this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2024

45 points (71.8% liked)

196

17312 readers

1648 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

Other rules

Behavior rules:

No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
No genocide denial
No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
No namecalling
Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
Other things seen as cleary bad

Posting rules:

No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
No advertisements
No gore / violence
Mutual aid posts require verification from the mods first

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:

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

moss@lemmy.blahaj.zone

greembow@lemmy.blahaj.zone

moss@lemmy.world

queue@beehaw.org

funky_rodent@lemmy.blahaj.zone

PeachyMcPeachface@lemmy.blahaj.zone

threegnomes@lemmy.blahaj.zone

greembow@lemmy.world

remotelove@lemmy.ca

Roflmasterbigpimp@feddit.de

A_Very_Big_Fan@lemm.ee

qaz@lemmy.blahaj.zone

A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world

qaz@lemmy.sdf.org

qaz@lemmy.world

qaz@sh.itjust.works

[Message from blahaj.zone] Neopronouns are not trolling (lemmy.blahaj.zone)

submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by qaz@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

66 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/20091173

I've been waiting until after Christmas day to make this post, but some of our communities recently have had a lot of noise and upset over someone that uses neopronouns that most people are unfamiliar with.

So I want to make this clear. 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. Pronouns are not rewards for good behaviour. They aren't only to be respected when you like the person you're interacting with, or if their pronouns "make sense" to you. Trolls, spammers, twitter users, it doesn't matter who they are, your options are to respect their pronouns, or to not engage with them.

I really want to re-iterate the importance of this. Gender diverse folk are undermined, invalidated and questioned at every step of our lives. As a community, we need to be working to undo that, not creating more of it, and that means there is no space for treating pronouns (including neopronouns) as a reward for good behaviour.

This isn't a free reign for trolls and spammers. The rules still apply. Trolling, spamming, etc will continue to be dealt with, but it's not an excuse to act as if respecting someones pronouns is optional.

(page 2) 24 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] pack_of_racoons@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Is it safe to asume that this is why the mods have

...been planning on moving 196 to lemmy.world ASAP…

per https://lemmy.world/comment/14170082

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] CreatingMachines@fedia.io 16 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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...

[–] MareOfNights@discuss.tchncs.de 19 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Because nobody IRL uses neo-pronouns XD

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] Deestan@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

Opinions aside, thanks for clarifying this.

[–] Deestan@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (14 children)

When talking about someone, is using the commonly accepted neutral "they" allowed, or is it considered non-tolerable misgendering?

[–] missingno@fedia.io 24 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

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?

[–] Deestan@lemmy.world 20 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

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".

[+] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone -9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Understandable, but

Not misgendering. It is how people have always talked about someone when the gender is either unknown, irrelevant, or hard to assume

Your later comment suggests you have a particular user in mind, in which case that user's pronouns are known, relevant, and require no assumption.

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.

It should be about respecting the individual(/system/thing), not just respecting a rule?

I was trying to ask if it fell more on "honest mistake, but not allowed" or "assumed to be an intentional transphobic trangression".

It doesn't sound like an honest mistake. Maybe it was from the user you mentioned who got banned, but it sounds like you're trying to see if it's okay for you to do it on purpose.

But maybe I'm misunderstanding! I would like to be

[–] Deestan@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Thanks for responding! I hope you have the patience to help me understand a bit more. :)

I guess we differ on whether you can respectfully refer to someone without gendered language?

Meaning, the mistake was assuming you could be neutral, not on not knowing the requested gender.

E.g. in academia (at least in my country) we tend to talk about authors of a particular paper as "they" whether they are one, several, male, female etc, even if you know their gender. It is consided respectful, unassuming and inclusive.

Do you think it is disrespectful to e.g. say "I love my partner, they bought me legos for christmas" when talking about my spouse to a colleague even I know she's female? Where my motivation is to not have gender in the conversation?

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (12 replies)

[–] Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 26 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

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

[+] PugJesus@lemmy.world 33 points 2 months ago (6 children)

[removed by mod]

[–] shapesandstuff@feddit.org 7 points 2 months ago

Seems mostly ok to kick someone for being rude and directly offending a specific person in their posts, regardless of the opinion voiced.

[–] MBM@lemmings.world 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That might've gone over better if it didn't read like an angry rant against "idiots"/"adult children"/"spoiled little shits"

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago

If it was banned for incivility, that would have been one thing. But it was banned for 'gatekeeping'. Writing on the wall, and all that jazz.

[–] julianh@lemm.ee 29 points 2 months ago (7 children)

A lot of people say the same things about trans folks in terms of gay rights. Some people might be fucking around, but drawing a line in the sand like that is going to inevitably invalidate people with legitimate identities. And if you really don't want to use them, it's super easy to just ignore. Idk if I've ever even had to refer to someone with third person pronouns on Lemmy.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Some people might be fucking around, but drawing a line in the sand like that is going to inevitably invalidate people with legitimate identities.

All concepts are just lines in the sand, even down into STEM. Lines have to be drawn somewhere. The question is whether the new line drawn or erased disrupts other lines, who it benefits, and what it's worth. I happen to have a very low opinion of the idea that gender is entirely arbitrary and without any line in the sand, and that "I identify as an attack helicopter" is not a conservative defamation of the trans and NB community, but a legitimate point of view.

And if you really don’t want to use them, it’s super easy to just ignore.

The commenter was removed and banned for disagreeing with the concept that dragonfucker is a gender. On the meta comm for the instance. Under a post by the main admin.

Idk if I’ve ever even had to refer to someone with third person pronouns on Lemmy.

Dragonfucker has been banned from a number of communities for insisting on just that.

[–] Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

the human brain is good enough of a prediction machine to not need a clean linear line in the sand imo, I'd like to believe that our judgement ability is closer to a support vector machine than a simple one dimensional 'greater than' statement

e.g. you'd know if someone was actually identifying as an attack helicopter as opposed to trolling by saying so, right? maybe it's just a phase for them but people have phases (imo) because they need to probe and gather first hand experience to learn

[–] klemptor@startrek.website 25 points 2 months ago (2 children)

you'd know if someone was actually identifying as an attack helicopter as opposed to trolling by saying so, right?

IRL maybe, but the issue here is that (at least from what I've observed) dragonfucker can be pretty confrontational, as if seeking a fight. It's obnoxious behavior and generally I roll my eyes and move along. I do think identifying as a "dragonfucker" for gender is hard to take as anything other than a long-running troll job, particularly because 1) dragons aren't real and even if they were, 2) "dragonfucker" is surely a hobby or job description, not a gender. Most reasonable people would find this ludicrous at first glance, and have their opinion confirmed by this user's strident tone and eagerness to take offense. It seems really unlikely that this person sincerely identifies as a dragonfucker (and honestly I can't even believe we're having this debate).

I really try to be balanced and understanding, but this user in particular seems to seek negative attention. Which is fine I guess, but I feel bad for anyone who falls into that trap.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (6 replies)

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Are 'nounself' style neopronouns included here?

[–] qaz@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Like drag?

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago (6 children)

Apparently they are included, by the actions of the admins in the linked thread.

load more comments (6 replies)

load more comments