LGBTQIA+ and iNaturalist

11 posts were split to a new topic: Moderation decisions about several posts in the LGBTQIA+ Thread

thats absurd, what do they have against cargo shorts?


they’re jealous they don’t have as many pockets, clearly!


Just FYI, I’m an “older”/elder and I use queer and gay for myself pretty interchangeably. There are always exceptions!


Anyways I made free icons for allies to use anywhere you want. They’re public domain because I made them and I hate capitalism and I say so. You can download them here:

and request more flags / specific labels to ally with by PMing me here or just commenting on the web archive page if you have an account. You can buy a pre-made pin from my Threadless shop too, they’ll appear here when I’m done uploading them (which will take half an hour probably)

I also make a crap ton of pronoun pins which you can also use as icons anywhere you want:
I was gonna add image previews but then this would be giant.

Feel free to share the links / files on other social medias, anyone can use them!

Edit: For those who don’t know, autigender is a term created by and for autistic people to describe how autism affects our gender identity / the way we perceive and or understand (or don’t) gender. It doesn’t mean autism is a gender you can transition to lol.


Just to make it more apparent, discussion about moderation of several posts in this thread were split into this one in #forum-feedback.


Refusal to use someone’s pronouns is misgendering, for the record. Not that I should have to explain this in 2023 on a thread about LGBTQIA+ people.


I’m so sorry my friend, but in this case I think splitting hairs is warranted. Here’s my take:

first off, in this specific case, @sedgequeen expressed that her decision was due to trauma and distress she has experienced in the past. I really think you should be more lenient towards her, as this is a case in which you both have legitimate boundaries that are conflicting.

refusing to use someone’s pronouns can look one of three ways:

  1. passively not using their correct pronouns.
  2. saying “I’m not going to use your pronouns”.
  3. actively misgendering a person.

all of these are misgendering, but 1) is not inherently hateful and even 2) can be, sometimes, in appropriate context, tolerable. 3) is just hate speech.

1 → passively not using their correct pronouns. maybe they’re lazy. maybe they forgot. correct them. if it becomes truly egregious, then a formal warning is needed. a sign of apathy after the first correction, but about 80% of the time I’ve found that the person was just… ehhhh…
2 → saying “I’m not going to use your pronouns”. this is a very common dog-whistle. it’s used as a way of denying dignity and humanity and agency to trans people. however, it is possible that a person may not be aware of its more sinister meaning. I believe that is true in this case. but the vast majority of the time, it’s being used with malicious intent.
3 → actively misgendering a person. remove that comment and if they do it again suspend them.


I appreciate everyone’s contributions to this conversation and I am learning from all of the links and back and forth how to be a better ally. I hope everyone receives the apologies they deserve.


thank you :)

dog whistles are so malicious because they’re designed to look totally innocent, reasonable, even morally forward. people can use them without even knowing they’re dog whistles. but if you’re the intended target, it hurts every time because you can never be sure if there was hostile intent… and then if you react strongly to, eg., “the parents’ choice of what is age-appropriate” people think you’ve gone off the deep end. because “parents’ choice” is masking “we, the hateful people in power, think it should be a felony to mention within any classroom at any age that gay people exist”. (see: Florida’s “don’t say gay” law).


Please. What is a respectful and polite, neutral pronoun, to use - when I don’t know, and you haven’t told me? In English we can use one, one is hungry it is lunch time here. Is that okay? Or they, is neutral and respectful? Other languages have actively created new neutral pronouns.


‘They/them’ is usually pretty safe as a neutral if you dont know. It kind of pulls double duty both as a plural pronoun and a genderless individual pronoun


To your user name.
10 years ago this artist drew a dragon for me.


Completely true. For the last 4 years we’ve had a lovely pair of dedicated gay male mallard ducks visiting our garden, they behave in just the same way as a male/female pair that also visit. In fact the gay couple are more loving to each other, preening themselves and each other on our lawn, chasing off other mallards that come too close, its lovely! :D Nature is nature whatever the species and love is love.


7 posts were merged into an existing topic: Moderation decisions about several posts in the LGBTQIA+ Thread

If you don’t know someone’s pronouns (in English), they/them is the best way to go, then you can use whatever their pronouns are once they or someone else tells you.


You see someone walking down the street with a cool haircut. Instead of assigning he or she pronouns based on what you assume of their gender, you can say, “Wow, did you see their hair? That was so cool!”

You could also use one, I suppose, but it might confuse people since that’s usually not used in everyday conversation these days.

It would be interesting for a new English pronoun set to be created for specifically when you don’t know someone’s pronouns, but it wouldn’t stay with that specific role for long, lol, I know lots of people who’d immediately snatch it up (positive) to use as a personal pronoun.


Tbh the singular they has been in use for so long in the english language that it really should be a nobrainer; the hullaboo in the media and general US culture right now is entirely manufactured outrage.


A very good quote from the linked article:

“For centuries, this function of they was grammatically accepted. It could transition from plural to singular depending on the situation, similar to the pronoun you. Only in the 18th century did grammarians declare that the singular they was invalid, their reasoning being that a plural pronoun can’t take a singular antecedent. Never mind that you, which used to be exclusively plural, had undergone this exact change.”

5 Likes Going to put this here. Again. Because the 2 posts are still there

1 Like

If you think misgendering trans people is wrong and should not be allowed in this forum, tell staff that on the new thread they made since they don’t want the posts criticizing them to be seen here:

Watch this one get removed too!