cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/25042034

This post is “FYI only” for blahaj lemmy members. It is not a debate, and is not intended for non blahaj lemmy users to weigh in and offer opinions.

I recently received reports of a feddit.uk user espousing transphobia. Specifically, this was a feddit.uk user refusing to use the word cis, repeating the “adult human female” dog whistle, and claiming that trans women are not women. I approached a member of the feddit.uk admin team and raised my concerns and sought clarification of their stance on posts like this, where the transphobia is mostly dogwhistles, and “civil disagreement” on the validity of trans folk.

I was told by the feddit.uk admin that their preferred response is this kind of transphobia is to “sort it out through discussion and voting”. However, the comments in question are currently more upvoted than downvoted, and little “sorting out” has occurred. The posts remain in place.

At this point, the admin stopped responding to my messages despite being active elsewhere on lemmy. When it became clear they were ignoring my messages and had no intention of removing the posts in question, I made the decision to defederate the instance.

I know some folk agree with the feddit.uk admins approach of pushback through discussion and voting, but this instance is not designed to be that kind of space. Blahaj lemmy is meant to be a place where we can avoid the rampant transphobia universally visible on nearly every other social media platform, and where we can exist without needing to debate our right to do so.

  • recursive_recursion they/them@lemmy.caEnglish
    1·
    1 month ago

    Our rules still stand that we won’t allow transphobia.

    Unfortunately, as the ruling on the interpretation of the law has recently changed, we are going to have to figure out how we approach this and that is going to require a consensus amongst the Admins, and an agreement on our wording going forward.

    I don’t get it. Why the self-contradiction?
    No matter how many times I read this I still don’t understand what’s happening on your end.

    • Maeve@kbin.earth
      1·
      1 month ago

      I think they are trying to work out how to do so within legal confines. A legal battle can be costly for someone without millions and billions. Ultimately, these governments will not succeed with backward-facing tactics. Hold trust in the ultimate goodness of the larger population. This is just extinction burst of dying ideations.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        1·
        1 month ago

        What law is that? Did the UK just enshrine some sort of right to be transphobic or something?

        • Maeve@kbin.earth
          3·
          1 month ago

          Here’s our answer, from the article linked in this post: https://lemm.ee/post/62470957

          This came after the UK supreme court sitting in London ruled that the terms “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act refer to a biological woman and biological sex. The action to determine this had been brought by For Women Scotland, a campaign group which brought a case against the Scottish government in which they argued that sex-based protections should only apply to those born female.