I stand by the fact that your original statement is either extremely US-centric (and frankly a bit racist from multiple points of view) or just generally incorrect.
Women need safe spaces because men historically oppressed them, and that is true all around the world, in almost all communities.
You decided to add white to a sentence that didn’t need it.
Are you implying that minorities aren't oppressed and don't need safe spaces? Because it seems like your questions are focused entirely on why I included both women and minorities in the same sentence, which I assert is true in the vast majority of the world where English (the language we are speaking) is the primary language for the country. Heck, it is also true for most European countries where English isn't the primary language.
Including both in the same sentence is because of the common shared group of oppressors, white men.
Women need safe spaces because men historically oppressed them, and that is true all around the world, in almost all communities.
If you want any statement to be true for literally the entire world, then your expectations are unreasonable.
I'm currently imagining you seeing a group of people talking on the sidewalk and you forcing your way into their space and insisting that you be a part of it because you saw their group existed.
The instances are the park authorities and the communities are their permits. They didn't just stake off a part of the park without that structure in place.
If a park has a camp going on, limited by age, they don't let people who are not signed up to participate in the camp.
You can still use the rest of the park when the camp is going on and the BBQ competition is going, but they still have some restrictions even in a public setting.
Honestly I'm not sure how limiting who can participate is significantly different from what and how discussions are restricted in communities. The only argument against it that I can see is that it is based on gender, and that simply isn't a black and white issue.
The software also doesn't force people in any community to stay on the topic of that community, that is done through moderation.
this whole thing is kind of like setting up a bbq in the middle of a public park, and getting mad at people, when they point out that there is a designated bbq area that you are supposed to use
Actually it is more like having a BBQ competition in the park where only people who registered can participate in the BBQ competition but everyone else is free to watch. To avoid everyone notnin the competition shouting over the people participating in the competition, they told everyone to be quiet and removed those that don't respect the competition by being quiet.
The problem is that the signs are in the middle of the competing, due to park limitations.
I can relate to this pattern of thinking due to a lifetime of avoiding deer and other wildlife. Garbage men travel in small groups to collect garbage bins, not solitary predators, so expecting more to follow makes sense.
The software could be changed to facilitate what they want to do, it isn't like the core design couldn't handle a feature where people could only comment if they were specifically granted permissions for the community. There could even be permissions on who can vote, like restricting to people who are subscribed and whatnot. The fact that it doesn't exist yet doesn't mean it can't work for the intended purpose.
The reason for being in the fediverse is visibility, same as most other communities.
The underlying issue is one of visibility, and making it more visible could also attract unwanted attention. For example, they could address people like myself who can't keep track of all the community specific rules by changing their name to something like "WomensStuff (no men)" but that would probably prompt people who would otherwise ignore or block the community to go make a fuss like they are in this post.
They could clarify the reason for the rule, although that does make the rules longer. For example they could include something about the intent being to have discussions from women's perspectives without them being drowned out when limiting who can comment.
Yeah, I liked him a lot more before his stand up routine became about how he was 'canceled' and had one trans fan. I just don't get how he didn't understand the latter was the same thing as having 'one black friend'.
Wow, just wow.