We are committed to providing a friendly, safe and welcoming environment for all, regardless of gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, personal appearance, body size, race, ethnicity, age, religion, nationality, or other similar characteristic.
We will exclude you from interaction if you insult, demean or harass anyone. That is not welcome behavior. In particular, we don’t tolerate behavior that excludes people in socially marginalized groups.
This 'struggle session' has cut open a sore of cisnormativity which allows plausible deniability of transphobic action and thought. It's senseless and insensitive to push back against what should be a non-issue. Cis and trans alike, set your pronouns so as to normalize an aspect of trans inclusion that goes some way to dispel cishet patriarchal norms assumed default by almost every space, especially online.
There is no excuse (that hasn't been considered and discussed and where applicable, taken on board) to push back against this as we as a community have. We can (and should) do better.
Moral police do not consider the actions they are policing to be "inconsequential". That is why they bother policing them, because they consider them to be the exact opposite of inconsequential.
I understand that you're extremely nettled about something but can you not try to nakedly gaslight us about words in the English language?
you're misreading what I'm saying. the user calling it moral policing believes it to be too inconsequential to deserve the force that's being applied. you wouldn't call opposition to murder "moral policing", right?