I don’t know. Sports conventions are not science. When I see the history of things being banned or allowed, it doesn’t always make sense. Then we have stuff like weight categories. Anyway, that’s beside the scope of this particular discussion.
Beyond XX and XY: The Extraordinary Complexity of Sex Determination
Try this. Biological sex is more complex than what is usually taught in high school. And that’s only humans. There’s this system for instance: Temperature-dependent sex determination
I thought the same. Now plataforms have a target audience to focus. The accounts move, the artists have to follow, the rest has a reason to move as well.
I understand that companies have to submit to these rulings, but do they have to do it quietly? It’s mostly a rhetorical question. They could keep a tally of every instance the government made they do something they disapproved of and make it public. Not profitable at all unfortunately.
I agree there’s abuse, but there are laws:
Article explaining the laws used as support / Article with historical precedent.
Both in Portuguese.
There’s the possibility Starlink will refuse the order to block Twitter. I don’t use one of the major providers, so I’m still unaffected. I just learned there are twenty thousand registered smaller ones.
It makes sense with the target audience you mention. Would it be possible to provide a transcription? I used to put a link to a free service with the YouTube videos I shared, but it was terribly formatted.
I opened the video on my computer to see if it was a small screen issue. I listened to half then muted the other half. Some personal thoughts, but looking for accessibility guides would be best.
Tried one last time full screen on my computer, but still the same problems. Information overload.
Just a note on the video format. I usually watch without sound and I’m glad for the subtitles, but it’s hard to follow what you’re saying and looking at the notes you put on the board.
That’s on me, I’m sorry. I realized the implications of my words, but failed to choose better ones. I have no problem with your style or tone. As I said, I feel your posts are personal and passionate.
Let’s try again. Context is important. I believe a lot in subjectivity, which can be confusing, others need facts and concrete examples, something I have learned to keep in mind when asked in the past. You tell me the best way to communicate with you.
You said I attacked you and that I want to fix your existence. Those are not facts. I offended you and I might have hurt you, these are facts and I won’t deny them, and I accept my responsibility for what I did.
You see, I suffer from anxiety and depression. After two months in therapy, I feel comfortable to once again engage in the community and take risks. I just wanted to help (which doesn’t excuse my mistakes), but reading this response would make me retreat again weeks ago. I would ask myself of I’m really this bad person you are interpreting me to be and if my contributions have any value, if I shouldn’t just let other people more prepared to deal with it. I was also hurt by what you said.
I’m a sensitive man, but my whole life people have called me robotic, unfeeling, reserved and the like. They didn’t agree with the way I lived my life and thought trying to change me was a kindness. They are wrong. I’ve seen so many people suffer because the world refuses to allow them space that I try to make sure I’m accommodating. I believe everyone should grow in life by learning how to express themselves in their own unique ways.
All this is me trying to reveal myself so I can be better understood. Because I think it’s important. Because I think this community is important. And because I think you are important too. I learned a little bit about you today. I have learned other bits before and imagine I’ll see more in the future. I asked some questions to help me with that as well, but you decide what you want to share.
Please, don’t feel like we are piling on you. I personally would say you came as a positive disruption, but making sure this is a safe space is a big priority and that means even discussions filled with good intentions have to be careful. You should check tildes for comparison.
Now about forums and chat rooms. Chat rooms never felt really personal to me, but I could never socialize with a lot of people at the same time well. Forums, 20 years ago, were a space I inhabited frequently. Deeper context for me was knowing who I was talking to because I had read their posts and comments in the past. We engaged ideas, but we considered people as well. Of course, not every discussion was the same, with some more abstract than others.
I have been seeing your posts for the past week. They feel very personal, but your approach feels detached, academic. Try being more conversational, asking questions and being interested. For instance: What brought you here? Why do you post? What do you expect to offer and get? Ideas, opinions, experiences? Educate people, get collaboration for your ideas, someone to challenge and strength them?
I truly believe our mods want to be accepting, but their role is also to maintain peace by guiding and reminding we all of our philosophy.
I’m not sure of I understand it correctly. Would pronouns in this case carry the same value as titles do, or terms of endearment? Maybe a mix of both. Titles have the explicit aspect, but terms of endearment inform the kind of relation we have in an informal situation.
The practical use still escapes my imagination. Would you talk more about that?
I understand the sentiment and the urge to clap back at these kind of non comments, but remember to be(e) nice. Specially to yourself. It’s not worth it to spend time and energy dealing with a troll comment.
I hadn’t realized how skeptical I was of even genuine attempts from big organizations until I got repeatedly surprised by how they were integrating everyone instead of the usual segregation. Their recommendation for people to not wear strong fragrances shows me that education is a simple accessibly tool that should be deployed more often.
Hello there. I assume you have good intentions with your comment, but I read it as if you were talking to an idea, not a person. A person has feelings that they want to express and be validated. Treat the wound before discussing how to prevent it.
You offered a solution, disengaging, which is nice. I also believe we have a responsibility to ourselves. The problem that I want to point out is you might not have asked yourself the question: "Why don’t they leave the situation? " Can you think of a reason? There must be, we can even ask if necessary. You see, what’s non essential in my life might be very important for someone else.
About space and fairness. This is not a childish dispute. You have the right to your space. In practical terms, they will follow you home and take it from you if you let them. I’m not being hyperbolic. They don’t want you to exist anywhere and will follow you everywhere. Beehaw is a gated space that so many people disapprove, but that serves a very specific purpose, being a safe space, because hiding and isolating yourself from the world is not good to your mental health either.
I was talking about how we always have this type of discussion frequently with my therapist earlier today. It’s always nice to pause and remind ourselves and those outside of our philosophy. One thing that I’d like to add is we might not be(e) nice sometimes because of personal circumstances. We are having a bad day and a comment will trigger a reaction that would be uncommon or we might be aggressive without provocation.
In cases we feel the need to hit back, I’d advise postponing the response by at least one hour. Give yourself time to clear your mind and think things over. And if you are the target of users having a bad day, reminding them that they are not be(e)ing nice is the alternative. Asking questions is the best. “Did I offend you?”, “Did I say something wrong?”, “I don’t understand what the issue is.” Even if they keep the aggression, they will point to the specific issue that needs to be worked on, or prove they don’t want to discuss genuinely.
I read it. I was familiar with that form of activism, but I don’t agree this is it. I saw all the examples presented as forms of reframing the situations to deflate their original meaning. The author says using weird is non violent, but it’s an attack using a word. The advice is use it because it hurts, not because it makes their ideals less appealing.
I sometimes say to my best friend, among other generally inappropriate things, that something she does is gay, and she does the same to me. It is a private reclamation of the use of the word gay as a slur, but outside any context, to an outside observer, it’s just casual homophobia.
Let me go back to that child. I don’t think they will hear horrible people being called weird and see it as being bad weird. It’s just plain weird. If it’s not being different that’s the issue, but the specific bad behavior, why the focus is on weird? We know words help shape our perception, we fight for those changes. What bothers me is hearing the same harmful words I heard so many times towards me and around me being used by those who seemed to understand how they hurt. I guess it’s similar to the discussion of being okay to attack someone’s looks if they are on the other side.
I decided to give a chance to Super Virus Defense. It was made by the brother in law of my best friend, but it was described as tower defense so it sat ignored for over a year. I play on PC, but it’s very mobile like. I’m addicted. There’s a grind element to buy upgrades, but it’s been so non mindless that it reminded me of how big companies just choose to make you suffer. Specifically, I can grind while completing higher difficulties in previous levels or by playing the endless mode.
Playing it made me want to create a post with all the Brazilian indie games that I really liked over the years.
I know little about the subject, so forgive me if I express myself in the wrong way. I support being inclusive to otherkin, but it seems to me that the changes would require more nuance. My question would be if we can attribute human characteristics so broadly to non human beings. Different demographics experience different realities, changing the language might help, but it might just be something aesthetic that doesn’t translate the specifics.
Is this case just a matter of the broadest category being inadequate? Similar to masculine forms being also neutral and general?