flamingos

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Sorry if it came across that hostile, I tend to be snappy after waking up and we've had a lot of transphobia lately.

Are the terms afab/amab still okay? I try and use them as opposed to “biological women” as I heard that one could be a dogwhistle before

AFAB/AMAB are fine, encouraged even. 'Biological women' is generally used by gender critical types as a dog whistle to mean that only cis women are real women.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

My warning was very pointed and specifically about rhetoric, not the actual underlying opinions.

Give me examples on why I shouldn’t use the term “cult” here, yet how it’s okay for other users of this instance to claim a large amount of the British population is in a cult simply because of their religious beliefs..

The trans cult thing is a common talking point by transphobes to discredit the idea of being trans, that it's nothing more than brainwashing. I really don't know how you expect "I don’t know who’s leading this movement, but it starts to seem like some weird cult" to come across, but it reads like you saying anyone with a more progressive opinion to you is in a cult. It's very easy for someone to make the jump from that to believing you think trans movement more broadly is a cult, especially given you're a transmedicalist.

Also, that comment by Hossenfeffer is clearly made in jest and, unlike trans people, Christians aren't a marginalised identity in Britain.

Thirdly, this place is where I get to hear the other side. Do you really want to force me to use an echo chamber by banning me?

No, that's why I gave a warning. I don't think you appreciate how much more leeway you get because I understand you come from a conservative background. You constantly say you're bad with this and when I try to clear up the boundaries of what I consider acceptable, you accuse me of engaging in cult-like tactics. Maybe I was too curt, but I'm trying to help you. I'm trans myself, so I hope you can appreciate why I'm sensitive to this stuff.

There’s no need to read between the lines here. I barely know what “dogwhistling” is nevermind people accusing me of doing it.

I'd really appreciate if you did read up on it. I can only moderate based on what you write, not what's in your head. I and others can't tell the difference between genuine ignorance or pretending to be ignorant to sneak bigotry in under the radar. The Green Party has a good page on trans/queer dogwhistles.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 4 points 3 months ago (5 children)

Sick of acting like what, having a different opinion and telling you to fuck off when you call them part of a cult? Like, how do you expect shit like "If I was going to be a transphobe, it would be because how you lot" to be received?

Also, first and final warning, I consider the implicit 'trans cult' stuff here to be a violation of our 'no transphobia' rule.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 4 points 3 months ago (7 children)

Flax, this thing where you walk into a thread about trans issues and your only contribution is calling people crazy and pedantry is getting really old. It doesn't make you look smart, you just come across as someone trying to mask their transphobia (and no, I'm not calling you a transphobe).

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 3 points 3 months ago

ಠ_ಠ take your upvote

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 2 points 3 months ago

Normally not much, but we've seen a big uptick in transphobia in wake of the Supreme Court ruling here which hasn't been fun.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 7 points 3 months ago

The linked linkers, because we're link aggregators that link together.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I've said this elsewhere, but there's something off about that account that I can't put my finger on. Like, what kind of Trump supporter opens up a socialism community on a UK focused forum?

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 3 points 3 months ago

Probably because of what happened with woem.men.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

According to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, you have to be born as a woman in order to be a woman.

This isn't accurate, the SC ruled that the only consistent definition of woman for the purposes of the 2010 Equalities Act is a 'biological woman'*. A trans woman with a GRC is still legally a woman, she's just not afforded the protections graned to women in the Equalities Act. (This is a crock of shit, but I'll spare you that rant)

* You might wonder how the SC actually defines 'biological woman' and it has nothing to actually do with biology, it's just if you originally had woman marked down on you birth certificate.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 46 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (13 children)

Hi, Feddit UK admin here, I'd just like to add a bit more context. We're currently discussing these comments in an admin chat, though this was apparently not communicated to Ada so she got the impression inaction was our position. Our position is not inaction, but these specific comments have become wrapped up in a policy discussion on how we facilitate discussion of our state's increasing hostile actions without allowing transphobia to propagate. I hope we can rectify the situation soon, but doing things by committee is never swift.

[–] flamingos@feddit.uk 1 points 3 months ago

To be clear, there were no posts, this is about two comments by one of our users, both of which I personally pushed back on. We're still discussing what to do, but consensus takes time.

26
Fedi tips for newcomers (neilzone.co.uk)
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by flamingos@feddit.uk to c/fedimemes@feddit.uk
 

The events of the last few hours have clearly shown that not everyone has a good grasp on how federation works, which there is no shame in. I remember having to look up how to dodge the Godrick roll attack in Elden Ring, a boss generally considered easy. This article by Neil is a good run down and even has advice Fedi veterans might find useful. Hope it helps :)

 
 
 
411
Rule (files.catbox.moe)
 
 

The Old Bailey heard the victim, who was aged 18 at the time, had been under the impression she was attending a roller disco with friends at Harrow Leisure Centre on 10 February last year.

Prosecutors said she was attacked during a 45-second pre-planned assault as revenge for performing a sex act on one of the teenagers who had not realised she was transgender.

Sentencing the group on Thursday Judge Philip Katz KC said the ambush was "vicious" and had "elements of transphobia and revenge".

Summer Betts-Ramsey, 20, of Barnet; Bradley Harris, 18, of Harrow; Shiloh Hindes, 18, of Peckham; Camron Osei, 18, of Tadworth and a 17-year-old boy who cannot be named due to legal reasons, each pleaded guilty causing GBH with intent.

 
 

Cory Doctorow explaining why he endorses the "Free Our Feeds" initiative (Lemmy discussion)

During the Napster wars, the record labels seriously pissed off millions of internet users when they sued over 19,000 music fans, mostly kids, but also grannies, old people, and dead people.
[…]
One thing everyone agreed on was how disgusted we all were with the labels. What we didn't agree on was what to do about it. A lot of us wanted to reform copyright – say, by creating a blanket license for internet music so that artists could get paid directly. This was the systemic approach.

Another group – call them the "individualists" – wanted a boycott. Just stop buying and listening to music from the major labels. Every dollar you spend with a label is being used to fund a campaign of legal terror. Merely enjoying popular music makes you part of the problem.

Here's what I would say when people told me we should all stop listening to popular music: "If members of your popular movement are not allowed to listen to popular music, your movement won't be very popular."

We weren't going to make political change by creating an impossible purity test ("Ew, you listen to music from a major label? God, what's wrong with you?"). I mean, for one thing, a lot of popular music is legitimately fantastic and makes peoples' lives better. Popular movements should strive to increase their members' joy, not demand their deprivation. Again, not merely because this is a nice thing to do for people, but also because it's good tactics to make participation in the thing you're trying to do as joyous as possible.

[…] When social media is federated, then you can leave a server without leaving your friends. Think of it as being similar to changing cell-phone companies. When you switch from Verizon to T-Mobile, you keep your number, you keep your address book and you keep your friends, who won't even know you switched networks unless you tell them.

There's no reason social media couldn't work this way. You should be able to leave Facebook or Twitter for Mastodon, Bluesky, or any other service and still talk with the people you left behind, provided they still want to talk with you.

That's how the Fediverse – which Mastodon is part of – works already. You can switch from one Mastodon server to another, and all the people you follow and who follow you will just move over to that new server. That means that if the person or company or group running your server goes sour, you aren't stuck making a choice between the people you love who connect to you on that server, and the pain of dealing with whatever bullshit the management is throwing off.

We could make that stronger! Data protection laws like the EU's GDPR and California's CCPA create a legal duty for online services to hand over your data on demand. Arguably, these laws already require your Mastodon server's management to give you the files you need to switch from one server to another, but that could be clarified. Handing these files over to users on demand is really straightforward – even a volunteer running a small server for a few friends will have no trouble living up to this obligation. It's literally just a minute's work for each user.

Another way to make this stronger is through governance. Many of the great services that defined the old, good internet were run by "benevolent dictators for life." This worked well, but failed so badly. Even if the dictator for life stayed benevolent, that didn't make them infallible. The problem of a dictatorship isn't just malice – it's also human frailty. For a service to remain good over long timescales, it needs accountable, responsive governance. That's why all the most successful BDFL services (like Wikipedia) transitioned to community-managed systems.

There, too, Mastodon shines. Mastodon's founder Eugen Rochko has just explicitly abjured his role as "ultimate decision-maker" and handed management over to a nonprofit.

I love using Mastodon and I have a lot of hope for its future. I wish I was as happy with Bluesky, which was founded with the promise of federation, and which uses a clever naming scheme that makes it even harder for server owners to usurp your identity. But while Bluesky has added many, many technically impressive features, they haven't delivered on the long-promised federation.

Bluesky sure seems like a lot of fun! They've pulled tens of millions of users over from other systems, and by all accounts, they've all having a great time. The problem is that without federation, all those users are vulnerable to bad decisions by management (perhaps under pressure from the company's investors) or by a change in management (perhaps instigated by investors if the current management refuses to institute extractive measures that are good for the investors but bad for the users). Federation is to social media what fire-exits are to nightclubs: a way for people to escape if the party turns deadly.

So what's the answer? Well, around Mastodon, you'll hear a refrain that reminds me a lot of the Napster wars: "People who are enjoying themselves on Bluesky are wrong to do so, because it's not federated and the only server you can use is run by a VC-backed for-profit. They should all leave that great party – there's no fire exits!"

This is the social media version of "To be in our movement, you have to stop listening to popular music." Sure, those people shouldn't be crammed into a nightclub that has no fire exits. But thankfully, there is an alternative to being the kind of scold who demands that people leave a great party, and being the kind of callous person who lets tens of millions of people continue to risk their lives by being stuck in a fire-trap.

We can install our own fire-exits in Bluesky.

Yesterday, an initiative called "Free Our Feeds" launched, with a set of goals for "billionaire-proofing" social media. One of those goals is to add the long-delayed federation to Bluesky. I'm one of the inaugural endorsers for this, because installing fire exits for Bluesky isn't just the right thing to do, it's also good tactics.

Here's why: if a body independent of the Bluesky corporation implements its federation services, then we ensure that its fire exits are beyond the control of its VCs. That means that if they are ever tempted in future to brick up the fire-exits, they won't be able to. This isn't a hypothetical risk. When businesses start to enshittify their services, they fully commit themselves to blocking anything that makes it easy to leave those services.
[…]
We can do better than begging people to leave a party they're enjoying; we can install our own fucking fire exits. Sure, maybe that means that a lot of those users will stay on the proprietary platform, but at least we'll have given them a way to leave if things go horribly wrong.

After all, there's no virtue in software freedom. The only thing worth caring about is human freedom. The only reason to value software freedom is if it sets humans free.

If I had my way, all those people enjoying themselves on Bluesky would come and enjoy themselves in the Fediverse. But I'm not a purist. If there's a way to use Bluesky without locking myself to the platform, I will join the party there in a hot second. And if there's a way to join the Bluesky party from the Fediverse, then goddamn I will party my ass off.

138
ISP rule (files.catbox.moe)
 
view more: ‹ prev next ›