- cross-posted to:
- youshouldknow@lemmy.world
- asklemmy@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- youshouldknow@lemmy.world
- asklemmy@lemmy.ml
An open source project the size of Lemmy needs constant work to manage the project, implement new features and fix bugs. Dessalines and I work full-time on these tasks and more. As there is no advertising or tracking, all of our work is funded through donations. Unfortunately the amount of donations has decreased to only 2000€ per month. This leaves only 1000€ per developer, which is not enough to pay my bills. With the current level of donations I will be forced to find another job, and drastically reduce my contributions to Lemmy. To avoid this outcome and keep Lemmy growing, I ask you to please make a recurring donation:
Liberapay | Ko-fi | Patreon | OpenCollective | Crypto
If you want more information before donating, consider the comparison with Reddit. It began as startup funded by rich investors. The site is managed by corporate executives who over time have become more and more disconnected from normal users. Their main goal is to make investors happy and to make a profit. This leads to user-hostile decisions like firing the employee responsible for AMAs, blocking third-party apps and more. As Reddit is a single website under a single authority, it means all users need to follow the same rules, including ridiculous ones like censoring the name “Luigi”.
Lemmy represents a new type of social media which is the complete opposite of Reddit. It is split across many different websites, each with its own rules, and managed by normal people who actually care about the users. There is no company and no profit motive. Much of the work is carried out by volunteer admins, mods and posters, who contribute out of enthusiasm and not for money. For users this is great as there is no advertising nor tracking, and no chance of takeover by a billionaire. Additionally there are no builtin political or ideological restrictions. You can use the software for any purpose you like, add your own restrictions or scrutinize its inner workings. Lemmy truly belongs to everyone.
Dessalines and I work fulltime on Lemmy to keep up with all the feature requests, bug reports and development work. Even so there is barely enough time in the day, and no time for a second job. Previously I sometimes had to rely on my personal savings to keep developing Lemmy for you, but that can’t go on forever. We partly rely on NLnet for funding, but they only pay for development of new features, and not for mandatory maintenance work. The only available option are user donations. To keep it viable donations need to reach a minimum of 5000€ per month, resulting in a modest salary of 2500€ per developer. If that goal is reached Dessalines and I can stop worrying about money, and fully focus on improving the software for the benefit of all users and instances. Please use the link below to see current donation stats and make your contribution! We especially rely on recurring donations to secure the long-term development and make Lemmy the best it can be.
Removed by mod
Yeah, no…
https://swimswam.com/ioc-releases-study-on-whether-trans-women-have-athletic-advantages/
Does that sound like an overall advantage?
You’re getting caught in bad faiths arguments from the right. MtF athletes do not retain any exceptional advantage against cisgender ones.
I believe you when you say you support the LGBT cause, but then please educate yourself on the topic and stop defending this position.
I’ll check. Maybe I’m wrong! Afaik no hormonal treatment was needed for some sports so inherently it made me question it (but I might be wrong).
I’m not talking about exceptional advantages, just any, but alright.
But having my comment removed is just dumb. If I’m wrong, let the comment be there, the downvotes will show that I am wrong, and people can learn and discuss this way. Being censored for being potentially and unwillingly wrong when I’m open to discussion is just dumb.
Thats not how moderation works. Misinformation and Disinformation, especially about oppressed minorities have no space on lemmy. It is okay to not know it and read up on it but just because you dont double down doesnt mean the initial point must stay. Additionally, feel free to host your own instance with all the “varied views” you want.
Agree to disagree then I guess
That’s your point of view, and I have my own
Came here to have less censorship than on Reddit, found out that it’s worse, eh
Yeah. In that case I suggest truth social.
Freedom of speech is entirely different from the populist/fascist viewpoint of being allowed to say literally anything. Freedom of speech is supposed to prevent the government from silencing dissent. Dissent and discriminating against minorities is entirely different.
It’s about correcting facts, not hate speech.
The subject might even be up for debate.
Freedom of speech, in the context I’m talking about, is obviously not meant in the way of fighting a government
Well, facts dont need correction. We have science for facts. Hatespeech doesnt need correction, it needs deletion.
I think I know what “kind” of freedom of speech you’re talking about and its not the intended one.
No, this is transphobic. End of story.
Great arguments, thanks
Having separate women’s teams at all was about access to organized sports activities because the existing men-only leagues banned them from participating. Rather than simply break down that barrier, legal and social compromises were made for women to participate but with the patriarchical addendum of only in separate leagues. Sometimes it was laws requiring women’s leagues to exist where men’s did. Sometimes it was women making their own leagues because they were excluded by men’s leagues.
The idea that women have separate leagues for “fairness” because they simply all wanted to be separate from men when competing is historical revisionism and a talking point largely concocted for the sole purposes of misogyny and transphobic exclusion, such as your comment.
Bold of you to assume this of me, when you don’t know me in any way. That wasn’t the purpose of my comment, I assure you.
I’ll do my research. In the meantime, stop making assumptions :)
The rationale was concocted for those purposes. You may simply be repeating it because you weren’t aware of the history or context.
You’re a transphobe and you aren’t allowed to disagree with trans people on whats transphobic and what isn’t. I’m cis though you can disagree with me, but the fact that you are disagreeing with a trans person makes it moot.
That’s just stupid. That’s the argument from authority reinvented.
Sure, they are more apt to say what is and what isn’t transphobic, but the debate doesn’t end there, and one isn’t always right because they are concerned.
And apparently I’m transphobic. I guess you can see things that I can’t, because I didn’t know this myself.
The argument from authority is a fallacy because someone who was right about a topic a 100 times can be wrong on the 101st time.
But a trans person talking about their lived experience and what they consider offensive is right all the time, since its their experience. It’s not an “opinion” they’re well researched in, something being hurtful to them is a fact because it is hurting them. Furthering that hurt is transphobic. Trans people are the ultimate authority on what is transphobic because they can tell you what is hurting them directly.
Like imagine saying “my arm hurts when you do this” and the doctor goes “hmmm are you sure, it doesn’t look this should hurt, lets agree to disagree”. Agreeing with the doctor would be an “argument from authority”, agreeing with the patient is just common sense. You’re the authority on whats hurtful to you, trans people are the authority on what is hurtful to them.
Also yeah, I can see that your transphobic. Since presumably you don’t want to be transphobic, you obviously can’t see it otherwise you would stop.
The word transphobic has the meaning that it is globally transphobic, and as such, it needs a consensus. An individual may not say “it hurts me” and as such the word automatically become globally transphobic.
If a black person says the term “black person” is racist and feels offended by it, it doesn’t mean they right about the term being racist. It just means that they were offended by it.
Appart from that, being offended by something doesn’t mean that thing is Xphobic. This terminology specifically means the fear of, or the hate/rejection of…, at least in the commonly used meaning.
Giving an opinion or inaccurate facts is not Xphobic if the intent was not there.
A perfect example is how the nword can, depending on the context, be considered as a racial slur or not. This is proved by the fact everyday usage and the legal decisions in some countries, including mine.
An example in my country, France, would be the word “pd” / “pédé” which literally means “faggot” in its usual meaning, and is homophobic due to that, but usage and context made it “not homophobic” in specific cases where the pejorative discriminatory intent was not meant, just like the nword.
Now, it’s up to you to decide if you accept the non-phobic usage of these words, but it’s subjective. I personally think using such words in any context is bad but that’s just my opinion, and rules should be clear and not subject to interpretation.
All of this to say that saying someone is transphobic just because they started a debate and doesn’t agree with you is a shitty and manipulating way of ending a debate by discrediting your opponent
I think I made it clear enough that I had no intent of being transphobic. Whether or not those informations were true remains subject to analysis, but one cannot say with certainty that I am transphobic based on this. I can personally assure you I’m not. A respectful debate not based on hate can’t be dismissed as “hate speech” (transphobia).
Removed by mod