Meta: What can we do to stimulate more activity here?

submitted by worried19 from self.GCdebatesQT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

The Discord server seems pretty busy, idk if it's as busy as the Reddit sub was. I try to mention this sub and link it as often (albeit organically) as I can, but I get the impression that people who would otherwise participate are wary of Saidit because they don't know anything about it or they associate it with neo Nazis and Alt Right.

Moving to another platform/website, being able to compromise on language-usage in some way and possibly re-branding the concept of the sub overall would be my suggestions for keeping the sub alive and revitalizing it with more diverse points of view and opinions.

It seems like there needs to maybe be a firm compromise of language for both 'sides'. Also the idea of 'sides' has been bothering me personally more & more, because to me that seems to make it more like a competition, when I feel this really should be a discussion because these topics affect most, if not all of us who participate in them. Spending more time on Twitter has led me to believe that increasing extremism on either 'side' is turning more people off from TRA & GC. It's definitely made me reach 'peak GC', even if I still hold more GC beliefs.

But the language compromise might be the biggest help to attract more diverse views, I think. I realize that language is a significant (if not maybe the most significant) part of the overall debate, and controlling the way others speak and express themselves is a major turn-off. I know the only reason I could even get into having thoughtful dialog here was by censoring myself and trying to use the language of the people I'm speaking with. It's a sensitive subject that seems near-and-dear to most GC & QT peoples' hearts, but being unwilling to make concessions seems to lead to a dead-end.

I apologize if I'm overstepping my bounds, maybe I am misunderstanding the original intent and spirit of this sub--maybe it is more intended to be a place to argue or take out frustration on the other 'side'. But if it isn't, then these would be my suggestions based on my observations in and out of the sub.

[–]worried19[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I think the main problem is that QT people aren't even lurking. If you look at our demographics poll, they're not here:

http://www.polljunkie.com/poll/pfipfo/gcdebatesqt/view

I appreciate you trying to drum up interest! But I just don't know if anything will entice more QT people over. I agree that we do need strict rules about language. Misgendering is something that is obviously going to turn off QT people from even attempting to participate. That rule needs to be strictly enforced.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Imo it’s a massive problem that we are expected to use the language of an oppressive group who threatens us with rape and death and runs on misogyny.

How are we supposed to speak if we must fit the censors of those who want us silent?

[–]worried19[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Because this is a debate sub. It's not a GC-only space like Ovarit. And we don't have to use their language. All that's ever been required is to avoid biological sex pronouns for posters who don't identify as their sex.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

We are using their language already when we use gendered, not sexed, pronouns derived from their sexist ideology.

[–]worried19[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

GC was never required to use their preferred pronouns, though. Just to avoid the ones our trans posters didn't like.

It makes sentences awkward, but it is doable.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

And using preferred pronouns means we are not allowed to use the ones formed from our perceptions. We are not allowed to recognise a male user as male. The reasons why hardly matter. We are still expected to pretend our perceptions are untrustworthy and wrong, something to be corrected by others.

You’re free to tell yourself this is not a problem if it’s okay with you but I’m not gonna lie and act like it’s not happening.

[–]worried19[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

We don't have to use their preferred pronouns, though. We can just avoid pronouns at all. I'm not saying it's a perfect solution, but if we want to meet TRAs in the middle, it seems reasonable to give them that at least. I'm not talking in society at large, just on our debate sub.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We’ve been over this one before. Not doing it again.