Is it safe to asume that this is why the mods have
...been planning on moving 196 to lemmy.world ASAP…
Behavior rules:
Posting rules:
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
Is it safe to asume that this is why the mods have
...been planning on moving 196 to lemmy.world ASAP…
Wow...looking at these comments, i realise I still have a lot to think about regarding my exact stance on all this...the fact that I have have zero irl exp in this is not helping...
Opinions aside, thanks for clarifying this.
When talking about someone, is using the commonly accepted neutral "they" allowed, or is it considered non-tolerable misgendering?
It's a useful feature of language for 'they' to be a valid default you should always be able to fall back on.
I don't even know who any of you are on Lemmy, and I don't care to. I'm rarely ever even paying attention to your names to begin with.
When talking about someone, is using the commonly accepted neutral "they" allowed, or is it considered non-tolerable misgendering?
Are you accepting that this is in fact misgendering, but still asking whether it's an acceptable form of misgendering?
I am assuming it as "not adding gender to the sentence". Neutral. Leaving it out. Not misgendering. It is how people have always talked about someone when the gender is either unknown, irrelevant, or hard to assume.
I am respecting a site or community's rule that this is not the case on their space, but it's such a deviation from the norm that I want it to be clear.
The qualifier "non-tolerable" was clumsy. I was trying to ask if it fell more on "honest mistake, but not allowed" or "assumed to be an intentional transphobic trangression".
i don't mind what people call themselves and I'll use it to refer to them if I notice it, but they shouldn't expect their pronoun to be understood if it's something obscure
Are 'nounself' style neopronouns included here?
Like drag?
Apparently they are included, by the actions of the admins in the linked thread.