this post was submitted on 08 May 2025
175 points (94.4% liked)
Technology
69845 readers
3922 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Ok but fr tho fuck Jonathan Haidt.
Haidt was JAQing off about trans people in the exact way that the Onion called out and satirized hours after their article was published. He's a "centrist" who seems to exclusively punch left, and he's just whining about getting called out with legitimate criticism.
He also got deez nuts'd iirc lol.
Edit: Shit, I had him confused with another Atlantic writer, Jonathan Chait. My bad. Haidt is also a left-punching transphobic "centrist" tho.
Jesus christ, it's like you read the headline and desperately wanted to provide supporting evidence.
Next time? Just for like 1 second?
Imagine that other people don't give a shit about you blasting your toxicity at the world. Maybe the world would actually be a better place if assholes like you shut up some times.
BTW, this has absolutely nothing to do with trans rights, this is just you personally acting like every other .ml out there.
Well, yes. First off because it's funny. Several other people in the thread thought so and made the same joke.
But also, yes, because I despise civility fetishism, and I also despise Haidt for being a transphobic shitlib. And obviously, the two are connected, the reason Haidt is whining about civility is that he got bullied on Twitter for his transphobia and he wants to be able to shit on trans people without suffering any kind of social reprecussions.
It's funny how you baselessly assert "this has absolutely nothing to do with trans rights" as if just saying it somehow makes it true, like some kind of magic spell. I wonder, would you say the same thing if it was a more prominent transphobe like JK Rowling calling out hostility in internet discourse? What if it was someone like, say, Charlie Kirk, or even Richard Spencer? Are you a true civility fetishist who takes issue with bullying bigots, or is it that you're only ok with bigotry when it's directed towards trans people? Idk, seems worth investigating.
But, you know, maybe civility fetishism isn't so bad. Maybe it's me who's wrong, I'm just a crazy radical, and I need to be more like MLK.
Huh, kinda seems like he saw tension disrupting the peace as being necessary towards pushing towards justice in equality in an unjust status quo. But maybe MLK is too radical too. You know who I need to be more like? Jesus. That's right, I'm turning over a new leaf and I've decided to be more Christlike.
Huh. Kinda seems like even Jesus agreed that social change necessarily involved creating conflict, or bringing conflicts to the forefront, in order to address injustice.
But ok, let's ignore them (maybe the world would just be a better place if assholes like them would shut up some times and stop blasting their toxicity all over the world) and look at the actual, present day reality. When exactly was internet discourse supposedly more civil? Let's compare to, say, 10 years ago, 2015. Before #MeToo so you don't have to worry about women calling people out for sexual assault and causing division, but it's also in the middle of Gamergate, so you know, really not a great time to be a woman on the internet, but I guess if you were a cishet white man, things were pretty peaceful and harmonious. You also didn't have a bunch of people calling out the bombs going to the Middle East, of course, we were still bombing civilians en masse, but I guess if you were a cishet white man, things were pretty peaceful and harmonious.
You know when discourse was really at it's peak? The 1950's. Before all these radicals started calling for civil rights or spreading division against things like bombing Vietnam or Korea, just an all around wonderful time, a Leave it to Beaver paradise, you know, just so long as you're a cishet white man.
At some point, obviously, you have to draw the line. And I've simply drawn it a little bit further than you have.
This, this is what neurodivergence looks like.
Are you saying that in an attempt to insult/discredit me in some way? Yes, I'm neurodivergent, and proud of it. I'm also correct on the points I made (save for mixing up Haidt and Chait, as I owned up to).
It's not an insult, just an observation.
Thanks for confirming it.
I'm sorry your comment was censored.
Hopefully we can get better communities someday that allow users to choose for themselves what they get to see.
When you can't refute any of the other person's points, just call them crazy 🙄
Seems like you're contributing to hostile online discourse with all these insults you keep hurling at me. I'm just trying to have a conversation.
Not calling you crazy.
I'm calling you someone with serious emotional issues.
Absent your attempts to make it insulting and pathological, that's called passionately opposing injustice. Being dispassionate is not inherently more "sane" or "reasonable," having emotions is human and some things should provoke emotional reactions.
But of course, in reality, my response was quite calm and well reasoned, presenting plenty of evidence to support my points. You're the one who can't keep pace with that and have to resort to these petty insults in an attempt to discredit me, because you're incapable of a logical response.