Asklemmy

44152 readers

1584 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

What discussion you know you are on the wrong side of? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 3 weeks ago by lorty@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

159 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Maybe you haven't been convinced by a good enough argument. Maybe you just don't want to admit you are wrong. Or maybe the chaos is the objective, but what are you knowingly on the wrong side of?

In my case: I don't think any games are obliged to offer an easy mode. If developers want to tailor a specific experience, they don't have to dilute it with easier or harder modes that aren't actually interesting and/or anything more than poorly done numbers adjustments. BUT I also know that for the people that need and want them, it helps a LOT. But I can't really accept making the game worse so that some people get to play it. They wouldn't actually be playing the same game after all...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] BlitzoTheOisSilent@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Unless you're providing statistical evidence to back up your claims, I'm not interested in discussing further.

You can continue making whatever excuses you want to justify your mild transphobia, but I'm done debating with you, and haven't even read this response because it's nonsense.

Whatever excuse you need to justify how an individual's request for you to respect their pronouns, their identity as a human being, is up for debate because it somehow inconveniences you.

[–] dnick@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago

Statistical significance of what? The number of people who vaguely see that gender identification is important to some people, but who don't quite get why is such a big deal so they don't spend a lot of time thinking about it, which results in some people being somewhat offended sometimes?

What i mean by people taking advantage of the movement for attention has less to do with statistical significance and more to do with the fact that most people hear or experience very little information about gender dysphoria outside of very vocal or exaggerated examples. Is that statistically significant? I'll try to answer that if you can give me even a ballpark number that you think would define either side of that equation, with the overwhelming guess being that you have no more idea than i do. My examples are anecdotal just like im guessing you're are.