Mod removed innocous post from Dadjokes because "kids don't understand gay marriage"
The post in question
Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.
View original on lemmy.dbzer0.comView original on lemmy.dbzer0.com
Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.
View original on lemmy.dbzer0.comThe post in question
177 replies
Ah yes, Lemmy, so popular with kids it competes with Roblox for the pervs attention
Whenever I go to the store, I see at least 4 or 5 kids begging their parents to let them have an account.
I kind of just assumed everyone on these boards was 3-6 years old. Are they not?
Only mentally.
Sexuality?????? “Likes to hold hands/be married with girls and/or boys” is not “sexual” and little kids can quite easily get that.
Seriously, is a kid with straight married parents not allowed to know their parents are married/like each other??? Tf
I sometimes worry that the straight, cis folks aint right :/
These days, both the straights and the straits are not OK.
You are correct that I’m not right, but just for different reasons.
Speaking as a cishet, we mostly aren't right but most of us are wrong in better ways 😉
Yeah, I've often thought we were a bit off. Ask someone why they are against gay people and they almost always find a way to be bothered by what's going on in the bedroom. But if you start asking them about their heterosexual bedroom activities they clam up and seem offended that you asked. And they still don't get why they are wrong
Mod posted a response: https://lemmy.world/post/52564578
As far as mod responses go, that's pretty dang good. For as much as we complain about bad mods we should applaud the good.
Fully agree. It's a great example of how to respond to criticism constructively. The Piefed developers should take notes, lol.
This person believes in abstinence
Also, did they unban the post? Or is this just damage control?
So much willful ignorance around this by people who just want to virtue signal to their peers.
I posted a response in the thread 🙂
That is a fantastic response. Bravo. Stuff like that is what keeps us from becoming another Reddit shit hole.
rare admission of guilt.
hopefully that community learns to read reports, and the actual contents before hitting the «Remove Post/Comment»
Generally, I find communicating with the reported on gets better intersection and solidarity than outright deletion. (Good faith moderation vs Report->Remove)
Scrolling through the community quickly, there were like 3 jokes mentioning a husband's wife, one mentioning a car's manual transmission stalling, and one that's over a week old that includes the word "ass' which is directly breaking the no-profanity rule, yet somehow the concept of a gay couple is too confusing for a 6 year old? Oh and also a joke about "Cherenkov radiation" which I am 1000% confident no 6 year old on earth has ever heard of.
PTB
Maybe people should be reporting those other posts mentioning heterosexual couples to make a point.
You know what they say: Alex and Philip don't make Robert
Well now you've done it. You're going to get removed for being racist.
Fair enough! Wish the mod was weighing in here at least then.
I'd tag them, but de-anonymizing (sp?) mods is against the rules of YPTB 🤷🏻
I hate so much when sections of Lemmy moderate as if they still have corporate masters to answer to and advertiser-friendliness to worry about.
On further discovery, that doesn't seem to be the case with this particular decision but generally?
Oh really? I missed that rule, I thought it was just using admin powers to reveal them was the no no. There's only one mod of that community.
Hence why I'd be able to know who to tag without being an admin myself 😁
I'm pretty sure that we're not supposed to mention even the most guessable identity if it's not in the modlog entry, though 🤷🏻
That's wild when the first posting guideline is
Seems like that's a tricky path to walk when posting here.
@[email protected] Any chance we could get clarification on the naming of PTB mods here? @[email protected]
One of the posting guidelines is literally:
So, if OP already figured it out, then I think it's fine to mention. But I'm actually not 100% sure why there is a rule against deobfuscating the modlog in the first place. I'm typically for more transparency rather than less. I think @[email protected] would have written the original rule, so I'm sure he can explain it better than me :)
Mods would just ban people for pointing out the posts or comments breaking rules rather than addressing the issues being reported
I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek with that comment honestly.
Lemmy.world not beating the allegations again.
Its the joys of how hard it is to convey sarcasm on the internet 😂.
Favorite removal reason from world is making too many reports so deleting instantly rather than locking
Mods have responded in other threads. Good response and taking a look at the rules.
Equating gay/bi people with sex and therefore inappropriate for children is a tactic of bigotry. The same argument was used to say that it's wrong for Mr. Ratburn to get married on Arthur, despite the episode being completely innocuous, or for any of the lgbtq characters in Steven Universe to exist. It's literally an argument to exclude queer people from society.
Same reason why showing gay relationships or drag on TV makes "christians" go nuts. They equate it to adult sexual behavior in order to silence it and keep it away from "family communities."
Only american christians really. In the UK it really isn't a problem.
The concept of "Dad" is too complex for children, and implies (at its core) the act of sex.
We should ban the concept of "Dad" from all forms that could be seen by children.
Someone needs to tell that mod that dad jokes aren't for the kids.
Ignoring that the avarage age of lemmy could be 25 up to 35 years
I'd say that a kid would understand sexuality better "look, they just love eachothers" vs "they are male but with a female body" or sum
I think it's actually much higher.
This is admittedly purely anecdotal and your mileage may thus vary, but in my experience as an elder millennial, most people here are around my age or older 🤷🏻
Yeah but not all people, it's an avarage so it will naturally be lower
If most people here are my age or older, it follows that the average must be younger? 🤔
A smaller or a too big number will throw off the avarage, that's also why using the avarage to see how much a country population earn is bad since billionare and millionare people exist
So what you're saying is that the median age here is close to my estimate, but there's a handful of precocious toddlers throwing off the average? 😄
Yep
If your 5-year-old can't understand someone being gay then you're a shit parent.
It really depends on the kid. Some 5 year olds just don't give a fuck about any of that relationship shit and IMO it's not so important that they need to be sat down and told all about all the attraction options. I don't just mean the alternate ones but also man and woman.
If they ask questions or show interest in the topic, I think they should be answered honestly, but the only essential information at that age IMO is about personal space, not touching people who don't want to be touched (at all if that's their desire but especially in the private areas), understanding that they are the ones in charge of deciding if someone else touching them is ok (though at that age, it would be more of a "you don't have you let anyone see or touch there unless it's an emergency like it got hurt"), and that anyone asking them to keep secrets from their parents without it involving presents or a happy surprise isn't their friend.
That said, there's nothing wrong with this joke. Either it will go over the kid's head and they ignore it or it will make them curious and prompt those questions. If you respond to those questions with deflections and/or lies, then I'd agree with the shit parent accusation. Same thing applies to not wanting certain topics visible at all for fear that kids might ask questions about them. That cowardice isn't doing their kids any favours.
You can be honest about what sex is without giving the necessary details for them to act it out.
oh yeah I have an unmarried aunt and uncle and it took me way longer than I'd like to admit to realise they were a couple.
My kid knew about gay people from the day he was born. PTB for sure.
PTB?
Power Tripping Bastard :)
What does that mean? Most babies have a pretty limited understanding of the world. 😅
I’m queer and he has family members that are LGBT+. He’s known of our existence forever. He has seen his grandfathers kissing since his very start. He’s seen me dating other women. It’s just normal.
Babies can't see any shapes at all for a while:
https://www.aao.org/eye-health/tips-prevention/baby-vision-development-first-year
I kind of get what you're saying, but the idea that a newborn baby would even understand anything more than, "this person smells good and makes nice sounds" is probably a stretch. 😊
I was using exaggeration to make a point. You’re being pedantic.
That point is that gay and bi people are normal. My kid grew up with his mother as a queer woman. It’s normal and not something that needs to be gatekept for children.
Pedantry is great for influencing people and making new friends.
I mean, op didn't say they were a square or a triangle so they should be good with their baby being able to see them.
I'm assuming they are gay and have a child.
Do we know what mod made this very homophobic decision, because I would like to know that they've been banned for this.
What's everyone so upset about? Clearly, the 3-6 year-olds on Lemmy have been protected!
...from knowledge about the existence of gay and/or bi people.
How many 3-6 year olds could there possibly be using Lemmy??
3-6
And they're a year old? Damn, they learned FAST
Nah, that's just a strange coincidence.
If I were you (which I am) I would know for sure it's at least 2
Ptb. That the mod doesn't understand the difference between romantic and sexual attraction says a lot about them as a person. It says even more that they expect the jokes to be understandable by a 5yo.
On the bright side, this is Lemmy! Anyone can make a new Dad Jokes community that doesn't have that stupid rule.
"Of course their gonna know what intercourse is by the time they hit fourth grade, they got the discovery channel, don't they?". In most situations like this, pre-internet, your older cousins would say "You'll find out when you're older".
Another one of the bigots who think mentioning anything not straight is both sexual and political - PTB
PTB, obviously.
so a teenager's dad cannot crack dad jokes anymore?
I bet a lot of teenagers going through the "my parents are the most cringetastic creatures in existence" phase would love for that to be the case 😁
Nah, the sole mod for that comm is just a weirdo prude.
I've known what lesbians were for as long as I can remember, because I have an auntie who was in a civil partnership with another woman. Apparently when it was explained to me in basic terms (after I had asked what a lesbian was, as I'd overheard it), I was just like "oh, okay." and went back to playing. Kids are better at understanding this stuff than we give them credit for
I'm going to say that's not a dad joke, but it's fucking hilarious. That said, the stated reason for removing it is idiotic.
All you have to do to illustrate how stupid this removal is, is to imagine this couple also has a kid, whom this joke is told infront of.
Spoilers: The kid likely isn't going to get it, in the same way that many many kids cartoons make reference based jokes and quips, and even mildly raunchy jokes that kids also do not understand... unless the context has already been previously explained to them.
Thats the point, thats how they work as jokes, you need the context otherwise its meaningless.
Then the other part of the joke is you get it while the kid doesn't, the joke landing two different ways at the same time makes you feel more knowledgable, that joke is for you, the parent/guardian, so the show is fun for you too.
Even if there were 3-6 yo lemmy users... the logic for removing this still doesn't actually make sense.
Part of the cleverness of the joke is that it is indecipherable to a kid that doesn't understand sex or sexuality... it thus doesn't 'expose' kids to anything they don't already understand.
Also, I’m not sure where the 3-6 year old comes in in the first place. The best “dad jokes” are something that a teenager would groan at. Little kids don’t understand shitty puns either, and those are the best.
not to mention, dads can still dad-joke with their adult children!
And more over, if the child would want explanation and go to it's guardian for explanation, it would be a perfect opportunity to explain these things. Relying on he education system to explain it to them when they are 15 is just bad parenting.
Exactly.
The paradigm this sets up is that the parent/guardian has the opporunity to make their own response to a kid asking about it.
I'll tell you when you're older
or
Well timmy, some girls like boys, some boys like girls... etc
Its a delicate topic, theres no one size fits all solution for all different kids, and giving the parent/guardian the responsibility and ability to direct how that goes is far superior to just a censor deciding no children nor parents are capable of handling this.
One thing that everyone should learn in sex ed is the Kinsey scale 0-6, and bisexual is 1-5 on the scale, so that's most of the scale. Most people don't know this and if they do, most won't admit the same gender attraction. Even in generally decent marriages to the opposite gender, they never know each other fully. Some might confuse that as choosing to be "straight" but they are still Kinsey 4 or whatever, and should not be resentful of people who chose both ways or not marriage. They should support equal rights too. It's all good whatever number people are, be free!
Isn't that scale pretty limited though, it doesn't consider the difference between romantic and sexual attraction. Eg, desperately want to guzzle cock but can only love a woman. Basically the stereotype of republican conferences crashing grindr.
Now that you mention it: if we get married, my partner will totally be able to tell people "I'm not straight but my husband is" if anyone asks her. She'd love that and so would I 😄🥰
Wtf? 10000% PTB.
I clocked Bert and Ernie as a gay couple as a five year old.
A reasonable reason to remove it was because it's not a dad joke. A funny joke, but not a dad joke
While I somewhat agree, that wasn't the reason given.
Right, I was trying to imply that their reason was bad
I'm not going to go as far as PTB. There's no out of scale action, the removal was in good faith, and the mod has been consistent in their moderation.
This is, however, clueless mod territory. It's bad application of a rule done in ignorance. It isn't okay, it shouldn't have been removed.
No power trip, just a bad decision, and there is a difference between the two
Having seen the mod's reply post in the community, I'm inclined to agree with you on all points tbh..
Split on this. The assumption 5 year olds couldn't get this joke because its funny to be in a gay marriage but not yourself gay seems bigoted. Kids could get that just as easily as jokes about straight couples. At the same time rule says no jokes with death or sex. PTB I.M.O.
Edit: On reflection placing sexuality in the category with drugs, death, and racism seems rough
It's not talking about sex though. Gay and bi people existing within a marriage has nothing to do with sex.
Or even sexuality really, because, once you actually raise your knowledge beyond "basic biology", it becomes eerily obvious that romantic attraction and sexual attraction aren't always in sync.
But regardless of that, why the fuck would you moderate an ONLINE FORUM based on what 3-5 year olds understand? They don't understand taxes, are tax jokes banned? They don't know how to drive, are road rage dad jokes off the list too?
The more I think about this, the more this mod can suck my clit. Am I supposed to disappear because I'm a bisexual person married with a kid? Am I supposed to not exist around my child because I might make a joke about being bisexual? Am I supposed to hide my own bisexuality until my kid is a teenager?
What the fuck is this gatekeeping?
This is your typical "I'm not homophobic, I don't mind gay people, but" person. They don't "mind" gay/bi/lesbian/trans/queer people existing as long as they do it without them needing to acknowledge that existence.
Or to simplify it... they ARE homophobic, but because of current social trends they're not allowed to say it out loud and they don't want to get cancelled.
Exactly, have a guy at work like this, claims hes not homophobic but went on a full on rant about his 8-9 year old kid seeing two guys kissing/making out in front of his flat, I even tried to make him see the homophobia by asking if he would have cared if it was a guy and girl and he confirmed it was mainly about it being two guys..some people.
Gay people existing is political type.
Didn’t you get the memo? Anyone not cis, hetero and following gendered stereotypes should never be in the same room as a kid or teen. /s
I agree with the other commenter: it’s finely veiled bigotry.
Hey, you dropped this:
,Married with a kid is different than married to a kid haha, but thank you.
I’m once again annoyed that the default term became homo”sexuality,” and not homoromanticism, because A) why the fuck does anyone who’s not an immediate prospect need to know about anyone’s sexuality? B) the phoneme sexuality implies… sexuality, so it just gives a bunch of bad faith motherfuckers ammunition; C) most of the time it’s actually referring to homoromanticism; and D) even when it’s not, the majority of people would describe a homosexual and heteroromantic person as straight (or closeted :[ ).
linguist here. you mean «homoeros» (ὁμόερoσ) “samelove” (Greek), not “man/mankind romance” (as opposed to “anserromantic” gooselover) (Latinus)
Fellow linguist here. I did get it wrong, but I meant heteroromanticism, which is an existing term because I’m not a prescriptivist :)
ok amelatinæ
Call me what you want, that’s your business 🤷
::: spoiler ∸◷❓ᑐ↓ᐳ畄,ᐳ꘠⍯? lon tenpo seme la ni li sona, li toki pakala? :::
::: spoiler 𓆊 At what time is it comprehension, and ramblings? :::
You're right. I was flattening sexual/romantic attraction and being overly loose with what qualifies discussing sex. I dont agree with the rule and will avoid the comm if that doesnt get amended, but my go to first standard in this comm is "was this mod action even in the rules" before I get to "should it be in the rules"
There is no law forcing sex and marriage to be intertwined, its just an assumption since they normally do. This joke mentions nothing about sex in the marriage, just a play on which genders each in the marriage are attracted to.since most people forget bi people exist
Yeah, Bi myself so I very much appreciate the joke. I just also try to give a berth for people to set whatever rules for a community. Not a rule I like or will accept to continue participating, but if the rule was just plainly "No X" and "X" gets posted I wouldn't necessarily fault the mod for enforcing the rules as they were, just wouldnt want to be in their comm.
I
think its fine to thinkagree that kids don't need to know about sexuality until puberty, but enforcing that really comes down to someone's own parenting.It's not a good reason to remove the pic related meme, which is completely neutral and pushing no agenda, on a forum ostensibly for adults, such as our own.
Kids not knowing about sexuality and therefor the absolute basics of consent only helps child abusers, and the earlier you ingrain the concept of consent, the better off they will be later in life.
Basic knowledge about this thematic complex has to be introduced in the first few school years to make sure they
Hiding these basic facts about life itself only makes bigots feel better and child abusers very happy.
Absolutely true. Not what I was thinking of in terms of sexuality, but I guess I knew what I was getting into when I made a vague statement
So you wanted to say kids do not need to know that there are people out there that do not conform to the mom/dad scheme, even when taking sex explicitly out of the equation? This is probably even worse, because it makes you as bigoted as the mod this thread is about.
Ragebait
So then, go ahead and say what you really really meant, but i ensure you that extrapolating from what you uttered until now that you are probably only going to dig your grave deeper.
Words which mean nothing ... grandstanding... political psychosis
I agree, we need to ban all hetero representation so children don’t see it.
No more talks about moms and dads, ban any hetero couples from interacting together in public spaces, remove them from all media.
Sure is weird how for some reason people never mean this when they say kids shouldn’t be taught about sexuality 🤔
~~They are probably projecting hard. I had a few situations where gay people were hitting on me, which made me feel uncomfortable - not because i care that someone else is gay, but because i absolutely do not find men attractive and have self-confidence issues making it difficult to say no, especially in a bar (edit: not a gay bar) where everyone is already somewhat drunk. ~~
~~I can absolutely understand that some men might have similar issues, where the thought of hooking up with another man simply feels icky. Difference is: do i let that feeling cloud my judgement in general or am i mature enough to separate those things? These people are still stuck in high school from a development standpoint, and thats both sad and dangerous. ~~
Edit: I was wrong, see my other comment.
I have to rescind my previous comment. In this specific case we are dealing with someone who uses the same playbook as the fascists, probably because they are one on top of being a homophobe, see my comment comment chain with @[email protected] above. He isn't even doing the part great where he plays with language, probably because of being an uneducated redneck.
Not a dad joke since it’s actually hilarious.
Also, what a PTB.
The name of this community (are they still called magazines here?) is Ye Power Trippin' Bastards, so presumably PTB = Power Trippin' Bastards.
It is indeed ;)
Times to play "check that mod's hard drive"
Seems to me that even if you're trying to keep all mentions of sex/gender out of DadJokes (what is a Dad anyway and how is he different from a Mom?) you should at least make a suggestion that OP send their post over to UncleJokes, which needs more content.
Well Dad Jokes is just a certain kind of corny pun based joke. It just got its name because it seems to be a common thing dads do, but it's not exclusive to anyone. My dad definitely made stupid jokes like "poof you're a sandwich" all the time, though.
Oh yes of course.
Uncle Jokes is specifically for a similar type of jokes but with a little more edge to them. Because your wink-wink-nudge-nudge uncle tells you the jokes your dad knows better than to tell his little kid. This one's pretty mild, Uncle knows some doozies.
(And when Junior, who only half-understood one of those jokes, starts telling it at school and gets hauled into the principal's office, blaming the uncle gets the parents off the hook.)
Yeah, that actually sounds about right.
I've reviewed the community's moderator log, and that is something they commonly do, in fact.
I don't understand, what would 3 year olds' understanding of sexuality have to do with community guidelines on Lemmy?
I'm seriously asking. Not one corner of this place is acceptable for a 3 year old, nor should it be.
Bigotry.
PTB
PTB &bigotry1. Lemmy.world ban kids to use their instance, also users of other instances. (Or at least it was their policy)Edited: The requirement is in the comm rules, not to protect kids, but for the level of complexity of the joke. I would suggest to the mod to rethink that rule when it can be use to hidden oppresed collectives.
The given reason is whack but it’s not a dad joke. It’s not a pun or play on words. It’s just a standard set up and observational joke
Unfortunately, some Lemmy instances allow conservatives. Wherever you have conservatives, you have bigotry.
Conservatism is cancer. It should be eradicated. Especially in positions of authority or any place where free speech is valued.
Reddit has been certailing speach for a while now, I pointed out on the Canadian politics sub that I'd notice their were quite a few more posts about the national post then their were other Canadian news agencys and I got banned imidiatly for it.
IRC one of the mods of /r/canada was outed as a white nationalist several years ago. This kind of thing is incredibly common on reddit in plenty of the bigger subreddits.
The mods are pushing a narrative, the place is flooded with bot posts and comments, and invariably it's pushing a narrative.
Ok this mod has gone absolutely mask-off about being a homophobic bigot despite their two-faced attempt at mollifying the backlash. Shame on you @[email protected]
Good removal but clearly for the wrong reason.
This is a husband joke, not a dad joke. It's almost like a dad joke but hasn't reached its final form.
I don't see it as a "kids don't understand gay people", and I think the mod was justified.
I'm grateful this forum has the respect to give me the courage to share my feelings. Just kidding! Downvote away.
The original post was put back up because the mod who removed realised they were in the wrong
I've taken a look at the moderator log, and they are pretty consistent about it.
I can understand the concern - seeing this post caused me to go take a look.
I'm open to my mind being changed, but it appears to me that they pretty consistently remove jokes with a sexual component, and often suggest c/unclejokes as an alternative place for posting them.
At the moment, this looks to me to be a community rule that not everyone agrees with, but a reasonable rule to have and enforce. It certainly does not break the Lemmy.World TOS.
The job of a moderator is to act as a janitor and facilitator. They remove spam, bigotry, and posts that don't fit. And then hopefully help ensure the things that do fit are allowed - so the community then upvotes/downvotes on what they like or don't like. But it is worth bearing in mind that moderators are all volunteers, and in addition to being a janitor and facilitator, they have often created the communities in question, and so should and do have a hand in how those communities operate. Ideally, it's a balance between what the community wants and the vision the mod has for the community.
I will also say that 1) everyone's opinions on what crosses lines are different, and 2) after moderating in various places for 30 years of my life, I can say that a surprising amount of content requires subjective calls to be made, even with brilliantly objective rules. Context is surprisingly critical in many cases, for example, although in this instance, it's more about where lines are drawn and what exactly is "sexual".
I personally don't have any problems with this joke at all, and if I were the mod, I think I wouldn't worry about what actual children might think of jokes - but that's where this community is, and this removal seems reasonable to me based on that rule.
What is sexual about being gay? Is mentioning "Dad jokes" talking about sex because dads usually become dads by having sex?
From what i've seen from the modlog, I would expect a joke that revolved around dad referencing sex with mom (or their sexuality at all) would also get removed.
Note that I don't personally agree with the rule, it's just a rule I don't see as problematic, nor being enforced unfairly.
Why don't you have a problem with "bisexual" not being considered "gay"? Because you've decided that's okay. And I don't disagree necessarily, because for example we have LGBTQ+ which separates out the letters. But if you reduce that to a single word, it would probably be "gay", meaning that bisexuality is also gay.
I'm sure it would surprise some of the commentors calling me a bigot to learn that my wife is bisexual. Not that you can't have members of some class being bigots. But I'd imagine it would sitll surprise them. Nor do most people who don't actually give a shit about the conversation and who are just looking for a convenient target to hate care much either. Which is not you, which is why I gave you an actual reply.
Where in the OP does it talk about having sex?
This has nothing to do with this post. To clarify though, I'm a bisexual woman. Sometimes I call myself gay, but it's not quite the right term. And you don't get to dictate what someone identifies as for their sexual orientation.
There is nothing inherently sexual about the original post.
But this isn't a joke about sex. This is a joke about romantic orientation - which usually coincides with one's sexual orientation, sure, but they aren't the same thing.
Saying that queerness is inherently sexual is a bigoted stance to take, and it's a bad look if you're defending it. And that remains true even if you have a queer partner or even if you're queer yourself. Since you want to use having a queer partner as a defense for your logic, why don't you ask her what she thinks of this situation? She may not agree with your take on it.
You're a bigot Harry.
Interesting choice to make a reference written by a known transphobe.
Interesting choice to double down on being ignorant while policing other people's expression.
It's frightening someone with your worldview is an admin. But I guess that says a lot about where we're at hey.
It's not surprising to me at all that you would say nasty things without knowing anything about me and making baseless assumptions.
I was responding to a judgement you made. That's not a baseless assumption mate, there's literal writing on the wall here of you making an ignorant comment as an admin to defend a moderation mistake.
I don't know anything about you other than what you've said here and I joked you were a bigot but I admit that was hasty. You may be truly ignorant about your judgement backing that 3-6 yo kids can't learn about queer people even though in our world people from those families have kids of their own.
It might seem reasonable to classify sexuality as something of a sexual nature, but you're talking about people's lives here. Someone has to go to school one day in a world where other kids parents told them their parents are perverted. The views you expressed here legitimise that world.
Not sure of any rule violations, but it doesn't feel like what I would think of as a dad joke. Normally I would call dad jokes something that's simple, absurd, maybe a bit punny, and generally gets a groan and head shake more than a laugh. This takes a bit of lateral thought to get, so maybe advanced level dad joke?
"I'm not gay but my husband is' is a regular old dad joke.
Why is there no acronyms for "everybody sucks" or something?
bad dad joke
bad reason for removal
There's no requirement that a dad joke must be good to be allowed. In fact, that's kind of the point of a dad joke
The joke is good. It's just not a dad joke. That makes it a bad dad joke, but not a bad joke.
But it should at least be in the spirit of a dad joke and this one clearly isn't for me. In fact it's too good of a joke to be a dad joke.
If it was removed for "doesn't fit community" I would 100% agree with the mod.
I'll try to clarify a bit more. This is going to be based on what I think a dad joke should be, so we might disagree on that.
A dad joke should basically be a very short, pun-based joke that would make a 5 year old laugh, but causes and adult to roll their eyes.
I have absolutely no issue with 5 year olds knowing about sexual orientations or gender identity. I grew up with quite early and liberal sex ed and I don't think it was a bad thing.
Still, OPs joke just doesn't meet the requirments. It requires knowing the difference between gay and bi as well as understanding that this difference is not broadly understood in society, thus you get to the "setup" where you assume a man with a husband must be gay. Only then to subvert the expectation by him denying being gay, because only his husband is.
I think it's quite a tall order to expect a 5 year old to put that all together and actually laugh at the joke. On the other hand I think it's quite a good joke and certainly not rolling my eyes about it.
I have no idea if the mod in question removed the post for bigoted reasons or just worded it badly. But I'd say that the joke in question didn't belong on dadjokes.
In the reddit AITH and similar communities, it's ESH, everyone sucks here.
Personally I think there could be a better term, but that's the one that's the most commonly used.