Hello Metafilter! Welcome to the first of many regularly-scheduled updates on the state of the site. Comments will be turned off for these, as they’ll cover far too many topics for an unthreaded conversation to manage, but we’re happy to hear from you via the Contact Form. If you want to discuss a particular subject with the community, you’re welcome to open a separate MetaTalk thread for it. [more inside]
The thread on “Racial slurs that should never be written,” was focused on racial slurs. Several people brought up other types of slurs, but they were told that that thread was not the place to address those slurs. This is the thread to discuss where to address those slurs. [more inside]
We need to talk about how trans issues are handled on MetaFilter. [more inside]
I posted Daniel Mallory Ortberg’s latest instalment of his ongoing serial fic. When tagging the post, I was conflicted about tagging it with his deadname (which is “Mallory Ortberg”. Two questions: 1) on a technical level, will tagging with his full name link up with older posts tagged with his deadname, since the latter is included in the former? He’s the same author, and that continuity of work seems valuable. 2) on a trans-etiquette level, is this shitty and equivalent to deadnaming? (I’m more interested in hearing what trans folks have to say on this one.) I ended up tagging the post with his name and his deadname but I’m questioning that.
This week in the news sucked and it's been all too easy to lose sleep over it. How are you? (Hugs, headpats and venting inside.)
The current post on trans* kids/gender identity has a really positive conversation going on. I've seen enough fighty trans*-issue threads here for that to be a real sign of progress. But mostly, I want to thank the mefites who've made it that way for assisting with my own education. [more inside]
I'm a bit miffed that my post was deleted for "If this is a conversation MetaFilter is going to have that is going to go well, you need to start with a different post than this. Leave the edgy make-people-mad quotes out of it and explain why it's something interesting you think people will want to talk about." Because I don't think a) this was an "edgy make-people-mad quote but rather the core of the article and b) the thread was going reasonably well. I don't see why this post was any different from earlier posts I've written about trans issues, or for that matter, that the quote I selected was any different from other quotes on posts on equally sensitive matters I've posted. I'd like to see if and why I'd be wrong in this.
Thank you, byanyothername. [more inside]
A few weeks ago, tensions were rising high in a trans*-related FPP over the tendency of threads on said topic to turn into trans 101 rather than focusing on issues highlighted, especially given how it could be perceived as threatening and exhausting. Juliet Banana was apparently listening to the debate and made a special note to include links to some FAQs in today's post on the topic. I just wanted to extend my kudos and bring attention to this excellent resolution to the debate, and suggest that this should be a standard for trans* posts in the future.
Is there anything we can do to stop this happening? There are so many interesting conversations to have about trans issues and that ain't one. [more inside]