This is the thing that I think the mainstream coverage is really missing. I remember listening to a podcast from The Verge where they portrayed the anti-meta pact as primarily a way for tech bros to keep control of these spaces. This completely ignores that the movement largely originated on LGBT instances. Go look at https://fedipact.online/ and tell me that @vantablack@kitty.social is some straight guy. Ultimately, the queer communities concerns were proven correct and Threads has explicitly platformed groups like Gays Against Groomers and Moms For Liberty while remaining wishy-washy at best about future moderation plans.
this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2023
2 points (100.0% liked)
LGBTQ+
2700 readers
5 users here now
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This.
People like to ignore the fact that the main concern people signing or supporting the fedipact have is the well-being of marginalised/oppressed communities that have made the fediverse their home because big social media wasn't safe for us.
Meta has a history of promoting a hostile environment for queer people, people of colour, non-Christian people, poor and homeless people, activists, people with uteri, etc.; and it actively whitelists groups that promote hate and violence against these communities. Meta coming here puts all of us members of marginalised groups in danger.
I remember listening to a podcast from The Verge where they portrayed the anti-meta pact as primarily a way for tech men to keep control of these spaces.
It's funny (not really) that they want to portray the fedipact that way because techbros/tech men are the only ones here that see Meta "joining" the fediverse as a great oportunity/something positive
My gay ass is still shitposting on Lemmy