See, to all you doubters, you didn’t pay enough attention to the Hulk

See, what happens is that the pizza gets hit with the exact dose of gamma needed to kick start the transformation into Pizzulk. Then, the bottomless rage of pineapple haters fills it up, and cooks it from the inside out

Allergies.

I’m allergic to bee venom, so I developed a phobia of them after my second sting at about 5 years old.

It took me until my thirties to start working on the phobia.

I reached a point where I was able to encounter bees, wasps, and hornets without fleeing or freaking out. I even caught a bumblebee that got into the house a few weeks ago and released it. Well, me and my kid did, it got into a weird corner and it took both of us to get it captured without hurting it.

But, back in my early twenties, I once ran away from a bumblebee that was doing absolutely nothing, leaving my patient standing there confused.

Those two events encapsulate my bee experience perfectly lol.

As it stands, as long as a nest of hornets or wasps isn’t in my yard, I’m okay with them. In my yard, if there’s nobody willing to relocate them, they ded.

Other bees and bee like critters are all good, though I would call the beekeeper that I know if a hive set up shop in the yard because he has promised he’d do so. And I know him because he was a total bro when I randomly called him and explained I was working through a phobia, and could he help with a few things. Dude went so far above and beeyond it was crazy.

Not only did he bring out single bees for visits in those little queen boxes, he did so with it taking a half hour each way, and turned turn gas money. Then, once I was chill with holding the box, he bought a freaking suit that would fit my sasquatch ass, just so I could visit his hives. Said that since he had started lifting, it was an investment in his success in getting beefed up, but dude is all of 5’7, and even though he does lift regularly is still way smaller than me, and always will be.

Anyway, point is that it eventually got to the point that I could visit his hives without the suit, though not up close. way closer than I ever thought possible, because it was close enough that bees were in the air around us. And I had my epipen in hand. But still.

That’s tangential to what you actually asked, but I do view flying, stinging insects with a different emotion than anything else. Bumblers are as close to zero reaction as it gets because they’re just so chill. As long as I see them instead of them buzzing me before I can track them, I can sit and watch them.

Honey bees, it’s number based. Once there’s more than a few, I can’t track them all, so I tend to get nervous and exit the vicinity calmly.

Wasps and hornets, I do not fuck with. That clenching in my guts when they’re nearby is not ever going away, I don’t think. But, I don’t run screaming like a child any more.

But other than that, my likes and dislikes are fairly broad. Like, I don’t even hate roaches and mosquitoes, I just don’t want them around because of health risks. I can see the beauty in them, I can appreciate them without an “ugh” factor. Compare that to seeing up close pictures of hornets where, as much as I recognize their beauty, it’s a horrifying beauty.

Now, how much I like something is pretty damn arbitrary. I love tigers, but lions are just cool. Why? No fucking idea. I like reptiles, but it’s not an emotional thing. It’s “oh, cool, a snake. So, what were we talking about?”

Dogs and cats, I don’t even factor into this kind of thing because we’ve coevolved with both for so long that they’re part of us.

But, chickens. Fucking chickens! We have some now, and I love the things. Growing up, the chickens I knew were all food production. Small scale, a dozen or so layers that could be used as meat in a pinch, plus some being raised for meat. So they weren’t exactly socialized with humans. If you weren’t bringing them food, and weren’t bothering them, they DNGAF about you.

But, our first one was taken in young, as a sorta rescue. So he got socialized part way. Then we got a hen that was hand raised, and very young, and she very much enjoys being with her people, so she’s much more personable with humans in general. And even the half feral hen that has joined us is a delight in her own way, despite not wanting contact directly. They’re all dumber than dammit, and messy and loud, but that’s part of what’s great about them too.

Two years ago, at this point in 2023, if you told me that the best part of my evenings would be cuddling on my couch with a chicken, I would have assumed you were tripping balls. And if you told me I’d be willing to die for a chicken, I’d have told you you were an idiot. But here I am, perfectly willing to run into the yard and take off after a coyote because it was fucking with my rooster. Which, I forgot the damn shotgun as far as that goes, which is also a good indicator of exactly how upset I was. Ran right past the thing, broke a hinge on the door and was as close to running as I get. Had to spend two days in bed recovering from screwing up my back during it, but I’d still do it again.

I fucking love my chickens, and that love has spread to other chickens. The one feral rooster that runs around used to annoy the shit out of me, but now I look forward to him, my rooster, and the little bantam rooster at another house serenading everyone. When the ferals pay a visit, or the flock from the other nearby house that keeps birds get loose and show up, I’m watching and smiling, even if I don’t go join them.

I think we have a fundamental difference in understanding in what defederation is, as a tool for admins to use.

While it should be the last tool to pull out, the entire point of it is to limit the spread of problematic content on an instance level.

This means that, if an instance is allowing things to stay up, other instances can defederate all at once instead of planning playing whack-a-mole with individual users.

While we’re currently talking about a situation involving dogwhistles, let’s step to the side and look at the concept itself.

There’s a list of instances recommended for defederation that can be a default. That list includes places that allow kiddie porn, places run by, or catering to nazis and their ilk, and even lemmygrad as an extremist instance.

Why not just block all those users individually instead of defederating?

I hope it’s obvious why not, that it would be a never ending moderation nightmare. The more a given instance is prone to a given kind of situation, regardless of what that might be, the more you have to consider defederation instead of individual bans.

Bringing that back to this situation, the question becomes one of thresholds. What is the right amount of transphobic dogwhistles to allow into an instance that’s by and for trans people?

In this case, Ada has set the threshold low. This has always been the case, so it isn’t something out of the blue.

When an instance is meant to be heavily curated in terms of screening out types of content, an admin is limited in their choices. If the instance has the means to have a big enough team, you can have people actively looking for content that isn’t acceptable and banning users. Or you can use defederation to screen out instances that are prone to the unwanted content.

Since there aren’t any instances with the kind of funding necessary to have a team of full time, 24/7 moderators screening the entirety of lemmy, defederation is the more realistic choice. It is something an admin team can deploy temporarily or permanently as the situation shifts.

So, I think it comes down to thresholds. Blahaj is set up as, and maintained as, a trans first space, a shelter for trans people online. They have a very low threshold because that’s the only way to meet that goal with the resources available to their instance. It seems you believe their threshold to be too low. Fair enough, we’re all allowed to have an opinion on the matter.

I would, however, point you to this very community, and suggest you go back through older posts. Blahaj is brought up frequently for banning users for this very thing. So, if they’re power tripping when they apply preemptive bans to users, and they’re power tripping when they defederate, what tools are they supposed to use? There aren’t any other tools at this point in lemmy development. There’s not even an automod to handle removing content on the fly, before it gets seen.

Iirc, the only filter that lemmy has for that is limited to a small range of slurs, and isn’t editable by admins. My memory may be faulty in that regard; if it is editable, and it can work on content from other instances, then that would be the better tool to use. But, afaik, it can’t do either. Last time I saw an explanation of how it works, it would only stop things on the individual instance, not federated content. Again, unless I misunderstood.

Then you run into the crowd that hates the idea of automod, so let’s be honest here, the blahaj team would be accused of power tripping if they did use something like that.

When it comes down to it, no matter what the blahaj team does, they’re going to catch hell. But the consequences of doing nothing are much worse. And, I’m going to be blunt as fuck here, 90% of the pissiness about blahaj’s rules and decisions catch hell that they either wouldn’t catch, or wouldn’t be as severe, because it’s a trans focused instance.

Do you remember beehaw at all? They completely defederated, and there was less venom towards them than for the selective defederation blahaj does. Admittedly, lemmy was smaller then, and there was venom, but not at the same scale.

I went back through the two main threads just now, and see no updates.

With that in mind, I do believe that if the comments haven’t been removed, at least temporarily, the matter has gone on too long. It has been long enough to verify the dogwhistle is in common enough use that even if the person using it didn’t know what it means, a moderator or admin should know and have taken action.

Even with the shitty state of search engines nowadays, it is possible to find out that a specific dogwhistle is known and in use within a few hours. Since it was something that I ran into months ago, it’s easy to confirm with A Wikipedia search

Since the recent UK court ruling is absolutely not applicable to this situation, and they’ve given no other reasoning for a decision being delayed on this matter, I don’t feel it would be reasonable for the comments to still be up. I don’t know if they are. Nobody has linked to them and shouldn’t have because brigading sucks even for this kind of thing, so I don’t know if the comments are still there.

Which, I think that brings us into complete agreement at this time. Rule 1 should have been applied already. If it hasn’t been, then it is implicit support for the comments.

Which is a valid viewpoint, obviously.

However, dogwhistles are a difficult thing to moderate. You first have to be aware that they exist (they are), then you have to be aware that a specific phrase is one (they do now), you’d have to verify that the report is one (still up in the air), and then decide what to do about it (still in the air).

Moderation does not have to be instant. Even if you have dozens of moderators or admins, expecting action even within an hour isn’t something to reasonably expect. Now, I haven’t gone back through and checked to see what they’ve decided at this point, if anything, but you and I are still talking about the principle itself, so I don’t know if that matters for this part of this particular discussion. As in, was the delay at the time of the post reasonable.

I agree with you that a comment using that dogwhistle needs to be removed. I agree that if it isn’t, then there’s a problem. The only point I see that we don’t agree on so far is how quickly an admin is expected to step in on a moderation case.

By this point, I would expect at least an update on the matter, some kind of “this is where we are in the process”. But, at the time of the post and the start of this particular conversation, I believe that they were still well within the range of an acceptable time frame for a policy decision on an unfamiliar dogwhistle.

Again, I’m still talking about events as of the time we started this chain. If you want to shift to what would be an acceptable state now we can, but I’ll need to go through both of the posts I’m aware of and update.

Well, I disagree, obviously.

This isn’t the appropriate community for a debate about what is and isn’t necessary for the struggle to minimize bigotry, so I won’t say much beyond the fact that trans people get killed all across the world, regularly, for no reason other than being trans. With that ugly fact in existence, I can not object to anyone working against the hatred towards them.

You call it bullying, I call it activism and struggling for protection.

I don’t think I would be able to change your view on the matter, and I know you can’t change mine because I’ve seen the violence and hate first hand. So I don’t have anything else to say here.

Ahhh, I made the error of forgetting to note that it does vary by location. Thank you :)

Aight, you seem to want to ignore the legal benefits, so I won’t mention that beyond saying that it is a hell of a lot easier to get married than to figure out all the paperwork needed to duplicate it, and not even have the exact same outcomes, just the majority. The tax thing, for example, you can’t file jointly if you aren’t married, no matter what else you set up (edit: in places where things like common law marriage aren’t recognized)

The biggest thing is the experience, imo. The memory.

Now, me and my wife went to the JoP, with our kid and required witnesses (my best friend and his husband).

No fancy reception, no major party, just went home and said to my dad “we’re back, no problems.” He said congratulations, and went back to watching TV.

Total spent was about a hundred bucks, including gas. And the memories of it are wonderful, we cherish it all, and we’re happy as hell we didn’t do anything else.

Wedding ceremonies, however, are expensive once you go beyond that bare minimum. That’s a cultural/sociological thing where the needs of the individual and the culture mesh into not only believing it necessary, but beneficial.

And, for the people that want it, it is beneficial. Ceremonies, rites, rituals, they serve a purpose beyond the legal or official status that comes with them. Weddings are as much about community as they are the couple. It’s the union being both recognized and celebrated at the same time, even when it’s a secular ceremony rather than religious.

Don’t get me wrong, the money spent on empty bullshit surrounding weddings is absurd. But the actual wedding, where the community stands around the couple is incredibly powerful in terms of validation, even when it’s the license that really matters legally. You can have ceremonies without the license; I performed several of them back before same sex marriage became legal. Those events were important, and doubly so because they had no legal standing.

I think that’s what you’re missing, that there’s a massive difference between two people shacking up and marriage. When the people involved swear an oath, and/or exchange symbols of union it means something, even if there’s no witnesses, not even someone to perform a ceremony. But as you move into witnesses and an officiant, it feels different because it is a public commitment. You can still divorce or whatever, but it happened, and you can never deny that. That moment, the vows, they exist in a way they don’t if you swear only to each other.

Yeah, two people can be just as committed, and honor their commitment perfectly without anything else. But it feels different.

Now, again, I’d argue that once you start shelling out for crazy dresses and cake and niche receptions, you hit diminishing returns very quick. That’s to satisfy other things, not the union itself. It may well make people happy, but it doesn’t add anything to the underlying point of there being a ceremony in the first place. That of saying to the world “where once there were two, now there are one”.

Not that anyone has to share the valuation, but it’s what underlies the whole thing, and it has value

Perfect idea, wrong asshole involved

Fair enough.

If I may, allow me to explain why I think it was a not wrong decision. Now, notice how I phrased it this time, please. It is definitely different in implication from my original phrasing, and that does represent some thought that has occurred since the time of the comment.

.uk is run by multiple admins. It is run as something between a collective and something akin to a democracy within the admin team. When it comes to making a decision for the instance that would require a change to policy, or a deviation from policy, a single admin making the decision without consulting the others would be a bet difficult choice.

It would require that admin to explain their decision going against established policy, possibly creating a big problem, one that could result in long term instability for the instance, possibly even the breaking of an instance.

A single admin holding to policy means that the instance is running as intended. The policies may need changing, but it isn’t a decision that is an emergency. There’s plenty of time for admins to discuss things, debate, weigh possibilities, come up with a plan, verify the plan would be effective, maybe even explore the possibilities publicly.

A delay is not a bad thing, when the issue is one that requires a change to policy. Since the admins have stated that they are discussing it, and that their reason for delay isn’t support for the comments in question, their decision to move slowly is not wrong as an instance. To the contrary, with it not being an emergency, it’s the smart decision.

Now, I’ll also say that the specific admin Ada contacted has publicly stated that they’re concerned about running afoul of UK regulations, and thus are weighing that in as part of any decisions regarding policies on dogwhistles as a form of transphobia, I’ll add that the specific admin did not make a wrong decision either.

However! As an individual admin, they did do something wrong, but not about the decision itself. Poor communication about internal matters when dealing with a credible issue reported by a reliable and known member of the fediverse that is also an admin and would understand even the most barebones explanation was a bad decision. I hesitate to call it wrong, but it fits that word well enough in this context for it to be acceptable, imo.

So, o would amend my previous opinion “didn’t do anything wrong as an instance” to “didn’t make a wrong decision as an instance”, as it more accurately reflects both the events as known to me at this time, and my opinion on those events. I hope it obvious that if more information comes to light, that opinion could, and almost certainly would, change if the new information was relevant to the previous events.

I say it that way because if .uk decided to just allow dogwhistles to go unchallenged and to stay up because of that, it would be wrong, in my opinion; but it wouldn’t change whether or not previous actions were appropriate or not unless there was an indication that was the intent all along.

Now, I also have to say that inaction being implicit support isn’t true in all cases all the time, and that statements do matter (or should) in coming to the conclusion that that is what’s occuring, but I don’t think anyone has to agree with me on those two subjects. They’re tangential to the issue here, in c/ptb to begin with, and I do believe that when the issue is dogwhistles, it does hold true with certain criteria met, so I agree in this case anyway.

Aight, ima weigh in because I want to, not because I need to.

But I didn’t write my first piece of fiction for myself until I was in my thirties.

I didn’t write the first the public to read until I was almost 40.

The first two kinda sold, but didn’t. Like, I had a publisher, and it flopped because zero marketing, and mid tier writing. I never said it was good, just that I did it.

Since then, I’ve finished another novel, am partway into the sequel, have a short story collection I’m editing for self publication, and I still haven’t made more than twenty bucks on anything published.

However, like Tolkien, that first story I wrote for the public was after years of writing stuff in general. Custom fiction, little stories for individuals in my life, that kind of thing that wasn’t for me.

So, if you expect to crank your first story out at 45 and have a hit, keep dreaming because you’d need a shit ton of luck and connections. But from 45 to 50 (my age), you can get a fuck ton better, and have fans, if you choose to share your work.

It’s never too late to start. It might be too late to get good, and even if you do there’s no guarantee it’ll sell, but don’t let that stop you

Well, yeah, but you’re a DUMBASS, so what do you expect?

!it’s their user name, don’t give me shit!<

Yeah, but I’m offing myself when I hit 70, so the clock is ticking

I think there always needs to be an up to a point when “buying usa” comes up. For any country, really.

When the general population has plenty of income to match the prices of goods made in a country with things like minimum wages set to a fair rate, good unions, and the government protecting the consumer first, chances are better that people will pay more.

But still only up to a point.

When none of those are in place, the point at which little people nope the fuck out to something made elsewhere gets lower because they can’t pay more, not and still pay for all the other shit that’s inescapable.

So, gotta factor that in

Edit: I like to visit articles after my initial thoughts. And their take on it is skewed. But not as bad I would have guessed. They seem to miss the point that, no matter how good their product is, it’s a luxury product to begin with. The typical consumer isn’t even going to pony up 100 bucks for a shower filter unless there’s a damn good reason. So, of course their already small buyer base is going to skew away from something damn near three times that. Which is the “up to a point”.

Even someone making okay money is unlikely to be making enough to look at something not mandatory that costs more than twice their hourly rate for the cheap version and decide to still pay more. They’re over the tipping point to begin with

Nah, mods could set/change flair, but not contents.

Then again users couldn’t change their titles either, which we can do here.

Borderline YDI.

Reasoning for that is that the decision to defederate is one that is in line with the stated goals of blahaj. They have made it clear that they will defederate, ban, or otherwise use the available lemmy tool to allow blahaj to serve as a safe, sheltered place for people that are under siege by the world at large.

Ergo, this can’t be a power trip as it isn’t arbitrary, or outside of stated goals. Were I a blahaj admin, I would have taken similar steps to maintain the instance as intended, even though I tend to look on defederation as a last ditch tool in general. You can’t maintain a truly safe space without aggressive defenses.

If blahaj was established as a general purpose instance, this would be power tripping. But it wasn’t, and isn’t a general instance. It’s like beehaw was; they’re using lemmy as the underpinning software, but the instance has a different goal than the typical ones. The federation status is one that’s nice but not necessary for the instance to achieve its primary goal.

This is more equivalent to a forum blocking links to breitbart, only at a bigger scale; curation rather than control for control’s sake.

However, I want to make it clear that .uk didn’t do anything wrong as an instance. That’s why it’s “borderline” YDI. It’s only YDI in the sense that the instance policy is incompatible with the instance goals of blahaj. The decision to aggressively moderate dog whistles is a difficult one, as dog whistles change over time, and are not always something every admin is going to hate resources to do.

Now, once you’re aware of a dog whistle, you have a few choices. One is to hide your head in the sand and pretend it isn’t anything at all. Another is to remove that specific occurrence, and do nothing else. You can delay a decision until you have time to verify that it is a dog whistle (you don’t have to just accept someone’s word that it is, no matter who is saying it). You can choose to not give a fuck. You can even agree with the dog whistle and directly support it. You’d be an asshole if you chose that option, but it is an option.

And there’s in betweens of all those.

The .uk admin decided to refer to their standing policy and take no action. Since it is a standing policy, it isn’t a direct support for the bigotry, only an expression of some factor that leads them to choose not to tale actions outside of instance policy. That factor may be something unpleasant, but that’s not the same as being something like bigotry, or even apathy. We don’t have anything at the time I’m writing this book from a .uk admin giving further insight. In other words, while I don’t agree with their choice, they didn’t do anything wrong either, unless there’s some evidence of bigotry on their end. And no, just not agreeing to remove a single comment or post is not enough evidence to determine that.

From my end of things, though I won’t go far into it because I don’t believe in derailing the main goal of this community, dog whistles are so common now, and have been so effective that they get picked up by people that aren’t expressly bigoted, they should be as aggressively monitored as possible. But nobody can keep up with all of them, even just one targeted branch of the practice. I try to keep track of the ones that are most relevant to my personal areas of militancy, and I keep running into new ones because the people creating them change them so frequently. But, when reported, they should be taken seriously, and after confirmation, be treated just the same as slurs and other hate speech. I also recognize that nobody is obligated to act before confirmation, and that it may not always be possible to confirm that a newish dogwhistle is one. It takes time for such knowledge to circulate.

Not a user, the admin.

It looks like a reaction to the user on the surface, but it’s the lack of communication and the policies that drove the decision, based on the post in question.

Unless you’re saying you don’t believe the reason given, which is a different issue, and totally your right

Id say it’s the mindset of the experienced linux user that matters.

If you’re willing to tell a person, “if you run into trouble, call me”, and then follow up when they do, half the fight is over.

Most people, they try it and it’s fine, as long as the basics are there. You show them where the browser and email are, set up desktop shortcuts to important stuff, and answer questions, and they’ll eventually not even think about the fact that it isn’t windows.

But the first time they run into trouble, and you can’t give them an answer in a reasonable amount of time, they blame Linux, because they forgot how long it took them to figure out windows originally, and aren’t willing to look things up even if that’s what they did when they ran into a Windows problem.

So, you gotta play tech support for a while if you’re the one introducing them.

You aren’t going to change mindsets inside someone else in any realistic timeframe.

Ehhhh, I think you screwed up by over explaining. The point you’re endlessly actually asking about makes sense, and it’s a valid discussion to have, but it’s buried when you’re trying to ask something. There’s a limit in the human brain to how much information you can track in a question before you start losing parts. There’s one for raw information as well, but it’s bigger and easier to bypass. I hope, because this is going to be a long response.

The reason that “super straight” is offensive is because it implies that attraction to a trans person isn’t heterosexual when the expressed gender would make the attraction hetero. By the very fact that “super” is used as the modifier, it implies better as well. And that’s just bullshit, which I think you pretty much said despite it being buried.

If you have some need to draw a distinction between heterosexuality that includes trans partners, it’s inherently trans exclusionary. There’s nothing wrong with not being attracted to trans people, it’s when the implication is that there’s a difference between heterosexuals that do and haven’t experienced that attraction that you run into the wall.

However, for the purposes of discussing the matter, I think either cis-exclusive hetero or trans-exclusionary hetero would be the most effective terms cis-exclusive would mean that your attraction is limited to cis people, with no rejection of transness in that you would be expressing it as attraction first. Trans,exclusionary would be for those that reject transness ideologically or for reasons other than raw attraction.

Now, I think it important to note that a lack of attraction by itself doesn’t mean anything else. It isn’t some kind of glaring proof of bigotry. The way humans form attraction leads to the unfamiliar having a greater weight in what base attractions factor in. As an example, not being attracted to white people doesn’t mean you’re a bigot, it just means that the collective set of characteristics of white people doesn’t match your inner “template”.

Now, that template may well have been formed because of bigotry, be it internal or external, but it isn’t the proof of the pudding. Just by virtue of growing up with little or no exposure to other physical traits than your own ethnicity can cause your template to be limited to those that look most like what you’re used to. The unfamiliar is, on a primitive level, a questionable source for mates.

It’s how people handle their templates that matters, not that they have them. If I say “white women are ugly”, that’s shitty, and a form of bigotry. If I say “I’ve never met a white woman that I’ve been attracted to”, that’s a statement of fact (well, not for me personally, this is an example, not a statement of my own preferences). Now, I could be saying it politely and still be a bigot, but saying it isn’t proof of bigotry.

This applies to trans people too. Acknowledging that you’ve never felt attraction to a trans person is a statement. Saying that they’re ugly is shitty, and is probably bigotry, depending on the reasoning. Saying they aren’t women/men is bigotry.

So, the why matters more than actual terminology, which means that more options in terminology are helpful when discussing the matter in general. The two I suggested are already what I use in my head when thinking about the subject of attraction as a whole, and how transness factors into the individual “templates”.

Now, as a personal example, I don’t have many limits in terms of what kind of women I feel attraction to. Race has never factored in at all. The range of physical features I feel attraction to is very broad, and tends to be more about details than categories (like noses; size doesn’t factor in, proportions do). As such, I can’t ever say I wouldn’t be attracted to a trans woman. I can, however, say that I would never be attracted to a trans man because I’ve never been attracted to a man. Tbh, I’ve never experienced attraction to anyone that strongly presented as male, even when I knew they were women. My inner template has an edge in the androgynous range of features and traits, and once it crosses into a perception of a person being a man/male, attraction goes away.

I included that as a comparison, because what/who I personally feel attraction to isn’t the same as examples used. For the same reason, I specifically have experienced attraction to trans women, but never in a circumstance where it mattered. Thus, I don’t fit either the cis-exclusive or trans-exclusionary labels, to the best of my self awareness.

Now, I get it. Trans identity is only fairly recently in general awareness. It’s been in my lifetime that it went from being something even most bigots didn’t really know existed (and they look for people to hate because that’s their fetish, hate) to being something that’s a topic of common discussion. So there’s going to be people that just don’t know enough to matter still talking about the subject. Ignorance isn’t the same as hate, though they sometimes wear the same hat. That’s where some if the things you talked about (l.e. “secretly gay”) come from. They just don’t get it.

That’s why I agree that the term “super” straight/gay is bullshit and needs to go away. But there is room for terminology to indicate the layers of attraction in conversation, as long as people aren’t being dicks about it

Yup, que