"Antiwoke" magazin on kbin.social posting bullshit like "how to end Wokeness" and "Time to reject the extrem trans lobby harming our society" How to report ? he is the moderator of that magazin.

@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" .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."

❤

MonochromeObserver,
MonochromeObserver avatar

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.

em3l0rd,

You're all so fucking sensitive. This is nothing hateful, and you're trying to censor it because someone doesn't align with your political views. You want lemmy to become your next leftist echo chamber. Go to your beehaw, where everything you don't like is censored.

static,
static avatar

user em3l0rd is from exploding-heads.com
It's about time we start talking about defederating exploding-heads.com

Noki,
Noki avatar

lemmy.world just defederated them:
https://lemmy.world/post/694810

"Tldr: Exploding heads is a right-wing, Trump worshipping bitcoin bro instance, in addition to being a bastion of bigotry and transphobia."

sensibilidades,

you're trying to censor it because someone doesn't align with your political views

Then shouldn't people like 10A be fine with discussion of banning their stuff? That's literally all 'anti woke' bullshit is about, censoring ideas.

all-knight-party,

I think you have a good point, which is that Kbin and Lemmy's position as decentralized sites should mean that most content should be allowed as a basic freedom, whether or not you agree with the subject matter. As long as we're allowed to block it I think having mass control over the content of all instances is too far and antithetical to what decentralized sites are trying to accomplish.

That being said, if you want anyone to be on your side you can't address them as a high roading asshole with poor tone. I'd hope we can leave the combative argumentative mindset of reddit behind and just try to communicate with people.

szczur,
szczur avatar

Wanting to actively attack people you don't like is not a political view, though. It's literal violence.
Hate speech doesn't equal free speech!

geoffervescent, (edited )
geoffervescent avatar

Reasonable people can have disagreements about trans rights.

For instance, the complexities of solving trans issues in sports, does the age of HRT matter for gendered leagues and title IX? Rule changes occur in sports leagues every year, how will acknowledging trans people change the ways we revise rules for safety, competition, entertainment, and sportsmanship? Should certain sports start to franchise into coed/nonbinary leagues?

For instance the best approach for teach children acceptance and tolerance towards peers who may come to identify with a different gender thsn assigned. There can be conservative and liberal approaches to teaching tolerance.

For instance the difference between the Human Rights campaign that wants LGBTQ civil rights to mimic POC civil rights (the capitalist conservative path, btw) versus groups that advocate liberation politics and taking civil rights in a more left wing direction.

Those are political disagreements. QAnon-fake-news trans lobby conspiracy is not a political disagreement - it's just trolling.

GizmoLion,
GizmoLion avatar

"Trans people are harming our society" isn't hateful?
Keep lickin boots, I suppose.

MerylasFalguard,
MerylasFalguard avatar

They’re from exploding-heads. Best to just ignore them, and don’t feed the trolls.

Hopefully we can get defederated from them eventually.

Osa-Eris-Xero512,

They need to be defederated now, not eventually. Letting the Nazis sit at your table only ends one way.

em3l0rd,

I don't care about mentally ill people. You cut off your dicks and when someone told anything negative about it, you cry about it and threaten to kill yourself.

Keep lickin boots

I'm not mentally ill, so I don't have to "lick boots". I think like that myself.

GizmoLion,
GizmoLion avatar

Literally nothing you said there was coherent or relevant lol, but then that's just par for you.

PenguinJuice,

People are allowed to believe that trans people are harming society. They are also allowed to share those opinions. Censoring anyone for any reason is far, far worse than anything I can imagine.

Harlan_Cloverseed,
Harlan_Cloverseed avatar

Go back where you came from, bigot.

tenaciouswisdom,

@Noki @ernest I dunno. Sounds like they are trying to spread some interesting ideas which might have a positive impact on society.

It is called freedom of speech. So either provide a meaningful debate with an opposing view, or block them by yourself to create your own "safe space".

Harlan_Cloverseed,
Harlan_Cloverseed avatar

No, I’m not interested in engaging with bigots. We’re going to defederate.

tenaciouswisdom,

@Harlan_Cloverseed @ernest @Noki Awe, poor baby... Point on the doll where the bad words from the mean people hurt you.

Good luck in your safe space echo chamber full of circle jerking sessions.

The fediverse is enlightening, raw, brutal, honest, horrifying, and beautiful. Full of unbridled knowledge and wisdom. Real instances let users decide what content to block and mute.

Should you ever discover your overies, or testicles again. The uncensored fediverse will be here waiting for you.

minnieo,
minnieo avatar

ovaries* lol

GataZapata,

You think climate change is made up

tenaciouswisdom,

@GataZapata @ernest @Noki Sorry, I do not subscribe to the climate change grifters religion.

Too many dozens of false predictions that have come and passed over the course of the past hundred years for it to be believable anymore.

GataZapata,

Right. That, to me, says you are not a reasonable person

tenaciouswisdom,

@GataZapata @ernest @Noki I'm actually one of the most reasonable and open minded individuals you'll ever meet.

I'm also very highly skilled in conducting independent investigations for researching subject matters that interest me.

Climate change interested me. I learned as much as I could. Practically every historical climate change deadline prediction has come, gone, and been proven wrong.

Climate change is the boy who cried wolf story for me now. It's a grift for power, money, and control.

GataZapata, (edited )

You thinking your own independent research weighs more than the conclusions of all the professionals of the topic combined screams you are not reasonable. That is easily in the top 5 retarded takes.

Also no. Not all predictions have been disproven. It is far more likely you just don't understand shit. I will now stop engaging with you as if you had a point. I don't want to validate you.

tenaciouswisdom,

@GataZapata @ernest @Noki Awe, I am sorry that you don't have the patience, investigative ability, evidence, and/or willingness to openly debate me on this subject matter.

Don't worry, most climate change believers won't either. They are like you. Right after my opening arguments they say a few clever words with little to no point that attack my character. Then walk away like they won.

In reality this how you come off to any logical person observing our conversation.

https://media1.tenor.com/images/b7ebed85bb75a3519a0ed37b0bf68e8c/tenor.gif?itemid=6138481

GataZapata, (edited )

You are a retarded person. Discussing this with you, with you taking pride in rejecting unified scientific finding, shows you are not just ignorant but proud of it. Discussion with you is futile, because you do not want to discuss or change your mind. You want your weird little shit ideas to be right, in spite of all the evidence presented to you by society over many years.

You are not an intelligent man. You are not reasonable. Your position is not right, or even defensible anymore. By clinging to it, you disqualify yourself from rational conversation at the adults table.

There is no point discussing with you if you make your own facts and live in your own imagined world where right is wrong. I implore you, stop being such an asinine person and look at IPCC data projection. Look at them and think about what they mean for your life and the world around you. As long as you refuse to recognize the data before you, you cannot be reasoned with. Goodbye. I hope you get better.

tenaciouswisdom,

@GataZapata @ernest @Noki Thank you for proving my point in my previous post. This time with more bravado and gusto. Bravo.... (Lmao)

Attacking my personal character.

Unwilling to do an open, honest, and fair debate.

Flips the table, rage quits, and storms off like they've won.

It is both hilarious, childish, and beyond pathetic.

Here's to hoping that you mature and grow up, but we both know that probably will never happen.

Cheers!

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/61/fe/66/61fe66908afe87f7a5c520835eb6c8c0.jpg

GataZapata,

I don't attack your character. I attack the pride with which you hold on to easily disproven ideas. It makes you dumb.

I cannot do a real argument with you- you have no point. All the evidence is stacked against you. There is simply no point in you repeating lies to me.

You have also not provided a single argument in this exchange-what climate change theories have been disproven, for example. Your first coent says 'all of them' but you never specify, never cite a source or anything else. Because you can't. You pull it out of your ass to ragebait and then act like a high and mighty intellectual. But you are the opposite-you deny knowledge and hold on to your weird ideas in spite of facts being repeated to you from all sides. There is no productive discourse to be had with you.

tenaciouswisdom,

@GataZapata @ernest @Noki You didn't ask for evidence. You didn't even want to hear what I had to say.

You just said the evidence is stacked against you so why would I listen to what one person has to say? Then attacked me personally, not my pride (lol).

This is the attitude of a child who isn't capable of an adult argument. A person who treats science as a religion, but can't be scientific themselves. A scientist, or open minded person would be interested to see any evidence could I provide.

GataZapata,

Provide then. I would be astounded if you could produce a scientifically sound and peer reviewed source that disproves climate change. In fact, I think producing such resultds would net you several honor-tenures and or Nobel prizes.

If you cannot, I am happy to send you a veritable library of recognized scholars who say the exact opposite of your take.

tenaciouswisdom,

@GataZapata @ernest @Noki Now that I called you out on your shit you want to try and act like an adult to save face for being childish?

Nope, you don't get the satisfaction. Not, because I can't have a debate with you, but rather you no longer deserve it.

Everyone in the Fediverse saw your true nature and depths of patheticness today.

You had your chance to have an open, honest, and civil debate. You fucked up. Now I'm going to treat you like the child you are and tell you to go to your room.

GataZapata,

So you have no sources for your wild takes. When pressed you cannot provide a single one and deflect like an 8th grader without homework lol.

The accusations you have launched at me during this exchange are projections of what you argue like.

Thanks for clearing up that you don't actually have a point. Bye

minnieo,
minnieo avatar

spoken like someone who dropped out of HS

tenaciouswisdom,

@minnieo @ernest @Noki @GataZapata Ironically you're right, but my story didn't end there.

Dropped out out of high school, went back, and got a diploma.

Then went onto college to get a bachelors degree in science.

Then several more certifications in industries ranging from medical, botany, and business development.

Founded 5 businesses and a nonprofit.

Got into stock trading and real estate for shits and giggles.

Now I am a semi-retired inventor until my prototypes are ready for investors.

szczur,
szczur avatar

Again. Wanting to actively hurt people you think are unworthy of living in peace is not freedom of speech. It's hate speech. And it's a whole different thing.

tenaciouswisdom, (edited )

@szczur @ernest @Noki The problem with hate speech is that hate is in the eye of the beholder. What is hate speech to one person is truth to someone else.

You can misconstrue anything into hate speech, fascism, racism, or biggotry if your mental gymnastics game is on point enough too.

This is why cognitive dissonance, brainwashing, and social decay is at epidemic levels world wide.

Words can't hurt you, or anyone. Only you allow words to affect yourself. Master your own thoughts and emotions.

szczur, (edited )
szczur avatar

Words are a vessel of emotions and general narrative. And they can hurt, especially when targeted at a minority fighting for rights. Not only does it make the people in question less "valid", it also affects them in making their fight for rights more difficult.

And about hate speech, no. Hate speech is hate speech. Always. For instance, you can deny climate change and even call it "religion" and that's fine. It's your opinion, it's something you believe in. I can think it's a dumb opinion and try to make you think otherwise, but ultimately, presecuting you for thinking that way and voicing your opinions is a violation of free speech. Because climate change, while it affects a lot of people, is not generally tied to people being one way or the other.

Transphobia, though, just like racism and antisemitism, are not interested in disagreeing with what trans people do or believe in. It has to do with disagreeing with their fundamental right to be and exist. Just like racism is not interested in criticizing what people of colour do. That's where that "mental gymnastics" bullshit comes in, and it's important. Thinking climate change is a hoax is an opinion. Thinking red onions are better than white ones is an opinion. Thinking it's okay to provide platform for people spreading dehumanising rhetoric posing an actual existential threat to a marginalized group is not an opinion. It has to do what it targets. If your rhetoric targets people for no other reason than your bigotry, I'm sorry, but it's hate speech. And it's really different than freedom of speech and freedom of opinion. Of course, you could criticize certain aspects of what trans people actually do in a civil manner. It's alright. But once you start to question the very way of them being trans it's over with free speech.

Hope you get that now.

tenaciouswisdom,

@szczur @ernest @Noki How I view trans people falls into 2 categories. Not a phobia (lol).

1.) Legitimately mentally ill. Pity them for succumbing to gender dysphoria. By means of bad influences and diet. Unbalanced hormones, ideas, and emotions causes gender confusion. Deserves help to recover.

2.) Groomer pedophiles. Using the LGB community as a shield for acts of evil.

As for hate speech, my previous post still stands. Master your own thoughts and emotions. I won't censor to cater to them.

szczur,
szczur avatar

Thanks for proving my point!

tenaciouswisdom,

@szczur @ernest @Noki

https://giphy.com/gifs/satisfactionusanetwork-5xtDaroWxp3mcuDC4Le

HubertManne,
HubertManne avatar

can you be more specific. I can't find what you found.

10A,

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?

matthieu_xyz,
@matthieu_xyz@piaille.fr avatar

@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,

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.

Aesthesiaphilia,

As a member of that group, we prefer to call ourselves "progressives".

10A,

Fair, but so does the center-left.

Noki,
Noki avatar

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."

VerifiablyMrWonka,
VerifiablyMrWonka avatar

Thank you for doing the investigation so I don't have to. He'll be going on many peoples block lists at this point.

10A,

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.

bushOfBerries,

I think you mistyped truth social in your URL bar. This place will not welcome you, I think.

ElleChaise,

Who are ya gonna believe, me; or your own eyes?

FfaerieOxide,
FfaerieOxide avatar

I think the people downvoting you know exactly how to engage hate.

10A,

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.

FfaerieOxide, (edited )
FfaerieOxide avatar

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,

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,
FfaerieOxide avatar

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."

Bipta,

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,

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.

effingjoe,
effingjoe avatar

Which god? Zeus?

Cyzaine,
Cyzaine avatar

Zeus!??! Blasphemy. All father or no father I say. Odin for best God.

GizmoLion,
GizmoLion avatar

Your sky daddy is fake, and I, for one, will not live under your people's delusions of truth.

Ski,

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

HelixDab,

Mmmmm, it's more like no one can reasonably demonstrate the truth of any god, rather than any specific god being demonstrably false. It's an important distinction. You can't disprove a thing, but you can prove that alternate explanations are far more probable, or that the thing doesn't fit the evidence.

szczur,
szczur avatar

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.

10A,

I absolutely do not want anyone's freedom of choice taken away. That's one of my core principles. God gives us free will so that we may choose. Without the ability to choose, we cannot be saved. So you are grossly misinterpreting me.

Noki,
Noki avatar

I am downvoting you because nobody should get eye cancer from your bullshit

AnonTwo, (edited )

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.

10A,

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.

yarr,

What about Leviticus 20:13? Is that hate speech?

10A,

I have no doubt most of the heathens in this thread would say "yes, it is". For anyone who believes it is, that should be your indication that your definition of "hate speech" needs severe adjustment.

HelixDab,

For Leviticus 20:13 to not be hate-speech, you have to start by proving, first, that any god at all exists, and second, that the Hebrew bible is the word of that god. The approach advocated in Leviticus assumes that morality is predicated on the will of a god; if a god wills a thing, then that thing must be moral, because that god creates morality. So unless you can demonstrate that a god exists, and that the translation that we have of Leviticus is the will of that god, then it should not be assumed to be moral. Perhaps you could prove the morality of it in some other way, but you haven't made that attempt yet.

The Hebrew bible also explicitly condones slavery and rape, which implies that god says those things are moral. Would you then agree that slavery in the American south prior to 1860 was a moral practice? Would it be a moral practice if it started again? The bible advocates for genocide; is genocide moral?

BTW there's disagreement about the meaning of that verse, from rabbinical scholars no less. Seems to me that evangelicals might want to do a little more studying to understand context before they make assumptions about the foundations of their religion.

10A,

One of our main lessons from the Bible is the primary importance of faith in God. Faith really matters to God, and it's extraordinarily healthy for us to maintain faith. That fact impacts most of what you wrote, so it's important for you to spend some time understanding it.

I do not need to "prove" God exists (although there's proof everywhere you look, and many well-known philosophers have written book-length formal proofs, but also scientific theories can only be disproven, not proven) because we know God exists via faith, which is stronger than any proof. Likewise, we know that the Bible is the true inerrant word of God because we have faith. It's unshakable. God gets to establish the rules, not us.

Once you understand faith, and you allow yourself to develop it, ask Christ for forgiveness and salvation, and you will be filled with the Holy Spirit. You will no longer doubt God, nor His word. You will realize you've been blind all these years to the copious evidence of God everywhere we look.

You come across as if you're struggling with a giant void in your heart, and you're plagued by demons. I was there once too. Nihilism and emptiness seemed normal, especially when you've surrounded yourself with others who are just as lost. But you are a child of God, and He wants you to turn towards Him. Once you stop doubting and questioning Him, and gain His salvation, you will be given the strength to overcome your sins.

Froyn,

Jesus wore dresses, get over it.

Infiltrated_ad8271,
Infiltrated_ad8271 avatar

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.

kestrel7,
kestrel7 avatar

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.

Infiltrated_ad8271,
Infiltrated_ad8271 avatar

OMG, yoU WANT TO CREATE A FAR LeFTIST ECHO CHAMBER

You do realize that this post is specifically about ideological censorship, right?

Aesthesiaphilia,

Hatred invites and deserves censorship.

yarr,

But if I block everyone I disagree with, I won’t have to censor anyone!

Lells,
Lells avatar

"Far Right" and "Extremist" are not Christian. Christian is John 13:34

"A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another."

That's what being woke is. Loving one another, regardless of how we may or may not have sinned.

yarr,

Christian is:

Matthew 10:34-36: “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn ‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’”

2 John 1:10-11: “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take them into your house or welcome them. Anyone who welcomes them shares in their wicked work.”

mrnotoriousman,

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,

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.

geoffervescent, (edited )
geoffervescent avatar

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.

AnonTwo,

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,

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.

jclinares,
jclinares avatar

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

10A,

Demons absolutely do exist, and I'm happy to discuss that in a different context. It's pretty off-topic here, though.

pancakesyrupyum,

“Demons absolutely do exist” lol

10A,

The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he doesn’t exist.

—Verbal Kint

pancakesyrupyum,

Haha hell yeah, hail Satan, am I right?

Animoscity,

Trust me, this guy told some people a thing and they wrote it down, and while no one has seen or has proof, its real.

jalda,
jalda avatar

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"

Noki,
Noki avatar

keep digging, your doing "gods work" ;)

strange to see someone as crazy as 10A on kbin.social, feels more like a Fox-Viewer who chose the wrong server.

GizmoLion,
GizmoLion avatar

His name's 10A... he may well be as sovcit too. Par for the course.

10A, (edited )

So happens I'm the moderator of m/FoxNews so, in a way, you're right!

minnieo,
minnieo avatar

mod of the foxnews mag lmfao. oh man, it keeps getting better and better

Osa-Eris-Xero512,

Guess it was only a matter of time before the Nazis colonized here with the server being open sign-up

10A,

You have clearly never been to m/FoxNews.

10A, (edited )

Click on the link to the magazine. I promise you you'll be happy you did.

minnieo,
minnieo avatar

i'm not in the mood for comedy so i'll pass, but thanks C:

10A,

I mean, it's literally news about foxes.

mmmplak,
mmmplak avatar

I mean who can argue with that. Things got weirder on the second page of this thread. I just can’t take this seriously.

deelightful,
deelightful avatar

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,

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

jalda,
jalda avatar

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

10A,

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.

Bizarroland, (edited )
Bizarroland avatar

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.

10A,

Okay except no, I wasn't doing that whatsoever.

jalda,
jalda avatar

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,

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

jalda,
jalda avatar

You still haven't addressed my point. Do you think it is desiderable that homosexual people are beaten to a pulp? Is a YES/NO question, it shouldn't be difficult to answer.

10A,

No, I do not advocate for violence (except in self-defense situations where there's no other option).

ThunderingJerboa,
ThunderingJerboa avatar 
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.

The purpose of our freedom is to worship God as we see fit, and to do His will. In the past we never needed to spell that out, because it went without saying. Different people have different views and belief systems, and they're all valid provided they all worship God.

As secular society grows, we lose the underlying reason for our freedom. Freedom is still a valid concept for anyone who knows how to use it correctly, and who understands that the ultimate freedom is the freedom from sin, which is achieved by accepting Christ Jesus as Lord and Savior.

But for those who think the purpose of freedom is to follow Satan, to abuse themselves and others, to commit endless sins, and then, most evil of all, to celebrate pride in their sin (as if they don't even understand that pride itself is a sin), no, I no longer agree that people are entitled to live their lives in the way that they want. They're entitled to repent, and once they do that we can discuss freedom.

Here is your exact quote, there is no "misrepresentation" here. You are firstly suggesting that the gays are worshiping (indirectly or directly) Satan and have no right to "freedom" because your fictionally sky daddy said so. Lets take a step backwards, so you are suggesting your all loving god, basically has doomed 3/5s (if not more until the white people came) of the world because he decided to only care about Europe and part of the middle east for hundreds to thousands of years because this all knowing being somehow couldn't have stable and growing amount of worshipers in Asia, the Americas, Australia, the pacific, etc dooming them all to hell (or purgatory depending on your denomination) because they as you say can't be able to accept "Christ Jesus as Lord and Savior."

You yearn for a day when everyone (in your neighborhood) had your stupid sky daddy's beliefs and if they didn't you wouldn't pull the trigger or what not but you aren't opposed because now we live in a world of sin and whatnot and you want them to repent because they decide to have their freedom that is instill upon them because they are born a fucking human not because a fucking fictional sky daddy said you have it.

It god damn hilarious you are also reiterating god damn fanfic, the cardinal 7 sins weren't a major concept until they were first enumerated by Pope Gregory I in the 6th century and further expanded upon by St. Thomas Aquinas in the 13th century. Then to top it all off, we as a modern society mostly know the configuration of hell by a god damn self insert fanfic by Dante Alighieri in "Divine Comedy" or to be more specific Dante's Inferno.

Also seems you aren't very godly if you aren't even following Jesus' own words

“You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (Matthew 22:39),

Your love seems very conditional on the concept that they have to worship your god before they deserve any love. Its honestly disgusting and you are the posterchild of why people hate religious nuts. People can worship what they want if they aren't hurting people but holy shit the shit you are willfully allowing by decree people deserve no freedom if they don't have Judeo-Christians.

Bipta,

You keep to coded language. Congratulations. Don't think we can't read it.

10A,

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.

ElleChaise,

The tolerance of intolerance leads to the loss of all freedom. You'd have to be either a fraud or a fool to try and sell the opposite as truth. So which are you?

10A,

If you are intolerant of intolerance, then you are intolerant. Full stop. If those are my only two available options, I must be a fool.

webghost0101,

Thats why its called the paradox of intolerance:

“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.”

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

To be fair, i have no problems with the existence off a far-right or even a pro-pedo separate Lemmy instance as long as the harm is limited to just written words on said instance. If we don’t allow those opinions anywhere then they will just be had in secret and spiral even more out of control. Instances that want to fully protect themselves to intolerant sickos can do so by defederating.

10A,

You may be unfamiliar with the work of Daryl Davis, who has convinced over 200 KKK members to leave the KKK. He's achieved this through talking with them. When people are isolated in echo chambers, their numbers grow. It is only through open dialog that we can overcome irrational intolerance. There is no paradox.

webghost0101,

That’s exactly what i meant with my second paragraph. We should provide safe spaces for all kinds of people, fascist included. And those people should be able to interact with other places on the federation (they will anyway, with multiple accounts if they so want) but by allowing their own instance were they enjoy proper free speech we can see who they are, study their rhetoric and engage ourselves to convince them otherwise.

But we still cant allow the toxicity in public where they can cause real harm. So these communities should be their own instance so other instances that might be targeted by hate can defederate.

A quick search reveals Daryl Davis befriended them, spoke privately, invite them to his home (his own instance) Spoke on their rallys (their own instances), he didn’t take them to a local event (public comment thread) while they are donning a swastika on their shirt.

10A,

TBH, I'd love to hear Daryl Davis's perspective on this discussion. I strongly suspect he'd write compelling sage advice, and then receive a hundred downvotes and replies calling him a nazi.

I'm probably older than most of the people here. When I grew up, a commonly repeated phrase we all learned was "sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me." I'm sure you'd be shocked and offended if I were to type out the names we used to call each other. The result was that it toughened us up, which is one of the most important lessons of childhood. My point is that I respectfully disagree with you that open dialog could possibly "cause real harm", ever, under any circumstances. You would need to be emotionally fragile to think getting your "feelings hurt" is real harm, and honestly I never encountered such people until the last few decades. I hope it's a short-lived phase.

It's so easy to shut down what you perceive as "toxicity in public" when it doesn't impact you. But that's a mighty subjective phrase, and you can very easily find yourself getting shut down. I understand that you're thinking about this in terms of instances, but we're in public here, and all instances with open signups are public. It's crucially important to always allow anyone to say anything in public, because as soon as we silence a person, we are likely to find ourselves silenced. The result would be an oppressive authoritarian society, which has happened repeatedly throughout history when people didn't stand up for free speech.

webghost0101,

I definitely understand and largely agree with your sentiment. But this is the internet, hate is not limited by just name calling. What starts with just a verbal argument can snowball into cyber stalking and bullying. An lgbt artist could see every artwork downvoted to oblivion. Bots can send subscribers of targeted communities daily death treats. Public data can often be de-anonymized (no matter how carefull you are) to extend the bullying to the real world.

Its not just about growing a thick skin to a few slurs now and then but the exhaustion of the daily reminder people want you dead. Personally i am rarely the target of such hate but ive seen in action how quickly a fandom can destroy itself just because someone well known. changes their own name to match their person.

For lemmy: If facist make their own instance and largly keep their racist opinion for their own safe space then the big public servers dont need to defederate or block them so they are welcome to join in on the public space just like the Minority insrances can. Even if they defederated eachother. Most people would see and be able to interact with anyone, only the intolerant and their potential targets would not with eachother.

But take for example what OPs post is about the large public server allows a facist community on its own instance. Now the only way for a minority to protect themselves is to defederate with the larger instance excluding themselves from the bigger public while the facists roam free as a subgroup within it. which is exactly how they like it.

There might be many other solutions, but as for now this one seems to be the only i can think off with the tools provided.

10A,

TBH, I also grew up when bullying was considered a normal part of childhood, and I was ruthlessly bullied. The result was it toughened me up. Back then it was extremely rare to hear of bullying leading to suicide, as you hear now. Bullying was just completely normal, and I can attest there are definite benefits from having lived with it.

Now don't get me wrong: I do understand your concern that online animosity can become a real-world attack, and I don't want anyone to get assaulted. But I also think the concern is grossly overblown, amplified by a culture of emotionally delicate individuals who were never toughened up as kids. In practice, this sort of IRL attack is extraordinarily rare.

And besides, if the solution to preventing assault is to shut down free speech, then frankly I'd rather live in a world of rampant assault. Not that I want assault for myself or anyone else, but weighing the options, a firm stance supporting free speech should not be negotiable.

I'm sorry that you kinda lost me after that. Please forgive me if I misunderstand, but you seem to be calling normal conservatives "fascists", and as a result I struggle to see your point. The vast majority of normal people are fed up with wokeness, which is the topic of the magazine in dispute. I don't say that to pick a fight, just to acknowledge that I find your usage of "fascist" confusing to the point that I struggle to interpret your last few paragraphs.

webghost0101,

My point is not about censoring speech neither is it about disallowing usa republicans from having a public community. I am not from the us and my public intolerance is towards the active displays of hate and discrimination often associated with fascist ideology.

Il provide some examples of what I personally would say is ok/not ok in real life public spaces (in general not just politics) But the real challenge we need to solve on lemmy is how to translats it to a digital space.

Ok:

  • civil disagreement
  • having a heated argument
  • stating you are personally pro-x, anti-y
  • having a body tattoo of any strong ideological symbol

Questionable:

  • using a slur in a heated argument.
  • wearing clothes with strong ideological symbols to an everyday outing.

Not ok:

  • marching around the streets with a nazi flag
  • stalking
  • reading detailed pornographic literature aloud towards a group of children.
  • seeking out public events with the goal to intimidate non political organizers and event visitors.
  • any kind of instigating of violence towards people or their personal property.
10A,

I appreciate that you point out you're not in the US, because our various cultural perspectives and expectations certainly do inform our opinions. (Although there's quite a range of variance within the US too.)

While I believe my self-designation as "conservative" is quite accurate, at least in an American context, my personal rearrangement of your lists would be far more liberal. The only items I'd put under "not okay" are porn for kids and instigating violence. (Thankfully we don't need to deal with literal violence on an online platform.) It's interesting how ideas can get categorized as left or right depending on the context and viewpoint.

If we were to survey the greater federated community here, I'm sure we'd get a variety of answers as to what's okay, questionable, and not okay. My position is that's a good thing, as our diversity of ideas enriches the community, and we can all learn from each other.

webghost0101,

This was a reasonably insightful discussion that i am not sure we can tame much further. We align on the core value of freedom of speech but are opposites on the semantics of where to draw a line.

I have to ask though.

Stalking is not, “not ok”? I’ve understood stalking as a serious crime all my life. I am very curious to hear of any possible justification to allow it.

For contexts when i say stalking i mean groups/someone following you every where you go in public for a reasonable time. Or continued and constant breaching of personal space after trying to get away.

10A,

Yep. Personally I'd put stalking under questionable.

It's usually a creepy thing to do, but there might be cases where you just want to look out for someone's safety, so you follow them. Usually that's not a stalker's goal, but it varies. If the stalking results in an assault, robbery, or any other crime, that's certainly not okay! But the stalking itself was just questionable until that happened.

Note that if you follow someone online, which is a feature built into kbin, that's stalking. And there's really nothing wrong with it, unless you follow someone just to downvote all of their contributions.

4am,
@4am@lemmy.world avatar

You don’t win arguments with word games. “Not tolerating intolerance is intolerant!” Is a glitch of language, not sound logic on which you mold your behavior.

Nazi punks fuck off.

RadicalHomosapien,

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,

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?

kestrel7,
kestrel7 avatar

Unequivocally yes. You are clearly not engaging in good faith and tolerance of malicious disinfo is basically the main problem currently facing our culture.

10A,

I heartily disagree, and that's mighty authoritarian of you. Your personal values and opinions might happen to align well with the majority of kbin users, but that doesn't make them any more valid than anyone else's personal values and opinions.

szczur,
szczur avatar

Thing is, you are the one advocating for limiting the rights of someone that doesn't actively harm you. YOU are the aggressor here.

Vamanos,

No no no. You’ve got it all wrong. We must be tolerant to intolerant people. You know how the woke agenda is affecting us. Yesterday the woke agenda slashed my tires. The woke agenda tripped me when I was walking!

All this woke agenda is harming us man. I heard the woke agenda said it was going to kick your ass.

This is an argument in bad faith. It’s taking a concept as simple as respecting people and trying to strawman this into some bullshit about freedom of expression.

Harlan_Cloverseed,
Harlan_Cloverseed avatar

No, the objective truth is that you’re an asshole.

GizmoLion,
GizmoLion avatar

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.

Jo,

When they're seeking to have people beaten to a pulp? Yes, obviously. Freedom for a few fascist bullies is unfreedom for everyone else. They can fuck off to Gab or Truth Social or somewhere else they'd be welcome. Not here.

bane_killgrind,

"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,

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,

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

GunnarRunnar,

Fuck off or grow up.

Yasuke,

Idk about truth and right and wrong but a place where because if you ask me sometimes that can be super subjective. What I do know is I want a place where people can state how they feel and to each his own. That’s true free speech as long as you aren’t being super disrespectful and rude. As long as you aren’t using harmful and destructive speech. This is the real world. People aren’t always going to think and be just like you. This is why sometimes you really do need thick skin. Because “rules” won’t always be there to protect you in the first place.

Naich,
Naich avatar

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,

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.

yarr,

Bahaha… “Anything I can’t argue my way out of” = hate speech

Naich,
Naich avatar

This is not a conversation. Nothing of value will be lost by shutting it down.

IncognitoErgoSum,

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,

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,

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.

10A,

Your notion of how that works is not rooted in the Bible.

IncognitoErgoSum,

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,

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.

effingjoe,
effingjoe avatar

What if your god told you to?

Bipta,

You present the false choice between hateful extremists and left wing extremists.

10A,

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.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • kbinMeta
  • DreamBathrooms
  • magazineikmin
  • Youngstown
  • thenastyranch
  • GTA5RPClips
  • rosin
  • slotface
  • InstantRegret
  • ngwrru68w68
  • PowerRangers
  • kavyap
  • tsrsr
  • hgfsjryuu7
  • mdbf
  • tester
  • tacticalgear
  • khanakhh
  • cisconetworking
  • everett
  • Durango
  • ethstaker
  • vwfavf
  • cubers
  • normalnudes
  • osvaldo12
  • modclub
  • Leos
  • anitta
  • All magazines
    •