• Imotali@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    Mod here. Just want to openly and unequivocally state… I will remove your comment if you’re transphobic. I will refer to trans people to let me know if you are being transphobic. I will ban you if you make an egregiously off colour comment. and I will take pleasure in doing this. Fuck your transphobic bullshit, go somewhere else. Nobody wants you here.

    • Che Banana@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Fucking A right. n

      You are amazing, brave people and deserve a place in society where you are loved . M

      • gunnm@monero.town
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        That’s the thing about choosing an instance, it’s his house, his rules. At least with Lemmy it’s like you can move out to the next building, Reddit is like living in jail nowhere left to move.

      • Imotali@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Frankly, I don’t care what you think of it. Transphobia is not allowed. This isn’t a democracy. It’s pretty simple: don’t be an asshole.

        Every comment removed violates the civility rules of this instance. Which reads thus (emphasis mine):

        Do not engage in name calling, ad hominem attacks, or any other uncivil behaviour. Criticize ideas, never people.

        IOW: Be transphobic and be prepared for me to iron fist the vagueness of those words. It’s pretty easy not to be an asshole.

        • Lorium_O@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          “Criticize ideas, never people.” Guess I can’t criticize serial killers- nevermind

        • Derproid@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Just to play devils advocate, wouldn’t that mean it’s okay to criticize the idea of transgenderism if you don’t criticize the people who are transgender (although not really sure if that’s even possible)?

          • Imotali@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            Yes. If you could prove transgenderism exists. See because you attach an -ism to it you are (in English) saying “the ideology of transgender individuals” which is “we exist” which is not an ideology. It is a fact. You can disagree with facts all you want but it doesn’t make you smart.or intellectual… it makes you wrong.

          • Captain_Waffles@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            That would be like trying to criticize blackness without criticizing black people, it’s not possible.

    • Pokethat@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      11 months ago

      Bruh, just do your job/hobby. Mods acting high and mighty is a big part of what made reddit so toxic.

      • Imotali@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        This is my job: to make perfectly clear what is and isn’t allowed. In no uncertain terms I will make sure this place is as free from transphobia as possible.

      • gunnm@monero.town
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        The good thing about Lemmy you can move to another instance with free speech.

        • Imotali@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          This is free speech. They get to say what they please. They are not free from the consequences of those words however. I, as a private citizen and not a governmental actor, can censor them.

          • gunnm@monero.town
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            I disagree, free speech means the right to express any opinions and ideas without censorship or restraint even if you find them offensive.

            You said you will remove any comment that is transphobic and ban if “you make an egregiously off colour comment”.

            That is not free speech, and it’s ok. Your instance, your rules.

            • Imotali@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              11 months ago

              They can say what they want without restraint or restriction. They are not free from the consequences of their words.

              They can say what they like. We can ban them if we don’t like it. That’s how free speech works in a consequentialist society (modern Western society is a synthesis of consequentialism and contractualism).

              • Pokethat@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                11 months ago

                That’s literally not free speech. If I say I like to eat broccoli every day and that people should try it for health reasons and you’re some kind of carnivore mod and it tickles you the wrong way and you block me for it… That’s censorship and the opposite of free speech.

                You’re telling me that you control the narrative. Now there’s nuance to censorship for sure, but you’re telling me that if you don’t like what I say I’m out. I have to type within the confines of the bubble of what isn’t too uncomfortable for you.

                I say let the downvotes do the talking. If I go on the electric vehicles instance talking about how (non-ironocally) I love to roll coal and how that’s what’s keeping me from trying EVs, I expect to be downvoted into the shadow realm. And that’s ok. What I’m not ok with is a mod assuming that my voice sucks and that I don’t deserve to be heard. Maybe some smart lemmier(?) will point out some doodad that makes a brrr noise and shoots out some harmless mist or something.

                • david@feddit.uk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  You have the right to be an asshole. Mods have the right to ban you for being an asshole.

                  Making out that they’re nasty for having some standards of behaviour in their area is calling good bad and bad good.

                  (Censorship is when local or national government put you in prison for protesting or ban your book or ban your ideas. That’s when your free speech rights are being infringed.)

              • gunnm@monero.town
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                Censor and banning opinions and ideas you don’t like is anti free speech.

                • Imotali@lemmy.worldM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  You were allowed to say it. I’m allowed to remove it. Welcome to the world. Don’t like it? Leave.

                  But also: nobody in the world actually likes the idea of absolutist free speech. The founding fathers certainly didn’t believe in such an idea.

            • Captain_Waffles@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              11 months ago

              Free speech is about the government not being able to restrict your speech. Guess what? Lemmy isn’t the government.

              • gunnm@monero.town
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                Lemmy is a protocol so there can be instances with free speech even if you don’t like it.

                • Captain_Waffles@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  This makes no sense in reply to my comment. Free speech is about the government, changing Lemmy instances won’t change the fact that Lemmy is not the government. My opinion, views, etc have nothing to do with this. As far as free speech is concerned a community would be free to remove trans positive comments if they so chose.

  • krayj@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    11 months ago

    I think it would have been fair to have a rule saying “no surgical modifications”… because doing things like facelift, nose-job, breast/buttox implants, cheek lifts, wrinkle removal, etc, are obviously unfair advantages (in a beauty contest) for those who have the money pay for it; and having a generic blanket rule like that would have accomplished the same thing they were trying to accomplish without being so blatantly transphobic… so a rule like what they have only proves that they are both despicable AND dumb. The entire notion of beauty pageants is outdated and stupid if you ask me.

    • dustyData@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      11 months ago

      Lol, you implement that and basically all beauty pageants stop existing. Which would be a good thing, mind you. But I’ve never met a pageant contestant in my life that isn’t … let’s say … heavily enhanced by medical procedures.

    • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I think it would have been fair to have a rule saying “no surgical modifications”…

      How are you intending to prove that that? Only the bad surgery makes itself obvious.

      • krayj@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Like any kind of contest, finding rules violations is hard and not foolproof. It’s like sports that forbid using steroids - competitors do regularly take those substances while training, then quit taking them for competition and go uncaught. Competitors who are discovered later to have been violating rules are stripped of titles.

        That said, I don’t think it’s a very controversial concept that a beauty pageant shouldn’t be a contest about who could afford the best surgeons. Well - as I said earlier I think beauty pageants are absurd to begin with, but if they have to exist I don’t think it should be a contest between surgeons.

  • stanleytweedle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I mean… it’s supposed to be a ‘beauty contest’ so why shouldn’t they compete?

    Not that I don’t think the entire concept of a competition over beauty is stupid, but they exist, so why not just see who wins?

    • Neve8028@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s funny because the original trans sports bans were justified by saying that they would have an unfair advantage. This beauty pageant ban is just transphobes saying that trans women are unfairly attractive lmfao.

    • Sivar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      These contests are full of ideology, so a trans person has a significant advantage over the others. There aren’t enough heartwarming and sob stories in the world to compensate for that.

      On the other hand, I don’t really care if those kind of competitions are unfair. If they help trans people convey a message, that’s probably the best thing that can come out of them.

  • eggvng@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Elia Bonci, who also spoke to la Repubblica, said: “I took courage, used my deadname and signed up for Miss Italy because fighting transphobia is intersectional and even though I’m not a trans woman, I’ve decided to fight for their rights.”

    much respect to all that followed!

      • maynarkh@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        They are trans men, who the organizers consider women as opposed to the trans women who can’t compete because they consider them men.

          • PeiPei1@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            I’ll summarize:

            • The contest organizers don’t accept trans women (AKA assigned male at birth, transitioned to female)

            • This means that they are being transphobic, they aren’t treating trans women as women.

            • The person in the article is the opposite, assigned female at birth and transitioned to male. AKA a trans man.

            • This person is considered a woman by the beauty contest despite identifying as male.

            • He entered the beauty contest as a form of protest and to bring attention to the blatant transphobia.

      • AmbleHamble@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Think the others were missing the point - they are trans men. Their dead name is their dead female name.

        The ruling was to prevent trans women from competing, so while they can’t stand for trans women, they’ll stand for all trans.

  • itscozydownhere@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    For context, Miss Italia is no longer broadcasted on important tv channels and almost no one watches or care about who wins now. Years ago (10?) it was a big thing and winners would make commercials and do movies/series and be remembered for life. But it’s too an old school concept now

    Anyway, I love this turn of events

    Source: Italian

      • itscozydownhere@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        I just googled it, apparently it might come back to the first national tv channel for 2023, we’ll see, anyway it was streamed on the official website before that and for the last 4 years

        • Here_in_Malaysia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          11 months ago

          Will they have the power to reject candidates? Maybe I’m naive to think they’ll have the trans men compete too but I wanna see how it’ll play out.

          • itscozydownhere@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            I think they totally can reject who they want… usually competitors are the winners of local beauty contest, so there’s a lot of ways to be excluded before even reaching the last decision stage. But not sure, I never really cared for it

  • tenitchyfingers@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    YES. This is EXACTLY what I’ve been saying!!! Like honestly, as a cis woman from Italy I’m so embarrassed by this nonsense. Like, cutting trans women out of the competition at this moment just means people are recognizing that trans women are “unfairly” more good looking than cis women. Which, personally, is true in my case but you don’t see me bitching about it. Fuck yeah trans dudes, trans chicks and non-binary buddies.

    • diprount_tomato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      Wait what? I get why someone would forbid trans women from participating in female sports events, but why TF can’t they go to beauty contests?

      • tenitchyfingers@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Ok, hold on, why would you forbid trans women from competing? Because of “unfair advantages”? First off, trans women who completed their transition don’t have a male body. They have a female body. And some athletes are naturally better at some sports than others. Like, shorter basketball players are naturally disadvantaged at basket, which is why they need to train twice as hard as taller players or switch to another sport. Also, every whiny white woman complaining about trans women doing better than them always forgets to mention the athletes winning are still the cis ones, which destroys the idea that trans women have an advantage.

        The point never held up either in sports nor anywhere else. And it was never about sports anyway.

            • seukari@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              From experience, female clothes aren’t proportioned to fit trans women as well as cis women. While in your other comment you make a good point about some cis women also being outside the ‘conventional’ physical expectations for women in western society, that doesn’t also mean that trans people don’t face the same issues. We talk about these problems from a trans perspective because trans people are often targeted with legislation and rules from people who don’t understand, and are blocked from being treated as their preferred gender. A bulky cis woman might share physical characteristics with a trans woman, but their existence is also significantly less opposed.

              Edit: to my first point there are a number of biological size/proportion differences between cis men and cis women that can be seen here: https://ehs.oregonstate.edu/sites/ehs.oregonstate.edu/files/pdf/ergo/ergonomicsanddesignreferenceguidewhitepaper.pdf

              • tenitchyfingers@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                Oh yeah, for sure, I’m not saying gnc cis woman face the same amount of oppression as trans women. What I’m saying is, by shoving people into very restrictive, hyper-specific boxes, we end up excluding people who by definition shouldn’t be excluded. Like the cis athlete who was excluded from competing because she naturally produces more testosterone than the others. While being cis, again. Or like, all the cis gnc women who get attacked or murdered because transphobes think they’re trans when they’re not.

                My point is, women aren’t all the same. Also, women who are naturally prone to packing muscles can and sometimes do go toe to toe with men in terms of height and strength. But they’re still cis women, and should compete as cis women.

                But all of this is pointless anyway: this is a BEAUTY contest, and excluding trans women in this historical period is basically like saying trans women have “unfair advantages in the field of beauty” which I mean, could be, but it’s very much a self-report. There’s also the objection that “trans women do surgeries to look the way they look” which yeah, true, but cis women who participate in Miss Italia also very much do get surgery to look the way they look. Matter of fact, there have been multiple scandals about Miss Italy winners having gone through plastic surgery to win. So I mean, everything goes.

      • axolittl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        It’s wrong to ban trans women from women’s sports, because trans women are women.

        • diprount_tomato@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          But they have the muscles of a male and usually beat all women-since-birth in competitions.

          Yeah, Ik I’m gonna get downvoted to oblivion and I’m gonna get called TERF but that’s the reason it’s controversial in the first place

          • tenitchyfingers@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            What’s your idea of what a trans woman’s body looks like, exactly? Like, do you think a trans woman is just “a man in a dress”? Because that’s just straight up inaccurate in every way. HRT changes trans people’s bodies and how those bodies work. That’s why we say “trans women are women and trans men are men”. Like, would you think making someone with the body of Buck Angel compete in women’s competitions would be fair? Google Buck Angel, look at him and then come back at me.

  • MonkderZweite@feddit.ch
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Wait, they have to tell the organizers such sensible details?

    Are they required to be virgins too?

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    This is a pretty awesome way to protest and show solidarity. These trans men are ballsy as fuck and I salute them.

  • uis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    What is protest part? Not sure it is malicious compliance either because contestant was not rebirthed as woman. Not that it’s possible unless you are buddhist.

  • diprount_tomato@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    Would they win in a contest that has female beauty parameters tho? It’s like judging an M based on how similar it looks to an F

        • Here_in_Malaysia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          11 months ago

          It’s not about winning, it’s about sending a message. The message being that trans women shouldn’t have any problem competing with cis women if the judges feel that trans men will have a problem competing with cis women. I hope that make sense to read.

    • lapingvino@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      No, because trans men are “biologically women” and are thus specifically allowed by this approach. It’s the same kind of conflation that causes the bathroom issues. People only seem to understand that trans women exist and think they are the same as trans men. Reminding people that trans men exist hopefully gets peoples brains working.