(Content warning, discussions of SA and misogyny, mods I might mention politics a bit but I hope this can be taken outside the context of politics and understood as a discussion of basic human decency)
We all know how awful Reddit was when a user mentioned their gender. Immediate harassment, DMs, etc. It’s probably improved over the years? But still awful.
Until recently, Lemmy was the most progressive and supportive of basic human dignity of communities I had ever followed. I have always known this was a majority male platform, but I have been relatively pleased to see that positive expressions of masculinity have won out.
All of that changed with the recent “bear vs man” debacle. I saw women get shouted down just for expressing their stories of being sexually abused, repeatedly harassed, dogpiled, and brigaded with downvotes. Some of them held their ground, for which I am proud of them, but others I saw driven to delete their entire accounts, presumably not to return.
And I get it. The bear thing is controversial; we can all agree on this. But that should never have resulted in this level of toxicity!
I am hoping by making this post I can kind of bring awareness to this weakness, so that we can learn and grow as a community. We need to hold one another accountable for this, or the gender gap on this site is just going to get worse.
Okay, if the civility rule is in place to protect minorities as you say, than why would we need a civility rule? That’s my point. We already have rules against bigotry.
You totally missed my point 🙄 and then you get all snooty about “facts unchallenged”. When really you just continually misunderstand or ignore my very clearly spelled out argument against this dumbass civility rule. Is this civility? You’re just ignoring all my points and posting useless screenshots.
Your words:
If protecting minorities was the goal, the rule would be against racism, sexism, etc… but that’s not the rule.
I showed that this was a false claim.
So you can say I missed your point, but your point was based on a false claim. And now you’re moving the goalposts.
I said “that’s not the rule”, not “that’s not a rule”. As in, that’s not the rule you’re talking about. You’re literally just misunderstanding me, probably deliberately, and ignoring all my points to focus on pedantics! This is why you suck so bad dude!
You’re ignoring the topic at hand to focus on something that you misinterpreted. Embarassing for you. Can’t believe you’re trying to turn this discussion into a grammar lesson, rather than the fact that your enforcement of civility rules is a shit thing to do.
So back to the topic, if civility rules exist to defend minorities, which is what you claimed … why do we need them if we already have rules against bigotry and hate speech!!!
And also back to the topic, how is continuing to ignore the conversation to rudely insist on your incorrect interpretation of my clear words… even after I clarified … how is that civil lmao
I’m still not understanding why it’s a shitty thing to stop people from having shouting matches and being bigots, which is what the civility rules are for, and you keep being rude rather than explaining it.
But it seems like you are not a fan of the ‘no shouting matches’ part, which seems to be the problem. And, again, I would suggest 4Chan if you want endless shouting matches.
