• 1 Post
  • 31 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle

  • You’re right. Incidentally, I searched lemmy for “transpeople” and found quite a few hits, some of whom were trans themselves. Not just allies can do it, I suppose. Maybe I’ve just not noticed it before.

    I’ve never noticed “transpeople” before, but I’ve heard a lot of trans folk use “transgirl”, “transwoman”, “transman”, etc, including myself once upon a time. I think it’s an easy mistake to make if you don’t think about it that hard.


  • Linguistically they’re prefixes I mean. You’re right, when used on its own it is an abbreviation but within transgender or cisgender they’re prefixes. It’s a relatively new thing to use “trans” or “cis” as an abbreviation instead of a prefix, so it feels natural to turn it back into a prefix by attaching it to the next word, and “transwoman” and “ciswoman” still kind of work as long as you do both because cis- and trans- are modifying the womanness. I agree that even that is uncomfortable and othering though, it’s definitely better to use trans as an adjective on its own and not divide women/men into separate subcategories based on transness. I just am more understanding of that particular faux pas because I get how people come by it.

    “Transpeople” on the other hand doesn’t work the same unless you’re referring to those who are trans-person and don’t identify as people, which I imagine is not who these people are referring to on purpose and rather they are dehumanizing us as a whole. Both are bad, but I don’t think they’re equivalent.


  • Trans- and cis- are prefixes, so I can understand how it feels intuitive to people to say “transman” as one word, but it’s only appropriate if one also says “cisman”, and for some reason combining cis with the respective words is less frequent. Transphobia, I’d imagine.

    I feel like I’ve never seen someone write “transpeople” who isn’t actively being hateful. That one seems like there’s less of an excuse for it. But then, maybe that reflects more on the communities I move in than anything.




  • I like Cyberpunk 2077 but I honestly somewhat agree. It’s fundamentally the same game it was at launch, and the same people who were hating on it for not living up to their expectations turned around and started glazing it after CDPR fixed a few bugs and adjusted the balance.

    There’s definitely a bit more polish than there was before, but I have no idea how all these people claim to have hated it on launch but like it now. I liked it on day one, and I like it today, but it’s really kind of a mid game. It feels like there’s potential for it to build up to something incredible in a second or third game, but as it is it could stand to be a lot better and I get a lot of your criticism and why you still dislike it.



  • Melmi@lemmy.blahaj.zoneto196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneRule
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Downvotes are only disabled locally, but that also disables downvote federation for our communities. Basically the downvotes you see were from people on your instance, and to everyone on other instances they can’t see the downvotes so it seems like you’re complaining about nothing.




  • Melmi@lemmy.blahaj.zoneto196@lemmy.blahaj.zonegrulef
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 months ago

    Wanting to own billions isn’t necessarily evil. I’d say it’s actually pretty common to want to be a billionaire in our society; the desire to gain wealth is core to capitalism. They may not understand the consequences of it or be able to conceptualize of the people they’d hurt.

    Hypothetically, if we treated it as an illness (or rather a symptom) we could shift societal norms and rehabilitate people who express signs of trying to hoard wealth.




  • I agree that chaotic characters would be more inclined to break laws. But I suppose to circle back, I don’t see why that makes them any less Good.

    Even your description of “law is an impediment to justice” sounds like a CG character would just do whatever they want without letting laws stop them, while NG might be more likely to consider whether or not to follow the law in any given circumstance and perhaps adjust their plan to be slightly more lawful, while CG might not respect the rule of law at all and just break into the prison and free the slaves or whatever.

    Neutral Good (NG). Neutral Good creatures do the best they can, working within rules but not feeling bound by them. A kindly person who helps others according to their needs is probably Neutral Good.

    Chaotic Good (CG). Chaotic Good creatures act as their conscience directs with little regard for what others expect. A rebel who waylays a cruel baron’s tax collectors and uses the stolen money to help the poor is probably Chaotic Good.

    Side note: I agree that law and freedom aren’t necessarily in opposition as pure concepts. But part of my argument is that CG characters wouldn’t innately hate objectively good laws like “don’t keep slaves”. The laws they’d take issue with are ones that limit freedom, like “don’t steal”. Most probably wouldn’t be ideologues campaigning for the destruction of the government but they might just steal to fund their Good.


  • Melmi@lemmy.blahaj.zoneto196@lemmy.blahaj.zonebillionaire rule
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Maybe I’m confused what you mean. Being opposed to the concept of laws doesn’t mean you need to break them; you can still think “people shouldn’t murder” or “slavery is bad”. I don’t think incidentally following laws makes you not Chaotic. You just don’t care what the law is; you’d be doing the same thing regardless of whether it was the law or not.

    Besides, I’m not sure “opposed to the concept of laws” is really true for all but the most extreme examples of CG. It seems like its more about wanting freedom than just hating laws themselves.


  • Melmi@lemmy.blahaj.zoneto196@lemmy.blahaj.zonebillionaire rule
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    The chaotic good alignment isn’t any less good because they can simply follow the just laws and break the unjust laws. They might resent the institution of law, but they aren’t obliged to do the opposite of the law, they just will do it for their own reasons instead of the legality. They’re still fundamentally good.

    A lawful good character would probably prefer legal methods to fight legal injustice, while a chaotic good character might prefer to break the law as they don’t see legal methods as worth anything/don’t recognize its authority. Both are Good, but they might use different methods when confronted with the same problem.