If this post doesn’t get deleted, I’m gone. This just shows again that lemmy.world is filled with transphobes and that the mods endorse them. I will look for an instance that doesn’t federate with them.
The picture shows a post by a trans person praising donald trump.
And a response to that post pointing out that trump is transphobic.
But you saw this and decided that its the people of lemmy world who are this transphobes?
How is this post not a pro trans post? By opposing trumps anti trans executive order and pointing that out to a trans person who supports trump, you are damaging trump, not the trans person.
People can be trans and also fucking idiots at the same time. Its not transphobic to think a specific trans person is being dumb.
It’s the lemmy people dogpiling and continuing the deadnaming after the point in the tweet has already been made. Yes Caitlyn Jenner is a moron who aligned herself with transphobic fascists who have legally mandated she be called by her deadname. Continuing to deadname her after the point is made is just additional cruelty on top without any additional benefit
Speaking more meta though, I fully understand the anger coming from people more to the left of Republicans, cruelty has won the Judiciary, congress and the presidency, cruelty has been an effective political strategy for republicans and a lot of people are angry and scared.
Normally I would agree. But in this instance, the very fact that Jenner is trans and voluntarily having her face eaten by leopards is at the core of the issue. So you can’t really tiptoe around the subject in this instance. She’s totally doing this to herself.
That is not what the second tweet said. What it said was: “He just ordered the government to call you <deadname>.”
Replace <deadname> with the N-word. Does your logic still hold up? If not, why are you OK with one slur, but not another?
I’m sorry, I’m really trying my best not to add to the collective rage and negativity on this site, but this is deeply disingenuous. The second tweet is the kind of nonsense that edgy hack comedians do when they want to get away with bigoted “jokes”. Wrap the offensive bit in layers of irony and detachment and rhetoricals, to distract from the fact that they are still saying the offensive bit.
There is currently an ongoing genocide against trans people in the United States. I am begging you to take this seriously, even if you’re going to joke about it. Especially if you’re going to joke about it, because humor is powerful and words have consequences.
“There is currently an ongoing genocide against trans people in the United States. I am begging you to take this seriously, even if you’re going to joke about it. Especially if you’re going to joke about it, because humor is powerful and words have consequences.”
I agree… which is why I think this tweet is actually spot on. Sometimes it’s actually more important to say the n-word, hard r and all, because to soften it would be to soften the danger.
When we talk about the Holocaust, we don’t say Hitler “unalived people” or “put them to sleep.” We show them the pile of shoes. We describe the evil in detail, because that’s going to galvanize people.
That’s not the same thing as disrespecting trans people. It’s recognizing the danger and not coddling the people who are facing that danger. Yes, words hurt, but the kind of stuff Trump has in store for people like us will hurt a whole lot more than if you called me by my birth name. It doesn’t help anyone to sugarcoat it.
Would I say “Trump only sees you as a cotton-picking n----r” to a black Trump supporter? Yeah, if the context was right (like it is in the example). Hard r and all. Because it’s true - that is what Trump thinks, even if he’s smart enough not to say it (often).
That’s not the same as me calling them the n-word, I’m stating what someone else thinks.
Of course I wouldn’t call a black person the n-word. Not because I’m afraid of the word itself, but because I genuinely don’t believe in the image of black people that word was meant to create.
But Trump absolutely does. And it’s ok to call a spade a spade. Important, even.
Well… the were when they were in the concentration camps in 1930s Germany after the institute that performed the first successful gender reassignment surgery was burned to the ground.
Sure it wasn’t the many generations of the horrors of slavery but this is literally just Dido-ing at this point comparing the scale of atrocities. An atrocity is still an atrocity. Slavery was bad and we still see major hardships to this day because of the effects of slavery and Jim Crow. Nazi Germany was bad and look around, we’re speed running the collapse of a democracy into a fascist dictatorship following the exact same steps as Germany did in the 30s.
Trans rights are human rights. They are not something you can take away because people “stop adhering to the social contract”, the same way we can’t take access to food and healthcare away from prisoners just because they did a crime (yes, in real-life they often get taken away, but you get the point).
Insisting on deadnaming someone also harms the whole transgender community, by pushing the point that those rights are conditional.
But the person replying isn’t saying that Caitlyn ought to be referred to by her former name. In fact, they aren’t actually using it to refer to her at all. They’re merely mentioning that it exists, which is appropriate in some contexts.
If I were going over medical records with my doctor, she would be fine to ask if (deadname) was my name, because it’s for a necessary purpose. That’s different from using it to refer to me.
Also, if Caitlyn is offended by seeing that name, she’s going to have an awfully rude awakening coming under the current administration. I think the time for subtlety is past on that front.
If finding irony in a situation is transphobic I guess you’ll have a hard time on social media in general. Have you tried gardening?
And I suggest you don’t announce your departure either, this isn’t a train station.
Finding the irony of a trans person cheering on a transphobic fascist isn’t transphobic, continuing to deadname (something transphobes do for the sake of cruelty) after the irony has been pointed out is transphobic.
Yes she’s a dumbass who supports a man who is legally requiring her to be deadnamed. If you follow continue to follow the laws of a fascist to hurt minorities, congratulations you’re still following the laws of a fascist to hurt minorities.
Call her a dumbass, point out that the law as written requires people to call her by her deadname, point out that she won’t be immune to fascist consequences when Republicans do come for trans people, don’t continue to deadname just because someone else already pointed out irony.
Is mentioning the name in a conversation deadnaming?
Because in my mind there is a difference between “trump said we have to call you bruce” and “hey bruce, guess what trump said”, but it might not be the same for the people who disagree with my argument
Yes there is a difference between “trump said I have to call you bruce” which is what the original post is, but the people in the comments posting photos of the Bruce Jenner decathlon board game, or referring to her as “Mr Bruce that is” or making a fake book title “they still call me Bruce II: electric boogaloo” are where the transphobia is setting in.
Yes she’s a dumbass, yes she is cheering on the leopards eating her face, yes those leopards are going after trans people, but that doesn’t mean we get to act the same way transphobes do to insult and dehumanize trans people no matter how much we disagree with the trans person. Attack their ideas and their dumbassery, not their identity.
I agree, and I haven’t seen many people doing that on this thread, so calling out the totality of lemmy.world users as “unmoderated transphobes” as the parent comment tries to do is forced and useless.
I’ll go a step further and say that this kind of behaviour detracts from the main cause of trans rights, which many of the people here stand behind. Because if you call me a transphobe when all I’m trying to do is to call out your bullshit, what you’re actually achieving is making me loose simpathy for your cause.
If this post doesn’t get deleted, I’m gone. This just shows again that lemmy.world is filled with transphobes and that the mods endorse them. I will look for an instance that doesn’t federate with them.
I am very confused by your comment.
The picture shows a post by a trans person praising donald trump.
And a response to that post pointing out that trump is transphobic.
But you saw this and decided that its the people of lemmy world who are this transphobes?
How is this post not a pro trans post? By opposing trumps anti trans executive order and pointing that out to a trans person who supports trump, you are damaging trump, not the trans person.
People can be trans and also fucking idiots at the same time. Its not transphobic to think a specific trans person is being dumb.
.ml bot moment i think
It’s the lemmy people dogpiling and continuing the deadnaming after the point in the tweet has already been made. Yes Caitlyn Jenner is a moron who aligned herself with transphobic fascists who have legally mandated she be called by her deadname. Continuing to deadname her after the point is made is just additional cruelty on top without any additional benefit
Speaking more meta though, I fully understand the anger coming from people more to the left of Republicans, cruelty has won the Judiciary, congress and the presidency, cruelty has been an effective political strategy for republicans and a lot of people are angry and scared.
wait how is the above transphobic? I thought it was a leopard-face-eating situation
Someone being a bad person is not an excuse to deadname them.
Normally I would agree. But in this instance, the very fact that Jenner is trans and voluntarily having her face eaten by leopards is at the core of the issue. So you can’t really tiptoe around the subject in this instance. She’s totally doing this to herself.
“The president just ordered the government to deadname you” is not deadnaming.
That is not what the second tweet said. What it said was: “He just ordered the government to call you <deadname>.”
Replace <deadname> with the N-word. Does your logic still hold up? If not, why are you OK with one slur, but not another?
I’m sorry, I’m really trying my best not to add to the collective rage and negativity on this site, but this is deeply disingenuous. The second tweet is the kind of nonsense that edgy hack comedians do when they want to get away with bigoted “jokes”. Wrap the offensive bit in layers of irony and detachment and rhetoricals, to distract from the fact that they are still saying the offensive bit.
There is currently an ongoing genocide against trans people in the United States. I am begging you to take this seriously, even if you’re going to joke about it. Especially if you’re going to joke about it, because humor is powerful and words have consequences.
“There is currently an ongoing genocide against trans people in the United States. I am begging you to take this seriously, even if you’re going to joke about it. Especially if you’re going to joke about it, because humor is powerful and words have consequences.”
I agree… which is why I think this tweet is actually spot on. Sometimes it’s actually more important to say the n-word, hard r and all, because to soften it would be to soften the danger.
When we talk about the Holocaust, we don’t say Hitler “unalived people” or “put them to sleep.” We show them the pile of shoes. We describe the evil in detail, because that’s going to galvanize people.
That’s not the same thing as disrespecting trans people. It’s recognizing the danger and not coddling the people who are facing that danger. Yes, words hurt, but the kind of stuff Trump has in store for people like us will hurt a whole lot more than if you called me by my birth name. It doesn’t help anyone to sugarcoat it.
Yes. There is a difference between saying “The president ordered the government to murder you” and actually murdering someone.
Again you can’t compare the n word to deadnaming, that’s racist.
Ordinarily, yes - but she’s praising someone who would quite happily dead name her. It’s apt, is it not?
Nah this is like the social contract thing. You only get protection from the social contract as long as you adhere to the social contract.
The minute you stop adhering to the social contact you stop being protected by it.
Don’t be a piece of shit and people won’t treat you like a piece of shit. It’s that fuckin simple.
Would you call a black person the n-word because they did something bad?
Would I say “Trump only sees you as a cotton-picking n----r” to a black Trump supporter? Yeah, if the context was right (like it is in the example). Hard r and all. Because it’s true - that is what Trump thinks, even if he’s smart enough not to say it (often).
That’s not the same as me calling them the n-word, I’m stating what someone else thinks.
Of course I wouldn’t call a black person the n-word. Not because I’m afraid of the word itself, but because I genuinely don’t believe in the image of black people that word was meant to create.
But Trump absolutely does. And it’s ok to call a spade a spade. Important, even.
If they were being extremely racist I might.
Not because I’m racist but just because I know it’ll piss them off.
With that said I’ve never actually done it just thought about it
Trans people weren’t put in chains try again
Well… the were when they were in the concentration camps in 1930s Germany after the institute that performed the first successful gender reassignment surgery was burned to the ground.
Sure it wasn’t the many generations of the horrors of slavery but this is literally just Dido-ing at this point comparing the scale of atrocities. An atrocity is still an atrocity. Slavery was bad and we still see major hardships to this day because of the effects of slavery and Jim Crow. Nazi Germany was bad and look around, we’re speed running the collapse of a democracy into a fascist dictatorship following the exact same steps as Germany did in the 30s.
Trans rights are human rights. They are not something you can take away because people “stop adhering to the social contract”, the same way we can’t take access to food and healthcare away from prisoners just because they did a crime (yes, in real-life they often get taken away, but you get the point).
Insisting on deadnaming someone also harms the whole transgender community, by pushing the point that those rights are conditional.
But the person replying isn’t saying that Caitlyn ought to be referred to by her former name. In fact, they aren’t actually using it to refer to her at all. They’re merely mentioning that it exists, which is appropriate in some contexts.
If I were going over medical records with my doctor, she would be fine to ask if (deadname) was my name, because it’s for a necessary purpose. That’s different from using it to refer to me.
Also, if Caitlyn is offended by seeing that name, she’s going to have an awfully rude awakening coming under the current administration. I think the time for subtlety is past on that front.
Removed by mod
If finding irony in a situation is transphobic I guess you’ll have a hard time on social media in general. Have you tried gardening? And I suggest you don’t announce your departure either, this isn’t a train station.
Finding the irony of a trans person cheering on a transphobic fascist isn’t transphobic, continuing to deadname (something transphobes do for the sake of cruelty) after the irony has been pointed out is transphobic.
Yes she’s a dumbass who supports a man who is legally requiring her to be deadnamed. If you follow continue to follow the laws of a fascist to hurt minorities, congratulations you’re still following the laws of a fascist to hurt minorities.
Call her a dumbass, point out that the law as written requires people to call her by her deadname, point out that she won’t be immune to fascist consequences when Republicans do come for trans people, don’t continue to deadname just because someone else already pointed out irony.
Is mentioning the name in a conversation deadnaming?
Because in my mind there is a difference between “trump said we have to call you bruce” and “hey bruce, guess what trump said”, but it might not be the same for the people who disagree with my argument
Yes there is a difference between “trump said I have to call you bruce” which is what the original post is, but the people in the comments posting photos of the Bruce Jenner decathlon board game, or referring to her as “Mr Bruce that is” or making a fake book title “they still call me Bruce II: electric boogaloo” are where the transphobia is setting in.
Yes she’s a dumbass, yes she is cheering on the leopards eating her face, yes those leopards are going after trans people, but that doesn’t mean we get to act the same way transphobes do to insult and dehumanize trans people no matter how much we disagree with the trans person. Attack their ideas and their dumbassery, not their identity.
I agree, and I haven’t seen many people doing that on this thread, so calling out the totality of lemmy.world users as “unmoderated transphobes” as the parent comment tries to do is forced and useless.
I’ll go a step further and say that this kind of behaviour detracts from the main cause of trans rights, which many of the people here stand behind. Because if you call me a transphobe when all I’m trying to do is to call out your bullshit, what you’re actually achieving is making me loose simpathy for your cause.
Better still, convince lemmy.ml to defederate from all of us.
Critical thinking has left the building
K. Bye.
I’ve seen so much gay shit on my feed I can’t believe that’s true