Maybe, but…they’re a blahaj user. It seems far more likely to me that they just misunderstood the news or misinterpreted what’s going on.

This doesn’t seem like the appropriate response

It seems fair to compare Taiwan to Austria pre-1938, IMO. Not a perfect parallel for a variety of reasons, but a few obvious similarities exist.

I’ve never noticed it from in Jerboa, so I dunno if it or any other app can do it. But on mobile web it’s hidden behind the community’s sidebar. The sidebar can be accessed via an expando from the top of the community page, or under the post and the comment box, but above any comments, on a post page. The modlog link is right at the bottom of the sidebar.

Friendly reminder that Lemmy’s modlogs are completely transparent and you can see the exact text of the removed comment by checking the modlog.

Wahoo absolutely does this.

I managed to find aoe3 and aom on the site by using a site-filtered Google search. Couldn’t find 1 or 2, but with both of those that I found being “remake”, I suspect the two I didn’t find would be the same.

It’s interesting, and perhaps highlights how vague the line is between remake and remaster. AoM I can see being called a remake (at a bit of a stretch), but 2 & 3 are pretty solidly remasters in my mind, due to being entirely in the original engine with just a bit of new QoL features and improved graphics added.

Is AlternativeTo actually good? It’s always come across to me like SEO garbage. The sort of thing that felt AI generated long before LLMs came on the scene a couple of years ago. So I’ve always avoided it.

And they updated some of the levelling to work more like Skyrim, because the Oblivion system sucked in comparison

Updated how exactly? Oblivion and Skyrim both have pretty serious flaws. I believe there are popular mods to fix the Oblivion system in a way that still feels like Oblivion, though it’s been a long time since I’ve read in to any of it.

Out of interest, how does that site classify Age of Empires Definitive Edition (and aoe2:DE and aoe3:DE) and Age of Mythology: Retold?

Did something happen in her past that makes her so hateful on this issue

I can’t guess as to the full extent of her transphobia, but I can point to a couple of elements of it.

She did suffer domestic abuse of some sort before and around the time the first Harry Potter book came out. This was a cis man who did it, but I think in her mind there’s no difference between cis men and trans women.

There’s also a well-studied psychological phenomenon where people tend to double-down on their prior beliefs when challenged, unless those challenges come in a very narrow form. Her earliest transphobic comments may have been her being tepid about expressing her true beliefs, but they may genuinely have been the sort of misinformed casual transphobia that a much, much wider segment of the population has which may have gone no further if she were a normal person. But because lots of well-intentioned people—largely some of her most dedicated fans—tried to educate her and help her to be better, she may have doubled down and got into the reactionary feedback loop that so many transphobes, racists, and members of the alt-right got into. They perceive constructive criticism, especially when it comes in large volumes, as a personal attack, and the people who aren’t attacking them instead encourage them to double down on their beliefs, and reward them when they do.

Her books show a very strong liberal bias. Liberal in the sense that it’s not regressive per se, but it’s also strongly opposed to analysis of problems as stemming from systemic issues rather than One Bad Actor. SPEW is the easiest to point to, but the lack of systemic change in the governance of the Wizarding World post-Voldemort is more significant, in my view. The problem was one Minister of Magic who was just ignorant of the problem of Voldemort, followed by another who actively covered it up. These individuals are the bad guys who need to be defeated. It wasn’t, as the books tell it, underlying racism and classism of wizarding culture. So it seems that Rowling is not good at spotting systemic injustice. Such as the higher suicide rates among trans people (especially if they’re not accepted), higher rates of DV and other violence, and other problems faced are not factoring into her calculations. Which makes it so much easier to cast trans people as the bad guys.

But I find it hard for these to adequately explain either the initial spark of transphobia per se, or the rather extreme extent she’s gone to. So yeah, like you I’m a little curious if there’s more to it.

but basically just don’t count for any laws like “50% of company board members must be women to receive this tax break”.

Which, idk, seems reasonable to me.

I have no idea how that’s reasonable. The point of such laws is to promote equality. And even if you choose to count trans women as a completely unique third category (which you shouldn’t…the word “women” in “trans women” is there for a reason), they are certainly a minority gender, so counting them for the purpose of pro-diversity incentives seems like a no-brainer.

Her public celebration of the result was absolutely grotesque

There should be no laws that depend on either gender or sex

Ideally, maybe. In a future perfect society. But let’s remember that the court case that triggered this was about whether trans women count as women for the purposes of meeting laws that require gender quotas. Quotas that most of us should support because of their importance in combatting existing gender inequalities.

Nah, that doesn’t apply in this case. The UK is a world leader in transphobia, acting not because the US does things, but because they’re entirely transphobic on their own.

Imma be honest, I don’t know what they said either, but in part it’s because your comment that they’re replying to didn’t make sense.

“Humans” nor “Americans” are a group that espouse moral authority.

This doesn’t scan at all.

I don’t disagree with you that these people are taking a message that seems inconsistent with the biblical portrayal of Jesus. But the above comment was criticising people “who feel the urge to spread Christianity in any way”. Which, yeah. Fuck them. If someone wants to do their research and convert to Christianity because they like it, more power to them.

But introducing children to that nonsense (by which I mean belief in resurrections and other obviously ridiculous bullshit, even if it’s not directly used to cause tangible harm) as though it’s fact at a vulnerable young age should be considered child abuse. And preying on vulnerable lonely or depressed people and using highly manipulative tactics like love bombing the way many evangelical branches of Christianity do, as do Mormons and I believe Jehovah’s Witnesses, should also be considered abusive behaviour.

So Fake London is now known for more than just stroads, then. It’s stroads and rapists.

It’s the Parker Drake meme