@ernest how do I report a Magazin on kbin.social ? There is a usere called “ps” who is posting to his own “antiwoke” Magazin on kbin.social. Please remove this and dont give them a chance to etablish them self on kbin.social. When I report his stuff it will go to him because he is the moderator of the magazin? Seems like a problem. Screenshot of the “antiwoke” Magazin /sub on kbin.social. 4 Headlines are visible, 2 exampels: “Time to reject the extrem trans lobby harming our society” “How to end wokeness” #Moderation #kbin #kbin.social 📎

edit: dont feed the troll, im shure ernest will delet them all when he sees this. report and move on.

Edit 2 : Ernest responded:
“I just need a little more time. There will likely be a technical break announced tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. Along with the migration to new servers, we will be introducing new moderation tools that I am currently working on and testing (I had it planned for a bit later in my roadmap). Then, I will address your reports and handle them very seriously. I try my best to delete sensitive content, but with the current workload and ongoing relocation, it takes a lot of time. I am being extra cautious now. The regulations are quite general, and I would like to refine them together with you and do everything properly. For now, please make use of the option to block the magazine/author.”

  • ernest@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I just need a little more time. There will likely be a technical break announced tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. Along with the migration to new servers, we will be introducing new moderation tools that I am currently working on and testing (I had it planned for a bit later in my roadmap). Then, I will address your reports and handle them very seriously. I try my best to delete sensitive content, but with the current workload and ongoing relocation, it takes a lot of time. I am being extra cautious now. The regulations are quite general, and I would like to refine them together with you and do everything properly. For now, please make use of the option to block the magazine/author.

    • Infiltrated_ad8271@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Could you clarify what you would do in cases like this? Censor based on misinterpretation of the clickbait headline, even if it does not contain hate content at all?

    • KTVX94@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I joined kbin recently and I’m kind of concerned about the implications of this. I don’t support those posts at all, but who gets to say what’s worth banning and what not? Wouldn’t that go against the decentralized nature of the site? Or is it the specific instance that magazine is on that has the authority to ban what’s inside? How does all of this work?

      Edit: my bad, I got kbin and kbin.social mixed up. Noob mistake.

      • livus@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Remember, kbin.social is just one instance of kbin. Ernest banning something on kbin.social does not mean banning it from the fediverse.

        It could pop up on another fediverse site or even another kbin site.

      • harmonea@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Wouldn’t that go against the decentralized nature of the site?

        No, it’s exactly the opposite. The entire point of a decentralized federation is that while yes, the admin is in complete control of what content is allowed on his or her own instance, users who don’t like what the admin is doing can just spin up their own new instances.

        Ernest can ban this type of content if he likes. Others can take the kbin software and make a new instance where it’s welcome. Ernest can choose not to federate with that instance if they continue to push content that’s against his rules, but Ernest doesn’t have the power to dictate the direction for hundreds of millions of users’ experience like a certain centralized site’s mad CEO or admin board does.

        What would be against the nature of ActivityPub is if Ernest built something into the software to prevent it being used for types of content he doesn’t like, even on other instances.

      • Kierunkowy74@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        kbin.social administration controls only what is published on kbin.social, and what content from elsewhere kbin.social users can see. An user banned from kbin.social can make another account, on another site and start recreate there his banned community. kbin.social will be able to ban this remote user and remote community, but this restricts only what kbin.social users can see.

        Exactly the same for another /kbin or lemmy site - just replace the domain name accordingly.

      • lazy@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        @KTVX94

        While I kind of agree with you in being concerned about who gets to control what we see and don’t see and the censorship aspect, there is also “the paradox of tolerance” to be considered and maybe in that light it is correct to not tolerate that subs intolerance.

        Regarding the Paradox of Tolerance:
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

      • updawg@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        It actually is one of the strengths of the decentralized nature of the Fediverse. But there are still growing pains associated with it.

    • HidingCat@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wow, more new servers! Looks like the growth has been really explosive. It wasn’t that long ago you migrated Kbin to Fastly right?

    • LoafyLemon@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      A friendly reminder; Please don’t forget to take your time and step away from Kbin whenever you need a break. Your mental health is just as important, if not most important, for the project to succeed.

    • Noki@kbin.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      thank you!

      I appreciate all you do and your quick respond.

      Multipile Things I noticed as a creater of this thread:
      can I close comments ?
      can I hide comments ?
      can I pin a response?
      can I quickly see from what server peope are interacting?

      I am no coder but would love to support you with all the work that is done.

      At least some of the costs can be taken of your shoulders:

      https://www.buymeacoffee.com/kbin

      Edit: Can you close this thread for me ?

      • ernest@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        All the things you mentioned are in the roadmap. However, we can either do it quickly and potentially encounter issues in a few weeks or months, or take a bit more time for a more thorough approach. I’ve decided to move away from playful prototyping. From now on, every change will be tested before it’s approved for kbin.social - it’s no longer just my code (https://lab2.kbin.pub/). I’d like to close this thread for you… but can we just agree not to respond in it anymore? ;p

        • Hobovision@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t think closing threads is a great idea or in keeping with how this all works. I think it’d be nice to be able to mute a thread as an individual, but by its nature these discussions are open and shared with many instances. If we close it on kbin.social, other kbin instances, lemmy instances, and even places like mastodon and pixelfed could keep discussing, if I understand activity pub correctly.

          • ernest@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            In such important tasks, I would like to engage in community-driven development. When I start planning these tasks, I will come to you with my whiteboard and sketch out the individual stages. Together, we will look for the advantages and disadvantages of such a solution, the weak and strong points. This is to jointly make a decision on whether the change makes sense on kbin.social but also in the perspective of the entire federation. It can be a great fun ;)

          • Snapz@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Let’s all agree that of its many issues, locking/deleting open threats to targeted minority groups and pro supremacist propaganda meant to hurt or influence vulnerable people was NOT a drawback of the Reddit experience.

            Yes, it’s a difficult thing to enforce a subjective line of a basic standard of decency, but it’s also what a society is and one of the main reasons we gather as people. The quality of a group is shown in how they accommodate the weakest and most vulnerable among them.

            If we aren’t prioritizing a way to send this CHUD and people liked them to the hypothetical edge of town, to be sure they can’t bombard the young person struggling with their gender identity with targeted hate at their weakest moment, then what are we doing here?

    • slicedcheesegremlin@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Everyone appreciates your effort here, ernest. Spez hasn’t gotten 92 upvotes on a comment in years lmao despite Reddit having millions of users, it really shows how the difference.

    • cacheson@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The regulations are quite general, and I would like to refine them together with you and do everything properly.

      I have been wondering how instance-wide moderation will end up looking on kbin, once you’ve had a chance to get a team in place for that. While it is (I assume) a “generalist” instance, it’s important to keep in mind that you can’t please everyone. Trying to have too broad of an audience will just result in retaining those with a high tolerance for toxicity (usually highly toxic themselves), while everyone else leaves in favor of better-managed spaces.

      Communities in general, and particularly on the internet, need to understand what their purpose is, and be proactive about filtering out those that are incompatible with that purpose. This doesn’t mean judging those people as wrong, or “bad people”, it just means recognizing that not everyone is going to get along, and that some level of group cohesion needs to be maintained.

      • atypicaloddity@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Agreed, that’s part of my problem with generalist instances. They’re so broad that they serve multiple communities with differing expectations, and it forces admins to take sides.

        • cacheson@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think there is value in having both generalist and specialized instances, and the big landing spots for new users should probably strive to be more generalist. As you point out though, there are limits to how broad of an audience one can practically cater to.

  • ArugulaZ@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The frothing hysteria over “wokeness” (ie treating your fellow humans with respect) is just a smokescreen by the oil industry, which hopes it will take some pressure off it for, you know, slowly killing us all with global warming. You do know this, don’t you?

    I went through a young Republican phase, too. Then I realized that the party had nothing to offer ordinary people but contempt and cynical manipulation. Like telling people that they can be good Christians by doing the exact opposite of what Christ did. Like pitting Americans against each other for their differences. Like convincing people that the former president, a monster by any objective standard, is this country’s savior when it’s clear that he’s just shaking the nation for loose change.

    It’s called “wokeness” because we finally opened our eyes, saw what was happening all around us, and decided to do something about it. You can either recognize the evil in this world, or become another oblivious victim of it.

    • ArugulaZ@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Every downvote is a sweet, sweet tear trickling down from the chubby cheek of an incel sociopath who was pre-emptively blocked. Delicious! Your agony sustains me!

      • bane_killgrind@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not really. There is millions visibly spent on lobbying efforts against climate change, and invisibly stockholders invested in energy are board members of media companies. For example Jack Cockwell has over a billion dollars in Brookfield hedge fund, and that fund has been increasing it’s holdings in energy for the last decade. There’s some BCE board member that has millions of dollars in Wajax stocks (industrial equipment manufacturer), about half his net worth.
        If you talk about industries with influence on one another from the perspective of ownership, you’ll find it’s all very incestuous as the richest people will diversify.
        Weirdly, the people involved in Fox News only seem to own stock in FOX, but cash contributions to those people aren’t shown in the market data I’m looking at. Maybe I’m not looking in the right places, but I’m not a finance person.

  • static@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    A single shitposter, with only downvoted posts. without attention they would have stopped posting, but now it has attention.

    While the content is stupid and vile, is he breaking any rules?

    • Balssh@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I disagree: better to kill the evil in its infancy, rather than let it spread and hope it goes away by its own.

    • AnonTwo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean, one of those examples is

      “Time to reject the extrem trans lobby harming our society”

      That is a global rule violation on most sites. Hate speech.

    • wahming@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Respectful Behavior

      We expect all users to treat each other with respect and kindness. Harassment, hate speech, or any other form of harmful behavior will not be tolerated. We reserve the right to remove any content or user that violates these guidelines.

      Isn’t this standard for anywhere that doesn’t want to end up as T_D or 4chan?

        • wahming@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          they are hate magnets.

          And they were posted with the intent to be so. That suffices in my opinion. It’s not the lone post itself, but the context of the magazine as a whole.

          If the moderator refuses to properly moderate the comments

          Yes, the mod of antiwoke is about to exercise proper judgement

        • AnonTwo@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Incidentally the person breaking the rules is making the biggest stir in this thread about not banning people.

          Guy literally is advocating beating people to death as a good Christian moral while also trying to advocate he shouldn’t be banned for it.

          • 10A@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            No, I did not advocate for beating people to death, and I would never advocate for that. Try reading the whole post and not taking a few words out of context.

            • jonion@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              And these are the people who would lecture about prejudice… Nothing but prejudicial bad faith in this entire thread.

              Being a filthy reactionary, I was really hoping that the fediverse could become something like the reddit of 10 years ago, but it seems like the dyed-in-the-wool redditors couldn’t help but bring their intolerance with them.

              Thank you for actually bothering to stand your ground. God bless.

            • AnonTwo@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              The whole post was even more disgusting. Others are welcome to read it, Static linked it, but I stand by what I said.

              If the devil did exist, he resides in your church, raising monsters.

    • albinanigans@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nah, we’re nipping this shit in the bud because the shitposting is only the Trojan horse.

      This shit’s already here. Now we gotta shine a light on it and deal with it.

    • sadreality@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      clowns always trying to censor somebody… hunting for some low level degenerate to turn him into “antihero”

      these people can’t seem to just enjoy a place with out starting a witch hunt

    • SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Streisand effect for sure. There seems to be run of these types of posts in the fediverse lately. People don’t seem to realize that sometimes they’re better off letting these situations take their natural course (and die), and not intervene unless it grows beyond manageability.

      • TipRing@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Respectfully, I disagree. If you are running a bar and a nazi comes in with all their nazi periphranalia and orders a drink and behaves. You still kick them out. Because if you don’t the next time they will bring all their nazi friends and it will be much harder to kick them out and then your other patrons stop showing up because of all the nazis around and now you are running a nazi bar.

        Ban hate trolls. Ban them immediately. Because if that content festers on the site it will be much harder to ban later.

      • zedtronic@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        #1 rule on the internet: don’t feed the trolls. Downvote them, block them, move on. They’re not here to engage in good faith.

        • 10A@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          As someone who genuinely does enjoy trolling on rare occasion, I think you misunderstand what a troll is. Speaking sincerely held ideas from across the political spectrum does not make someone a troll. A troll is insincere yet playful. That’s not to say I shouldn’t be blocked by anyone who wants to block me, but it’s not for being a troll in this context.

          • blightbow@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            A troll is insincere yet playful.

            I chuckled at least. A troll’s motivation for the rise that they seek is largely inconsequential, as is the delivery mechanism. ;) Let’s not go and disenfranchise the majority of the internet’s trolling population with narrow typecasting!

            While we’re on the topic of trolling, are you familiar with Sealioning?

            Sealioning (also sea-lioning and sea lioning) is a type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursuing people with relentless requests for evidence, often tangential or previously addressed, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity (“I’m just trying to have a debate”), and feigning ignorance of the subject matter. It may take the form of “incessant, bad-faith invitations to engage in debate”, and has been likened to a denial-of-service attack targeted at human beings. The term originated with a 2014 strip of the webcomic Wondermark by David Malki, which The Independent called “the most apt description of Twitter you’ll ever see”.

            It’s a rhetorical question, no need to respond. Someone else might learn something they didn’t know before today. :)

          • mark@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            No such thing as free speech on these “niche” social platforms. Pitchforks and torches, if this was real-life they’d be throwing you in a pond tied up and waiting for you to float…

            • blightbow@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              14 day old account on its home instance, its only posting activity is within this thread, and both comments are low effort outrage farming with images.

              The emotionally evocative hyperbole in the second sentence was pretty good though. Is it your own material? If so, can you write some more persecution porn for us? You don’t need images as your crutch, you’ve got some real writing talent going for you here.

              • mark@fedia.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                A picture is worth a thousand words and just sums up this toxic thread and witch hunt.

      • rastilin@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        The problem is that by that point it will have grown beyond manageability. You know the “Nazi bar” saying.

        There’s a bunch of people (who are Nazis) and they seem cool, quiet, well spoken, just having a drink. And they bring their friends and those guys are cool too. Then those guys bring their friends and those guys are less cool and now normal people don’t drink at the bar anymore and you look around and it’s a Nazi bar and you can’t make them leave or they’ll start causing “problems”. So. I’m all for just using the brutal hammer of censorship.

        It’s not a free speech platform and no one ever said it was.

      • AnonTwo@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        So here’s my issue here.

        This guy is clearly not a small issue. He’s being as loud and obnoxious as possible.

        If there’s nothing in place to deal with one huge troublemaker, what’s to stop a dozen who come to Kbin and start making hateful communities?

        My concern at this point is that Kbin itself gets defederated because the other instances don’t think it’s taking moderation seriously.

      • smokinjoe@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        and not intervene unless it grows beyond manageability.

        I’d rather nip it in the bud. You’re just letting things fester.

        • slicedcheesegremlin@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          The biggest thing im afraid of happening to Kbin/the lemmyverse is that it will end up like Ruqqus, especially now that it seems to be swamped with trolls.

        • SpacemanSpiff@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t disagree with the sentiment, but it will become impossible to accomplish, practically speaking, as the fediverse grows. There’s only so much that can be done with volunteers, and it’s not like armies of paid staffers work much better (as we’ve seen the major tech corps try to do).

          There is a sociological aspect to this, numerous studies have confirmed the effects of highlighting bad actors. There’s a copycat effect (as studies on mass shootings show) as well as what we call the Streisand effect. Both inadvertently encourage others to perpetuate the behaviour rather than serving to limit it.

          • AnonTwo@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Where does this sentiment come from? Reddit for the most part already does this. Twitter before Elon showed up did this. Most modern sites already do this

            The only place I can think of where this is commonplace is 4chan, because they don’t moderate.

            Yes, highlighting bad actors over a course of time can be problematic. But the point in this case is the point out that we don’t have the tools to deal with said bad actor. The tools that other sites have. It’s not being said in vain, the goal is to make aware that something needs to be done so that people don’t even see the bad actor to bring attention to them.

            There is a purpose to the current efforts. I think everyone understands that constantly bringing attention to them will do no good, but the goal here is to bring attention to tools that are needed, so that it doesn’t happen again, or at the very least to this extent.

        • mack123@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          The rules of the internet remains unchanged, regardless of platform. Do not feed the trolls.

            • mack123@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Sometimes the mobile U/I wins, but I decided to let it stand regardless of replying to the wrong comment. Maybe the troll learns something, though I doubt it.

        • kestrel7@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          So you advocate your own posting taking its natural course and dying off? I can think of a way you can hurry up this process.

          • mcgravier@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Dude, he’s mocking you all and you don’t even get it. The more you scream the more attention you’re bringning to his magazine.

            You people are hopless.

            • 00@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Dude, he’s mocking you all and you don’t even get it. The more you scream the more attention you’re bringning to his magazine.

              Other people are not as stupid as you think. But the question between not giving it attention to challenge it and possibly giving it food to fester or not giving it attention and also not challenging it is not easily answered. Looking at the repulsive backlash, drawing attention to it was the right choice. Sure, some more people might flock there, but the vast majority strongly disapproves and now knows that kbin.social (unsurprisingly) has awful people on it as well.

  • hydro033@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t know what is going on with this new magazine, but are you suggesting that we can’t be critical of “woke” culture and/or aspects of trans culture? I think both have some excesses deserving of some criticism, e.g. witch hunts on social media and transwomen in women’s sports.

    Edit: Unbelievable downvotes over a completely reasonable take. Perhaps there is no hope for the internet after all.

    • Borgzilla@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I see it as an opportunity to see how resilient the Fediverse is against censorship. Each instance has its own rules, and can federate (or not) with whoever they want. You want to build a stormfront clone or an extreme-left community? Go ahead, make your own rules. It does not mean that my instance has to federate with yours, though.

      Sorry about the grammatical mistakes. English is not my native language.

    • AnonTwo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re being downvoted for making a reasonable take, to a completely unreasonable set of posts.

      The problem is basically people going “let them talk banning is free speech!” When the talk is either an article demonizing the trans lobby, or a post below it that takes a moment to talk about how back in the day it was acceptable to beat homosexual people to a pulp.

      That is why you are being downvoted. Because you’re trying to act like a reasonable response is to be expected to a set of unreasonable and destructive takes. There’s a group here trying to normalize hate speech as something that can just be argued with when most of them are cherry picking their arguments or just arguing in bad faith in general.

    • PenguinJuice@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is really disgusting and probably the worst part of any movement, everyone is brain washed into believing only one narrative and dissent is silenced. It’s pretty much just fascism.

      • fosho@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        you think a movement of tolerance for trans folks is brainwashing? i’m pretty sure it’s society evolving to accept that people exist outside the box of binary genders and other folks deciding they have no problem with that.

        you’re trying to tell people that what they know themselves to be is wrong. you’re out here lacking empathy - making no attempt to really try to understand what life is like for people like this. and ultimately you’re making a fuss about something that bears no tangible outcome on your daily life.

        we don’t want to have this conversation anymore. it has been done to death. we understand your perspective and it’s based on fear of the unknown. end of discussion.

    • Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m sorry for the downvotes. People are assuming you support what’s being said on that magazine, when you explicitly said you didn’t read it. It’s pretty vile stuff, not just reasonable criticisms. The place needs to be banned, it’s very clearly hate speech.

  • PenguinJuice@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    People are allowed to have a difference of opinion. You don’t get to silence people just because you disagree with them. Please do not go down that dark path.

    Believe it or not there are people who do not subscribe to certain views, bur that does not make them “hate mongerers” anymore than the extreme opposition. It’s only extremists and people who try to silence others for their views that are assholes. You live in a great big world full of a lot of differing opinions and that’s what makes it beautiful. Silencing opinions because of your personal beliefs is not acceptable.

    • fedosyndicate@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. […] for it may easily turn out that [the intolerant] are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; [the intolerant] may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive […] We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.

      We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to [other crimes] as criminal.

    • slicedcheesegremlin@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      complexity does not inherently make your argument better. “Slavery is is horrible and evil but free black people shouldn’t have the right to vote” is a “nuanced opinion,” but that doesn’t mean it isn’t racist and terrible.

    • OKbinBuddyChicanery@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Transphobia, racism, etc aren’t an opinion. They are hate speech. Full stop.

      I am absolutely against silencing opinions. I am also absolutely in favor of silencing hate speech. Understand the difference.

      • PenguinJuice@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Racism is disgusting but transpobia? I don’t believe that’s hate speech. People can not like something but not wish death on the person or outright hate who they are as a person. People are allowed to dislike certain behaviors. It’s not comparable to racism and its definitely not hate speech.

        • szczur@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          But you do not disagree with someone doing or believing something. By defending transphobia you disagree with someone being one thing or the other. Because transphobia isn’t based on disagreeing with what trans people are doing or believe in. It disagrees with their fundamental right to exist and wants to take it away. It’s no different from racism or antisemitism.

          That’s the difference you seem to miss.

              • 10A@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s true, and it’s a good point. All of our behavior is rooted in our free will.

                • Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Which of course brings up the question why you care if others choose to live differently than you, or if others choose to try to resolve their gender dysphoria by aligning their biology to match their brain’s perception of what they should be? Or if they choose to enter relationships with other people of the same gender? How does that harm anyone?

            • fosho@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              at the end of the day, you’re just an asshole for telling other people who they can and can’t be when it doesn’t affect you AT ALL.

        • AnonTwo@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          but transpobia? I don’t believe that’s hate speech.

          Uhhh…no, that is hate speech. It’s in definition damnit.

          I’m going down this thread and holy crap did you 180 from normal conversation into downright bigot.

      • hydro033@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        What about when it’s more nuanced like “I support trans people to do whatever they want, but I don’t support transwomen in women’s sports.” Or “I am cautious about transitioning young children until we have a better medical understanding of gender dysphoria.” Seems like many here would still consider my perspective to be “hate speech,” which I, of course, find ridiculous.

        • effingjoe@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          When you’re discussing traits inherent to a person-- not things they do or believe, but things they are, it’s almost certainly hate speech. A quick test would be to swap the inherent thing you’re talking about with skin color, since that one seems obvious to most people. So, would you say that an opinion that you support people of color, you just don’t support them playing sports with people that aren’t POC, be nuanced opinion or hate speech?

          As for your second hypothetical, that is a discussion for doctors and experts, and they’ve already had it, and that’s why children can’t get non-reversible procedures until they’re 18. No one is transitioning children; they are blocking their development so they can have a choice on how to proceed when they’re adults.

          • hydro033@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            False equivalence. XY humans destroy XX humans in sports, it’s why we have men’s and women’s divisions - women are a protected class. Allowing XY individuals in women’s sports is not fair to women, and undermines the entire purpose of sport and a women’s division. Look at it this way : men’s division is really an open division, but we created a women’s division for the purpose of fairness.

            Second point, let’s just say you don’t know how much I know about this topic or these issues. The question of reversibility by using hormone blockers is still being debated. We simply do not have enough data to know if its safe. You cannot treat hormone manipulation as some simple process. There are many feedback loops involved in the HPG axes.

          • fosho@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            regarding the sports issue, i can understand the argument that this situation could be abused for an unfair advantage. and eventually it most likely would be by someone. however i don’t have any good solutions that aren’t shitty. even an absolutely sincere trans person could still have an unfair advantage but i would never advocate discrimination by banning them from competing. either option is unfair to someone. it’s a tough issue and one that has no easy answers.

            • hydro033@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Agreed - I think relabeling divisions as open and women (XX) divisions is the best solution. Other solutions I have heard include only regulating things at high levels of play, e.g., championships and other events that have prestigious awards. Joanna Harper has advocated the latter.

              • fosho@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                hmm - i like the idea of removing gender from divisions and instead using another criteria that better defines an individual’s ability. that way when a trans woman goes to compete they aren’t specifically put into a category for men but rather a group of people who have relatively comparable abilities. sortof like weight classes. i mean - it’s still kinda shitty because now someone has to decide based on difficult criteria who belongs where, but i think that’s a step in the right direction. i’m would hope that for trans folks, the idea that they are put into a gendered category is what is the most discriminatory rather than a skill/ability category. however, the end result would likely be the same just with different labels. maybe that’s what matters most? i don’t know. no easy answers.

        • CynAq@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s not nuance, that’s just ignorance and a knee-jerk reaction to a very complicated issue which has to be left to experts, who, in addition to being normal people with compassion and love like most of us towards their fellow humans, know the most about their topic of expertise than any of us.

          • hydro033@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            It is indeed nuance. Just because you’re not well read or educated on the topic, doesn’t mean I am not. I have been thinking about these things for years and years, and I do indeed have a formal education in biology. So, no, not a knee-jerk reaction, sorry. Again, I am all for letting trans individuals transition and exist how they want, and I am all for respecting pronoun usage, and whatever else - that is compassion towards fellow humans. I am just pointing out two aspects of this debate where I have my own thoughts that have some slight pushback on progressive perspectives.

            • CynAq@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              If you were as “well read” as you think you are, you would know how much bullshit you’re spewing right now. Especially about children getting the gender affirming care they need without any need interference from “well-mean” idiots like you.

              Your “concern” is potentially killing young people, and you’re here talking out of your ass, convinced you have compassion for people.

    • Cylusthevirus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      If your “certain view” is that trans people, other queer people, and/or anyone left of Tucker Carlson shouldn’t exist, you’ve opted out of the social contract of tolerance and should expect to be shunned.

      Tolerance is either a two way street or a suicide pact and I’m not here to watch people die so the worst dregs of humanity can spew their garbage.

      • PenguinJuice@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Whoa, I would never wish someone wouldn’t exist anymore, wtf? Most moderate people I know just don’t like the behavior, they don’t hate the people… I know assholes exist who actually want to kill people who disagree with them but that exists on both sides of the aisle.

        • minnieo@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Most moderate people I know just don’t like the behavior

          what does that even mean? what is ‘the behavior’? i’d like to see you try and tell me without generalizing literally millions of people

        • fosho@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          you could always … you know … not care. your life would be so much more fulfilling and meaningful if you stopped sticking your nose where it doesn’t belong.

        • z500@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Yes, because certainly this time around people are going to stop at side eye and clucking their tongues. Because it’s nothing but a difference of opinion, you see.

    • HelixDab@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Disagreements” are for things like tax milage, or whether or not a school needs a new football field. “Disagreements” are not for things like, “jews should be gassed”, or “trans people are all pedophiles”.

      • 10A@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago
        1. To be very clear, in my opinion, Jews should not be gassed (or otherwise murdered), and not all trans people are pedophiles (I don’t know the stats, but I’d guess they’re about the same as the rest of the population).
        2. Anyone who disagrees on the preceding two points has every right to openly speak their mind in a free society. And whereas their free speech rights are our own free speech rights, we must defend their right to freely state their opinions in all public forums. Free speech is not for ideas we like, but precisely for the ideas we dislike.
    • rideranton@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      You can block domains if you click on the domain next to the post, go to the sidebar and block it like a magazine

      • shatteredsteel@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        That hasn’t been functioning for me, I’ve had to go to each magazine individually to block them.

        If I click the button on the instance it doesn’t do anything, I still see the posts in my feed. I’ve tried on a few of the non-english instances (since I don’t know other languages).

  • MonochromeObserver@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I agree with others that you just gave that ps guy what they wanted: attention. You should’ve messaged ernest directly to ask him for better report tools.

    Meanwhile, go to beehaw if you need better protection from people like him.

  • 10A@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Welcome to the real world, where people disagree with you, and sometimes they’re right and you’re wrong. You can learn from everyone’s perspective.

    Is kbin meant to be a far-leftist echo chamber?

    • Noki@kbin.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      its a far right talking point, do you want extremist on kbin.social?

      Edit: Funny, your the guy agreeing with “ps”.

      “No normal person who obeys the laws of sexual morality calls himself a “cis”. It’s a slur used by those who hate being called something they don’t call themselves (their God-given gender), but have too much cognitive dissonance and too much hatred for normal people to let that stop them. We need to reopen the asylums yesterday” - this you ?

      more hatefull stuff from you “We may not all have been Christian back then, but almost all of us were, and everyone supported Judeo-Christian values without question. Homosexuals were regularly taken outside and beaten to a pulp, so it was extremely rare for anyone to think such behavior was acceptable.”

      • 10A@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Woke is far-leftist neo-Marxism. What you call “far right” and “extremist” is actually normal, conservative, and Christian. What you call “hateful” is actually just truth telling.

        Downvote me all you want, but you sound like naive child who hasn’t learned how to engage with competing worldviews.

        • mrnotoriousman@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Woke is far-leftist neo-Marxism

          Lmaoooo with the buzzwords. Define far-left neo marxism and give some examples of it being promoted by US politicians.

          • 10A@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’d be happy to do that, but not in the context of this thread. If m/antiwoke survives, maybe we can have a mutually respectful disagreement about it there in a few days.

        • jclinares@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you answer “yes”, you just might be repeating the whisper of a demon."

          So, wait… people who have a competing world view from yours are listening to demons? Now who’s naive? xD

        • geoffervescent@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          We are all happy to engage with competing worldviews

          What you call “far right” and “extremist” is actually normal, conservative, and Christian. What you call “hateful” is actually just truth telling.

          This isn’t a competing worldview, or rather, it’s a competing worldview in the same way that phrenology and alchemy are competing ways to view anatomy and chemistry. Like, it’s possible to genuinely believe in these things if your conditions of childhood existence are so constrained, isolated, or manipulated that you are happier living life in your own personal ‘Truman show.’ But the rest of us don’t have an obligation to play along with your fantasy.

          Most of us here on the internet have at some point met someone we’ve had a reasonable political disagreement with but could walk away understanding each other better due to those disagreements. Most of us would even say thise diagreements have gone in both political directions. The same cannot honestly be said for folks with your version of a ‘world view.’ It’s like a method actor but worse because it lacks any goal, it’s like a person suffering mental but worse because the cause (Patriarchal models of religion) is external, intentional, and had been prosthlytizing delusion as a worldview for millenia.

          • 10A@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Hatred is not speech you disagree with. It’s not speech that hurts your delicate feelings. It’s not speech that contradicts your values. It’s none of that.

            I’m fine with downvotes, although I miss old-school reddiquette back when we upvoted content that should be seen, regardless of whether or not we agreed with it. But this discussion is about banning people and magazines, not downvotes.

            • Bipta@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Hatred is not speech you disagree with. It’s not speech that hurts your delicate feelings. It’s not speech that contradicts your values. It’s none of that.

              Right. It’s speech that tells people they’re not worthy of or welcome to exist.

              Thanks for playing.

              • 10A@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s not exactly what hate speech is, but it’s also not what I said. Standing up for conservative Christian behavior is wholly different from telling anyone they’re not worthy or welcome to exist. We are all made in God’s image, all of us able to repent, be forgiven, and live according to God’s will.

                • Ski@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  What if they don’t believe in the Christian God because the Christian God is demonstrably not real?

                • szczur@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  So perhaps you should repent for actively hurting your fellow children of God. Because unless you’re not a hardcore old-school christian, freedom of choice on how to live ones life if it doesn’t hurt anybody is a God given right. And you actively want to take that away.

            • kestrel7@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              No one needs to see this, you are throwing out extremely basic arguments that all of us encounter every day in this regressive society. You aren’t speaking truth to power, you’re just being part of the power right now. You aren’t making yourself look good and you aren’t making the world a better, freer, more nuanced, or happier place.

              People: Hey, stop being a jackass.

              Conservatives: OMG, yoU WANT TO CREATE A FAR LeFTIST ECHO CHAMBER

              Every fucking time.

            • FfaerieOxide@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Do you remember when I called you an asshole?

              I’d like to expand that you’re a mi-sogynist , homophobe, and your support for fascists leaves me with no compunctions presuming you hold racist beliefs as well.

              In short, I want to make clear this is not a case of what you may have read in Mathew 10:22. You are not being persecuted, and it is not “for righteousness’ sake”. You are a hate filled asshole who pursues policies which will harm society, and you seek to insert and establish the dominance of (what you believe to be) the word of your god while desiring safe space free from the calling out of your hate.

              I also suspect you might be closeted.

              That last line is not served as a “gotcha”. I want you to know community and acceptance can exist outside what you seem to have found convening with some very dangerous ideology on the right. I suspect at some level you want to be lead away as as you say yourself there are places you could hang out that would not challenge your beliefs. You are here in a “den of sin”.

              I will commune with a few gods (not yhwh; different better gods) to see if they can bless you with the conviction to choose kindness over cantankerousness.
              Change is possible.
              You are not broken beyond repair.
              I Love You.

              I have faith in your ability to be a better person than you have thus-far demonstrated yourself to be.

              • 10A@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Wow, this is such a well composed comment that I almost want to upvote it. Nice work with all of the links and research. You deserve a better reply than I have the energy to write, as I’m tired of this conversation. Sorry.

                To address a few of your accusations:

                1. I am not racist. I’d like to remind you that the southern slaveholders were all Democrats, and the Republican party has always opposed slavery. To this day, Democrats are obsessed with skin color, in their CRT and BLM, while Republicans advocate for color-blind meritocracy. Let’s not argue about politics here, please, but no, I am not a racist.
                2. I am not closeted. I do confess that I endure other sorts of evil temptations on occasion, though, just like any human being does, so I can certainly relate to those who suffer from SSA. But as a Christian, I pray that I may be shielded from such temptation when I encounter it, and prayer works.

                And lastly, quickly, to address two other high-level points you made:

                1. I’m here because there are a large majority of non-Christians here, many of whom have no exposure to the word of God or anyone who praises it. I believe the Great Commission tells me to be here, if the community will accept me. I may get plenty of downvotes (seriously, look at my reputation score!), but if I can plant a seed in the fertile heart of even just one other person, the Holy Spirit will do His work.
                2. Despite your rejection of the one true living God, I truly appreciate your expression of love, however sarcastic it may have been (I can’t tell). I am certainly not broken, though I was a broken, drugged out nihilist in my youth before I found Jesus. I love you too, @FfaerieOxide.
                • FfaerieOxide@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You seem to be under the mistaken assumption I am interested in debating you.

                  I am not. Nor do I care to hear you loudly proselytizing as a certain other group of people do.

                  I invite you to consider why you get the reaction you universally seem to to your posts, and proffer that it is not because everyone is jealous that Jesus loves you more than them.
                  I am not however here to convert you, nor do I intend to platform fascist talking points by treating them as worthy or needing of debate.

                  I will leave you with the words of one of the prophets of my faith,

                  “You ain’t a vampire; you don’t have to suck.”

            • AnonTwo@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Can you explain how a post that was aimed towards “trans lobby harms our society” is not hatred?

              I mean I somewhat blame the OP for not linking the posts for some context, but after a bit of looking around it sounds like the posts in question are in fact hate speech and not just things to disagree with.

              • Infiltrated_ad8271@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Since you read in context, could you tell me where the hate speech is?

                I only see one article where they spend most of the time making a disclaimer in favor of trans rights, followed by a critique of non-diagnosis and surgery on children, or how nothing is allowed to be questioned. That last one we can see in this thread, people are foaming at the mouth over a title (which includes "extreme, btw…), it’s crazy.

              • 10A@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                What if an article was titled “Christian lobby harms our society”? Would you consider that hateful? Personally, as a Christian, I certainly wouldn’t upvote such an article, but I wouldn’t try to get it banned either. People have viewpoints based on personal experiences, and some people find harm in some political lobbies. It’s not hatred to speak what one believes to be true.

        • AnonTwo@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          You know, calling everyone not on your political compass “Not Normal” is kindof not coming off as mature as you think it is…

          Basically rather than “disagree” with people, you’re creating strawmen to debase anyone speaking to you, so you don’t have to disagree with them.

          • 10A@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m sorry. That sounds reasonable. I’m really trying to avoid political debate here, and just stand up for kbin allowing a diversity of perspectives. I understand how that might come across as you describe.

      • deelightful@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Unfortunately I don’t know how to report magazines/users so I can’t help you there but I just want to add my support to what you’re asking because this sort of thing is against the kbin terms of service:

        We expect all users to treat each other with respect and kindness. Harassment, hate speech, or any other form of harmful behavior will not be tolerated. We reserve the right to remove any content or user that violates these guidelines.

        • 10A@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          The communist far-left calls all disagreement “hate speech”. It is not hateful to speak the truth.

          • RadicalHomosapien@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            There is no disagreement when it comes to gender identity. You don’t get to disagree with how someone lives their life when it doesn’t effect you. It is not a “communist” ideology to support trans folks and you’re exposing how little you actually understand about politics with these types of assertions.

            • 10A@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s off-topic to debate that here, so I’ll refrain. But suppose you’re right, and I understand nothing. And suppose the antiwoke mod knows nothing either. Would that be suitable grounds to ban a magazine and/or ban us as users?

              • GizmoLion@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Well that depends, you’ve been pretty thoroughly educated in this post, so now what will you do about it? I fully expect you’ll return to your far right anti-woke hatemongering, in which case yes you should be blocked.

                Or you can retract it, and maybe there’s hope for you yet.

          • bane_killgrind@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            “We need to reopen the asylums yesterday” isn’t the truth, it’s your opinion.

            In my opinion, words like this are propaganda intended for radicalisation, and dehumanize people that don’t fit into rigid definitions of acceptable lifestyle. Your opinion states that these people should be deprived of liberty and free movement, and deprived of autonomy over their own bodies.

            In my opinion, I don’t need to tolerate you in my social circles, and Ernest doesn’t need to use his own computing resources to enable your shit take on what freedom is.

            Kindly go and have your “free speech” using resources that come out of your own pocket, not an unwilling person’s.

            • 10A@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              I respect most of what you wrote. Yes, that one sentence you quoted at the top is nothing more than my opinion. Yes, you could consider it propaganda. But I didn’t intend it to be for radicalization, and I wouldn’t hope that to be its effect.

              I don’t mean to dehumanize anyone, no matter what. But I do agree that I have advocated for a somewhat rigid definition of acceptable lifestyle.

              With regard to depriving anyone of liberty, free movement, and autonomy, that’s specifically for those who need mental help. For many years we used asylums to contain such people. Many of our current social ills began when we closed the asylums down, and changed the DSM to redefine conditions formerly considered types of insanity to now be considered perfectly healthy. This too is just my opinion, but I’m trying to clarify that it only addresses people who need mental help.

              You most certainly don’t need to tolerate me in your social circles, and I won’t be offended if you choose to block me.

              Ernest doesn’t need to do anything at all, and I think we can all agree we’re grateful for what he’s done. Personally I hope he establishes a free speech policy, but in any case we’ll see what happens.

              With regard to money, I’ve bought Ernest coffee and I hope you have too! That doesn’t entitle me to anything, of course. But it’s just to say that yes, I have contributed.

              • Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                and changed the DSM

                Side note, that’s more an indictment of the DSM and the rigor of psychology than anything else. Whether something is a disorder or not depends on how popular it is, the whole thing reeks of quackery

          • Naich@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            If you genuinely can’t see that it’s hate speech, then you need to be blocked and not debated because you are immune to reasoning.

            • 10A@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Amusing. If I can’t accept your obviously incorrect position, then you must shut down conversation because I’m immune to reasoning? Take a look in the mirror.

          • jalda@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            You are longing for the times when “Homosexuals were regularly taken outside and beaten to a pulp”. Isn’t this hateful?

            • 10A@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              It would be if that’s what I said, but I never said I was longing for anything, and I never threatened to harm anyone.

                • 10A@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  No, actually I say what I mean. You might try taking the context of the entire comment into account. It was about the purpose of freedom.

              • jalda@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Whatever, I copied your whole paragraph in another comment, and the context is pretty clear for anyone who cares to read it. I didn’t claim that you personally were threatening to do the beating, only that you thought that the beating was desiderable for the “program of western civilization”. If you really don’t want homosexual people to be beaten to a pulp, then you should seriously reconsider how you express your ideas.

                • 10A@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Even taking that paragraph out of context is misleading. The whole comment was about the purpose of freedom.

              • Bizarroland@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s called masturpraying.

                You’re not hurting anyone (in the physical sense) but you’re getting off on the idea that bad things should happen to other people, people you consider to not be in your “in group”, and this is usually done in the name of and for the glory of God.

                It’s a fancy sin that preachers don’t tell people about because they’re usually guilty of it themselves.

                Masturpraying is direct service to and worship of Satan, and he really enjoys it because the people who do it do it in God’s name as they commit spiritual violence against the kingdom of God and its occupants while thinking that they are doing good.

      • jalda@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t usually go to through other people’s comment history, but this one is a goldmine

        “It made sense back when everyone was, more or less, on board with the program of western civilization. We may not all have been Christian back then, but almost all of us were, and everyone supported Judeo-Christian values without question. Homosexuals were regularly taken outside and beaten to a pulp, so it was extremely rare for anyone to think such behavior was acceptable. At this point we need to ask ourselves what the purpose of freedom is. Are we a free people so we can exercise perverted pleasures of the flesh, the slaughter of innocent babies, and genital mutilation of children without their parents knowledge? If you answer “yes”, you just might be repeating the whisper of a demon.”

        “woke neo-marxism claims that any normal person is bad. That means its practitioners openly discriminate against conservative white Christian men, especially if they practice heterosexual behavior in a traditional marriage.”

        “Ironically, secession is about the most American thing we could do at this point”

    • Matthieu@piaille.fr
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      @kbinMeta
      @10A
      Considering the issue about tankies on some lemmy instances, I think we understand how much left is too far left. And what you describe as “woke” isn’t it.

      • 10A@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I concede that’s a very good point. The term “far-left” (just like “far-right”) is problematic because there’s such a wide spectrum. In the center-left, you have old-school leftists like Bill Maher. On the far left you have tankies. In between them you have the woke. So what do we call that? I can’t pretend to answer the question, but I recognize that you have a very good point. Personally I’ll continue calling woke far-left until I learn a more appropriate term.

    • IncognitoErgoSum@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t want kbin to be a far-leftist echo chamber. I also don’t want kbin to be a far-right echo chamber. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to want to protect a community from extreme and hateful views, regardless of which side they come from, because those views tend to attract the type of horrible, toxic people such as yourself who advocate beating the shit out of people for being different in a harmless way.

      Welcome to the real world, where people who are different from you exist and mind their own business. If you can’t put up with people who don’t affect you in any way, I don’t think the rest of us owe it to you to put up with you, either. Go find a cesspit to wallow in.

      • 10A@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I upvoted you because your response was based on a misunderstanding of me. I never advocating for harming anyone, and I would never do that.

        • IncognitoErgoSum@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oh, and about sexual morality, here’s how that works:

          If it doesn’t involve children, animals, the deceased, or non-consenting people, it’s none of your business. Persecuting people who have done nothing to you is immoral.

            • IncognitoErgoSum@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Matthew 7:5 -You hypocrite! First, remove the beam out of your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother’s eye.

              Maybe worry about yourself first, guy who pines for the “good old days” when gay people used to get the shit beat out of them. Nobody corrupts the God’s word like loud, intolerant far-right Christians.

              • 10A@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Do you know how many times in this thread I’ve explained that I never expressed a desire for harm to come to anyone? And each time I’m just downvoted and mocked with a “we know what you really mean” attitude. No, really, I don’t pine for that. Some people just really love to hate on Christians.

      • 10A@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I agree that would be a false dichotomy. I disagree that I presented that choice. But I appreciate that you’re actually engaging with ideas here.

  • magnetosphere@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Those “antiwoke” people disgust me. I encourage disagreements. I don’t encourage thinly veiled hate disguised with code words. Tolerance isn’t “far left”.

    • fedosyndicate@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree, I think it’s good to have a discussion, and polite disagreement is quite acceptable. But like you said, encouraging violence and hatred is not acceptable to me.

      • DarkGamer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Tolerance of evil kind of is far left.

        @10A Hatred, bigotry, scapegoating of vulnerable minorities, lies, gaslighting, opposition to democracy and the rule of law is what defines the modern right. That is textbook evil, and you seem very committed to defending it. Look around, those left of you do not tolerate it. Almost every other comment is from people who want to block you or show you the door. Features are being added to this platform to specifically block your hate speech.

        The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly self-contradictory idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance.

          • 00@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            How is one guy saying (to extremely paraphrase) “some people have used the label of freedom to exploit vulnerable people” relevant to this? Like, thats a given, that some people will use this as a guise. Now, is there a systematic problem of leftists arguing for the freedom to assault children? No, only in the imagination of projecting right-libertarians.

            • jonion@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Michel Foucault, Gayle Rubin and Judith Butler aren’t just “some people”, they are three of the most influential thought leaders of the (post-)modern Left. Foucault of course being joined by heavyweights like Derrida, Lyotard, Deleuze, de Beauvoir, Sartre, Barthes etc. etc. and so on and so forth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_petition_against_age_of_consent_laws

              The point of course being that this thread is full of idiots who have never even heard of the likes of Foucault or truly appreciate how badly they jumped the gun here (turns out there was still some “intolerance” left). Your cult of transgression and tolerance is not philosophically sound.

              • livus@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                With all due respect poststructuralist academics (many of whom are dead) are not the sociocultural leaders of anyone.

                That 1977 petition is heinous, but I don’t think that being influenced by poststructuralism some 47 years later means anyone has to agree with those politics.

                • jonion@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Survived just fine through Judith Butler though.

                  When I took a couple of critical theory oriented literary courses at uni these were the names that came up again and again, but there was no mention of their ultimate transgression. This is how the myth of an entirely dangerous right and an entirely harmless left is propagated. Just don’t mention the bad parts of the left and create one continuous antagonist group out of everyone from Ted Cruz to Heinrich Himmler. Every rightist is implicated in the actions of their most radical thought leaders, but leftists are afforded the luxury of not associating with characters like Foucault, Lenin or Mao at their own leisure.

                  And I know that you know this but a “thought leader” doesn’t need to be alive, so that’s not really an argument. These people are tremendously influential and popular in our time (and Butler and Rubin aren’t even dead), as demonstrated by the negative response to the Derrick Jensen lecture clip linked above.

          • stillnotahero@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            The far-right brings messages of hate, violence, intolerance, and attempts to pass legislation to justify their views. The far-left has brought us the weekend, the 40 hour work week, child labor laws, etc…

            • jonion@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              the far-right

              who?

              messages of hate, violence

              such as?

              intolerance

              the tu quoque is almost too tempting here

              pass legislation to justify their views

              this is a joke, right?

              Oh, and I didn’t know people like Henry Ford and the 2nd Baron Trent were “far-left”. I guess the horseshoe really does exist after all.
              Stop beating strawmen, your ideological muscles are only gonna atrophy further.

              • stillnotahero@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Alright you caught me in a good mood, so I’ll throw some articles out here to explain my line of thinking. I hope you’ll see I’m not arguing with strawmen.

                Article from October of last year describing right wing outrage to drag shows.

                Fast forward to recent months and it appears that words have turned to action, in the form of legislation

                I believe some else mentioned the Paradox of Tolerance, but I will link it again just in case you missed it.

                I hope this clears up my line of thinking. No invisible boogymen here - just some examples of,
                In my opinion, things changing for the worst. And if you were not arguing in good faith… oh well.

                • jonion@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yeah I get where you’re coming from but this all hinges on the concept of Popper’s Open Society taken to its most extreme.
                  Have you ever considered why this whole “children must be able to see drag shows” notion didn’t show up just 20 years ago?

                  Idk, this kind of devil-on-the-wall “this is trans GENOCIDE” rhetoric when it comes to shit like increasing penalties for indecent exposure and not allowing children to attend drag shows really just says the quiet part out loud.

                • MrMonkey@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The “Paradox of Tolerance” is garbage. An interesting thought experiment where Popper came to the wrong conclusions. You can’t believe in “Freedom of Speech” AND “The Paradox of Tolerance”. They’re incompatible.

                  https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/toleration/

                  I’ll take “freedom of speech” over “governmental censorship” any day.

                  Because nobody thinks about what happens if a fundie takes power and decides that abortion is “intolerable” and arrests people who make pro-choice arguments because they’re being offensive. Or if anyone makes fun of religion, that’s intolerance and you must go to jail.

                  TLDR: Fuck “The Paradox of Tolerance”. It’s dumb.

                • jonion@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Nonsense, we most certainly can. In fact, most countries “worked out” without ever needing to be tolerant in the first place.

                  Popper doesn’t even acknowledge that this notion can be universalized, and then you’re just back to square one with Carl Schmitt and the Concept of the Political.

                  Take your LGBT example. For that to work, you must be intolerant of, say, Salafis. Then the Salafi can respond that his in-group (the faithful, true to God, whatever) are being threatened by those who must necessarily be intolerant of him by nature of their own allegiance.

                  Thus you still end up with a value judgment despite Popper’s veneer of neutralization and depoliticization. That’s where the real philosophizing begins. How do you justify allegiance to one side of the friend/enemy distinction over the other?

                • Alstjbin@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The apparent paradox is solved by viewing tolerance as a social contract. Only those who adhere to the contract and are tolerant of others can have a claim to receive that same tolerance. Similarly those who are intolerant should have no expectation to be tolerated since they do not adhere to the social contract which should provide that tolerance.

  • TooTallSol@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Thank you for exposing all the people who want kbin to be just like Reddit. If that is what kbin turns into then it can join spez right where he belongs.

    Your calls for censorship should get YOU and your peers in this thread banned.

  • Aloomineum@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    If there’s more people here like 10A it would be great if you could speak up so I could keep building my block list

  • Bobo_Palermo@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Simply don’t go to that magazine? Fuck, people…censorship is bad, but it sounds like kbin is committed to it. Is there a community I can join that has full free speech? This is a serious question.

      • minnieo@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        i disagree with him obviously, but this just makes us (the people opposing him) look bad, dont do that

      • HamSwagwich@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ive decided not to block him so I can follow him around annoying him and downvoting everything he says

        Perfect example of why voting should be public!

        Blocking him is the right answer, it’s the right thing to do and solves the problem of him presenting posts you don’t want to see.

      • VerifiablyMrWonka@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh, no no. It was that I blocked one person and there were only 6 other comments left (all fine) :D

        Blocking a person seems to remove any comment tree they’re a branch in (i.e. their posts and all responses to those posts)