• FreedomAdvocate
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    28
    ·
    3 days ago

    Do you think they should classify the “n word” as a slur and limit its reach? Is that censorship?

    Cis isn’t being blocked from being seen or read.

    • Lemminary@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      First, don’t fall into the trap of confusing censorship with moderation. Second, don’t confuse the world’s richest man’s sad attempt at fueling culture wars with plain racism.

      I used to use Twitter and I know for a fact that it’s literally being limited by not allowing it to be read or seen, appearing under one of those disclaimers at the bottom of a thread that was caught by the filter and in practice functions as a convenient dustbin to silence discourse. And you said it yourself, it’s being treated differently by preventing its diffusion and visibility.

      Or tell me, why is a neutral word like cisgender being censored at all? But spare me the gaslighting.

      • FreedomAdvocate
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        I know for a fact that it’s literally being limited by not allowing it to be read or seen

        How do you know this? If you can’t see it or read it, how do you know this?

        And you said it yourself, it’s being treated differently by preventing its diffusion and visibility.

        That isn’t censorship.

        Or tell me, why is a neutral word like cisgender being censored at all? But spare me the gaslighting.

        Again - it’s not being censored. You don’t get posts removed for saying it. You don’t get banned. The term is a controversial one, it’s not “neutral”. “Cisgender” has no need to even exist as a word. You don’t need a word to mean “not trans”, which is 99.99% of the population. The word “transgender” existing negates a need for “cisgender” to exist. “Cisgender” is really only ever used as an insult, which is why it’s treated as such. There’s no word for “not blind”, because not being blind is the default, the standard.

        First, don’t fall into the trap of confusing censorship with moderation.

        It’s funny you say that. Moderation that removes all differing opinions, and bans people who express them, is censorship. Limiting the reach of posts deemed “hateful”, while not removing them or banning the person posting them, is not censorship.

        • Lemminary@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          3 days ago

          How do you know this? If you can’t see it or read it, how do you know this?

          Because it’s been reported by the news that I cited.

          That isn’t censorship.

          It’s the literal definition. Just because it’s thinly veiled as a moderation measure by a billionaire doesn’t mean that the core concept doesn’t apply. Like I said, don’t confuse it either way.

          You don’t get posts removed for saying it. You don’t get banned.

          And like I said, censorship is not only when your content gets removed or you get banned. You can have a similar effect with different mechanisms that effectively render content invisible, and I find it disingenuous of you not to consider that.

          “Cisgender” has no need to even exist as a word.
          You don’t need a word to mean “not trans”,

          Brother, we have created entire fictional languages for less, and have names for concepts you can’t even conceive of. Your argument is fragile. And your monolignualism is showing with those nearsighted takes.

          “Cisgender” is really only ever used as an insult,

          Cisgender has been thrown at Musk and his supporters because they treat it as an insult. Don’t even. lol

          Limiting the reach of posts deemed “hateful”, while not removing them or banning the person posting them, is not censorship.

          It’s most definitely a form of censorship, and I will die on this hill tonight.

          • FreedomAdvocate
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            3 days ago

            From your own source:

            According to TechCrunch, users who write “cis” or “cisgender” on the X mobile app receive a full-screen message stating, “This post contains language that may be considered a slur by X and could be used in a harmful manner in violation of our rules.” Users can choose to continue publishing the post or delete it.

            Strange censorship that is, letting you say what you want.

            • Lemminary@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              I know, strange times we live in where “liberal” words are treated as if they were so dangerous that they need a consent screen. I don’t see that happening to hate speech and you’re here defending this.

              I know it doesn’t register in your mind the implications but I don’t expect you to.

              Btw, you seem to be defending a company that does this shit:
              https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/elon-musk-x-twitter-antisemitism-hashtags-trending-hate-rcna151945

              • FreedomAdvocate
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                If you say the n word on twitter you get the same message, as you do with other slurs.

                Btw, you seem to be defending a company that does this shit

                A company that relies on ads putting ads in their service? Oh no, the horror…

                • Lemminary@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 days ago

                  I love how you reply by pretending that everything I’ve said up to this point hasn’t been said in this thread.

                  But I love more how you pretend that the contents of the ads being served to millions of users shouldn’t be reviewed for hate speech because the company is turning a profit and that makes it all ok.

                  Tell me, how old are you and what is your highest level of education? You sound sus as hell with these myopic replies. You really sound like you haven’t experienced life.

                  • FreedomAdvocate
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 days ago

                    More educated than you, I can almost guarantee :). Some people call me Doctor, though I think that should be reserved for science and medicine. What’s yours btw? Degree in gender studies or arts? The lefts obsession with calling everyone they disagree with “uneducated” is so pathetic.

                    What are you talking about with regards to the contents of the ads? The “issue” that some people pretend to have is that they don’t think ads should be shown near content they deem hateful. It’s not the contents of the ads that people complain about. As for that complaint, only dimwit sees an ad and instantly thinks that the company the ad is for supports whatever views are shared in the same vicinity of it. In reality it was just a way for the left to try and guilt advertisers into leaving Twitter because they were upset that Elon ruined their safe space.