And I’m only, like, 98% joking about it also being the day I saw a headline on Lemmy about Wayland use overtaking X11.

I mean, honesty, there has to be some legally standing harm having been done or be possible. By a fucking billionaire tech mogul guy to a foundational, open, and free part of the tech ecosystem who also relies on fundraising.

Edit: on the other hand I’m waiting to be pounded by a reply about the logo being open source. Which it is. But you know ethics and tech and stuff.

It might not be worth challenging them, by the time it gets anywhere the current business will be gone. They always had little to no hope of paying off the $13bn loan Musk saddled the business with, now the business is worth less than the loan. Musk knows this, which is why he’s trialling all sorts of dodgy shit on the platform, such as this and also the API charges.

It’s just the generic unicode character, they wouldn’t have a case.

Not to play down how absolutely terrible I’m sure Musk is as a father, but her mum’s also loaded. That would certainly make the decision easier.

Yeah I suspect as much too. Nothing more than a passive and abhorrent form of violence imo.

Cisgender is straight up just not a slur though, it literally just means the opposite of transgender, which is also not a slur, despite the fact that it can be used with derogatory language or sentiments.

I think you’re currently in a place where I was in myself many years ago. This is all assuming everything you said was in good faith. You see all of the pain and damage the -isms have caused (racism, sexism, etc) and it seems at first blush that if society simply disregarded the traits those -isms are based around, the problem would go away. There’s enough truth in the idea to make it feel like a solution and, even if it’s subconscious, it kinda takes the onus of action off of you and puts it on the people that that are actually racist or exist. I don’t want to assume your political leanings, but I was farther right on the political spectrum than than I am now, and it fit well with my ideas about personal responsibility and limited government at the time…and I feel like it was regarded as common sense with everyone in that political sphere at the time. At the time, I was a 20-something cishet white guy (I’m still all of those things, except 20), and I felt like everything I had I’d earned, and I legit thought people could pull themselves out of the mire if they wanted it enough. I didn’t like being grouped in with the -ists, but I also wasn’t likely to call out a buddy for making an offensive joke.

That whole chain of thinking is deeply flawed, but it’s an easy place to land, especially in middle-America. I feel like a good analogy that would have hit home with me at that point in my life would have been stories about places where Christianity was outlawed. I remember I had one of those old Christian comic books that were popular in the 90s about it. If you wanted to wear a cross, you’d have to hide it, you couldn’t talk about being Christian or meet with other Christians (like a church service or prayer group) without having to worry about the law coming down on you. (Really makes me wonder where that infamous sense of persecution the right has comes from). At the time, I’d hear those stories and think, “Man, government sucks…it would be terrible to have to hide who you were like that.” I think about those stories now and I think instead about not wearing the clothes you’re comfortable in, not being able to get healthcare for legit medical diagnoses, not being able to have a club or group of similar people you couls safely meet with to build community around shared life experiences. The story about persucted Christians in some unnamed dystopia was also telling the true story of LGBTQ people in my own country. And women in my own country. And racial groups In. My. Own. Country. I never would have accepted the idea that those persecuted Christians would be OK if there just wasn’t religion. Just like I know marginalized groups today won’t be OK if whatever society deems “wrong” with them just went away. Societies have inertia, and without someone exerting some kind of force on them, they’ll maintain their current trajectory. I came to see I didn’t like my societies trajectory, so I started trying to change it, probably went a little too extreme in the other direction for a while, but eventually learned to just listen first. It’s OK if I belong to a group (or several) that have been bad actors. It means I’m in a position to leverage my privileges to help change society’s momentum. I grew up very poor, but I’ve got pretty much every other privilege society has to offer. I honestly don’t know that I’d have been as fortunate as I am today if even one of those privileges was missing. Even with the deck stacked pretty well in my favor, it was a fucking fight to get here…and even now, doing so much better than most, it feels like barely hanging on some days. I agree that humanism is what we should be striving for, but I also understand that I’m part of a group that’s done a lot of bad to a lot of other groups. I don’t think it makes sense for me to be “proud” of any immutable part of my identity, but that also means I shouldn’t feel personally attacked when people talk about that identity. Things like the whole bear thing would have probably bothered me in the past, but now it’s more nuanced. I’m sad people feel that way, but I don’t blame them, and I’ve listened enough that I believe them. Now the question I ask isn’t “How is this fair to me?” but instead. “How can I use my membership in the group to help change its momentum to something better.” Sometimes it’s voting, sometimes it’s canvassing or protesting, sometimes it’s reaching out to someone I see a part of my past self in.

Cisgender is a descriptive term. If you have seen it in a derogatory context, then you should take issue with the context.

It is so strange to say that identity should take a back seat to humanism when every historical example of discrimination and dehumanization is based on identity. Identity in those instances is not imposed on oneself, but is used to define the outgroup that is being dehumanized. Identity politics is simply an honest accounting of groups that being descriminated against. When the discrimination ends, we see the group identity evaporate. We need only look at the early 20th century definitions of Caucasian, and the identity politics of Irish and Italian Americans subsequently evaporating when that definition evolved to include all Americans of European decent, to see that identity politics is a reaction to injustice and not the other way around.

agender

guess this is what i will tell people to call me now. because i don’t give a shit that i have a penis.

100% agree with you. but sadly humanism doesn’t incite people to team-based violence, so it’s very going to be very popular. human beings very much prefer tribal thinking to global thinking.

The definition of cis is, “a person whose gender identity corresponds to their sex assigned at birth.” Does you gender identity correspond to the sex you were assigned at birth? Mine does.

People made the same arguments about “heterosexual” and “straight”, at least with the latter I could see why someone would see that as a slur (it’s a term originates from animal farming), while “heterosexual” just describes someone is attracted to the opposite gender (go on, and use it as an “a ha!” moment against me by claiming it as a proof that even I know there’s only two genders, like fundamentalists do with atheists saying “oh my god!”). “Cis” is just the opposite of “trans”, even if Musk had the techbro-level idea of treating “cis” the same way most sensible people treat that “cool and funny” gamer word, he wants to say out loud in the public, like he used to do it in apartheid Africa.

Where I live, I can be legally denied a job, housing, or medical care. If the cops wanted to, they’ve retroactively invalidated changed drivers licenses, so they could probably just arrest me for driving. I couldn’t access any form of domestic violence resource when escaping my marriage.

Some trans people are crazy assholes - just as some cis people are crazy assholes. But there is no system level oppression of cis people. Drama is annoying, but drama doesn’t mean you don’t get to eat.

No women allowed club, only bros

if used descriptively it’s not a slur.

if used to harass, intimidate, and demean, it’s a slur.

Gender dysphoria, the psychological suffering caused by feeling like you are in the wrong body, is the disease. Being a trans person is not a disease, and using that as a basis for insulting or discriminating is inappropriate. Somewhat like autism is the mental disease but having autism is not a disease and it is inappropriate to treat a person as if it is the entirety of their existence. Way too often illness has been used as the basis of mistreatment and outright extermination. People have diseases, they aren’t their diseases. We have introduced this notion from the fields of ethics in medicine and it’s why a lot of things are no longer used in language nor in concept: the disabled, the retarded, the syphilitic, the autistic, etc. People aren’t diseases and they aren’t their disease.

If you knew a thing or two about the history of gender, you’d know that medicalization of gender is precisely one of the main historical roots to justify discrimination, criminalization and abuse towards trans people. Medicalization of gender has literally killed millions of people throughout history.