Sorry, I meant to say that speech isn't as free as people are saying in this thread. We have people essentially screaming "punch a nazi" as if it's a controversial opinion here, when there are other milder opinions that would create some serious outrage and get you banned on a whim.

I think it's universally understood that there are consequences to what you say, and even how you say it, and when. I think that's part of my point. I'm not here to argue for absolute free speech. I don't believe in that.

I'm merely pointing out that the Fediverse as a whole is a lot more policed than people say. It doesn't take much to create animosity.

If an instance has values so diametrically opposed to yours that they end up banning you, then good riddance, no? Edit: E.g. getting thrown out of a Nazi bar is no huge loss.

I don't think that's how it works. You can very much agree with a community the overwhelming majority of the time while getting along fine, and still create some friction by touching specific topics. At least, that's been my experience in general everywhere, both online and IRL.

Disagreeing is one thing, and it's what we're doing, right? But there's a big difference when you're being dogpiled, vilified, harassed, insulted, and strawmanned all because people dislike what you said, even if it wasn't offensive or wrong. Then you get your comments removed and your account banned when you merely defend your point of view.

And also, nobody owes you to platform your beliefs uncritically

But that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying quite the opposite, when even the point you're making is calling something into question. These mods aren't even paying for the hosting service.

Saying that someone banning someone from their community is impeading on your free speech is just like complaining that someone didn’t invite you to their party because you insulted them.

Oh, come on, these are open forums where everyone is encouraged to participate at first, and you don't even have to be insulting to get on the wrong side of some people. I have been banned while being perfectly polite and following the rules.

I think you're assuming a lot about what the interaction actually was about, how it happened, and why. And you're assuming that I don't know what being part of a marginalized group that gets constant shit thrown at feels like.

An apology is not in order when the person is making a big deal out of nothing, making shit up, and reframing what's being said to defend imaginary people or abstract ideas. Then add to that malice when things don't go their way. If I had said something about a particular person or something egregious, I would understand, but I said it about a drawing.

I have difficulty backing down in lots of scenarios but accidentally upsetting someone I didn’t mean to isn’t one of them.

You say that because you haven't met the whiteknights in the community who get upset on behalf of others or lose their shit when others don't follow their mental models of gender expression/identity. You know how white people will sometimes cry culture appropriation, and the natives are like, "uh, we're actually ok with that"? Yeah, they exist in the gay world too, and some are vicious and vindictive to the point of being abusive themselves. To me, it sounds like you're defending a Karen.

Did you downvote your own post?! The scores are +0-1 when I’m seeing it (and the-1 isn’t me).

Considering there was a 17 hours gap, it's quite possible that someone had the time to read and downvote it before you saw it.
And I get it, there are quite a few people who don't like people that don't perform fake values.

One of the depictions of unreasonable trans people was a video that came up in the beginning of the this trend of trans people coming out + a lot of people getting medical treatments related to their gender identity.
It was some tall, brown coloured, athletically muscular "man" (because he looked mostly like a man, apart from the lipstick, which might as well have been just a man wearing lipstick, to those around him) loudly complaining about something in a restaurant, while the staff tried to de-escalate. One of the staff members then calls him (her?) "Sir", to which (s)he then became melodramatic. Although the chap didn't end up telling others what (s)he wanted to be called, until the very end of the video.

Now, it might have been someone with a genuine problem, that was just not captured in the video, but could also have been someone just trying to gather hatred towards a community that hadn't even been formed yet.

But of course, I have had a depiction of trans(-ish?) people long before the trend started on the US internet. It is of groups of people (called "ladyboys" by English reporters, but there has been a colloquial term) who are often hermaphrodites, but could also be eunuchs.
The story about them I was told as a child, was that they come in groups during marriages, asking for exorbitant (but somewhat payable) amounts of money and 'make a scene' if not paid. The scene they make would be stuff like public nudity, with obscene looking displays, or going around cursing people (which some person told me that they actually work).

To me, that looked like just some begging+harassment ring. Add to that, an anecdote of one my relatives having been casually molested in public as a child by them, made me think pretty lowly of them.

Those groups seem to have died down now (I think?), which maybe partially because the Government officially recognised the third gender (quite a while ago actually, since I see it in govt. forms) and apart from them getting access to education (the Govt. funded kind, meant for poor people, because if one is rich, being in a minority is just a minor inconvenience as far as "means" go), also getting some reservation quota for certain menial jobs, if they were to not find work normally.

And then there was the depiction of a hermaphrodite in the pretty popular cartoon (anime) "Kochikame", which made me think that Japan had been ahead in this kind of thing, as the depicted person was normally working as an officer.