I know little about the subject, so forgive me if I express myself in the wrong way. I support being inclusive to otherkin, but it seems to me that the changes would require more nuance. My question would be if we can attribute human characteristics so broadly to non human beings. Different demographics experience different realities, changing the language might help, but it might just be something aesthetic that doesn’t translate the specifics.

Is this case just a matter of the broadest category being inadequate? Similar to masculine forms being also neutral and general?

Normal people talk things over? I would seriously believe that to be the farfetched scenario.

I don’t know. Sports conventions are not science. When I see the history of things being banned or allowed, it doesn’t always make sense. Then we have stuff like weight categories. Anyway, that’s beside the scope of this particular discussion.

I thought the same. Now plataforms have a target audience to focus. The accounts move, the artists have to follow, the rest has a reason to move as well.

I understand that companies have to submit to these rulings, but do they have to do it quietly? It’s mostly a rhetorical question. They could keep a tally of every instance the government made they do something they disapproved of and make it public. Not profitable at all unfortunately.

Ethnic and exotic food suddenly sound like very strange terms. This question made me realize that people from outside would call the food of my country simply Brazilian food, but we ourselves divide and subdivided them in more categories. I’m sure the same is true everywhere.

I know this is not a question for discussion, but I thought this could add more variety to the answers.

I agree there’s abuse, but there are laws:

Article explaining the laws used as support / Article with historical precedent.

Both in Portuguese.

There’s the possibility Starlink will refuse the order to block Twitter. I don’t use one of the major providers, so I’m still unaffected. I just learned there are twenty thousand registered smaller ones.

It makes sense with the target audience you mention. Would it be possible to provide a transcription? I used to put a link to a free service with the YouTube videos I shared, but it was terribly formatted.

I opened the video on my computer to see if it was a small screen issue. I listened to half then muted the other half. Some personal thoughts, but looking for accessibility guides would be best.

• Any reason for embedded subtitles? I think being able to customize them to your own comfort would help.
• The extra information / notes should be bigger. I think that’s what I usually see. I might have had issue with complete sentences instead of key ideas.
• Present the note before the explanation, that way I have some sense of where you are going.
• Speak a little slower or add some pauses between sentences or ideas. This is the first video of yours that I thought the subtitles were too fast, but it will help with your board format.

Tried one last time full screen on my computer, but still the same problems. Information overload.

Just a note on the video format. I usually watch without sound and I’m glad for the subtitles, but it’s hard to follow what you’re saying and looking at the notes you put on the board.

Did you watch the video I put in my comment? It explains the different processes involved in sex differentiation.

Your argument has the same issues as many of the others of the same kind, it doesn’t reflect reality. You say there are biological differences, which we can accept, but, when a baby is born or when you see someone, those biological differences are assumed instead of being tested.

What I see is colloquial language and scientific language being equated.

• Society divided sex into A and B, doctors forced and keep forcing everyone into those categories.

• Science divides into A, B, C, D, E…, which are not easily perceived.

• Society, instead of adapting or accepting its limitations, decides to choose a characteristic to be scientific, but they don’t test anything. They are just being prescriptive with their language.

In other words, you can’t tell the gender or sex of someone by just looking at them. One piece of anatomy is not enough, one specific chromosome is not enough, one specific gene is not enough.

It should have been the failures of not using polyamory. And you’re right about amatonormativity being the erasure of aro people, even ace in general I would argue.

The first one might involve amatonormativity as well. This and the failures of not using polyamory when all parts are completely in sync really bothers me. I’ll forever be thankful for having Joan and Sherlock from Elementary, even if they are borderline codependent.

I think this video will be a nice complement:

• Science Proves There are More than Two Human Sexes

Chromossomes, genes and hormones have their roles. It’s never simple.AMAB and AFAB are really only what a doctor decided. I was sure Mia Mulder had a video talking about how sex is a social construct based on this fact, but I can’t find it anymore.

My provider, small one from my town, or the attendant just decided to give me the password. After months, I found out how to extract the configurations and used my old router instead.

I hadn’t realized how skeptical I was of even genuine attempts from big organizations until I got repeatedly surprised by how they were integrating everyone instead of the usual segregation. Their recommendation for people to not wear strong fragrances shows me that education is a simple accessibly tool that should be deployed more often.

My comment is all context. The word is not the problem, it’s the way it’s being used.

Try it in terms of double standards. It’s an experiment that has been done. People see a man talking aggressively to a woman and some will intervene. People see a woman talking aggressively to a man and the number that intervenes drops significantly, some will cheer.

Or try it in terms of victims of violence. They see people fighting and they react as if they are in immediate danger. They feel safe with their friends, but their friends suddenly decide to start arguments on the street.

Reading what you wrote, I know you can understand the issue. We are not saying you all are wrong, just that it hurts. Can you understand why it hurts? That’s the only thing that really matters and that I want to discuss right now.

Hello there. I assume you have good intentions with your comment, but I read it as if you were talking to an idea, not a person. A person has feelings that they want to express and be validated. Treat the wound before discussing how to prevent it.

You offered a solution, disengaging, which is nice. I also believe we have a responsibility to ourselves. The problem that I want to point out is you might not have asked yourself the question: "Why don’t they leave the situation? " Can you think of a reason? There must be, we can even ask if necessary. You see, what’s non essential in my life might be very important for someone else.

About space and fairness. This is not a childish dispute. You have the right to your space. In practical terms, they will follow you home and take it from you if you let them. I’m not being hyperbolic. They don’t want you to exist anywhere and will follow you everywhere. Beehaw is a gated space that so many people disapprove, but that serves a very specific purpose, being a safe space, because hiding and isolating yourself from the world is not good to your mental health either.

Sorry for hijacking the post, but I don’t think people get why this usage of weird bothers some people. It’s not that we (several kinds of weird we) are not used to be called weird or similar. We grew up and found people who were like us and understood our quirkiness. Weird was the weapon of the bigot and we took that away from them. Until our friends, or community at large, started acting like the people that hurt us in the past. We could deal with the bullies and ignorant using it against us, but this new situation was unexpected.

I don’t like comparing struggles, but I’ll use examples to, maybe, make things clear. Using queer instead of weird would have bothered them the same, although I don’t believe it would have worked the same way, but more people at our side would see the issue. And the next one might be much more personal, but reading “good weird, bad weird” sounds like “good negro, bad negro” to me. You don’t get to judge or qualify me.

Also, even in a discussion that completely accepts and is understanding of people using weird as a weapon to the point of trying to find another word to be used in a positive way, there are comments that invalidate the feelings of those who are affected. If you believe words have power, why can’t you see the collateral damage?

Honestly, I’m trying to endure it until election season ends there in the USA, but I’m starting to feel the need to talk about all the wonderful things I like using the word weird just to counteract the negativity.