I understand, but they also openly hated trans women (and men, incidentally, which is why they hated trans women).
Advertisement
by Galloism » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:58 am
by Crockerland » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:58 am
Wallenburg wrote:Ah yes, shutting down harassment and hate groups is so awful. In fact, it's just as bad as Nazi Germany.
by Purgatio » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:59 am
Dawn Denac wrote:Purgatio wrote:
Hatred of who? Believing in the concept of biological sex, distinct from gender identity, isn't synonymous with hating trans people.
Cough.
For trans people, the line between the two can tend to blur fairly heavily. Plus multiple sources I've looked at said the sub was viciously transphobic.
by Purgatio » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:00 am
Gravlen wrote:Purgatio wrote:
And they've applied their ToS in an arbitrary and capricious way, and we're entitled to scrutinise it and criticise it if it doesn't make sense. And in respect of r/GenderCritical, it quite clearly doesn't make sense.
Criticise and cry as much as you want to. It's not going to make a difference however, and it's not going to change the power dynamic.
by Atlexil » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:01 am
Purgatio wrote:Necroghastia wrote:You have got to be fucking kidding me.
Trying to get your intellectual opponents banned off an online platform for having a different definition of feminism is the epitome of intellectual intolerance, parochialism, and close-mindedness. The feminist activists on r/GenderCritical weren't hurting anyone, they just held views that the radical trans activists don't like and disagree with. The Internet doesn't exist to conform and comport to their every ideological belief.
by Northern Davincia » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:03 am
Conserative Morality wrote:"Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Hoppe."
by Purgatio » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:04 am
by HIreland » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:04 am
The brewery of the cell: Government funds project to gene-splice human and yeast mitochondria | Bright stage lights and high blood alcohol count revealed to be responsible for bartender general's spontaneous combustion | Ship runs ashore after crew suffocates in methane cloud produced by HIreland's sewage swamps | Drunken-most's teleprompter hacked, reads speech denouncing own lack of personal hygiene
by Gravlen » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:06 am
United Dependencies wrote:Gravlen wrote:Ah, I think I understand.
That's more complicated. It's usingmodspolice as a weapon, but in a quite literal sense. IRL, that can have fatal consequences, and when you call an armed response on someone who're plainly not doing anything wrong it can be problematic. It shouldn't be criminal, however, and the fault of police shooting innocent people ultimately lies with the police - kinda like how Reddit's choice to remove subreddits is something they're ultimately responsible for.
Wouldn't this border on filing a false report? I guess if they don't submit an actual statement in writing it isn't. Do some jurisdictions have laws governing calling the emergency services lines?
by Dawn Denac » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:07 am
Purgatio wrote:Galloism wrote:I understand, but they also openly hated trans women (and men, incidentally, which is why they hated trans women).
They really didn't hate trans women, they just didn't think they should be regarded as women, because they were gender-abolitionists who believed women were oppressed on the basic of biological sex, not gender presentation or identity. That's all. No hatred involved there. Just a rational difference of opinion on a controversial social issue.
by Bear Stearns » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:08 am
by Gravlen » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:08 am
Purgatio wrote:Gravlen wrote:Criticise and cry as much as you want to. It's not going to make a difference however, and it's not going to change the power dynamic.
That's a pretty nihilistic attitude to take. Don't point out an injustice if the injustice is committed by someone powerful. Wow, unbelievable.
by Purgatio » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:08 am
Atlexil wrote:Purgatio wrote:
Trying to get your intellectual opponents banned off an online platform for having a different definition of feminism is the epitome of intellectual intolerance, parochialism, and close-mindedness. The feminist activists on r/GenderCritical weren't hurting anyone, they just held views that the radical trans activists don't like and disagree with. The Internet doesn't exist to conform and comport to their every ideological belief.
Okay, Purgatio. I'm gonna just say this as a cis guy who hangs out in a few LGBT spaces along with knowing some transpeople. But you aware that TERFs consider transwomen to be "dirty orcs" and that transmen are "women brainwashed by the patriarchy", yeah? Seriously, TERFs consider transpeople to be their ideological enemy for some weridass bullshit reason and don't think they're actual people. And on the subject of Rowling and Lineham. Rowling is a shit author because of her stupid as fuck Word of God statements and basically virtue signaling for progressive points. While Lineham was somebody who was obsessed about hating transpeople to the point their family had to do an intervention before cutting ties with them.
by Vedan » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:09 am
by Purgatio » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:09 am
Dawn Denac wrote:Purgatio wrote:
They really didn't hate trans women, they just didn't think they should be regarded as women, because they were gender-abolitionists who believed women were oppressed on the basic of biological sex, not gender presentation or identity. That's all. No hatred involved there. Just a rational difference of opinion on a controversial social issue.
Yeah no, hold up. What?
So in the name of equality because women are oppressed on the basic of biological sex, trans women don't have the right to be regarded as women?
:hyperthink:
by No State Here » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:11 am
Vedan wrote:That's a bunch of racist BS!! "We here at Reddit are against hate speech of all kinds...unless its directed at whites." I think I'm gonna go ahead and leave reddit, they obviously dont want my business. If your going to enact anti hate speech rules at least make them apply to everyone equally. Whoever came up with that last part specifically excluding hate speech against "the majority" is a racist and should be fired.
by Purgatio » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:11 am
Gravlen wrote:Purgatio wrote:
That's a pretty nihilistic attitude to take. Don't point out an injustice if the injustice is committed by someone powerful. Wow, unbelievable.
Oh no, have fun pointing it out. I, too, have shaken my fist against percieved injustice and then gone about my day doing absolutely nothing to change things, as you seem to be doing.
by Dawn Denac » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:11 am
Purgatio wrote:Atlexil wrote:Okay, Purgatio. I'm gonna just say this as a cis guy who hangs out in a few LGBT spaces along with knowing some transpeople. But you aware that TERFs consider transwomen to be "dirty orcs" and that transmen are "women brainwashed by the patriarchy", yeah? Seriously, TERFs consider transpeople to be their ideological enemy for some weridass bullshit reason and don't think they're actual people. And on the subject of Rowling and Lineham. Rowling is a shit author because of her stupid as fuck Word of God statements and basically virtue signaling for progressive points. While Lineham was somebody who was obsessed about hating transpeople to the point their family had to do an intervention before cutting ties with them.
Whatever you think about Rowling and Linehan, they did not deserve the harassment and abuse that they received for simply having an opinion that the trans activists and agitators disagreed with. Regardless, gender-critical feminists don't hate trans women or trans men. They believe that trans women and trans men should not be referred to based on their gender identity, but their innate biological sex, because they want to maintain a coherent vision of radical feminism and women's liberation, and they believe, rightly or wrongly, that oppression under patriarchy rests on biological sex, the belief that biologically-female people are normatively-expected to perform gendered roles associated with that sex (pregnancy, making babies, child-rearing, being a submissive house-wife, sacrificing career etc. etc.), but that opinion does not come with any inherent hatred, bigotry, or dehumanisation of trans men and women, just a difference of opinion as to whether language like "he" or "she" should flow from biological sex, or gender identity. Gender-critical feminists believe it should be the former, because they are worried if trans men and women get their way in terms of vocabulary, it would erase female vocabulary in respect of policy issues that concern natal women and girls (i.e. saying "pregnant people" instead of "expectant mothers" or "pregnant women", saying "menstruators" instead of "women", that kind of thing), and thus nullifies the ability of gender-critical feminists to call out the sexism and misogyny involved in such policy issues.
by Pilipinas and Malaya » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:13 am
Purgatio wrote:Pilipinas and Malaya wrote:
I hear Parler houses a good bunch of the people on the right side of the spectrum now.
Also, I'd like to ask. I'm a bit out of the loop. What's the drama behind r/GenderCritical?
Feminist activists fighting for women's liberation were silenced by a bunch of close-minded people who have an intellectual disagreement with how they define 'feminism'. That's literally it. They got banned for defining the meaning of 'feminism' in a way that some people and activists don't like. Now their platform is banned from Reddit. Its outrageous.
by Necroghastia » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:14 am
Purgatio wrote:Necroghastia wrote:You have got to be fucking kidding me.
Trying to get your intellectual opponents banned off an online platform for having a different definition of feminism is the epitome of intellectual intolerance, parochialism, and close-mindedness. The feminist activists on r/GenderCritical weren't hurting anyone, they just held views that the radical trans activists don't like and disagree with. The Internet doesn't exist to conform and comport to their every ideological belief.
by Dawn Denac » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:14 am
Necroghastia wrote:Purgatio wrote:
Trying to get your intellectual opponents banned off an online platform for having a different definition of feminism is the epitome of intellectual intolerance, parochialism, and close-mindedness. The feminist activists on r/GenderCritical weren't hurting anyone, they just held views that the radical trans activists don't like and disagree with. The Internet doesn't exist to conform and comport to their every ideological belief.
The nazi activists on Stormfront aren't hurting anyone, they just hold views that radical nonwhite activists don't like and disagree with!
Yeah, no. "Gender critical" ideology is based upon intellectual ignorance and closed-mindedness. It's an insult to even call them "intellectual opponents" when the whole thing is based on lies, conspiracy theories, and bigotry.
You are right about one thing, though - the Internet doesn't exist to conform and comport to ideological beliefs. Which is why Reddit's perfectly free to ask them to take their business elsewhere.
by United Dependencies » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:15 am
Purgatio wrote:If you are fighting for women's liberation, and your definition of the oppressed class at issue, "women", is based on biological sex, then yeah, trans women aren't biologically-female, and therefore not "women" in the eyes of a women's liberation movement based around biological sex. Its perfectly rational.
Alien Space Bats wrote:2012: The Year We Lost Contact (with Reality).
Cannot think of a name wrote:Obamacult wrote:Maybe there is an economically sound and rational reason why there are no longer high paying jobs for qualified accountants, assembly line workers, glass blowers, blacksmiths, tanners, etc.
Maybe dragons took their jobs. Maybe unicorns only hid their jobs because unicorns are dicks. Maybe 'jobs' is only an illusion created by a drug addled infant pachyderm. Fuck dude, if we're in 'maybe' land, don't hold back.
by Purgatio » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:17 am
Dawn Denac wrote:Purgatio wrote:
Whatever you think about Rowling and Linehan, they did not deserve the harassment and abuse that they received for simply having an opinion that the trans activists and agitators disagreed with. Regardless, gender-critical feminists don't hate trans women or trans men. They believe that trans women and trans men should not be referred to based on their gender identity, but their innate biological sex, because they want to maintain a coherent vision of radical feminism and women's liberation, and they believe, rightly or wrongly, that oppression under patriarchy rests on biological sex, the belief that biologically-female people are normatively-expected to perform gendered roles associated with that sex (pregnancy, making babies, child-rearing, being a submissive house-wife, sacrificing career etc. etc.), but that opinion does not come with any inherent hatred, bigotry, or dehumanisation of trans men and women, just a difference of opinion as to whether language like "he" or "she" should flow from biological sex, or gender identity. Gender-critical feminists believe it should be the former, because they are worried if trans men and women get their way in terms of vocabulary, it would erase female vocabulary in respect of policy issues that concern natal women and girls (i.e. saying "pregnant people" instead of "expectant mothers" or "pregnant women", saying "menstruators" instead of "women", that kind of thing), and thus nullifies the ability of gender-critical feminists to call out the sexism and misogyny involved in such policy issues.
Rowling and Linehan actively spread their own brand of hatred and rhetoric. These gender-critical people are well aware of what they're doing and you know it. The entire point of a woman or man to transition in that manner is to be utterly regarded as the gender they are transitioning to. The argument of our rights being erased from policy issues is flimsy at best, considering how long woman's suffrage has been going on for even before the transgender movement started to gain traction and I'm going to be damn vocal in making sure that's understood.
by Gormwood » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:18 am
Atlexil wrote:Purgatio wrote:
Trying to get your intellectual opponents banned off an online platform for having a different definition of feminism is the epitome of intellectual intolerance, parochialism, and close-mindedness. The feminist activists on r/GenderCritical weren't hurting anyone, they just held views that the radical trans activists don't like and disagree with. The Internet doesn't exist to conform and comport to their every ideological belief.
Okay, Purgatio. I'm gonna just say this as a cis guy who hangs out in a few LGBT spaces along with knowing some transpeople. But you aware that TERFs consider transwomen to be "dirty orcs" and that transmen are "women brainwashed by the patriarchy", yeah? Seriously, TERFs consider transpeople to be their ideological enemy for some weridass bullshit reason and don't think they're actual people. And on the subject of Rowling and Lineham. Rowling is a shit author because of her stupid as fuck Word of God statements and basically virtue signaling for progressive points. While Lineham was somebody who was obsessed about hating transpeople to the point their family had to do an intervention before cutting ties with them.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Big Eyed Animation, Duvniask, Eahland, New-Minneapolis, Port Carverton, The Jamesian Republic, Valrifall, Washington Resistance Army, Xind
Advertisement