Reviews for Shinigami Eyes
Shinigami Eyes by Shinigami Eyes
Review by nepnym
Rated 1 out of 5
by nepnym, 3 months agoi remember when using slurs was considered to be transphobic. the current problems are By Design, and have been for a while.
this is a disgustingly sexist terf extension downright lying about being community-friendly. i wouldnt be surprised if it came out in a few years it was a psyop to sow division within the community. this is the material effect it has -- i cant wrap my head around the intent.
the double standard and pattern of the terms on the rules page is, bad, to say the least.
1 star reviews now outnumber 5 star ones.
ill avoid making comments towards the creator, because anything i may say would get this review flagged -- i find the extension itself deserving of a red flag using its original, more fair ethos. the current rules page makes my blood boil.
as note (important): trying to find any further info on the current maintainer, etc, anything/anyone to contact further leads to a lot of bad/weird/harmful misinfo! this is separate and only towards the practice of the extension. there is no minority where it is suddenly appropriate to use hate speech.
i was the first person to open an issue on the gh about this -- so i guess ill stack on to the 1 star reviews, if this helps anyone. i really hope this problem can be fixed because of the large size of the userbase (this extension is even in papers!), so it's sad to see this change.
and -- as an important note -- based off some of the dev responses to reviews -- afab transfem is for intersex people. agab terminology is for intersex people, and appropriating it to exclude intersex experiences is, needless to say, Bad. and its also not trans friendly, because it explicitly, and i cannot stress this enough, excludes a specific Kind of trans person (in a way that is bioessentialist! there's nothing noted about amab transmascs is there? and if there was -- i'd be complaining about that too!).
to specifically flag and exclude afab transfems from the community would be to say that the only trans people who matter are perisex. to only highlight specific hate terms against non-binary and perisex transmasculine people as being ok to use would be to imply that the only community experiences that matter are those of transfems -- and that the only people trans enough to deserve protecting -- are transfem.
anything less than "all trans people" (by demographic) is transphobic. i dont know why we cant spotlight the struggles and oppression against one group without specifically putting down and excluding another group. it speaks poorly of transmisogyny as a concept to use it as a bludgeoning tool to silence more vulnerable members of the community, even those who are transfem. im tired.
this is a disgustingly sexist terf extension downright lying about being community-friendly. i wouldnt be surprised if it came out in a few years it was a psyop to sow division within the community. this is the material effect it has -- i cant wrap my head around the intent.
the double standard and pattern of the terms on the rules page is, bad, to say the least.
1 star reviews now outnumber 5 star ones.
ill avoid making comments towards the creator, because anything i may say would get this review flagged -- i find the extension itself deserving of a red flag using its original, more fair ethos. the current rules page makes my blood boil.
as note (important): trying to find any further info on the current maintainer, etc, anything/anyone to contact further leads to a lot of bad/weird/harmful misinfo! this is separate and only towards the practice of the extension. there is no minority where it is suddenly appropriate to use hate speech.
i was the first person to open an issue on the gh about this -- so i guess ill stack on to the 1 star reviews, if this helps anyone. i really hope this problem can be fixed because of the large size of the userbase (this extension is even in papers!), so it's sad to see this change.
and -- as an important note -- based off some of the dev responses to reviews -- afab transfem is for intersex people. agab terminology is for intersex people, and appropriating it to exclude intersex experiences is, needless to say, Bad. and its also not trans friendly, because it explicitly, and i cannot stress this enough, excludes a specific Kind of trans person (in a way that is bioessentialist! there's nothing noted about amab transmascs is there? and if there was -- i'd be complaining about that too!).
to specifically flag and exclude afab transfems from the community would be to say that the only trans people who matter are perisex. to only highlight specific hate terms against non-binary and perisex transmasculine people as being ok to use would be to imply that the only community experiences that matter are those of transfems -- and that the only people trans enough to deserve protecting -- are transfem.
anything less than "all trans people" (by demographic) is transphobic. i dont know why we cant spotlight the struggles and oppression against one group without specifically putting down and excluding another group. it speaks poorly of transmisogyny as a concept to use it as a bludgeoning tool to silence more vulnerable members of the community, even those who are transfem. im tired.