Reddit Starts One-Sided Censorship

[Galloism]

Sure, ok.

But that's rather beside the point - there was also the hatred that went with it.

Hatred of who? Believing in the concept of biological sex, distinct from gender identity, isn't synonymous with hating trans people.

I understand, but they also openly hated trans women (and men, incidentally, which is why they hated trans women).

[Crockerland]

Ah yes, shutting down harassment and hate groups is so awful. In fact, it's just as bad as Nazi Germany.

I think the problem is that they're picking and choosing to only ban certain harassment and hate groups and have a double standard for the ones that are sufficiently "woke" and politically correct.

For example:

• Genocide denier subreddits, such as r/Turkey where users routinely deny the Armenian Genocide, or r/Communism which denies Holodomor
• Anti-white racist subreddits such as r/FragileWhiteRedditor, r/BlackPeopleTwitter, or r/Racism
• Anti-miscegenation subs such as r/WMAF, r/Hapas, or r/HandsOffHapas
• Islamic subreddits such as r/Islam, which are free to promote hatred against Jews, LGBT people, etc. in accordance with Islamic teachings

[Gravlen]

That's up to Reddit to decide. It's their ToS.

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.

[Purgatio]

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.

They really weren't, I've trawled through the sub many times before it was banned, all the posts were about defending the integrity of sex-segregated spaces, women's athletics, preventing trans activists from erasing female vocabulary when it comes to the female body and policy issues related thereto, that kind of thing. And I understand that trans people might disagree with r/GenderCritical on these issues, and have a differing opinion. Fair enough, there will be differing opinions in a diverse and democratic society. Engage with them, debate with them, don't just try and shut them down in this petty and authoritarian silencing of dissent to your gender ideology.

[Purgatio]

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.

That's a pretty nihilistic attitude to take. Don't point out an injustice if the injustice is committed by someone powerful. Wow, unbelievable.

[Atlexil]

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.

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.

[Northern Davincia]

4chan is better anyway.

[Purgatio]

Hatred of who? Believing in the concept of biological sex, distinct from gender identity, isn't synonymous with hating trans people.

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.

[HIreland]

This is an older issue but it might be relevant to the topic at hand. The subreddit r/againsthatesubs was actively running fake accounts to post rule-breaking content on subs they were trying to get banned and then reporting that content with other accounts.
Testimony of a former member

[Gravlen]

Ah, I think I understand.

That's more complicated. It's using mods police 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?

It all depends on what they are reporting. Saying "I've seen something suspicious, and I don't know if it's a crime, but..." is on one side, while, say, calling the police on someone and accusing them of trying to break into a church and threatening the caller with a gun when they were unarmed and painting the building (they owned), is over the line and should be prosecuted.

[Dawn Denac]

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.

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:

[Bear Stearns]

You can nationalize tech companies and then break them up. Or you can give them the ma bell treatment

I don't know how the law has changed, or if it's something about tech companies in particular, but IBM and Microsoft defended themselves just fine.

Because lawmakers are usually retards when it comes to understanding technology

[Gravlen]

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.

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.

[Purgatio]

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.

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.

[Vedan]

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.

[Purgatio]

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:

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.

[No State Here]

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.

The majority isn’t white people though, meaning it’s okay to be racist against Han Chinese now

Kung Flu spam here I come!

[Purgatio]

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.

You know, you are allowed to express opinions without those opinions changing the world overnight? If your criteria for when you're allowed to speak is your opinion must enact radical policy changes that solve earth-ending problems, then you can't ever speak your mind on anything. This is such an intellectually-disingenuous argument.

[Dawn Denac]

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.

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.

[Pilipinas and Malaya]

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.

Was it even the sort of sub that would post stuff that denied trans women were women or like that? Ngl, this post still lacked quite a bit of context.

Edit: Now I see the issue. It seems to be as a result of the sub referring to the trans people by their biological sex.

[Necroghastia]

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.

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.

[Dawn Denac]

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.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This.

[United Dependencies]

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.

The notion that trans women are men pretending to be women for the purpose of entering women's locker rooms and other women only spaces is not rational. In fact, it is a stereotype that works to harm trans women. Just one of the ideas that people like Rowling spread.

[Purgatio]

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.

Pretty sure the agitation for trans-inclusive language wasn't a thing when the suffragettes were fighting for the right to vote. Regardless, the argument of gender-critical feminists is they object to attempts to erase female vocabulary that describes the reality of biological sex, and that in turn nullifies their ability to call our sexism on issues that directly concern or pertain to biological sex. For instance, talking about period equity, so many organisations like Planned Parenthood would retweet information about the 'tampon tax' and have to use the word 'menstruators' instead of 'women', in order to be trans-inclusive. Or, when discussing abortion rights and reproductive oppression, so many organisations speak of 'pregnant persons' instead of 'pregnant women'. Trans activists forced a women's college to end their staging of the Vagina Monologues, because the reference to 'vagina' was apparently offensive and bigoted against trans women. Trans activists have spoken up against free-bleeding protests at feminist marches, against the 'pussy hates' at the Women's March etc. etc., slowly the concept of biological sex is being erased from political discourse, the very word 'women' is being erased from issues in which biological femaleness is clearly at play. The issue, then, is gender-critical feminists are slowly losing the lexicon and the vocabulary needed to call out institutional sexism where it exists and arises, because of the demand for 'trans-inclusive language' erasing female vocabulary on all these issues.

[Gormwood]

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.

Calling them gender infiltrators seeking to undermine "true" feminism for some strange reason.