4 ms·

> And then jumped through every possible hoop in order to keep using their website! I don't think you read the entire article. Her goal at this point is to del

> And then jumped through every possible hoop in order to keep using their website! I don't think you read the entire article. Her goal at this point is to delete her account[1], which she cannot do until she regains control of the account. She's at a stalemate right now. [1]"But now I just want out. I want my account deleted. I want the bullshit, inaccurate pages Facebook creates about me without my consent gone, too, but that’s just a bitter little joke for the ages, isn’t it? Facebook is just going to do whatever the fuck it wants to me. And to you."

phaemon 11y ago
I did read the whole thing. Her goal now is to get the account deleted. She was trying to keep using the site before they asked for an official ID. "Facebook is just going to do whatever the fuck it wants to me. And to you." Perhaps, I don't know what Facebook is doing to me. I didn't delete my account, I just stopped using it. It fact, I still get emails from them that are redirected to a 'facebook' folder that I haven't checked in a while. I'll check now. Hmm 1,558 unread messages...ok... Oh well, if it was important, they would have phoned or emailed or something :)
hugh4 11y ago
I tried reading the entire article, I really did. But it kept jumping around and losing focus from one thing to another that she was upset about. Eventually I figured out the answer to the question I came here for. It turns out that the reason the author is sitting at home crying on a Saturday night is because he/she/it is an emotionally unstable wreck who can't deal with life's minor inconveniences and enjoys creating drama where none exists. If you get locked out of your account and refuse (out of paranoia) to prove your identity to get back into it... well, there's not much that they can do for you. Don't like it? Don't use facebook.
- morganvachon 11y ago
  Facebook's mistreatment of LGBT folks is a real, documented thing that has existed for many years, and one of their pain points for that group is forcing a person to provide government ID and a "real name", which can then be used to ban the account for "misrepresenting" their sexual orientation as well as expose them to harassment from hate groups. The author is an outspoken advocate for LGBT rights, so I can see where she is coming from with this. > It turns out that the reason the author is sitting at home crying on a Saturday night is because he/she/it is an emotionally unstable wreck... "he/she/it", really? The author clearly identifies as female, and you just outed your own bias against the very class of people she is fighting for.
  - techdragon 11y ago
    What's hilarious to me is this is one of the times, linguistically speaking, where you have an "easy out". The author could have used "they" without it being insulting since it's valid mostly normal English. I'm not a otherwise biased person here. I seriously can't understand why anyone feels the need to make make life harder for someone over a petty thing. Except when language matters. I often feel something I've started calling "pronoun paralysis" and it's not because I'm talking to someone that doesn't care about this and I'm attempting to "inject" bias into the conversation by awkwardly referring to a male to female post op female who identifies as female as anything other than "she". It's the opposite, when I want to talk in detail with someone about this topic who does care, or who is a member of the LGBT community, it's time to put on the linguistic bomb disposal suit and waddle my way awkwardly through a conversation like I'm recreating a scene from The Hurt Locker. Can we all just be more accepting of the use of they/them/theirs and end this mess? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they
  - DanBC 11y ago
    See also Facebook's weird standards around photos of women breast feeding their babies (strictly banned for years) and terrorists beheading captured people (fine by Facebook).
    - morganvachon 11y ago
      That's something that has always struck me as upside-down. A sane society sees sex (and to be clear, I don't consider breast feeding at all sexual, it's Facebook making that connection) as healthy and positive, and violence as unhealthy and negative. Yet here is Facebook having zero issues with public beheadings of all things, while blocking something that isn't even sexual in nature on the grounds of public decency? It's maddening.
- scrollaway 11y ago
  The article's not great, neither is your reply. Copy-pasting what I said below, it applies to you more than anybody else: Quick reality check for a moment: for some people, "using facebook" is not a choice. I mean, it is ultimately a choice, just like wearing clean clothes is a choice or paying your rent is a choice. For some people, Facebook is the only channel of communication with some people they don't want to be separated from. For some, it's how they manage their social life, or there is some form of social pressure to use it and they're not in a position to say no easily. And I'm sure if I don't add this little disclaimer, some pompous jerk will come correct me, tell me everything about how they were pressured to use Facebook but chose not to: Yes, you can do it, everybody can do it, but you're not in a position to tell other people how to live their lives when you are the person who knows the least about their lives. And funny that, THIS is the exact same problem GP quoted. Facebook has a lot of power and that power is not being used responsibly. Defending that is appalling. > he/she/it That's very unnecessary. What's wrong with 'she'?
- umanwizard 11y ago
  I don't lean super social-justicey, and your point has merit, but I downvoted you for the gratuitous "he/she/it" slur. Why be mean for no reason?
- MichaelGG 11y ago
  I agree the article isn't great, but I downvoted and flagged for the "it" slur. There's no need to talk like this. And the FB issue really goes far beyond trans or lbtq or any such personal characteristic. The privacy concerns run deep and should be troubling to everyone.

phaemon 11y ago

I did read the whole thing. Her goal now is to get the account deleted. She was trying to keep using the site before they asked for an official ID. "Facebook is just going to do whatever the fuck it wants to me. And to you." Perhaps, I don't know what Facebook is doing to me. I didn't delete my account, I just stopped using it. It fact, I still get emails from them that are redirected to a 'facebook' folder that I haven't checked in a while. I'll check now. Hmm 1,558 unread messages...ok... Oh well, if it was important, they would have phoned or emailed or something :)

hugh4 11y ago

I tried reading the entire article, I really did. But it kept jumping around and losing focus from one thing to another that she was upset about. Eventually I figured out the answer to the question I came here for. It turns out that the reason the author is sitting at home crying on a Saturday night is because he/she/it is an emotionally unstable wreck who can't deal with life's minor inconveniences and enjoys creating drama where none exists. If you get locked out of your account and refuse (out of paranoia) to prove your identity to get back into it... well, there's not much that they can do for you. Don't like it? Don't use facebook.

morganvachon 11y ago
Facebook's mistreatment of LGBT folks is a real, documented thing that has existed for many years, and one of their pain points for that group is forcing a person to provide government ID and a "real name", which can then be used to ban the account for "misrepresenting" their sexual orientation as well as expose them to harassment from hate groups. The author is an outspoken advocate for LGBT rights, so I can see where she is coming from with this. > It turns out that the reason the author is sitting at home crying on a Saturday night is because he/she/it is an emotionally unstable wreck... "he/she/it", really? The author clearly identifies as female, and you just outed your own bias against the very class of people she is fighting for.
- techdragon 11y ago
  What's hilarious to me is this is one of the times, linguistically speaking, where you have an "easy out". The author could have used "they" without it being insulting since it's valid mostly normal English. I'm not a otherwise biased person here. I seriously can't understand why anyone feels the need to make make life harder for someone over a petty thing. Except when language matters. I often feel something I've started calling "pronoun paralysis" and it's not because I'm talking to someone that doesn't care about this and I'm attempting to "inject" bias into the conversation by awkwardly referring to a male to female post op female who identifies as female as anything other than "she". It's the opposite, when I want to talk in detail with someone about this topic who does care, or who is a member of the LGBT community, it's time to put on the linguistic bomb disposal suit and waddle my way awkwardly through a conversation like I'm recreating a scene from The Hurt Locker. Can we all just be more accepting of the use of they/them/theirs and end this mess? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they
- DanBC 11y ago
  See also Facebook's weird standards around photos of women breast feeding their babies (strictly banned for years) and terrorists beheading captured people (fine by Facebook).
  - morganvachon 11y ago
    That's something that has always struck me as upside-down. A sane society sees sex (and to be clear, I don't consider breast feeding at all sexual, it's Facebook making that connection) as healthy and positive, and violence as unhealthy and negative. Yet here is Facebook having zero issues with public beheadings of all things, while blocking something that isn't even sexual in nature on the grounds of public decency? It's maddening.
scrollaway 11y ago
The article's not great, neither is your reply. Copy-pasting what I said below, it applies to you more than anybody else: Quick reality check for a moment: for some people, "using facebook" is not a choice. I mean, it is ultimately a choice, just like wearing clean clothes is a choice or paying your rent is a choice. For some people, Facebook is the only channel of communication with some people they don't want to be separated from. For some, it's how they manage their social life, or there is some form of social pressure to use it and they're not in a position to say no easily. And I'm sure if I don't add this little disclaimer, some pompous jerk will come correct me, tell me everything about how they were pressured to use Facebook but chose not to: Yes, you can do it, everybody can do it, but you're not in a position to tell other people how to live their lives when you are the person who knows the least about their lives. And funny that, THIS is the exact same problem GP quoted. Facebook has a lot of power and that power is not being used responsibly. Defending that is appalling. > he/she/it That's very unnecessary. What's wrong with 'she'?
umanwizard 11y ago
I don't lean super social-justicey, and your point has merit, but I downvoted you for the gratuitous "he/she/it" slur. Why be mean for no reason?
MichaelGG 11y ago
I agree the article isn't great, but I downvoted and flagged for the "it" slur. There's no need to talk like this. And the FB issue really goes far beyond trans or lbtq or any such personal characteristic. The privacy concerns run deep and should be troubling to everyone.