this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2024
411 points (89.7% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35904 readers
1648 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
(page 4) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hperrin@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago

It seems that way because the minority of people who are against trans people are very loud and obnoxious, and their voices are heavily amplified by sites like Facebook and Twitter.

[–] BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee 6 points 4 days ago

Since when do conservatives care about mass shootings?

[–] asdfasdfasdf@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

yeah, was going to say - there have been trans mass shooters, lol

Another notable case:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Springs_nightclub_shooting

Aldrich's attorneys have said in court documents that their client identifies as non-binary and uses they/them pronouns, preferring to be addressed as Mx. Aldrich. Neighbors allege Aldrich to have made hateful comments towards the LGBT community in the past, including frequent usage of homophobic slurs. Aldrich never mentioned being non-binary prior to the shooting and was referred to with masculine pronouns by family members. Police testified they found rainbow-colored shooting targets in Aldrich's home. Experts in online extremism have voiced the possibility that Aldrich's proclaimed self-identification could be disingenuous, while the Center for Countering Digital Hate acknowledges the suspect's past actions and impact on the LGBT community.

I am personally inclined to agree that the self-identification is likely disingenuous, a stunt for the courtroom (maybe to make it harder to argue he committed hate crimes).

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago

Fear, control, indoctrination, tribalism, double standards, poor mortal character, hypocrisy, and because it 'makes them feel icky' and so they have to be loud and obvious about it so that they're community sides with them and doesn't suspect that they're (allegedly) total closet cases.

[–] wipeout69@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Because there are only 2 possibilities:

  1. Trans people are real and the Bible is a book filled to the brim with bullshit

or

  1. Trans people are not real but merely EVIL men and women possessed by Satan because god created Adam and Eve, not they and them

They are in fact mutually exclusive. So what do you think the moron cult members will choose, the option that requires deprogramming... or the option that aligns with their stupid bullshit cult beliefs?

[–] vga@sopuli.xyz 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (6 children)

I'm going to be an apologist for conservatives for a sec, just for the sake of giving out my theory of mind of these people.

I think this all happens mostly due to the stress trans people are inadvertently causing their parents. When your kid comes out of the closet, this will happen to a parent regardless of how liberal-minded they are. Even if you have no problem with the concept, your kid being trans brings about new kinds of threat scenarios you never had to think about before. If you're a sensible, smart and handsome person like I truly fucking am, you can process it in a few years and come out as not being a 100% asshole towards the issue.

But if your reference group is republican church goers, there's a high probability that such a person just simply does not have the mental or social toolset to process it in any sensible way. They will construct a toxic viewpoint for this issue, strengthen it from outside sources and then start to spread that toxicity.

[–] T156@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

I think this all happens mostly due to the stress trans people are inadvertently causing their parents. When your kid comes out of the closet, this will happen to a parent regardless of how liberal-minded they are. Even if you have no problem with the concept, your kid being trans brings about new kinds of threat scenarios you never had to think about before. If you’re a sensible, smart and handsome person like I truly fucking am, you can process it in a few years and come out as not being a 100% asshole towards the issue.

I feel like it's more the opposite problem. For the parents, trans people are a vague boogeyman. They've never meant a trans person personally, and they're constantly told that trans people are just waiting to jump them in the bathroom, or at sports, or all sorts of other things, so they've never had to contend with someone they know being trans.

If it was simply stress or threat to the kid, it wouldn't really explain the reaction to disowning them, since most of those aren't about the treatment that their kids would receive for being trans.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] HipsterTenZero@dormi.zone 8 points 4 days ago

some schmucks want to exploit the very basic fear of the unfamiliar, and they pointed it at trans folk to get votes or whatever.

[–] inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

I see a lot of mostly correct answers here, but as a trans person myself I can't help but feel they are all missing the core concept.

People hate trans folk for the same reason "get back in the kitchen" is still said to women in any non-"traditional" role or the "angry black man/woman" is said about anyone advocating for their own rights. There are strict gender and racial roles that are enforced by our society so rigidly, that many have assumed them to be naturally correct laws of the universe. Anyone existing outside of those roles is seen as either mental illness to be corrected or malicious evil-doers wanting to cause trouble.

When in fact the reality is much simpler, that being human is a more diverse expressive and dynamic experience than those holding on to those "natural laws" would like to admit. To exist outside the role you were "assigned" is a threat to society that assigns the roles, ergo a threat to the very way of life for those who see gender, sexual and racial hegemony as innate truths.

Conservatives who hold high tradition are naturally the first to speak out and seek to regulate us back in to "normal society" via legislation but liberals are absolutely not immune. To reduce transphobia to a political wedge issue, while correct, doesn't quite explain the more innocuous yet quite prevalent transphobia inside left leaning spaces.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

I'm pretty sure they just think it's icky.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›