OneMeaningManyNames

He/Him, Anarchist/Communist Front End Developer, originally from BC, currently in coastal Albania. Perpetually looking out for my next exchange community empowerment project across the globe.

  • 49 Posts
  • 183 Comments
Joined 4 months ago
cake
Cake day: July 2nd, 2024

help-circle
  • I agree with the sentiment of your post, but I think the scope is way off. I read through the comments and I found things I did not expect to find here (which messenger is better) and not the stuff I was expecting to find, which is the actual survival game. Yeah sure, reliable secure telecommunications is an aspect of it, but if you really expect the US to pull a Holocaust on trans people there are several other things to think about, both before and after discussing the channels of communication.


  • In general I agree with other responders, in that it is best to let them explain their bigotry. Having said that, and for the record:

    • a stealth trans woman will face misogynist discrimination at work
    • a non-stealth trans woman will face transmisogynist discrimination at work
    • a stealth trans man might be able to take advantage of passing privilege and male privilege combined [1]
    • a non-stealth trans man will face transphobic and misogynist discrimination at work

    If any of the above people are non heteronormative they will face homophobic discrimination either way.

    Let alone that these legal transition procedures are wildly imperfect, and it would be unreasonable to assume that a person can as easily transition in law as they imply. In fact it might take years and $$ just to get just the most important paperwork done[2]. And then what? Do they think that legal name change is like a Permanent Polyjuice Filter that allows you perfectly pass and live as the other gender?? P r e p o s t e r o u s

    Besides, why would anyone transition in paper if they are not transgender? This is the most basic comeback. Ask them “Why don’t you switch genders then? Grass might be greener on the other side.[3]” They will probably respond “But I am not trans”. “Neither am I”, continue, “I just want equality at work, trans rights included”.

    (Source: Old social studies coursework on transgender issues, but some info might be outdated.)


    1. This is not to mean that he might face other types of discrimination in different settings, like reproductive health. ↩︎

    2. And don’t even ask about non-binary provisions, more often than not they are not any. ↩︎

    3. You might also be better looking as a lady than what you look now, lmao, no just kidding don’t say that. ↩︎





  • a “put your money where your mouth is” fallacy

    Is this a “fallacy” or is it an “angle”? Probably it is little more than straw-man attack, because you know even homeless people need actual homes not just places to crash, and it is also a form of ad hominem attack that typically targets progressive/social change demands (do you really hear that often the opposite, like “if you hate homeless people that much, why don’t you support gassing them?”). I don’t know if people call those fallacies these days, I tend to see them as tactical conversational attacks. A fallacy is sth you can easily fool yourself with.



  • They do not matter at all.

    I beg to disagree. If “useless internet points” don’t matter, why is there a billion dollar marketing industry surrounding them? I mean all kinds of data mining conducted on all forms of internet reactions. People are paid good money to crunch these types of numbers, including who is casting the votes (man, woman, white, black, American, not-American, liberal, conservative, etc, etc). Then there is the troll/astroturfing angle. There are different types of campaigns that pay drones to upvote or downvote stuff, for marketing purpose or state-actor agendas.

    Sure basing your self-esteem on internet points is harmful and useless, but seeing internet reactions as a narcissist fuel only is also naive and misleading. Given the OP wants to get genuine feedback to his opinions to use as a political or moral compass, the question of the feedback quality is not moot at all.

    It should have no bearing on your life what so ever.

    The feedback quality is also indeterminate. We can’t know the proportion of astroturf, spooks/trolls, and genuine users in any upvote/downvote score and/or reaction. This can lead to a situation where the feedback to your opinions is always muddy, and vague. Do my opinions suck or is this their problem? In real life you won’t get honest feedback to your opinions anyway, for reasons of politeness. I read once this is why conspiracy theories thrive in Facebook more than Twitter (old study), because a network of acquaintances will not challenge your BS, but a crowd of strangers will.

    For all these reasons I think the OP’s question is a valid problem we don’t yet have good answers to. And it is relevant to any platform, Lemmy included.





  • So this is what Vulcanization is? Are you weirdly worked up about this topic?

    Like all these people were happily Yugoslavs and somebody fueled the** different nationalisms** in them to break them up? How does this** compare even remotely** to the American situation?

    In America you have several states that oppress their own people because they stand fundamentally against constitutional democracy, freedom of religion, abolition of slavery, gender equality, climate science, endocrinology, …add here whatever the average christofascist hates in order to feel righteous and murderous.

    In that they explicitly want to undo modernity and bring society back to the Dark Ages, they are basically the equivalent of the Islamic State in every aspect, except for the flavor of Abrahamic OS they run on their state apparatus.

    So instead of telling normal people (leftists, scientists, muslims, gay, trans, intersex) to tolerate those weird freaks, why don’t you go preach to oppressed Arab populations to find some common ground with ISIS, and GTFO ?







  • He rather questions modus ponens? Things can have many causes, that is why the presence of the effect in absence of the cause does not mean there isn’t a causal effect. Rain makes grass wet, even if the grass is wet without it having rained first, because there are presumably many reasons the grass can be wet (eg sprinklers), even if they are unknown to us. That having been said, this specimen is a hilarious face palm, all the same.