Anon hates reddit
-
It's moreso how here people tend to gravitate to a single community. It is annoying if that community is on an instance which could be banning people for other reasons unrelated to that community. I didn't say it isn't a valid space, it's just how instances work. For a while Blahaj had defederated feddit.uk because we handled trans topics differently to how they'd prefer. It would be annoying if, let's say, the main and active asklemmy community was on blahaj
Ah yeah that's a reasonable take and I do know what you mean. I broadly like what federation offers over centralization, but it's not without its quirks and some drawbacks, I hear ya.
-
Ah yeah that's a reasonable take and I do know what you mean. I broadly like what federation offers over centralization, but it's not without its quirks and some drawbacks, I hear ya.
At least if a community goes bad, people can shift very easily and it's an inconvenience. I think ideally though, there should be a way to create publicly accepted combined communities. Maybe an option in a community's setting to graft in posts from another community. Although then rule enforcement and moderation might get a little tricky. For example, just say [email protected] grafted in [email protected], maybe along with uk politics and other UK related subs (even local UK subs, that'd be cool!). Users on unitedkingdom may see something on casualuk and unknowingly leave comments on it which are political- and discussing politics is banned on casualuk.
-
At least if a community goes bad, people can shift very easily and it's an inconvenience. I think ideally though, there should be a way to create publicly accepted combined communities. Maybe an option in a community's setting to graft in posts from another community. Although then rule enforcement and moderation might get a little tricky. For example, just say [email protected] grafted in [email protected], maybe along with uk politics and other UK related subs (even local UK subs, that'd be cool!). Users on unitedkingdom may see something on casualuk and unknowingly leave comments on it which are political- and discussing politics is banned on casualuk.
Yeah I'll be honest, I don't have a lot to say about how those kinda scenarios should be managed at the moment, I haven't thought that stuff through too deeply I'm realizing. I'm pretty happy to defer to folks with experience in community moderation and such, I'm frankly a pretty poor candidate for that, for several reasons (somewhat moody, sometimes fond of borderline hyperbolic takes, etc.).
I do think users should be able to have the experience they want, but that's vague enough to be almost uselessly uncontroversial, and I also recognize that some people's wants can be incompatible with others', without either necessarily being unreasonable or unfair. So, another partial reflection of the human condition in general I guess.
-
Eunuchs were men, though. They were castrated so were seen as less of a threat. I do not think we can compare eunuchs to non-binary/gender-non-conforming people of today.
I don't think that's the case
Matthew 19:12 NRSV
[12] For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.”Jesus mentions two types of eunuchs here. Those who are made, and those who are born as eunuchs. The latter, those who are born as eunuchs are what we today call intersex people.
Intersex people have ambiguous sex characteristics and are born that way. Intersex people make up around 1.7% of the population, around the same amount as people who have red hair. They are pretty distinct. Sometimes they can have male genitalia and female sex hormones, while still others can have ambiguous genitalia. Others still have male chromosomes when being phenotypically female.
Not every one of these was included in the term Eunuch, as they aren't always visible traits. But many of these traits were visible so they were seen as distinct from men. Oftentimes they're born that way.
(An aside while it's on my mind, Jesus tells us that marriage is overrated in this passage. I think we neglect our single church members a lot, seeing as there doesn't seem to be much space for them outside of the context of marriage. And this passage says that marriage isn't for everyone)
-
I don't think that's the case
Matthew 19:12 NRSV
[12] For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.”Jesus mentions two types of eunuchs here. Those who are made, and those who are born as eunuchs. The latter, those who are born as eunuchs are what we today call intersex people.
Intersex people have ambiguous sex characteristics and are born that way. Intersex people make up around 1.7% of the population, around the same amount as people who have red hair. They are pretty distinct. Sometimes they can have male genitalia and female sex hormones, while still others can have ambiguous genitalia. Others still have male chromosomes when being phenotypically female.
Not every one of these was included in the term Eunuch, as they aren't always visible traits. But many of these traits were visible so they were seen as distinct from men. Oftentimes they're born that way.
(An aside while it's on my mind, Jesus tells us that marriage is overrated in this passage. I think we neglect our single church members a lot, seeing as there doesn't seem to be much space for them outside of the context of marriage. And this passage says that marriage isn't for everyone)
I always interpreted this as referring to asexual people, not intersex people
I think we neglect our single church members a lot, seeing as there doesn't seem to be much space for them outside of the context of marriage
True
-
I always interpreted this as referring to asexual people, not intersex people
I think we neglect our single church members a lot, seeing as there doesn't seem to be much space for them outside of the context of marriage
True
wrote last edited by [email protected]Oops. I meant the former, eunuchs from birth
Asexuality is the lack of sexual attraction, so while they still might be male or female, they just don't feel that attraction