see that somebody uses neopronouns and they appear to be in earnest, I respect and adhere to that and I appreciate that you do too. I do worry that there may arise some trolls who misuse our benevolent intentions and who attempt to mock and insult us by taking advantage of generous good faith and ultimately make things worse for all of us. Thanks for taking the time to address this and watching out for everybody.
In cases like these in which all contextual signs point to a person being disingenuous about what their pronouns are, are we the users still expected to speak as if that person is genuine and to use the pronouns they list until they state otherwise?
If that person is trolling, then report their behaviour, not their pronouns. The contextual behaviour you refer to is the real issue, and what will get them banned. And don't interact with them in the mean time. If their goal is invalidating the idea of neopronouns, the correct response isn't for you to invalidate the use of neopronouns as a result of their actions.
But even "attack helicopter" and the like... If you're not familiar with it, look up the story of Isabel Fall. She was almost driven to suicide, she changed her name, and may even have detransitioned as a result of the fallout she received from a story she wrote about the attack helicopter pronouns. Her intentions were good, it was an honest act of reclamation, but people were so upset at the mere idea of her story, that her own community turned on her. Her story looked like the story a troll might have written. But critically, it wasn't a story written by a troll, it was a story written by a trans person trying to find power in a slur that had been levelled against her community.
So until I can sense peoples intentions with unerring accuracy, the only thing we can act on is actions. And using neopronouns, even unusual and challenging ones, isn't a trolling action by itself. If someone with challenging neopronouns is trolling, their actions will make that clear, independent of their pronouns.
The contextual behaviour you refer to is the real issue, and what will get them banned. If someone with challenging neopronouns is trolling, their actions will make that clear, independent of their pronouns.
Here are 3 users’ comments just on this post concerning the contextual behavior of a specific user whom I presume to be the impetus of this whole discussion. I obviously cannot source other comments that may have been deleted or removed:
“it felt trolly and disingenuous the way that dragonfucker was going about it”
“My only concern is that people (or one person in particular) aren’t genuine, but are doing to to discredit trans people, and the concept of gender fluidity in general… I’ve read some of their comments that set off some red flags for me that maybe this person isn’t being genuine.” Continued “(also some other red flags like about how there is clearly some sort of kink aspect to this for them and their dragon partner), and gets people banned for questioning it.”
And here are 10 modlog remarks by your instance’s mods pertaining to the contextual behavior of the same user. There are additional modlog remarks by mods of other instances to similar effect. Please do take a look through them all:
2x: Banned: reason: Trolling
Banned: reason: history of misgendering and encouraging suicide
4x Banned: reason: Encouraging suicide, bad faith accusations, moderator harassment. Not Appealable
Banned: reason: encouraging suicide
Banned: reason: History of encouraging suicide
Removed Comment: reason: Advocating violence, encouraging suicide
Many users and mods alike believe that the user’s actions have made it clear that they are trolling and intend harm upon the community, yet they remain unbanned (edit: clarification: unbanned from the instance). As admin, have you scrutinized your users’ and mods’ listed concerns over this apparent repeat offender prior to now? Does the admin team have a direct line for users to report bad actor users and their actions? I do not expect you to “sense peoples intentions with unerring accuracy”, but do you distrust the acuity of your userbase and modteams over and over again? If the user is a troll, you are doing exactly what they want you to do; if the user is not a troll, many people have taken measures to avoid hostility from them. Even if this user were genuine with their gender expression/identity/etc., is the rest of their behavior acceptable and undeserving of an instance ban?
You will get trolls on this instance. You will get trolls anywhere online. It’s naïve to assume genuineness as the default online; don’t wait for a troll to break character. If you want this instance to be hospitable and to live up to the protectiveness, the anti-bigotry, the empathy, and the inclusion that it prides itself on, the instance needs admins who take less iffiness to guess when a user is trying to take them for a ride.
I had already blocked this user who knows how long ago. Their behavior doesn’t affect me anymore. I’m also not part of a demographic that needs this instance. Go ahead and ban me for speaking out for those who do need this instance. But this user —and any other users whom the admin team shies away from calling trolls— they will affect the new people who come to this instance who do need a safe place, and those new users will be deterred from here by the hostility and unfettered trolls that are tolerated.
You don't need to use any pronouns to block and report.
Exactly this
i don't get why its so hard for people to use the block function and move on, i was sick of hearing about dragonfucker the second i saw dragonfucker crying victim in every thread on my feed. other comments have outlined my feelings on neopronouns so i wont get knto that
it felt trolly and disingenuous the way that dragonfucker was going about it, so i used the block function because it was exhausting to look at. shouldn't be more complicated than that
I don't care for neopronouns, but it also doesn't matter what I think. If it's REALLY a problem for me, like that person who's gender identity is divinity and the pronouns that person uses are capitalized, I just won't refer to that person. (Seriously, that does bother me, not that person's gender in general but referring to anyone, fictional or not, Like This.)
Your last point raises a good question.
Mods, if someone says Their pronouns are supposed to be capitalised, will we be called for it if we don't capitalise Them?
I see that case as an anomalous one because the tension I personally have there is: a person may be a god, but that doesn't make that person my god, and I shouldn't be required to behave worshipfully towards a god I don't follow. I may choose to follow other religions' conventions around how they refer to their gods and/or prophets in some contexts, but the idea of not having a choice in matters of religion makes me deeply uncomfortable. Respect between equals, which is what using a person's pronouns generally is, should be automatic, but deference to authority should be earned in my book.
Very true. I do hope that the one or two trolls who instigated this post stop getting free rein to start drama. Pronouns should be respected, narcissism should not.
Without ever making a post on the Lemmy, I have donated to this instance every month for well over a year, amounting to hundreds. Your principled moderation is why I am here. I will forever be grateful for the space you've given us