4 ms·

like it or not but things like pronouns, rainbow themes, gender neutral avatars, even masks are used as political symbols to signify allegiance. It's opt-in (l

like it or not but things like pronouns, rainbow themes, gender neutral avatars, even masks are used as political symbols to signify allegiance. It's opt-in (like wearing an arm band) and allows people who partake to identify political allies and adversaries. Even pointing this out objectively will get somebody steamrolled.

climb_stealth 4y ago
Interesting, thanks for clarifying! Looks like I live in an environment where this is not a thing. Or I'm not aware of it. I'm also not in the USfor what it's worth.
- gnarbarian 4y ago
  You don't notice it because as soon as somebody steps out of line they are erased. my root comment has been flagged and nobody else will even see it.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - Kerrick 4y ago
    For what it's worth, I can see it and it's been over 11 hours. I find it really interesting what people consider political/apolitical these days, even things that weren't before. If somebody says they like to drink orange juice, that's currently an apolitical statement. If somebody else comes out and says that drinking orange juice is a bad thing to do, and gives a political reason for it, the first person suddenly "becomes political" by virtue of enjoying orange juice and talking about it, even though that wasn't political before. Why should the opinions of dissenters have the power to turn someone's otherwise apolitical statement political? (Now compare that allegory to somebody who said "Since this is the internet and you cannot see me, please know that I'm a he/him" on a BBS in 1985. That was an apolitical statement. But now, saying it on your social media in 2022 it's political? How come?)
    - gnarbarian 4y ago
      it was unflagged sometime last night.
patates 4y ago
[flagged]
- tervly 4y ago
  Which human right does abolishing all female-only spaces come under? As that is the end goal of this movement that starts so seemingly innocently with preferred pronouns.
  - egeozcan 4y ago
    If you believe that, you need to take another look what people are actually asking for. Taking any search for any decency and turning it into "they want to end the world!!" can be done to anything in any part of the political spectrum.
    - tervly 4y ago
      This is what is actually being asked for. The purpose of preferred pronouns is to legitimize the idea that being a woman or a man is an identity rather than a material fact of existence. It's intended to validate the concept of males being included in the category of women. So, when female-only spaces are made 'inclusive' by admitting such males (i.e. those who want to be women, or who say they are women) then they are no longer female-only spaces. Eventually, if this continues, they will have been effectively abolished. See also: https://fairplayforwomen.com/pronouns https://fairplayforwomen.com/pronouns
      - egeozcan 4y ago
        Pronouns are not the only way to identify CIS females. I see no harm for exclusive zones, but it doesn't matter what I think, as that's a separate discussion. The link you posted, summarized and purified from drug references, says pronouns blur senses for males and females, which I also see no harm for. I, being CIS, also declare my pronouns and many others too, which article plainly denies as such: > Almost without exception, the people who request, or demand, others talk about them using specific pronouns, are asking for pronouns associated with the opposite sex to their own. LGBTQIA+ people are just people. Some have an agenda like others, some don't. Some take the identification issues to the political arena, some just... are.

climb_stealth 4y ago

Interesting, thanks for clarifying! Looks like I live in an environment where this is not a thing. Or I'm not aware of it. I'm also not in the USfor what it's worth.

gnarbarian 4y ago
You don't notice it because as soon as somebody steps out of line they are erased. my root comment has been flagged and nobody else will even see it.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Kerrick 4y ago
  For what it's worth, I can see it and it's been over 11 hours. I find it really interesting what people consider political/apolitical these days, even things that weren't before. If somebody says they like to drink orange juice, that's currently an apolitical statement. If somebody else comes out and says that drinking orange juice is a bad thing to do, and gives a political reason for it, the first person suddenly "becomes political" by virtue of enjoying orange juice and talking about it, even though that wasn't political before. Why should the opinions of dissenters have the power to turn someone's otherwise apolitical statement political? (Now compare that allegory to somebody who said "Since this is the internet and you cannot see me, please know that I'm a he/him" on a BBS in 1985. That was an apolitical statement. But now, saying it on your social media in 2022 it's political? How come?)
  - gnarbarian 4y ago
    it was unflagged sometime last night.

patates 4y ago

[flagged]

tervly 4y ago
Which human right does abolishing all female-only spaces come under? As that is the end goal of this movement that starts so seemingly innocently with preferred pronouns.
- egeozcan 4y ago
  If you believe that, you need to take another look what people are actually asking for. Taking any search for any decency and turning it into "they want to end the world!!" can be done to anything in any part of the political spectrum.
  - tervly 4y ago
    This is what is actually being asked for. The purpose of preferred pronouns is to legitimize the idea that being a woman or a man is an identity rather than a material fact of existence. It's intended to validate the concept of males being included in the category of women. So, when female-only spaces are made 'inclusive' by admitting such males (i.e. those who want to be women, or who say they are women) then they are no longer female-only spaces. Eventually, if this continues, they will have been effectively abolished. See also: https://fairplayforwomen.com/pronouns https://fairplayforwomen.com/pronouns
    - egeozcan 4y ago
      Pronouns are not the only way to identify CIS females. I see no harm for exclusive zones, but it doesn't matter what I think, as that's a separate discussion. The link you posted, summarized and purified from drug references, says pronouns blur senses for males and females, which I also see no harm for. I, being CIS, also declare my pronouns and many others too, which article plainly denies as such: > Almost without exception, the people who request, or demand, others talk about them using specific pronouns, are asking for pronouns associated with the opposite sex to their own. LGBTQIA+ people are just people. Some have an agenda like others, some don't. Some take the identification issues to the political arena, some just... are.