Hey folks!
I’m writing this because funding for the Lemmy project has dropped to critical levels, which could seriously impact its future development.
Thanks to the generous support of our lemm.ee community, our server infrastructure costs are covered, and we even have a few months of runway. I’m deeply grateful to everyone who has contributed - lemm.ee wouldn’t exist without your help.
However, infrastructure alone isn’t enough. Our servers run Lemmy software, and without ongoing development, the platform cannot grow or even be maintained.
Lemmy is an open-source project with many contributors, but the vast majority of development work has been carried out by a small group of core maintainers. A few maintainers work full-time on the project, relying solely on donations and occasional grants to support themselves.
I’ve seen Lemmy development up close, and the maintainers have consistently gone above and beyond what I consider the standard for small open-source teams - they are constantly writing code, mentoring contributors, and keeping everything running. Their work is essential, and without continued support, it cannot be sustained.
If you value Lemmy, please consider supporting its maintainers directly. Every bit helps.
Please check out this post for more details about how to support the maintainers: https://lemm.ee/post/63034576
Thank you for reading, I hope you have a great weekend!
What would be the correct way to voice opposing views about these issues?
Genuinely asking as to my ignorant eyes this looks like a reasonable way of discussing the issues, so I must have some kind of wrongthink here and would love to be guided back to a place where people can discuss opposing views safely.
Speaking from a place of explicit respect for minorities’ lived experiences, and using appropriate terminology that is both scientifically accurate and minimises harm.
This comment fails on all three counts:
“Biological men” is not a scientific term, because biologists don’t study men and women, they study males and females. Man and woman are genders, which are studied by psychologists and sociologists.
“Biological men” is not a term that minimises harm. Calling trans women men is a form of misgendering, which has been well documented to cause psychological distress and worsen mental health.
The comment denies the statement from lived experience by trans people, that trans people are being targeted by the owning class. Members of a privileged majority telling the minority that they’re wrong about their daily experiences isn’t respectful.
Drag will be happy to provide sources for any of the claims in this comment which you have doubts about. In return, drag asks that you keep an open scientific mind, seek to minimise harm, and listen to minorities about our lived experiences.
Thank you. No sources required, and I already try to do those things…hence my questions! I hope that my questions don’t cause harm, if they do I would like to find a way to learn without harming.
If they had said “biological male” then this would be okay? Sounds equally as hurtful to me…what is the correct term use? Trans woman?
The only thing I see them denying is that the same group of people spreading trans rights are also the ones spreading transphobia…which sounds logical to me?
I appreciate that this sounds like I’m defending them but I’m really not, I suspect from what’s said in this thread that they have a storied history of being hurtful on this topic which i think is indefensible. But I am out the loop and have very little idea who this person is.
Drag sees the effort you’re making and is grateful. You aren’t causing offense.
Yes, “biological male” would be scientifically valid language - in part - but it would not minimise harm. Trans women is much better, you’re right. Drag says it would be scientifically valid in part, because the trans women competing in the Olympics are required to no longer be entirely male. They must be on estrogen and testosterone blockers. That means regardless of what happened in the past, their body is currently performing many of the biological processes of a female, and not many of a male. In the parts of sex relevant to athletic performance, trans women are entirely non-male. Drag would say they’re females, except that trans women actually tend to be weaker than cis women due to lower testosterone. All bodies, male or female, produce testosterone. With testosterone blockers, trans women are at lower testosterone levels than a cis woman.
We, the trans community, spread trans rights. We pressured them into putting LGBT flags on buildings. The Olympic Committee are not the government, they’re a private organisation, and they weren’t pressured to allow trans women by governments, they were pressured by a group of scientists employed by the IOC Medical Commission (initially, in 2003. There have been developments since then).
We have been saying the owning class is attacking us for years. It should be obvious from Trump’s attacks on transgender people that billionaires hate us. And Rupert Murdoch owned media has been spreading transphobia all over the world for a lot longer than that.
If you’ll permit drag to speculate as to why: Capitalism and patriarchy are very closely linked. Trans people’s existence is a radical threat to the patriarchy at a basic level. If anyone can be any gender, if the “objective reality” of gender is destroyed, then gender oppression becomes nonsense. Rich white men want to preserve the social system that keeps them at the top, and trans people’s existence makes it obvious to everyone that they shouldn’t be.
Thank you for the insight. I’m glad to have the opportunity to have this discussion and gain some new understanding of the world outside my usual.
I love drag, but saying liberalism is coopting struggle of oppressed people to distract from the class war isn’t denying the reality of the oppression. Saying pink washing exists isn’t saying women aren’t oppressed.
Also that’s just one sentence. Let’s not do a whichhunt thingy
Drag doesn’t think Nutomic is smart enough to make the point you just did without saying a slur.