Scholar Social meta 

Hi just a reminder that scholar.social exists explicitly in order to be a safe space for queers and other minorities in academia

We take it to be a founding principle of this instance that academic freedom can only exist where the existence and validity of interlocutors' identities is taken as axiomatic

Abuse, "debates" over minority rights conducted in bad faith, hate speech, etc. are all not tolerated here

Scholar Social meta 

@socrates what would be an example of a nonexistent or invalid identity?

Follow

Scholar Social meta 

@sciurus For example, if you are of the type who wishes to "have a debate" over whether there are gender identities outside the binary, that is not acceptable

Scholar Social meta 

@socrates I was trying to come up with an example of an actually invalid self-designated identity, if such a concept is possible. For example perhaps Sarmatism among the Baroque Polish nobility could be considered nonexistent? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmatis

Scholar Social meta 

@sciurus

> I was trying to come up with an example of an actually invalid self-designated identity

No, don't

My post was not an invitation to discussion

I was establishing ground rules

Consider this a warning

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Scholar Social

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!