this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2025
49 points (96.2% liked)

Out of the loop

13667 readers
198 users here now

A community that helps people stay up to date with things going on.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Ceedoestrees@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

I assumed your closing paragraph was the summary of your take, as you built an argument on how aggressive censorship is turning the world into a "fisher price paternalistic dystopia." You described personal anecdotes about over-moderation and purported that limiting free expression could stifle ideas. In response, I debated that moderation and censorship are required to safeguard free expression for voices that might not be heard.

This latest controversy with Bluesky is part of an ongoing issue with moderation, where users want Jesse Singal banned, a journalist who publicly supports free speech and open sharing of ideas while harassing anyone who criticizes him behind the scenes. Bluesky users say he circumvented their blocks with screenshots of their posts, where he makes rebuttals they can't see, exposing their user names when he's well aware many of his followers are bloodhounds. A number of journalists critical of him have said he has either tried to sue, smear their reputations, or get them fired. This relates to my point on parodox of tolerance— which is not true, because a concept can't be true or false, it just describes the phenomenon at the basis for this controversy.

About the original statements: Bluesky's response was condescending without adressing the issue. Yes, Jay Graber has championed users ability to curate their experience, but in practice their moderation has been lacking with regard to racism and transphobia while others have been banned or had critical posts deleted when they don't violate the TOS. For instance, after Charlie Kirk, when people celebrated his death without calling for violence. Thus, why I brought up the disproportionate views on cancel culture.

With regard to your opinion on gender dysphoria, I did read the messages you were banned for. As for English not being your native tongue, while I understand the struggle, I can only respond to what you say.

No one is disagreeing that gender dysphoria can have a neurological cause. It's just weird to point it out and suggest it hasn't been researched thoroughly enough, when transexuality was considered a mental disorder for most of it's history. Only recently have more factors been uncovered as research teams look for a broader understanding. So, while you may have have researched it, I don't believe you've done a very good job of it.

An edit because you brought up ADHD: This is a great analogy in favor of early gender affirming care because, while ADHD is neurological, it can't be cured and can only be managed.