Meta community. Discuss about this lemmy instance or lemmy in general.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/37235684
Obviously reporting transphobic comments to a transphobic mod isn't going to result in any action, so I'm wondering if the admins are going to do anything about it?
(if someone needs an image description, please ask)
OK that's the last straw for me. I am willing to give the benefit of a doubt to people, but this is the third strike for this person. So I've asked them to move their comm to another instance as they don't align with our instance values.
Yet another very common db0 W
Yet another very common transphobia L
I mean, serious question. Is the goal to produce a pure echo chamber where no dissent arises? How far does this go. It seems like the end result of this is 5-10 large groups of peeps who have "aligned values" that can endlessly reinforce each other. I have a MAGA chud relative that spouts all kinds of nonsense. Is the best thing to literally exorcise this person from my life? I don't know that a lot of identity driven silos is really all that healthy either.
Yes people should be safe, but that doesn't necessarily imply that no one EVER disagrees with them does it?
Tolerance of intolerance is how intolerance prospers.
Bigotry is not a matter of opinion, it is one of hate.
Why don't we just make a trans league so we can just stop talking about this with anyone ever again?
Also, does a person who has gone through male puberty before transition not have at least some advantage in certain areas due to bone structure alone? I understand that trans girls who pre-empt puberty are likely physically equivalent to their cisgendered peers, but I have my reservations about integrating people who transition later in life. If I'm wrong, I would love to see any studies anyone may want to share.
EDIT: I am wrong, thank you flamingembers and southsamurai. I would also like to apologize for the wording of this post. My original thought was that trans women who previously went through male puberty may have an advantage in some areas due to a potential wider skeletal structure in their upper bodies as compared to cisgendered peers. I did let my (unfounded on research!) opinion creep into that too much, and I do understand why that would leave a bad taste in the mouth of anyone who knows better.
The evidence clearly contradicts the thinking that my original post was based upon - there was no area studied where trans women had an advantage. On top of that, it also appears trans women can't even intake as much oxygen as cis women - which would already offset any size differences even if trans women were bigger and stronger on average (they aren't).
This isn't news to anyone educated, but I wanted to edit this comment so that any transphobes upvoting my post due to having the same flavor of ignorance that they do understand that I do not agree with them, and I am not trying to propagate their views.
Nope. Male puberty doesn't cause changes that aren't mitigated by transition.
Any changes to bone structure that don't change are the ones that are present in any athlete in a given sport.
I'm not digging through studies for you, because I haven't gotten a single paycheck from anyone ever for doing so online. That information is out there, and it's your responsibility to do your due diligence on the matter.
If you don't know that you're wrong or right already, by having looked for the information needed to make a credible opinion, maybe hang back a bit, or at least ask better questions.
Maybe some people learn things by asking questions in the right spaces to be corrected intellectually. I'm completely fine with being wrong, that's why I asked a controversial question here. I don't need you to provide studies to rethink my opinion, I just figured people in this thread might have some available. Apparently the only thing you have on hand at the moment is snark.
Also you'll only help educate people if you get paid? What??? This would have been such a good moment to point me toward literally any resources that could help in my research. You didn't even have to link a study, you could just link a database. You and I both know there are studies funded by special interest groups that are biased against trans people. I never claimed to have a credible opinion, which is why I invited discourse.
Anyway, thanks for your statement. I guess I'll have to look into this more myself. Just keep in mind that most people, when the burden of research is placed upon them by someone who clearly has knowledge of the subject, will simply say "fuck that" and keep being ignorant.
EDIT: If you check this thread again, I'd like to apologize for my incredulity at your statement. I didn't realize the full ignorance on display in my original comment at the time, and my response was fueled by that. I acted as though you were being overly snarky, which I no longer believe was the case. I acted as though research was a burden. It's not, but my point was that I was seeking information socially and assumed someone might have studies on hand, which is what I was looking for, and your response didn't offer. You did, however, give me the correct information - it was my mistake to act as though it was unfounded due to your unwillingness to provide sources. So, in contradiction to what I said earlier, I did need studies to rethink my opinion. That was completely my mistake, and I should have thought more about what I wanted from this discussion before posting or responding in the first place. You are correct, it is my responsibility to educate myself. I should have used your statement as a jumping off point for my own research, but I was caught up in the one detail of my original post wherein I asked for studies, and because of that I saw your comment as less informational and more snarky. I apologize for misinterpreting your intentions.
I do still believe the uneducated need a helping hand from time to time. My purpose was to reach out for that, not to start a fight, and I apologize for being inflammatory as well.
All that said, I don't necessarily think it was a bad idea to reveal my ignorance, as you helped inform me, and led to an interaction where someone did link studies that proved me wrong. I understand how I came across, and why you would be unwilling to put in that effort for someone displaying that level of ignorance. It was unfair to insinuate that I'd be having this discussion under my terms - I apologize for that. I'm grateful that flamingembers did step in to meet me on my ground, and strongly believe that in some cases (mine included) using someone's established mindset and what they're willing to accept to spark discussion that leads to change is what helps them grow. However, I recognize your attempt to do this in your response and apologize for my unwillingness to connect at the time because I didn't see how it fit into my original question (which was supposed to be asking for studies, but really just came across as a challenge)
I'm leaving my original response unedited. I hope anyone else reading this can use my original response as an example of how not to clarify your thoughts.