Yeah, I know, and PugJesus fed the troll. He did exactly what drag wanted, he told everyone there were limits to his acceptance. He made the trans community feel unsafe, because some of them genuinely do have genders like drag’s. Ada did the right thing, she banned anyone who thought it was okay to invalidate trans people, the trolling didn’t work on her. But it worked on Pug, he changed his values, and now the community doesn’t trust him to be their ally.
Yeah, I know, and PugJesus fed the troll. He did exactly what drag wanted, he told everyone there were limits to his acceptance.
I hope you’re accepting of dogfuckergender too.
He made the trans community feel unsafe, because some of them genuinely do have genders like drag’s.
Lord.
But it worked on Pug, he changed his values, and now the community doesn’t trust him to be their ally.
I’ve never believed in dragons. Not even as a kid! Yes, shocking.
And I’ve long defended the trans community against conservative canards like “I identify as an attack helicopter”; an old canard that Drag commented on positively.
At some point, you, as an individual, apparently, decided conservative arguments, rather than being ridiculous slander, were something to aspire to. I’m sorry that you lost your way.
If you’re talking real dogs, no, those can’t consent. If you’re talking puppygirls, yes, obviously.
And I’ve long defended the trans community against conservative canards like “I identify as an attack helicopter”; an old canard that Drag commented on positively.
Speaking of consent, did the trans people around you ask you to do that in the way you did it, or did they tell you to stop because you were making them uncomfortable?
Trans people see you as a white knight who wants to “protect” people you won’t listen to. Who applies your limited cisgender worldview to their lives against their will. “Father knows best”, it’s abusive. You need to have more trust in other people to define their own experiences.
If you’re talking real dogs, no, those can’t consent. If you’re talking puppygirls, yes, obviously.
Not puppygirls, doggender. Are you denigrating the dogness of doggender individuals? Are you saying they can’t be dogs?
Speaking of consent, did the trans people around you ask you to do that in the way you did it, or did they tell you to stop because you were making them uncomfortable?
I can honestly say that I’ve pushed back against the attack helicopter canard around trans folk and not once been told to stop or had it implied that it was unwelcome before coming to Lemmy. I started pushing back against it in the late 2000s precisely because trans folk were fighting it. Furthermore, the attack helicopter canard is widely accepted as a conservative attack of the ‘one joke’ variety, and has long been unwelcome in mainstream LGBT spaces.
Trans people see you as a white knight who wants to “protect” people you won’t listen to. Who applies your limited cisgender worldview to their lives against their will. “Father knows best”, it’s abusive. You need to have more trust in other people to define their own experiences.
Fucking what.
Opposing conservative canards is now white knighting and abusive.
Are you fucking kidding me.
Is your only objection to the litterboxes in schools myth that it’s not true?
Are you denigrating the dogness of doggender individuals? Are you saying they can’t be dogs?
If a dog’s nonsapience is part of their gender, and anyone pursues a sexual relationship with that dog, then I’m calling that bestiality and urging them to stop, as we’re getting into rape territory. Believe it or not, I’ve been in a similar situation before. However, most dogs don’t consider intelligence part of their identity to the degree that they reject sapience.
And as to your question, if I were a school principal and a student suffered from species dysphoria that a litterbox would relieve, I would provide that student with a litterbox (in the bathroom, not in the classroom) so long as that student or their family/carer took responsibility for keeping it clean.
Now I urge you to read at least the Research section of this Wikipedia article so you can be acquainted with the science https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otherkin
If a dog’s nonsapience is part of their gender, and anyone pursues a sexual relationship with that dog, then I’m calling that bestiality and urging them to stop, as we’re getting into rape territory. Believe it or not, I’ve been in a similar situation before. However, most dogs don’t consider intelligence part of their identity to the degree that they reject sapience.
So you’re saying that they’re effectively not dogs in some deep and essential way?
And as to your question, if I were a school principal and a student suffered from species dysphoria that a litterbox would relieve, I would provide that student with a litterbox (in the bathroom, not in the classroom) so long as that student or their family/carer took responsibility for keeping it clean.
Fucking Christ.
Now I urge you to read at least the Research section of this Wikipedia article so you can be acquainted with the science https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otherkin
This is the totality of the ‘research’ section of wiki:
Daniell Kirby wrote the first academic paper on otherkin in 2008, which served to introduce the community to other academics.[14] Kirby described otherkin as sharing ideas with the neopagan movement, however she called this an “interim classification”, and warned that “to construe this group as specifically neo-pagan or techno-pagan obscures the focus of the participants”.[14] Subsequent research has treated the otherkin community as having an essentially religious character.[23][16][30][31]
From 2016 onwards, otherkin research has taken more of a narrative identity approach, investigating how otherkin come to understand their experiences.[32][21][4] Reviewing prior research, Stephanie C. Shea criticizes the prevailing conception of the otherkin subculture as being, or being alike to, either a religion or a spirituality.[33]
In four surveys of furries (with a sample size of 4338, 1761, 951 and 1065 respectively), depending on the sample, between 25% and 44% responded that they consider themselves to be “less than 100% human”, compared to 7% of a sample of 802 non-furries surveyed at furry conventions.[34]
What am I supposed to glean from this that I didn’t already know?
Fuck’s sake. Next you’ll start talking about your tulpa.
So you’re saying that they’re effectively not dogs in some deep and essential way?
No, intelligence is not necessarily essential to dogness, just as whiteness is not essential to swans.
What am I supposed to glean from this that I didn’t already know?
Otherkin are a recognised social phenomenon to which scientists assign some legitimacy. But okay, you want more direct proof that scientists think these identities are genuine and worth valuing, here it is:
Otherkin science is conceived, constructed, deployed, and enforced by a lay group that, for all intents and purposes, appears to ignore central scientific tenets in their very self-definition. I argue here that, in fact, they take great pains to employ scientific knowledge in a rational and systematic way to explain their other-than-human identification. In doing so, they seek to
mitigate the tension between their Cartesian epistemological frameworks of empirical science and their animistic ontological perception of other-than-humanness: the dissonance caused when what they know conflicts with what they experience.
Next you’ll start talking about your tulpa.
That term is culturally appropriated, “parogen” is the more respectful term for the online phenomenon.
No, intelligence is not necessarily essential to dogness, just as whiteness is not essential to swans.
Says who? Are you speaking for all doggender folks now? And swangenders as well?
Otherkin are a recognised social phenomenon to which scientists assign some legitimacy. But okay, you want more direct proof that scientists think these identities are genuine and worth valuing, here it is:
Jesus Christ. That paper isn’t talking about what you think it is. It’s discussing the use of scientific terminology and thinking in online groups of ‘otherkin’, and how they use it to attempt to fashion and validate their identity. It’s no more saying that the identity is ‘genuine and worth valuing’ than a paper discussing how racialists use scientific terminology and thinking in their attempts to fashion and validate their own identity. The paper points out, at several points, that their thinking is not backed up by scientific evidence.
That term is culturally appropriated, “parogen” is the more respectful term for the online phenomenon.
Dragonrider was a troll. Don’t shed any tears for them.
Yeah, I know, and PugJesus fed the troll. He did exactly what drag wanted, he told everyone there were limits to his acceptance. He made the trans community feel unsafe, because some of them genuinely do have genders like drag’s. Ada did the right thing, she banned anyone who thought it was okay to invalidate trans people, the trolling didn’t work on her. But it worked on Pug, he changed his values, and now the community doesn’t trust him to be their ally.
I hope you’re accepting of dogfuckergender too.
Lord.
I’ve never believed in dragons. Not even as a kid! Yes, shocking.
And I’ve long defended the trans community against conservative canards like “I identify as an attack helicopter”; an old canard that Drag commented on positively.
At some point, you, as an individual, apparently, decided conservative arguments, rather than being ridiculous slander, were something to aspire to. I’m sorry that you lost your way.
If you’re talking real dogs, no, those can’t consent. If you’re talking puppygirls, yes, obviously.
Speaking of consent, did the trans people around you ask you to do that in the way you did it, or did they tell you to stop because you were making them uncomfortable?
Trans people see you as a white knight who wants to “protect” people you won’t listen to. Who applies your limited cisgender worldview to their lives against their will. “Father knows best”, it’s abusive. You need to have more trust in other people to define their own experiences.
Not puppygirls, doggender. Are you denigrating the dogness of doggender individuals? Are you saying they can’t be dogs?
I can honestly say that I’ve pushed back against the attack helicopter canard around trans folk and not once been told to stop or had it implied that it was unwelcome before coming to Lemmy. I started pushing back against it in the late 2000s precisely because trans folk were fighting it. Furthermore, the attack helicopter canard is widely accepted as a conservative attack of the ‘one joke’ variety, and has long been unwelcome in mainstream LGBT spaces.
Fucking what.
Opposing conservative canards is now white knighting and abusive.
Are you fucking kidding me.
Is your only objection to the litterboxes in schools myth that it’s not true?
If a dog’s nonsapience is part of their gender, and anyone pursues a sexual relationship with that dog, then I’m calling that bestiality and urging them to stop, as we’re getting into rape territory. Believe it or not, I’ve been in a similar situation before. However, most dogs don’t consider intelligence part of their identity to the degree that they reject sapience.
And as to your question, if I were a school principal and a student suffered from species dysphoria that a litterbox would relieve, I would provide that student with a litterbox (in the bathroom, not in the classroom) so long as that student or their family/carer took responsibility for keeping it clean.
Now I urge you to read at least the Research section of this Wikipedia article so you can be acquainted with the science https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otherkin
So you’re saying that they’re effectively not dogs in some deep and essential way?
Fucking Christ.
This is the totality of the ‘research’ section of wiki:
What am I supposed to glean from this that I didn’t already know?
Fuck’s sake. Next you’ll start talking about your tulpa.
No, intelligence is not necessarily essential to dogness, just as whiteness is not essential to swans.
Otherkin are a recognised social phenomenon to which scientists assign some legitimacy. But okay, you want more direct proof that scientists think these identities are genuine and worth valuing, here it is:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327969897_Policing_the_Fluff_The_Social_Construction_of_Scientistic_Selves_in_Otherkin_Facebook_Groups
That term is culturally appropriated, “parogen” is the more respectful term for the online phenomenon.
Says who? Are you speaking for all doggender folks now? And swangenders as well?
Jesus Christ. That paper isn’t talking about what you think it is. It’s discussing the use of scientific terminology and thinking in online groups of ‘otherkin’, and how they use it to attempt to fashion and validate their identity. It’s no more saying that the identity is ‘genuine and worth valuing’ than a paper discussing how racialists use scientific terminology and thinking in their attempts to fashion and validate their own identity. The paper points out, at several points, that their thinking is not backed up by scientific evidence.
Jesus fucking Christ.