KoboldCoterie

I have heard that small recurring donations are more helpful in general than larger one-time donations, so that's what I tend to do - small recurring donations to services I use or creators whose content I consume. I tend to only do this when the service or content is primarily donation-supported, though.

This is also easier for me to manage, because it becomes a monthly recurring cost and I can see easily how much I'm spending on donations and adjust them as needed, whereas with larger one-time donations, I tend to lose track of how much the total is in a given period.

I have almost never felt the need to do so, in fact, I do get a bit amused by it. As I said, I do not have a notion of male/female. If someone considers me feminine, I do not feel any different. It maybe a mental thing, or again, a by product of my upbringing.

It's more of an issue for trans folks, some of whom feel a strong disassociation with their biological sex. If someone's trying hard to pass as a gender that doesn't match their sex, having someone misgender them feels pretty awful.

I used to somewhat dislike english for being confusing, but it is effectively my first language. I have read/written English more than any other languages combined (4 others) and also spoken it the most/ 2nd most. I find it good enough. Especially, since it’s lingua franca in academia

Fair enough! For what it's worth, I wouldn't have known you weren't a native English speaker if you hadn't said so yourself (though it did provide useful context around why you were confused about gender vs. sex!)

I want to ask one more thing, I have never asked/thought of my gender. When you say “you identify as male”, I do not know what that means, what does it mean to identify as a male or female or something else. As I wrote above, in my native tounge, there is no separation.

In your original post, you said:

I am a male, and If I get my terms correctly, I am possibly Aero Ace. I am (possibly) coming of a privilige that my percieved gender identity is same as that of what I accept myself to be.

Which I took to mean that you are biologically male, you consider yourself to be male, and your outward appearance is male. (Apologies if I misinterpreted your meaning.) 'Identify as male' simply means that that is your preferred gender (as in, do you prefer to be thought of / referred to as male or female), whether or not it matches your biology. It's most applicable to trans people, who might be biologically male but identify as female (which we'd refer to as a trans woman, or more concisely, 'a woman'), or vice versa.

As I said, I understand that I am privileged. Though I have been misgendered, mostly because my voice is quite shrill, and people often confuse me of being feminine over phones.

I didn't mean to call you out with that comment, I was just using the term you used. :) Wasn't throwing shade. Having a voice that doesn't match your gender identity is a great example of why you might want to tell someone your pronouns the first time you talk to them, though (if appropriate).

Also, most people LGBTQIA+ representation in media here mostly focused on the sex part.

LGBTQIA+ relates to sexual preference (mostly), so it makes sense that it's equated to sex.

I understand it being a difficult concept when your native language doesn't differentiate, though. That's pretty rough, and good on you for trying to get a better understanding of it.

If it helps with the terminology:

'Sex' can refer to whether someone is (biologically) a male or female - basically, whether they were born with a penis or a vagina. You typically don't disclose this to someone when meeting them.

This is separate from gender, or 'preferred gender', or 'gender identity', which refers to what someone wishes to be referred to as. Someone's sex can be female and their gender be male (and we'd refer to that person as a male). This is what you'd answer with if someone asked you, "Are you a girl or a boy?"

'Sex' can also refer to the physical act of having sex with someone, which in turn relates to the LGBTQIA+ acronym, which describes sexual preference (e.g. do you want to sleep with men or women, or both, or neither, or whatever else). I think this might be where some of the confusion comes from. English is a pretty shitty language to learn, especially as a second language.

Firstly, I think you're conflating gender with sexual identity. Gender isn't covered by any of the LGBTQIA2+ initials; it's important (to some people) to inform someone of upon meeting them, because it usually relates to their preferred pronouns, and if someone appears outwardly male but prefers to be referred to as 'They' (or any other combination of gender + pronoun), that needs to be disclosed. You've probably never felt the need to do this because (as you state) you're male and you identify as male and your outward appearance is male, so I'm going to assume you've never had anyone misgender you, but not everyone is so lucky - or privileged, you might say.

But this gave me the thought, that why do we not use the same pronouns for everyone (for example they/them), or maybe 2 pairs, one for formal, one informal, or 1 more pair, for singular and plural. Why do pronouns have to depend on gender?

This is just how the English language works. Personally, I've never met anyone who got upset if someone used a gender neutral pronoun (though I understand those people do exist). If you want to make it easy on yourself, just use They/Them for everyone; English just happens to not be too well-equipped for this, and it can cause confusion in some contexts (singular vs. plural, or when trying to single a particular person out of a crowd). Some of the other pronouns that you've probably heard were an attempt to create a singular gender neutral pronoun but none have really stuck in wide use.

The second part is sexual prefernces. I do not know much about sex or sexual preferences. I am a young adult, and have not had to know about this for any person that I have met yet. I have never had the interest to know about this for someone, neither have I retained this information.

This is likely because you're ace. If you had a sexual interest in someone, you might be interested to know what gender they preferred.

I understand that if you are looking out for partner/s, then you would have to share this, so we would have to use some words for it. But why do we have to keep this as a part of gender.

We don't. This is separate from gender. The only letters in the LGBTQIA2+ acronym that relates to gender is T, for Trans, and I for Intersex, but generally speaking trans people (who I've met, anyway) would prefer to just be known by their preferred gender in casual conversation, and intersex people don't typically advertise that, either (nor should they need to).

As in, why would I want to share this information with my governments (who do census), or for my visa applications. Should this not just be something personal?

You don't have to disclose sexual preference for either of those things, at least not where I'm from.

If a person tells me their gender, how should I react/respond to it? Is my current line of actions appropriate (just address them with their preferd pronouns, and if I do not know that, use they/them; completely ignore the sexual part of it)

You say "Okay", and refer to them by their preferred pronoun; it's essentially the only reason it would come up in casual conversation. Again, there's nothing sexual about gender. Gender and sexual identity are completely separate.

Another thing that I want to ask is, why do some groups use different acronyms? I remeber hearing about this the first time, and the word used was LGBT. Then I heard LGBTQ, then LGBTQIA+, and today I heard LGBTQ2. I presume that since more people are getting aware, and they are trying to express themselves, they need some newer words, and hence the acronym would keep on evolving, if so, is it not a endless exercise? Am I being insensitive If I use one over other (for quite some time, I have been sticking with lgbtqia+, in hope that + means extensions, as in, others, so hopefully it is less excluding than others, but if that is not the case, please correct me.)

Over time, the acronym has evolved to be inclusive of more groups. That's all there is to it. As an asexual person, you're represented by the A (or the +). I have only a few times ever seen a shorter acronym used to specifically exclude some groups, and that shit was shut down pretty quickly by other folks who heard it. If you say "LGBTQIA+", I highly doubt anyone will be offended or feel that you're excluding them. (The + is indeed a general addendum meant to include anyone who is part of the community and wasn't explicitly given a letter.)

I think strict/aggressive moderation to enforce that rule is kinda problematic

Why? If you look at the interaction OP had, he made a post in the women-only community proclaiming himself to be a man, was asked politely by a mod not to post again, posted again, and was banned. Seems this is an easy situation to avoid by simply... not posting again if asked not to.

Even if you do get banned for posting when you don't belong, how is that any different than if you'd proactively marked the community as read-only?

Why do you feel that you have the automatic right to insert yourself into a conversation that your opinion isn't wanted in? There's no issue with the way they're presenting or moderating their community; they make the rules plain on the sidebar.

How about fake women profiles by men?

Again, why do you assume this is an issue? Most men can simply respect that women would like to have a conversation with other women. Why are you not able to just accept this?

Simply adding one word would have made the title much less misleading.

'JD Vance gets briefly suspended from bluesky 'just 12 minutes after first post''

As it stands, it strongly implies that his first post caused him to get suspended, and that he's still suspended now. I'm not even sure why this is considered newsworthy. Why did someone even bother writing this article? Answer is, I'd wager, because the headline makes it sound sensational when it's in fact not, and it drives clicks.

You don't think that the omission of the very relevant followup fact from the title is misleading, perhaps intentionally so, to someone only glancing at headlines?

Imagine if the police were looking for your neighbor, mistook your house for theirs, arrested you thinking you were them, then minutes later released you when they realized their error. Would an article titled 'TachyonTele arrested in own home' be a fair summary of those events?

This seems great, and I wish governments would do this just in general for a wider range of products, to be honest. If they aren't doing something to add value, resellers like that deserve what they get.

This feels like it would have been the perfect subject of a global fundraiser to just buy the sites at the auction.

people aren’t great on average

Well, of course not. If 'great' was the average, it wouldn't be great anymore - it'd just be average.

Doesn't actually matter.

A normally weighted die has a weight of 16.67% for each face. No matter what result the first die rolls, the second one has a 16.67% chance of rolling the number needed to total 7. Therefore, the average chance of a (total of) 7 is (16.67 + 16.67 + 16.67 + 16.67 + 16.67 + 16.67) / 6, or, 16.67%, or, 1 in 6.

Consider your example: Die #1 has the following weights:

• 1: 0%
• 2: 20%
• 3: 20%
• 4: 20%
• 5: 20%
• 6: 20%

In your example, if die 2 rolls a 6, there's a 0% chance of a (total of) 7, instead of the normal 16.67%, but if die 2 rolls a 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5, it has a 20% chance of totaling 7, instead of the normal 16.67%.

The average chance, therefore, is (0 + 20 + 20 + 20 + 20 + 20) / 6, or, 16.67%, or, 1 in 6.