Ah yes, the infamously transphobic instance, lemmy.blahaj.zone.
Well, you see, if you criticize a trans person’s politics, that’s transphobia. Doesn’t matter if their politics are orthogonal to their transness, and it doesn’t matter if you, yourself, are trans.
Just look at Israel to see how this works.
No I think they’re putting words in OP’s mouth because I recall some drama where Blahaj members accused sh.itjust.works of being a transphobic instance
Hexbear et co literally have called Blahaj a transphobic instance, numerous times. Lunacy.
Like many right-wing fascist-simps-in-arms, plenty know some buzzwords to get people riled up, but don’t know when and where to properly use them.
I really appreciate the levels of irony in your comment, whether or not they are intended.
Hexbear doesn’t count
Is the fediverse always like this? Inter-instance shitflinging?
It got much worse just prior to the USA election. Also the entire purpose of this community is shitflinging onto tankie instances, usually after someone gets banned from them so… you’ll see a higher concentration of that here vs. the Fediverse at large.
There’s also !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com and !fediverselore@lemmy.ca that are less shitflinging about it, and have a much wider focus than just onto tankie instances. Check them out! 😀
Mostly, no. Usually, it’s just .world and .ml that get into slapfights. Hexbear is just bizarre.
Hexbear is a horrific mix of trolls and true believers that makes it weirdly toxic.
Yes, there are a lot of tankie instances
what’s even more fun is how i got banned from blahaj.zone’s c/transgender for saying hexbear is extremist and they decided to frame that as “calling trans people extremist”.
can someone give more information about SJW and Blahaj? I know there was something about !noncredibledefense@sh.itjust.works and ADA @ blahaj where the noncredibledefense mod was being dumb, but was there more drama than I know about?
I moved here because of .world being controversial and I don’t wanna move again :/
Would you say the nazis were socialist because they called themselves “National Socialists”?
Anyways, pretty much any time I see trans people talk about that instance, they complain about all the transphobes that gather there (probably to be transphobic to trans people) and mods/admins do nothing about. If an instance is full of transphobia, seems pretty fair to call it transphobic instance.
Gotta love the tankies and China, just because the ruling “party” of China has the word “Communist” in their name doesn’t mean they’re not an authoritarian dictatorship lol
Literally doesn’t even matter what they call themselves. Russia and Iran are blatantly capitalist, authoritarian states yet they still support them, lmao. They’re idiots, not even the useful type.
Authoritarian regimes invariably use counter-language to thought control. See: Reasonablists, and Hail Zorp.
Hail Zorp!
I too engage with zorp. I love organizing!
Agreed. Which is why I said nothing about China.
No, i wouldn’t. I was saying that lemmy.blahaj.zone is a trans (and lgbtq in general) inclusive instance.
I must admit, i don’t know much about the userbase, so i’m not immediately doubting that it could have issues, or outright transphobia. I was just pointing out that the user in the image immediately accused the OP and the instance in general of being transphobic, despite the instance literally being for trans/lgbt+ people.
It has nothing to do with “transphobia.” It’s just a way to slap a label on someone you disagree with, out of nowhere, to engage a tribal and reality-free way of thinking where they can be the good guy and you can be the bad guy.
deleted by creator
I’m aware. I’m saying it’s simply a label for the person who brought it into the conversation in the screenshot, from literally nowhere for literally no reason.
if you have damning evidence of blahaj’s unchecked transphobia, i suggest you post that rather than comparing the largest trans instance to the literal nazi party. otherwise put down the hearsay stick.
I never compared blahaj instance to nazis. I compared the argument that the name having “blahaj” in it to meaning the instance is inherently free of transphobia to the stupid argument that having “socialist” in its name means nazis are socialists.
I haven’t had any personal problems and certainly wouldn’t make sure a comparison. Also just realized why its seemed so dead: apparently they defederated with the instance I’m using recently. Seems like they’re at least trying something.
cool. however you characterize what you are saying, don’t do it unless you have evidence.
Evidence that many trans people feel they’ve experienced lots of transphobia there? Would be easy to find that, but I don’t care to do that for some off-hand comment. My point had nothing to do with blahaj itself, but rather about how common that opinion is from trans people.
“trust me bro the evidence is all over the place and its so easy to find it would take me 0 seconds but i don’t want to.”
thats you. that’s how you sound.
Also “for an offhand comment”
proceeds to argue over multiple comments and several hours
Is the unopposed transphobia in the room with us right now? I don’t see it in the meme communities I’m subscribed to there.
I don’t really pay attention to which instance I’m in and don’t really see all the much transphobia in general, but like I also don’t read through the comments on the types of things that would attract transphobia (things like talks about banning trans people from participating in sports, for example - no meme communities). Just pointing out what the argument is of those who have beef with blajahzone.
I’m not convinced the complainers are actually trans. Tankies are notorious liars, after all.
Seems like a weird schtick to post primary in trans communities just to make in 1 in 1000 comments a complaint about their own experiences in a specific community. But sure, you get to be the arbiter of who gets to count as real trans people.
thx.
I’ve been waiting for some unilateral power.
So trans people are actually the real transphobes, because real transphobes flock in to trans space to attack trans people… That’s some real
soundass backwards logic you got there, bigot (being trans doesn’t exclude you from lateral bigotry, which is what you are actively participating in).
On this day, meds were not taken.
have a discussion with person i disagree with ❌
call them mentally ill ✅
love this place
Choose to keep stupidity to yourself ❌
Actively choose to say insane shit ✅“Why are people calling it crazy to say unhinged shit without prompting”
Fun fact you can fit a lighbulb into your mouth but cant get it back out without it breaking.
Dislocation of the jaw and unhinging doesnt count, the snake people can go back to Reno where they belong.
I am choosing to say insane nonsequiters for my own amusement.
the snake people can go back to Reno where they belong
NGL, literal snake people from Reno would make for an excellent comic book, movie, or Fallout mod 😄
Fun fact you can fit a lighbulb into your mouth but cant get it back out without it breaking.
hey can you please tell me what to do if you do put a lightbulb in your mouth?
please respond quickly.
Urgent care.
I’ve probably only forgotten to take my HRT like a couple times in the last few months. I did accidentally miss my allergy medicine a couple days ago. Never have gotten any medication for ADHD though - my mom was against it when I was a toddler and a doctor tried to prescribe it and I haven’t bothered trying it on my own. Getting a new diagnosis as an adult seems annoying and expensive.
I read a stronger implication that you have psychosis than anything else - which is still not cool, for what it’s worth.
Was wondering if they’d get more explicit with what they were implying. Probably not after having a couple people point out how its problematic, but they also got a some upvotes from people who might just be upvoting all replies to my comment.
Still, the ADHD stream-of-conscious posting probably doesn’t help. I’m reminded of the jokes about English classes forcing students to give some explanation of the “meaning” of small details in stories even if the author actually intended no such thing.
Did you even read before you posted?
Read the thing I was replying to or my own comment. If the former, definitely. If the latter, probably not. Is there some obvious typo in my comment or something?
In interactions with authoritarians, I’m often reminded of Jean-Paul Sartre’s description of anti-semites.
“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”
Tankies follow the same underlying basis for their justifications of authoritarianism as every other stripe.
woah you kind of ate it up with this comment. huge insight/comparisons here i’d never considered.
I should post this to every tankie that comes with their BS
Handy that your client shows that it’s a 4 days account
Voyager mobile. Yeah it’s a cool feature.
The meme I sent in the original pic
What country is that?
China, North Korea etc
Huh… I’m a bigot!
Im going to throw a hissy fit now.
I’m so sorry. The fruit was right there, hanging low, looking delicious. I just had to do it!
I was too lol. I just distilled the original reply down to it’s base meaning.
Oh snap! I can’t believe I didn’t catch that. Guess it’s time to hit the bowl again…
Wise man say: ‘Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza.’
China, North Korea etc
Thanks for the context that seems reasonable
The better timeline
The longer you live the more you learn all countries are bad in there own right.
Hence me becoming an anarchist ahah
As someone from Switzerland it pisses me off how some people see our country as a utopia. We still have massive inequalities and suffering. People may not be dying on the streets, but they are sure as hell dying preventable deaths behind closed doors.
Gotta imagine how horrifying life is in other countries where they see a greener pasture across every other field but theirs
Yeah.
It’s crazy though because I’ve had times where I’m unable to get enough food to eat. Or afford to pay for rent and therefore been forced into a psych ward because that’s where they throw homeless people. I’ve watched friends die of malnutrition when I couldn’t afford to help.
But to others, that’s a utopia.
So how do you view anarchism as supporting those with disability better than the current systems?
That may be true but that also is not an excuse to commit crimes against humanity
An excuse? Every country on the planet has committed crimes against humanity we’re already doing it.
Maybe I’m missing something but genocide is bad
Source? /s
Unfortunately it’s not bad enough to not be supported by modern day democracy.
STOP SPREADING LIES CLOWN!
Lololol blocked
😂😂
new accounts
As in they’re getting banned a lot or they’re trolling/sockpuppeting, or both.
The one true scotsman would never!
From (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman)
No true Scotsman or appeal to purity is an informal fallacy in which one attempts to protect an initial a posteriori claim from a subsequent falsifying counterexample by then covertly modifying the initial claim.[1][2][3] Rather than admitting error or providing evidence that would disqualify the falsifying counterexample, the claim is modified into an a priori claim to definitionally (as opposed to evidentially) exclude the undesirable counterexample.[4] The modification is usually identifiable by the use of non-substantive rhetoric such as “true”, “pure”, “genuine”, “authentic”, or “real”, which can be used to locate when the shift in meaning of the claim occurs.[2]
Philosophy professor Bradley Dowden explains the fallacy as an “ad hoc rescue” of a refuted generalization attempt.[1] The following is a simplified rendition of the fallacy:[5]
Person A: “No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.” Person B: “But my uncle Angus is a Scotsman and he puts sugar on his porridge.” Person A: “But no true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.”
on new accounts
you are a bigot because you disagree with me on something random
Pretty much this, and yes, I see it a lot too
Chinese ragebait tankie bot spotted
