From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp12.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id aODkIie7GmJjeAAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2022 00:43:35 +0100 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp12.migadu.com with LMTPS id 2Mq/Hye7GmKjIQEAauVa8A (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2022 00:43:35 +0100 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05FA01C34A for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2022 00:43:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1]:35192 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nO6ir-0005L3-Vr for larch@yhetil.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2022 18:43:34 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:37858) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nO6iX-0005Kr-Mn for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2022 18:43:13 -0500 Received: from dustycloud.org ([50.116.34.160]:40442) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nO6iU-00086O-F6 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Feb 2022 18:43:13 -0500 Received: from chicory (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dustycloud.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4078526617; Sat, 26 Feb 2022 18:43:09 -0500 (EST) References: <874k4pzub7.fsf@nonconstructivism.com> <843aa5cc-6ae4-4bdf-d4c3-bf395a021625@gmail.com> <87sfs6wmf9.fsf@dustycloud.org> User-agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 27.2 From: Christine Lemmer-Webber To: Taylan Kammer Subject: Re: An appeal to empathy on actual hurt caused by this thread Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2022 14:07:13 -0500 In-reply-to: Message-ID: <87sfs5ry7n.fsf@dustycloud.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=50.116.34.160; envelope-from=cwebber@dustycloud.org; helo=dustycloud.org X-Spam_score_int: -2 X-Spam_score: -0.3 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (-0.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06=1.592, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, Morgan Lemmer-Webber Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1645919015; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post; bh=slnvt5nrLD/ALbBfrEo8liM1UIr5GtfVFzsK1jEqgKc=; b=g1WTHleLDipE8abzkuh4OfDpdr0BDr/lgmXmLIElDp5E5+D483XVee2JAwd02bq6/MBlIw l8xQ7KwBDZMho/+7D4qCQMMJPSJqwTUMDr8uc6MVLD8i8DpXWKYc9pSWXtJ61y4b98cAqg q3B8pz2lcEEubgGVEyaLnuW3oXf3iETjBcU6LiLuuG+9wtG/iueRwfnlMB11pf+x/ybrWz S938NEGaSMBiw9+s0oGQLeFxXSIa26XUInircGWUErfx2+ZusGJKxol2rqVq8eScZT7gMk 4Ybrahkn4m5N8mlOB6r/Gy18KRRYxRdYFm/SZ/IQSinsixZux7Rdp0ZWQnDtjg== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1645919015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=RTp5ykaKXbcMASwT6IElib4A8eqo6P2qGZwoBFPmBvF5WJ1JXXhlGLLgcsbl9ft6BKJ737 PsZ1ucqd+GIjp+mYX55UOKdAVF/Gj6yBcqOfN7Ni4UICHF+X93kLUUo4fOGuST5wX9Vamj txbEew5y5vE3OL2RhN+zIULx0YlwPaW/V39RPYLe+w5gqsUNCkEMkJzIEGlVfLck7hiCuZ 92SjS3FnT4u56YnsUL07ePdr40inLtMCSuW3SKP7sdjqMd6FF5FT+8Sj/vKSUAYKZfmXXL v+HxG8gq+lOIu+Y+7PZCAaeXfjlIuO3OXRBFc/LlBkRlNGRbV+nMuf+RYqlWmQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -3.61 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 05FA01C34A X-Spam-Score: -3.61 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: RwWLdXF7+itm Okay. Now a longer reply. I am taking a substantial portion of my day to do this. I think there is a lot more going on here than even appears at the surface. So I have re-read everything that has been said so far and am doing my best to take care in what I write here. I hope it's of some greater help and contribution for the health and well being of this community, which I cherish. Taylan Kammer writes: > Hi Christine, > > Thank you for opening up. It was definitely not apparent to me that you > had such a reaction to the thread. As we know, text doesn't convey the > nuances of human communication very well, and I had read your initial > emails as rather relaxed, or at worst mildly annoyed. Had I realized > that they were coming from such a stressful position, I would have > responded differently. For whatever it's worth, at the point that I composed the email, I was anxious. > My heartfelt apologies in that regard. Apology (personally) accepted. I can't speak for others of course, but it is my hope that we as a community can find healing and understanding and move forward. And I believe you when you say this was not your intent. I also appreciate you being open and thoughtful throughout the rest of this email. Know that this, and the previous, emails were not easy for me to write. I wrote them from a position of disclosure and vulnerability. But not writing them would be worse. I am glad I did write it, because (and obviously, I won't talk about the specifics), I received replies from some folks in private saying they felt their experiences mirrored and it may have affected their participation in Guix, and had already affected their feeling of safety and self-identity. Not to mention my own felings. > For us to be able to build up better mutual understanding and empathy in > the future, perhaps it would be good for me to open up about some things > as well. Certainly not a thing requied to do, but I appreciate it. > Frankly, I think we're more similar than anyone taking a glance at the > thread might ever think. I've had experiences with gender dysphoria as > well, and my dis-identification with male peers has certainly played an > important role in the development of my severe chronic depression. > > I'm a rather reserved person when it comes to personal matters, not as > open about my feelings as you are (and good on you -- it's not doing me > much good to be the way I am in that regard), so I don't want to go into > too much detail, but let's just say I've had multiple near-death moments > throughout the years in relation to my condition, and the latest bout of > severe suicidal thoughts was just a few months ago. I'm sorry to hear it. > The partly hostile responses (from others, not you!) I've received in > the thread have been anything but pleasant, to say the least, but have > not led to a major breakdown, perhaps thanks to the medication I'm on, > which might be why I was able to respond a few more times... I am sorry, again, to hear about your dealing with depression, or that you have had to undergo any breakdowns at all. As for "partly hostile responses", I'd like to respond to this more later, at the end of this thread. > I've packaged higan for Guix, back in 2015. Near (then byuu) helped me > revitalize some of my fondest childhood memories with the emulator he's > built. After taking some interest in the program's workings, I was also > briefly active on his web forum, and had positive interactions with him. > We weren't close personally, but I had built up a *lot* of fondness and > respect for him. The news of his suicide was absolutely awful to me. > > Moreover, a certain web forum that shall not be named which was behind > the bullying campaign against Near/byuu (and countless others) also has > a "profile" of sorts written up on me in one of their threads, as a > potential future bullying target or something. So far I've been spared, > but they do have my home address, and my employer's details are a web > search away. > > All of which is to say, I *deeply* empathize with your position, and at > no point would I ever wish to inflict this type of pain on anyone. I'm truly sorry you had to experience that. Nobody deserves that. Though (and not to undo the previous two sentences) I will say, the choice of "he" for Near gave me most pause in this email, given the thread's existing context of gender consierations, and that Near identified as nonbinary as far as I understand, and that this and their autism were partly why they were bullied into suicide... > I would like to sincerely reassure you that the sole purpose in sending > the patch, and subsequent messages, was to pledge for another view to be > respected on equal regard to the one that's already correctly respected. > > The reason I've felt strongly about that, pressing me to reiterate the > position in the subsequent thread by Zimoun, was of course not some > twisted wish to cause hurt. Rather, it was because that perspective is > based on the experiences of countless AFAB people who have been hurt in > countless ways, just like the perspective that is currently rightfully > encoded in the CoC is based on the experiences of trans people. (I've > also found the sex-based perspective to have strong explanatory power > w.r.t. my personal problems, although I've come to see that as almost > irrelevant in the face of everything else I've learned.) > > --- > > There's one thing I've not been able to understand. I don't know if you > wish to respond any further, but if so, please note that the following > is a completely genuine inquiry, and not meant in any confrontational > manner at all, just like the rest of this email. I think it would be > very helpful for the future if you could help me with this: > > The key reason the thread / my mails have caused hurt seems to be that > they've come across as an attempt to debate transgender experiences. > What I've not been able to understand is how that happened, since I > actually tried very hard from the beginning to make it as clear as > possible that I had no such intention. > > For example, I had said things like: > > "I can assure you that I'm 100% fine with the CoC mentioning gender > identity and, for example, if someone were to make inflammatory > remarks towards the worldview of transgender people in this community, > I wouldn't hesitate opposing that." > > And in the summary: > > "I sincerely have no issue with the CoC protecting people based on > gender identity or other transgender status, and am equally > disinterested as others in having debates about that topic." > > Yet something seems to have gone wrong. > > There was one email, my response to Liliana, in which I've touched on > the debate itself, but that was even before your emails so I don't > think it was that... > > Reading over my mails, I just don't understand why they might have been > misunderstood so badly. If you could shed some light on that, I would be > very grateful! It would certainly help me avoid mistakes in the future, > if I were to talk about these matters in a different place. Thanks. I am taking you at your word: you asked me to explain, and so I am spending most of my day writing this email. I hope that ends up being productive. I am doing my best to fulfill your request and make it so. > I hope this message reaches you in the empathetic way it's meant. I've > decided to sacrifice about half a night's sleep to write it, because it > was certainly important enough for that. Well, I probably wouldn't have > been able to sleep anyway. :-) It reached me in an empathetic way. And I appreciate that. It was also my hope, in leaving myself vulnerable in my previous message, that we could have a discussion, find common ground, and perhaps healing. But now I do want to express something in particular, in response to a previous part of your email: > The partly hostile responses (from others, not you!) I've received in > the thread have been anything but pleasant, to say the least There may have been multiple people who have been perceived as hostile or partly hostile, but the only person who was explicitly reprimanded for it by another person on list was Liliana (who was reprimanded by multiple people). Note, this is also the only other person who has openly identified as being affected by issues of addressing transgender identity on list, and also the person who spent the most time explaining the other issues. Presumably, this is because of the point at which they said the following (using a different quoting style to distinguish): #+BEGIN_QUOTE On the topic of sex characteristics, while the term is somewhat badly chosen thanks biology being super-not-political, I do think the addition would be significantly less problematic than simply adding "sex". It is nowadays understood that these characteristics don't define "sex", whatever that might be, and only the name has remained because naming is hard. As a nice side-effect, adding it would give us two reasons to ban Taylan; first for discriminating against trans people based on their sex characteristics and second based on their gender identity or expression. [...] I agree that the guidelines themselves don't sound bad, but given the maintainer to audience ratio, I understand that Guix would want to go its own way in this regard. As far as public apologies are concerned, however, I don't think these elicit a proper amount of self-criticism in most cases =E2=80=93 we all know the kind of actors who will publicly apologize only to continue with (pardon my French) shitty behaviour, rinse and repeat. #+END_QUOTE One person in particular called it "beyond the pale". Was it? It's certainly a dramatically different tact than I took. But before we play "good trans, bad trans" (actually let's never play that), I want to point out a few things: - I think Liliana is a more direct speaker than I am in general. I don't think this is bad. A lot of Liliana's messages cut straight to the point in a way common for many hackers, whereas I spend a lot of time buffering. But Liliana is hands down one of Guix's most productive contributors. Her analysis tends to be sharp but almost always strikingly insightful when I've seen it. I did a search across my mail: in the six month interval between July of 2021 and January of 2022, Liliana is reponsible for 2.75% of guix-patches traffic and 2.8% of bug-guix traffic. Considering that most of her posts are review (which we sorely need), and that many of the replies are single email responses to multiple email patch series, those numbers are actually probably deflated from what it should be. So I'm saying that Liliana speaks directly is probably partly how she manages to get so much done. I find myself consistently glad that we have Liliana in our community. All that while being, depending on how you slice it, visibly a minority or double minority in our group. More expansion on this below. - In fact, regarding Liliana's first email, I sent her a thank-you message after sending my first message. Because I had the same feelings the moment I saw it, but I didn't feel courageous enough to say anything. So I was grateful for Liliana for speaking up. - Liliana had, at this point, been writing fairly patiently for a few days. Detailed writings explaining common trans experiences and how this was likely to affect transfolk. - By the time Liliana appeared to lose her patience in the above quoted section, it had been days with these conversations happening despite the very first things Liliana and I both raised was that we were worried about whether or not this would be used as a vector to debate trans experiences, and then that continued to happen. For days! So I don't blame Liliana for losing patience, or assuming bad faith by this point. - I did try very hard to be thoughtful. But that takes energy and is actually something I've received active training on, speaking in I-narratives and de-escalating and etc. Not everyone has that training, and it's a lot of intentional energy and work to do it. Especially when it's an issue that affects you directly. - Regardless, sometimes it feels like, what does being kind get you? It sucked that, while you called my first email kind, you then proceeded to do exactly the thing I asked not to have happen on this list: further debate the experiences of transfolk (after saying you didn't want to!). I appreciate that you expressed regret for me being upset, and I made that clear by putting myself in a vulnerable state. I'm glad it connected, but wish I didn't have to do it. But it also didn't only hurt me... I'm just the one who expressed myself in a vulnerable way that connected. Liliana didn't direct attention to herself, but she did express the ways in which these things are hurtful for people who have experiences like hers, so it shouldn't be hard to draw the connection. (I don't want to speak for you Liliana, but I'd be surprised if you weren't hurt.) Not to mention that speaking up makes you a target. And for those who didn't, suffering in silence is still suffering. Earlier I said that I admired Liliana's productivity despite, depending on how you cut it, being either a minority or double-minority. Here's what I mean: being a woman on the internet sucks. Being a trans on the internet sucks. Part of the experience of being a *trans* *woman* is that when people don't know you're trans, they treat you shittily in one invalidating way, and then when they do, they treat you shittily in another invalidating way. Everywhere, but *especially* in tech. This doesn't mean that women who are cisgender don't tend to have their own challenges. I actually think that's quite true, and serious. Personally, I suffered a lot by being *perceived as* masculine when I was younger (particularly because I failed under basically every metric of being masculine, not to meniton being teased for intersex characteristics by those who identified them), but I benefited in regards to my career as a tech person, in that when I was very young and I began to express an interest in computers, the pattern matching mechanisms around those people around me identified "yup, seems like something that would be befitting you" in a way that likely wouldn't have been true if I was perceived female, and I was encouraged to do so. And when I walked into FOSS conferences, people assumed I belonged. I didn't transition until after my career was already established. And it's something I do acknowledge (but I also don't think it's something I think or ask for the burden of others acknowledging in general, because it really does trigger imposter syndrome issues even to discuss this and can be used as a mechanism to force outing people). And I've been taught to speak in a louder voice, and that my voice is welcome, and so I do that. (But on the other hand, I co-host a podcast, and every time I hear my own voice disconnected from my image, it's incredibly dysphoric and it hurts. I know plenty of transwomen whose voices have been lost from narratives, because they are, quite literally, afraid to speak up.) On the other hand, transitioning later in life sucks in other ways. I have a long career where I've been fairly fortunate to do interesting things, but this means my past outs me in ways that I can't cover up. And every time someone sees a commit by my old name or an article or video with my old appearance, I know it's encoding information that makes it harder for them to see me as a woman. And that sucks. A lot. But the above experience isn't true for all transwomen. I have friends who are transwomen who transitioned at much younger ages. Most of society didn't know. Their lived experiences match those of most cisgender women, with the primary differnce being that they have a secret they have to guard closely. And that's just for *transwomen*. It's well known that the experiences of *transmen* largely get dropped out of the larger narrative. And I'm not one, so I can't speak for them really, only relay. But my friends who are transmasculine, yeah they tell me it's invalidating in totally different ways: they didn't get the benefit of society assuming them male when growing up, and so have been held back from opportunities that their perceived-as-male colleagues got back then. And then they enter into a world where, if they sufficiently pass, they suddenly get these benefits that society bestows upon men, and that's both kinda validating and also incredibly shitty feeling, and they tell me their past for *not* having access haunts them, especially for the many who ended up following more traditionally feminine career paths because that's the direction they were encouraged to go. And there are all sorts of different ways to be invalidated, not to mention TERF/radfem (and yes, let's get to those terms soon) narratives of pity where "aww it's so sad, because they're not *really* men", or a weird sense of anger/betrayal for moving to the dark side, etc. And it *is* true that there are a lot of transwomen in tech, and especially in FOSS, and much of this has to do with being-perceived-as-male status at a formative time. But also, speaking for myself and many friends I've spoken to, there's an added layer. Let's say you're growing up, you're experiencing severe gender dysphoria. The world is mean, the world sucks. But computers... they're a refuge. You learn to use them, they respond to you poking at them and entering commands, and there's all these interesting things you can do. And you can do it quietly, by yourself, without the computer judging you, while the world outside is harsh and mean and full of people who are bullying you. And people on the internet, well, many of them don't even have to know you for anything else. You can be yourself. In a world that's killing you, it's a place you can be alive. So for a variety of reasons it's true that, relative to the general population, it seems like there are more transwomen in tech than in other fields (and even more transmen in tech than most of the population... basically, if you're transfeminine *or* transmasculine, for whatever reason, you're more likely to be in tech). And given the prestige that being in computing *now* has it's no wonder there's scrutiny about that. (Aside: given that I started to take interest in computers around 1995 and my classmates mostly just made fun of me for it because being interested in computers was mostly uncool then, prestiege, in my experience, is not the primary drive. It wasn't until being in computing was associated with *making a lot of money*, which happened towards the end of the 90s, where that started to change. Yeah okay, I've dated myself.) And this can be correctly pointed to as being *partly* (but as I've outlined above, not *entirely*) part of a common tendency (but again, not a universal one) where many transwomen have still benefitted from male privilege from the way they were perceived prior to transitioning. So here's the problem. There's a kernel of truth there, and one even worth addressing. But if you're trans, you've seen this before. The seed that's planted is used to grow something much more vicious. So when I saw: Subject: [minor patch] Amend CoC Before I even opened it, I began wondering what kind of change it was going to be, and if anything "minor patch" made me think it was probably the opposite. And when I saw "sex" added, I thought "Oh, was that missing? I thought I remembered that being there." And then I immediately thought "I just hope this isn't an entry point or backdoor for debating trans experiences." But my mind says, "adding another thing doesn't seem so bad." And then even in that own email it says: #+BEGIN_QUOTE This is a really tiny thing. A recent thread on the ML prompted me to look at our CoC and I noticed it doesn't include 'sex' in the list of things based on which one might be discriminated against, so attached is a patch that adds that one word. Note: The upstream Contributor Covenant wouldn't want to include it because the author seems to have a peculiar world-view where they don't acknowledge that humans actually have a sex. I hope the Guix maintainers are more reasonable than that. :-) #+END_QUOTE and my stomach just *dropped* at that, since I know the lead developer is a transwoman. So, that's like, a really bad sign. I think to myself: I've seen where this goes before. I just hope it doesn't go there. Something like, "I need to make this space safe for people who basically don't think the trans narrative is real to feel safe saying so." Regardless of your intention, pretty much everything that followed seemed to confirm that. And you asked me to explain, so here's what I saw from there (possibly not exactly in order): - Liliana expressed exactly the same fears I already was holding. - In reply, you said "I really feel the need to point out that what you seem to consider a transphobic talking point is seen as a fundamental principle of feminism by many others, and that long predates the contemporary transgender movement." - You later pointed out that exactly the opposite thing was said by Coraline, and that's true, but the bigger point was really "let's please not open this up in a way where trans experiences are debated" then *boy howdy* did that happen. =20=20=20 - You linked to the exchange where you and Coraline had the debate, so I'll re-link it: https://github.com/EthicalSource/contributor_covenant/pull/548#pullreq= uestreview-131019878 In a certain sense the "gender (sex)" felt like it was really a clear version of what I was anxious about, that this would be being passed off as a way to *broaden* the scope, but really would be a *constraint*. - Or, I thought, maybe this would be an entry point to say "well we have to open up the space for people who want to debate whether or not to treat trans people as the gender they're expressing to feel safe" (or to just intentionally dismiss treating trans people respectfully) - And then it proceeded to feel like exactly that, with two women trying to explain why they didn't want this to happen and some guy talking over them telling them that they're wrong, in the name of *feminism* no less. In direct reply to the email where I said I was nervous about this being an entry point for that kind of thing and asked that we not debate trans experiences on list, I received a thanks for being kind in my reply and then got the following whammo of a comment: #+BEGIN_QUOTE Not to hide anything: personally, I ascribe to views (broadly, radical feminism) which contradict some key aspects of the transgender movement. However, that's irrelevant in this context. #+END_QUOTE As Morgan pointed out, it's *hardly* irrelevant. And actually, this lead me to look up the history. The term "radical feminism" predates the term "trans-exclusionary radical feminism" by quite some time. In fact the person who's the first person known to use the term "TERF" was a ciswoman who said: #+BEGIN_QUOTE implicitly aligning *all* radfems with the trans-exclusionary radfem (TERF) activists, which I resent #+END_QUOTE and was, in her post, defending transwomen. The article is fairly interesting: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/29/im-credited-with-ha= ving-coined-the-acronym-terf-heres-how-it-happened Terms shift, and there thus may be some irony to the above shift, as quoted. But the term "radical feminist"'s primary use within the last decade plus is describe people dismissive of the experiences of transfolk, and in your sentence was *directly* followed up with "which contradict some key aspects of the transgender movement" so I have to say, if this isn't what you meant, you did an extremely good job of painting yourself as saying "btw, I'm a TERF kthx" here. Well, you asked for me to explain things. I'm explaining it. Now frame again, in your mind, that this is happening in the context of two women who are transgender on list asking "please don't let this be a TERF entry point" and then read the following thing you wrote: #+BEGIN_QUOTE As it stands, if a person with a classical feminist consciousness about sex discrimination were to ask me whether the Guix community would show respect towards her experiences and take her issues seriously, I would not be able to reassure her. Rather, it seems that any such woman who enters the community and is open about her views is going to risk being vilified and lectured about her own lived experiences. By a group of male-born people, no less. #+END_QUOTE So anyway, I mean, if you really didn't mean to align this with TERF talking points, I have to say you did a bang-up job of doing so on accident. (The last sentence particularly stings, for reasons I hope are obvious.) And here and elsewhere, there's been what's felt like a weird savior complex (as Morgan addressed in her emails) that both erased the cisgender women who have contributed or been part of Guix (and wholeheartedly agree on one point: there haven't been enough) and felt like it dismissed the transwomen who were speaking up as not really being women. I don't know what caused this, I'm trying to take it in good faith. You mentioned experiencing gender dysphoria. I don't know your experience, but I do know people who have experienced gender dysphoria and through some internalized transphobia fell into the trap of spreading that stuff around, especially if they have an enormous amount of guilt. But I really don't know what happened. And I'm not interested in blame. And the goal, as stated, of increasing the scope of people feeling protected, why heck that's a really good goal. But it ended up coupled with all this other stuff, with a group of people who already have seen an extremely similar narrative play out in ways to write out their experiences and *said so*, and then that narrative played out anyway. So, it was the stuff it was coupled to that was the problem. Anyway. I spent pretty much my whole day on this. But you asked, and so I answered. As said, I appreciate your work. And I want to take you in good faith. Anyway. I don't know if this was helpful, or of any good. But let me close with something else: I think code of conduct documents are important, but they're not licenses, they aren't held up in a court of law. I don't think that's the point, or the goal. They're always going to be loose, and imperfect. The goal is to express the kind of community someone can expect, the kind of way we hope to see behaved. To that end, I think that Guix, historically, has been one of the brightest stars in the sky in terms of having a nice and promising community, but a lot of that promise has yet to be fully actualized. Having the community be a safe space for transwomen, transmen, nonbinary folk, cisgender women, and people of all minority groups, should be a priority. That's active effort, and it's important. A code of conduct document sends a signal, and it provides guidance. But we succeed in how we act to one each other. This has been a difficult experience, but I hope, in some ways, we can heal and be stronger for who we become.