I recently got community banned by OP for ‘homophobia’, because I pointed out their misogynistic post title, I then got site banned w/ remove account from the OP’s admin, because they didn’t like that I cross posted the link to my own thread on db0

OP is making a big stink over shit he does himself, all of these rules are selectively enforced. people just rend their garments when .ml does it

considering their immediate reaction to me complaining about their misogynistic post title was to perm ban me for ‘homophobia’ I’m pretty comfortable saying that they’re the thin skinned one

YDI, every interaction I’ve had with you has been toxic, can’t really blame anyone who bans you

quoting an older response I saw to you here:

you just sort of say your thing and move on, even if you pose yourself as seeking conversation. This is exemplified by how you constantly say the same things unprompted over and over even when not a single person has responded positively to some of it, and there’s no apparent effort to change what you’re saying to even account for that, even if it’s just presenting an argument differently (though normally you don’t even really argue, you just declare).

you did that same sort of behavior about the ongoing genocide and got banned.

you go into a Marxist/anarchist space and act confused when people react negatively to someone pushing a reformist social democrat line.

YDI.

Someone @'d me because I was banned, so I let them know I had already made a post about it.

the mod in question already had made it clear they had no interest in moderating themself based on reports, so I made a comment, and was banned for it.

I default sort by new comments as it bumps small communities to the top.

Both of the threads were literally at the top of my /all and I happened to comment about its misogynistic title in one minutes before the other, the horror.

I was not purged for the slop post, which I didn’t make, but rather for linking to a db0 post in a comment.

for what it’s worth, I have absolutely no reason to like this guy and I still wouldn’t call him an ‘idiot’ because it’s an ableist term.

the mods are just trying to ensure that any is somewhat on topic and not just people trading insults

hordes of patriarchy-lovingly homophobic Marxists

sadly I am familiar with the trope, mostly from other spaces than here though. plenty of ‘old guard’ Marxist parties irl do suck in that exact way for example.

that is why I don’t have much tolerance for ‘patriots’ of any affiliation and call shit out when I see it.

I said you were conflating the word cumrag with lgqbt+ peoples

I wasn’t though. I was pointing out that using cumrag as an insult broadly was not in line with being a ‘queer friendly’ instance, as it is overtly misogynistic.

You seemed intent on misreading it so you could slap ‘homophobic’ on another gay person calling your shitty behavior out.

I didn’t say you said I was being homophobic.

You weaponised claims of homophobia to try to silence criticism of China/Russia.

Which is it then?

as I said in another post here, I didn’t say you were being homophobic, that was your accusation.

I did not conflate being queer with an insult.

I was pointing out that your post title was misogynistic. Gay people can still be putting their internalized misogyny into the world, and I would hope a queer space would discourage that, rather than have it actively defended by moderation.

Ironically it is you who is using claims of homophobia to silence another gay person criticizing your behavior.

This was shared in 0 matrix rooms as far as I know.

If you’re going to call me a tankie just because you don’t like the servers I post in, maybe I should be calling you a nazi for posting in the comm nazi bar loaded with cryptofash posters eager to be free of ‘degenerates’, calling myself and others degenerate roaches that they’re eager to be rid of.

Calling out a gay person posting a misogynistic thread title is not homophobia

I’m an anarchist, my post was pointing out the misogyny I saw in your post title, literally using a quote block with a paraphrased version of your own post title to make it more obvious.

my reading is that misogyny isn’t just about whether the target is female, and obviously on a surface read anyone can be a cumrag, or use one.

the use as an insult still relies on demeaning traits that our culture associates with women or femininity. gay men can still have internalized misogyny

Even though “cumrag” can apply across all genders, the primary meaning has been “a thing used to wipe up semen,” and “a person treated like a used-up sexual object.”

the people getting framed as:

• passive

• used

• disposable

• interchangeable

• something sex “happens” to

are women, femmes, and bottoms coded as feminine.

I can feel empowered by describing myself as a slut, cumrag, whatever, and use the term affectionately for others. however using those as insults on anyone I disagree with is still reproducing misogyny

fwiw I wasn’t saying the mod was homophobic based on that comment.

I just thought that it was unnecessarily sexually degrading and misogynistic, thus not a good fit in a ‘queer friendly’ space

is this misogyny?

yes

i don’t agree with the mods there on some things, but I agree on this

As I have stated in other comments: “To be very clear, we never should have been there fighting in cities in an unjust war or inversion…”I will repeat it over and over again.

why qualify it? if there’s a justification does that suddenly make full-scale invasions okay?

I’m actually curious, would Afghanistan an example of another unjust war?

why does this use of force in a calculated way to avoid civilian collateral damage not make the cut but other instances do?

I’m opposed to all wars except the class war, if you’re going across the world to kill civilians in an imperial war and you joined the Marines to kill, I’m not going to have a lot of charity about the use of improvised explosives in civilian areas

do you think there was anything wrong with what the US was doing in Iraq and Afghanistan? do you think that launching full scale invasions of other countries is okay as long as there’s a justification?

the BC did not want to authorize mortars for returned fire

because civilians were in the area?

he created a less harmful indirect fire solution

It not a war crime.

So if every single incident of returning indirect fire possibly firing on civilians is a war crime, then there are a hell of a lot more war criminals in the military that need prosecution.

as far as I’m concerned every US president should be at the front of that list and it definitely shouldn’t stop there