All: What do you miss about the old sub?

submitted by womanual from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (9 children)

Why not make the rules QT friendly then? Forbid references to other posters as part of arguments, especially as the reason someone thinks something. Maybe appoint an actual QT mod as having a trans GC mod isn’t the same. The sub is called GCdebatesQT not GCdebatesTrans.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Porcelain_Quetzal is QT I think. I’m not against another QT mod necessarily as they aren’t super active. I’m not sure about your other suggestion. I feel like people being able to talk about their experiences with trans people is important to these conversations so I don’t know if it makes sense to ban that. I guess we could ask people to be more general... 🧐 I don’t know... It wouldn’t be my decision to make by myself in any case.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 3 insightful - 8 fun3 insightful - 7 fun4 insightful - 8 fun -  (7 children)

There are plenty of trans people to talk about without talking about other sub members. And making assumptions about why people think things is just illogical. None of us know enough about each other to know why we think things.

[–]BiologyIsReal 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

That is funny comming from you. I mean you're the one who often accuse anyone of being a bigot as a argument. So, what kind of QT friendly rules are you looking for? Some that let you bully other users while they can say nothing?

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (5 children)

How about not banning a commonly used term for trans mens genitals on a whim your majesty?

[–]BiologyIsReal 8 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 4 fun -  (4 children)

I didn't ban it in a whim. I enforced the rule of not using derogatory terms to refer to people's genital, a rule that I didn't even write. And, as I said, you're not even a "trans man", anyway.

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (3 children)

It’s not a derogatory term though, and it never has been. It’s only ever been used by trans men to refer to their own bodies. The fact that you banned a term that isn’t even meant for you and is widey used by the trans masc community proves that there is no real intention towards making this place at all acceptable for QT posters. You reign over an echo chamber your highness

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 5 fun -  (2 children)

It does get used for us. And I think that's something we should be able to debate. I agree with you that banning words is counterproductive to this entire project.

[–]BiologyIsReal 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I'll only allow "front hole" when they stop getting offended by "misgendering".

[–]HeimdeklediROAR 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Disgraceful