Iā€™m gonna get real with you folks, weā€™ve had way too many of these posts recently. Iā€™ve been reflecting on this topic a lot the past few days. For me personally, I couldnā€™t care less about my gender identity. But just because thatā€™s true for me, doesnā€™t make that true for everyone.

The beauty of the fediverse is that if you donā€™t like the way a particular instance or community is moderated you can simply choose another to hang out on, or create your own.

Blajah has made it pretty clear by now they will ban anyone who argues against the validity of xenogenders, in order to create a safe space for those folks. Thatā€™s fair enough imo.

Safe spaces should be respected, and Blajahā€™s admins/mods do not deserve abuse for creating and maintaining those spaces.

I can completely understand why Blajah users donā€™t want to have to constantly argue with external users about the validity of their chosen identities. Bans are one way Blajah has decided to manage that problem so that their users can experience lemmy in relative peace and safety. While it is a blunt tool and I have my reservations about preemptive bans, there are not many other options for @ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone, other than defederation from most instances. That would be a terrible outcome for the fediverse as a whole.

In order to help Blajah to maintain their safe space, I would like to propose, if @db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com agrees and community sentiment is positive:

  • that we no longer accept posts about this topic in this community; and - we also remove previous posts on this topic from the community.

Thatā€™s all folks, have at 'er.

Edit: thanks for all your feedback and comments. I think itā€™s clear that the vast majority of people are fed up with this topic coming up repeatedly.

Summarizing the feedback, Iā€™d say most folks would prefer to retain previous posts for the sake of posterity, and to serve as an example of why we donā€™t want anymore of these posts. Iā€™m happy to take that on board. For those folks saying Iā€™m a PTB for intervening in this way, Iā€™ll just remind you that I havenā€™t made any arbitrary mod decisions, and Iā€™ve consulted with db0 and the community as a whole before taking any mod actions.

I think the way to move forward with this is to acknowledge that thereā€™s a bunch of queer and straight people who have a problem with xenogenders. Personally, I think thatā€™s a valid perspective and shouldnā€™t sanctioned on our instance. But for Blajah, theyā€™ve drawn a line in the sand over this and thatā€™s ok too. Our instance wonā€™t be blocking anyone over their opinions on the topic, especially in this community where free discussion is necessary and encouraged. But safe spaces should be respected.

A lot of folks mentioned I should more more specific about the ā€œno more posts about Blajahā€™s mod policiesā€ rather than making it a sweeping and overly broad statement. I think thatā€™s good feedback. I will amend this to "No more posts in this community about the validity or otherwise of neopronouns, xenogenders, and bans originating from Blajah about gatekeeping or transphobia. This is in recognition of Blajahā€™s safe space policy. You are of course free to discuss those topics outside of this community.

Note that this decision isnā€™t about ideological gatekeeping, its about reducing the workload for our own mods and admins in trying to moderate this community, and to avoid iterating over the same old topics again and again.

Blajah isnā€™t getting a ā€œfree passā€ over YPTB posts - if you feel they are power tripping over other issues then feel free to make a post here. But if itā€™s a post questioning the validity of xenogenders or about Blajah bans for gatekeeping then that will no longer be allowed here. Those folks deserve a safe space on Lemmy, even if itā€™s not a mainstream opinion.

For those folks who feel aggrieved about being accused of ā€œtransphobiaā€ or ā€œgatekeepingā€ over their views on this topic, I completely understand just how hurtful it can be to be unfairly (imo) accused in this way. Iā€™ve been in the same position, and I also found it difficult to deal with. I want those folks to know that our instance does not require you to support xenogenders in order to participate in our instance. However we do require that you use preferred pronouns whenever they are specified. Thatā€™s been a longstanding instance policy on dbzer0.

Thank everyone for your feedback.

  • spujb@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    6
    Ā·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    happy to chip in. it was right here that you verbally invalidated someoneā€™s identity and expressed clear intent to invalidate other identities in the future. edit i misunderstood and Pug wanted the most recent occurrence. see below for details and that occurence.

    content warning

    • PugJesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      Ā·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      Was that what I was banned for? Because it seems to me that I was banned just the other day, not 2 months ago.

      Thank you for also confirming that acknowledging reality is against your moral code.

      • spujb@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        5
        Ā·
        5 days ago

        ah! it was not clear you meant the most recent instance. still happy to chip in! i t was right here that you verbally invalidated someoneā€™s identity and expressed clear intent to invalidate other identities in the future.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          7
          Ā·
          5 days ago

          If you canā€™t use their pronouns or otherwise interact with them without invalidating their identity, then, you arenā€™t to interact with them.

          Are you capable of parsing this sentence? Because it seems like you canā€™t. Or, more likely, wonā€™t, I suppose because you like making a fool of yourself.

          • spujb@lemmy.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            6
            Ā·
            5 days ago

            what do you think you have to directly @ someone when talking about their identity for the rule to apply? that we can all just talk behind each otherā€™s backs and as long as we never make direct contact itā€™s ok? XD silly goose

            gonna end this conversation. the rhetorical work is done.

            • PugJesus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              7
              Ā·
              5 days ago

              what do you think you have to directly @ someone when talking about their identity for the rule to apply?

              What the fuck do you think ā€˜interactā€™ means, exactly