Gender Identity in Modern Ireland (Mod warnings and Threadbanned Users in OP)

Annasopra · 24-03-2021 11:41pm

Deleted User wrote: »

CIS male prison officers arent in prison because they are dangerous enough to be locked up

What a rotten point.

Are you trying to say women prisoners never get attacked by cis male prison officers?

Gremlinertia · 24-03-2021 11:44pm

Note, having read posts regarding the child of gay parents in a shampoo advert, one it is off topic, two, suggesting that the parents are brainwashing or that it constitutes some form of child abuse is abysmal, drop it

24-03-2021 11:46pm

Annasopra wrote: »

Are you trying to say women prisoners never get attacked by cis male prison officers?

This thread is a mess long since because of a poster or two answering simple statements with responses beginning "so you are trying to say" or similar.

Its transparently awful and cheap rhetorical tricks to keep the thread a shambles

Amuse yourself away with it, good luck to you.

One eyed Jack · 25-03-2021 12:13am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This thread is a mess long since because of a poster or two answering simple statements with responses beginning "so you are trying to say" or similar.

Its transparently awful and cheap rhetorical tricks to keep the thread a shambles

Amuse yourself away with it, good luck to you.

To be fair, I think you may have misunderstood the point Annaspora was making, that inmates in women’s prisons are already subjected to sexual violence and sexual exploitation by the prison staff who are charged with responsibility for their protection. The vast majority of prison officers in women’s prisons are men, but there’s not a peep heard of the sexual exploitation and violence which has been perpetrated by prison officers on the inmates. It appears it’s only an issue when an inmate is transgender.

Why is that? Surely if there are concerns for inmates in the women’s prisons in Ireland, it would be worth considering who are they actually at risk from? The reality is that they are most at risk from the prison staff, and the other inmates who are already in the prison, or were transferred from Dublin to Limerick (as if Limerick wasn’t overcrowded enough already) -

Scissor Sister Linda Mulhall dumped by her former prison officer lover

Evil Scissor Sister Charlotte Mulhall probed over allegations she ‘committed sex act on worker in Irish Prison Service’

‘Scissor Sister’ murderer Mulhall denies ‘inappropriate relationship’ with female prison officer that led to transfer, court told

It just appears as though people are keen to use examples of people who are transgender committing sexual violence and exploitation against women in prisons as a means to argue against people who are transgender having the right to have their preferred gender identity recognised in Irish Law, even though one literally has nothing to do with the other, because the matters of accommodation and protection and rehabilitation of inmates and so on of inmates in Irish prisons, are a matter for the Irish Prison Service -

Opening the application, Mr Power, appearing with Cian Kelly BL and instructed by Tracy Horan and Co Solicitors, accepted the Prison Service has discretion to move inmates and that the courts cannot micromanage prisons.

If the Courts don’t have the powers to micromanage prisons, the general public certainly don’t have the powers to micromanage prisons, so the point of bringing up individual inmates in their arguments is effectively for nought. I suspect it’s rather an attempt to obfuscate the discussion of people’s rights by using ‘guilt by association’ tactics. If you’re looking for cheap rhetorical tricks to keep the thread a shambles like...

JamesFlynn · 25-03-2021 12:30am

Annasopra wrote: »

What? This is Ireland. The discussion is about Ireland. Its not about Sweden. Its not about the UK.

We're similar in many ways to the UK and Sweden, so I think it's reasonable to assume trends there are also happening here. My own observation is that there are very many more trans-identified kids in the local school compared to five years ago.

Sticking just to Ireland though as you ask, of those five male-born transwomen in female Irish prisons, one has faced (independent.ie):

charges of sexually assaulting two women and of threatening to kill or cause serious harm to a third.

So we're running at 20% of the Irish male-born transwomen prison population so far who are undeniably a serious threat to women.

Annasopra wrote: »

It says an awful lot that gender critics always claim concern for women in prisons but only concern in relation to attacks by trans women - never ever concern that women prisoners might be attacked by cis male prison officers. Its very telling.

Here again the questioning of the motivations of folks who disagree with this ideology. I'm also concerned that women prisoners might be attacked by male prison officers, but the topic of this thread is Gender Identity, not prison officer violence.

I wonder what you're insinuating when you say "Its very telling"?

Would it surprise you that I've transwomen colleagues and friends, and they consider me a friend?
That I've danced (badly) in nightclubs with a transwoman friend, go to dinner/pints regularly with another?
That I've kissed a transwomen?
That one good friend's dad is now trans and another friend's great kid is a transgirl?
Send a birthday card to a trans friend every year and receive one back?
(Trans is not that unusual in my line of work so I've known some transwomen for over 20 years)

The tactic seems to paint anyone who disagrees even slightly with this new ideology as dishonest, not genuine or uncaring of trans folk, but it isn't true.

Before there's the retort that this is a "some of my best friends are . . . . " argument, well none of my closest friends are transwomen, but I do have trans friends, and I don't believe they consider me anti-trans.

(I've only kissed a transwoman on the cheeks btw, as she's dutch and that's what they do over there, cheeks of the face too before anyone makes that joke

)

km991148 · 25-03-2021 12:35am

Yeah, and I'm not racist either, some of my best friends are black.. of course that's the retort when you use that exact argument (I'm not saying you are anti trans btw, but its a strange direction to take, when you know that's the response).

On the subject of trans people in prison. No one seemed to mind the number of trans prisoners who were sexually assaulted (last time I posted it was the UK as well).

The entire prison situation is tragic and more should be done at all levels to make them safer.

JamesFlynn · 25-03-2021 12:48am

km991148 wrote: »

Yeah, and I'm not racist either, some of my best friends are black.. of course that's the retort when you use that exact argument (I'm not saying you are anti trans btw, but its a strange direction to take, when you know that's the response).

That's exactly the opposite of what I said. I said none of my best friends are trans.

I wanted to make the point that we don't know the background of everyone who disagrees with us and perhaps it's more complex than assumed.

I wonder if there's any other topic that is so divisive today, as in any position that isn't completely 100% unambiguously in favour of "transwomen are women" with no nuance of space for complexity, gets such consistent vitriol and insinuations of bad faith in response. I'm not complaining, it's just a very interesting phenomenon.

km991148 · 25-03-2021 1:02am

JamesFlynn wrote: »

That's exactly the opposite of what I said. I said none of my best friends are trans.

I wanted to make the point that we don't know the background of everyone who disagrees with us and perhaps it's more complex than assumed.

I wonder if there's any other topic that is so divisive today, as in any position that isn't completely 100% unambiguously in favour of "transwomen are women" with no nuance of space for complexity, gets such consistent vitriol and insinuations of bad faith in response. I'm not complaining, it's just a very interesting phenomenon.

I actually don't think it's so divisive. I think it's trans people just want to get on with their lives, in peace and without everything being a battle (as do most non trans)

I think it's only in places like this and Twitter to things get out if proportion.

Incidentally, I didn't literally mean your best friend, it was a generalisation on the usual retort that you predicted!

jam_mac_jam · 25-03-2021 1:06am

km991148 wrote: »

Yeah, and I'm not racist either, some of my best friends are black.. of course that's the retort when you use that exact argument (I'm not saying you are anti trans btw, but its a strange direction to take, when you know that's the response).

On the subject of trans people in prison. No one seemed to mind the number of trans prisoners who were sexually assaulted (last time I posted it was the UK as well).

The entire prison situation is tragic and more should be done at all levels to make them safer.

Nobody wants trans people to be assaulted either. That's obviously as horrible as everyone else being assaulted. Saying nobody seems to mind is not really fair. Why would nobody mind?

As One eyed Jack pointed out there is also a huge amount of offenses occurring in prisons against everyone.

I will be the first to admit that I have never considered people's safety in prison or known much about it.

That doesn't mean that my concern for self identified women to be placed in women's prison is driven by any prejudice against them. Or I wish to deny them their rights. The rights and safety of both the transgender people and the cis women need to be considered.

It is an issue that needs to be resolved and seems to be in Irish prisons by keeping separation.

There obviously needs to be an improvement for safety for everyone in prison. You are sentenced to imprisonment and not abuse. I would hate anyone to suffer abuse in prison from another inmate or from staff.

Quantum Erasure · 25-03-2021 1:15am

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

And now....

for something completely different.

I noticed the ukpolitics subreddit has been shut down, seemingly in solidarity with one of the mods who had been permanently banned for posting an article from The Spectator, about trans issues in the Green party...

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-green-party-s-gender-intolerance-problem (I think that's the article, not sure)

Seems like one of the admin has gone rogue, Graham Linehan recently posted a blog about them/she/her here

https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/something-rotten-at-the-heart-of

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Same shìt, different day is all.

Ada Lovelace and Grace Hopper would be horrified to see what the ideas they developed have become that they have enabled idiots like James Damore and Graham Linehan to spread their ignorant nonsense.

Not sure what that has to do with anything, tbh...

Anyway, this admin is no longer employed by reddit.
And here's the article that was posted to kick it all off, not the one I posted above, but both are worth a read

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-green-party-s-growing-contempt-for-women-s-rights/amp

km991148 · 25-03-2021 4:26am

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Nobody wants trans people to be assaulted either. That's obviously as horrible as everyone else being assaulted. Saying nobody seems to mind is not really fair. Why would nobody mind?

As One eyed Jack pointed out there is also a huge amount of offenses occurring in prisons against everyone.

I will be the first to admit that I have never considered people's safety in prison or known much about it.

That doesn't mean that my concern for self identified women to be placed in women's prison is driven by any prejudice against them. Or I wish to deny them their rights. The rights and safety of both the transgender people and the cis women need to be considered.

It is an issue that needs to be resolved and seems to be in Irish prisons by keeping separation.

There obviously needs to be an improvement for safety for everyone in prison. You are sentenced to imprisonment and not abuse. I would hate anyone to suffer abuse in prison from another inmate or from staff.

Yeah it's true. Poor form posting no one seems to mind and linking it. It's rarely commented on, but as you rightly say that doesn't link it to the other case.
Late/poor standard of posting that I'm always moaning about in others..! Sorry.

Annasopra · 25-03-2021 9:21am

JamesFlynn wrote: »

We're similar in many ways to the UK and Sweden, so I think it's reasonable to assume trends there are also happening here. My own observation is that there are very many more trans-identified kids in the local school compared to five years ago.

Sticking just to Ireland though as you ask, of those five male-born transwomen in female Irish prisons, one has faced (independent.ie):

charges of sexually assaulting two women and of threatening to kill or cause serious harm to a third.

So we're running at 20% of the Irish male-born transwomen prison population so far who are undeniably a serious threat to women.

Here again the questioning of the motivations of folks who disagree with this ideology. I'm also concerned that women prisoners might be attacked by male prison officers, but the topic of this thread is Gender Identity, not prison officer violence.

I wonder what you're insinuating when you say "Its very telling"?
Would it surprise you that I've transwomen colleagues and friends, and they consider me a friend?

That I've danced (badly) in nightclubs with a transwoman friend, go to dinner/pints regularly with another?

That I've kissed a transwomen?

That one good friend's dad is now trans and another friend's great kid is a transgirl?

Send a birthday card to a trans friend every year and receive one back?
(Trans is not that unusual in my line of work so I've known some transwomen for over 20 years)

The tactic seems to paint anyone who disagrees even slightly with this new ideology as dishonest, not genuine or uncaring of trans folk, but it isn't true.

Before there's the retort that this is a "some of my best friends are . . . . " argument, well none of my closest friends are transwomen, but I do have trans friends, and I don't believe they consider me anti-trans.

(I've only kissed a transwoman on the cheeks btw, as she's dutch and that's what they do over there, cheeks of the face too before anyone makes that joke )

Trans people now feel comfortable to come out in school. This is a good thing. And we should continue educational programmes provided by the likes of BeLong To so that transphobic bullying happens less.

The article you posted doesnt seem to be about a trans person?

Yeah thats great. You have trans friends. Have you discussed your detailed views on trans issues with your trans friends? Otherwise again I dont see the relevance of posting about your beliefs of their beliefs.

Annasopra · 25-03-2021 9:29am

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Nobody wants trans people to be assaulted either. That's obviously as horrible as everyone else being assaulted. Saying nobody seems to mind is not really fair. Why would nobody mind?

As One eyed Jack pointed out there is also a huge amount of offenses occurring in prisons against everyone.

I will be the first to admit that I have never considered people's safety in prison or known much about it.

That doesn't mean that my concern for self identified women to be placed in women's prison is driven by any prejudice against them. Or I wish to deny them their rights. The rights and safety of both the transgender people and the cis women need to be considered.

It is an issue that needs to be resolved and seems to be in Irish prisons by keeping separation.

There obviously needs to be an improvement for safety for everyone in prison. You are sentenced to imprisonment and not abuse. I would hate anyone to suffer abuse in prison from another inmate or from staff.

The point is though that this concern for cis womens safety only ever seems to be discussed in relation to trans women in prisons. If the concern is so genuine why is this only bought up now and why is the safety of cis female prisoners in prison with cis male prison staff who could and do abuse them ignored. It actually feels like the safety concerns of cis female prisoners are being used and a lof the concern isnt genuine.

GreeBo · 25-03-2021 9:59am

JamesFlynn wrote: »

Here again the questioning of the motivations of folks who disagree with this ideology. I'm also concerned that women prisoners might be attacked by male prison officers, but the topic of this thread is Gender Identity, not prison officer violence.

Im afraid it seems to be SOP.
- You cant worry about transwomen in prisons until you reform the entire prison system
- You cant worry about transwomen & safety in sport until you make all sport safe
- You cant worry about transwomen and careers until you reform all jobs
- You cant worry about transwomen and fairness in sport until you make all biology fair

To borrow a phrase, it's very telling, almost like the position is untenable without whataboutery.

GreeBo · 25-03-2021 10:03am

Annasopra wrote: »

The point is though that this concern for cis womens safety only ever seems to be discussed in relation to trans women in prisons.

You mean on the specific Gender Identity thread?

Do you complain that the grass thread in the gardening forum didn't give updates on the football international last night? I mean it was on grass like.

km991148 · 25-03-2021 10:12am

GreeBo wrote: »

You mean on the specific Gender Identity thread?

Do you complain that the grass thread in the gardening forum didn't give updates on the football international last night? I mean it was on grass like.

But there are many aspects of safety in relation to trans.
Violence against transwomen in male prisons is rarely brought up.
Transmen are even less likely to be brought up (either as a group that may need protection, or as potential aggressors what with all the new hormones coursing through their systems).

If you have concerns over transwomen in female prisons, fair enough, but these other cases are rarely highlighted. That's not to say everyone with those concerns is transohobic, but transphobes always have those concerns.

GreeBo · 25-03-2021 10:31am

km991148 wrote: »

That's not to say everyone with those concerns is transohobic, but transphobes always have those concerns.

You see I was willing to engage until this line.
What exactly is your point here other than basically to say "I'm not saying everyone with these concerns is transphobic, but, well they are"

km991148 · 25-03-2021 10:37am

GreeBo wrote: »

You see I was willing to engage until this line.
What exactly is your point here other than basically to say "I'm not saying everyone with these concerns is transphobic, but, well they are"

No, quite the opposite.

I mean I'm literally saying one does not imply the other.

I'm saying a lot of transphobic media outlets, organisations etc hang on the cost tails of 'concern', making it difficult for anyone who is genuine about safety to make any similar point. I'd actually be annoyed at The Times etc for exploiting this position (rather than, for example, supporting their click bait articles).

I think it's valid to have that discussion around safety if you like (I don't necessarily agree with it fully, but I can see why it's raised). No one wants to make things more dangerous.

Mic 1972 · 25-03-2021 10:52am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It’s an odd comparison Mic, not the first comparison that would come to most people’s minds I would imagine. Finding something personally disturbing, and highlighting what you imagine is a serious issue are two entirely separate concepts, and the whole premise of your original point was that the advertisement is what makes people uneasy about parents who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, etc.

At least own your responsibility for the claims you make instead of trying to project them onto anyone else. If it makes you uneasy, then just say that, rather than trying to put responsibility for your unease on the people whose values you disagree with, or ‘highlighting issues’ like you actually care about the perpetuation of negative stereotypes of people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender.

You’re contributing to the very issue you’re complaining about, and then trying to make out that you wouldn’t think like that though :pac:

Who are you trying to kid with that nonsense?

You dont get to parade around your child dressed up like a girl and gaslight people who thing your parenting skills are debatable.

Mic 1972 · 25-03-2021 10:53am

Annasopra wrote: »

This is all very much your opinion. Its very much your opinion that trans children shouldnt be accepted that they are what they say they are You seem to have this strange idea that the parents of trans children turn them into trans - no idea how this works exactly? You seem to have a strange idea that parents should force their children into wearing into wearing gender specific clothing and only having characteristics of the gender they are assigned at birth. Why is that though? Why do you feel trans children shouldnt be accepted? Why are you in favour of forcing children like this? Why do you want to force trans kids not to be trans?

that's exactly what his parents did to him, forcing him to wear gender specific clothes and addressing him like he is a girl

One eyed Jack · 25-03-2021 11:04am

GreeBo wrote: »

Im afraid it seems to be SOP.
- You cant worry about transwomen in prisons until you reform the entire prison system
- You cant worry about transwomen & safety in sport until you make all sport safe
- You cant worry about transwomen and careers until you reform all jobs
- You cant worry about transwomen and fairness in sport until you make all biology fair

To borrow a phrase, it's very telling, almost like the position is untenable without whataboutery.

I don’t think anyone has ever suggested anyone can’t be concerned about whatever they’re concerned about. People are asking why their concerns regarding a broader issue is zeroing in so specifically on either what are a tiny minority of all perpetrators, or people who aren’t perpetrators at all, but are associated with perpetrators by virtue of characteristics they have in common, or even guilt by association with people who have nothing in common with them at all, who are being associated on the basis of their behaviour?

It’s perfectly reasonable to question the logic that suggests concerns that predatory men could exploit the provisions of the gender recognition act by claiming they are women in order to gain access to vulnerable women and children in order to abuse them in women’s domestic shelters, prisons and sports... when predatory men have never needed the gender recognition act to do any of those things?

There are plenty of men in these positions already, and some of those men are predators who use their positions to abuse their authority to commit abuse and violence against women and children, yet the people who are concerned about what they call transgender ideology seem to wish to ignore the far greater proportion of people who commit these acts of sexual exploitation and violence, in favour of zeroing in on claiming they’re trying to prevent people from having these opportunities, people who might claim to be transgender in order to commit these acts.

Apart from the fact that people who commit these acts are in a far better position to do so when they are in a position of authority, and as such it’s not whether they’re wearing a dress or a prison officer’s uniform, and I know it’s a bit obvious that criminals who get caught are never very clever in the first place, but the people who are claiming people are at risk from anyone on the basis of their gender identity alone, and that these predatory men could purposely commit crimes so they can claim to be transgender and gain access specifically to women in order to commit abuse, when there are far more opportunities and easier opportunities for predatory men to have access to women and children and nobody would ever suspect anything, such as if they were married, because statistically the highest proportion of predatory men who abuse women and children are married heterosexual men*...

It’s a bit fcuking far fetched really :pac:

*Which is why y’know all those women in domestic shelters that people who are opposed to transgender people having access or claim that men might be sneaky and try to get past the front desk in a dress... they’re there because marriage laws were never thought through in the same way the gender recognition act was never thought through because apparently it allows for predatory men to have access to women and children in order to commit abuse and exploitation. That’s the same logic as is used against the gender recognition act which can be applied in many, many other contexts, and that’s why people question what they see as this “gender critical” ideology in the very same way as people question what they see as this “transgender” ideology.

Surely if people are claiming that they can’t “ask questions” and question other people, they should be able to answer questions about their own motivations and answer questions themselves? They claim to want debate and discussion and all the rest of it, but they don’t want to answer questions and it really does appear like they want to shove their own beliefs down other people’s throats who either don’t agree with them, or don’t care less for their inflammatory hyperbolic rhetoric being used to disguise their contempt for people who are transgender.

GreeBo · 25-03-2021 11:26am

km991148 wrote: »

No, quite the opposite.

I mean I'm literally saying one does not imply the other.

To what end though?
Most things don't imply other things, we don't spend time pointing that out though, so why is this different? Seems pretty transparent to me that you do believe there is a relation between them and you are using it to label people transphobes.

You are using the old trope of "I'm not saying all X are Y, but..."

One eyed Jack · 25-03-2021 11:27am

Mic 1972 wrote: »

You dont get to parade around your child dressed up like a girl and gaslight people who thing your parenting skills are debatable.

I know you don’t mean me personally Mic (I give people far more reasons to think my lack of parenting skills are deplorable :pac: ), but this is the thing - parents will generally raise their children as they see fit, and will defend their decisions as to how they raise their children in Court if it comes to that, because it’s also a fact that other people think they always know better how to raise people’s children than those people themselves who they are criticising.

The families who chose to participate in the advertising campaign you’re referring to, and there are a couple of other advertisements as part of the campaign I have no doubt you will think are sullying the reputations of families who don’t conform to your ideals of the nuclear family, they’re not gaslighting anyone. People choose to take it upon themselves to be offended on behalf of those parents children. Nobody is asking for your approval as to how they’re choosing to raise their own children. Definitely nobody is asking for your criticism. You’re choosing to give it, and you imagine people should take your criticism seriously, and everyone should condemn the parents for their behaviour and all the rest of it.

Nobody is being gaslighted or any of the rest of it. Gaslighting and child abuse are serious accusations, and describing behaviour and values you simply disagree with, or which don’t align with your values, is trivialising gaslighting behaviour and child abuse by setting the bar so low that anyone who disagrees with you or doesn’t share your values could automatically be found guilty of committing a criminal offence.

km991148 · 25-03-2021 11:46am

GreeBo wrote: »

To what end though?
Most things don't imply other things, we don't spend time pointing that out though, so why is this different? Seems pretty transparent to me that you do believe there is a relation between them and you are using it to label people transphobes.

You are using the old trope of "I'm not saying all X are Y, but..."

It was on the context of another post about whataboutary (by you!).

I'm trying to show understanding and taking you at your word. I see I won't be afforded such a courtesy. Fine. But if you don't want to and you don't want to engage, then.. don't? No need to muddy things up by telling me what I actually meant! I know what I meant, I'm of sound mind, I was present when I wrote it and that still stands.

GreeBo · 25-03-2021 11:58am

km991148 wrote: »

It was on the context of another post about whataboutary (by you!).

I'm trying to show understanding and taking you at your word. I see I won't be afforded such a courtesy. Fine. But if you don't want to and you don't want to engage, then.. don't? No need to muddy things up by telling me what I actually meant! I know what I meant, I'm of sound mind, I was present when I wrote it and that still stands.

But if you are taking everyone at their word, why bring transphobes into it at all? You still haven't explained why on earth you would make such a statement if you weren't trying to imply that we are all transphobes?

km991148 · 25-03-2021 12:39pm

GreeBo wrote: »

But if you are taking everyone at their word, why bring transphobes into it at all? You still haven't explained why on earth you would make such a statement if you weren't trying to imply that we are all transphobes?

Because I've been following this thread for a long time (probably too long) and that's normally the accusations that are thrown about. One side claiming transphobic view points or the other side claiming they are unfairly being accused. Taking the context of the thread and in particular the last couple of days, I was going out my way to show no whatabotary or accusations.

Here's an example: The last time prisons were reintroduced to this thread it was via a Times UK article highlighting the problem with prison assaults commited by trans prisoners. The paper is known for pedaling transphobia because it sells (clickbait style). If they were genuinely concerned about safety, I'm sure they would have also added in the number of attacks on trans (which if I recall were 9 times more frequent, not that numbers matter too much as one attack either way is one too many).
I was trying to see beyond that and clearly stated one does not mean the other. The opposite of an implication that they do

GreeBo · 25-03-2021 12:54pm

km991148 wrote: »

Because I've been following this thread for a long time (probably too long) and that's normally the accusations that are thrown about. One side claiming transphobic view points or the other side claiming they are unfairly being accused. Taking the context of the thread and in particular the last couple of days, I was going out my way to show no whatabotary or accusations.

With respect, I cannot accept that, it would be like randomly saying "I dont blame all Germans for the war, but all the Nazis were german"
It serves no purpose other than to antagonise other posters.

km991148 wrote: »

Here's an example: The last time prisons were reintroduced to this thread it was via a Times UK article highlighting the problem with prison assaults commited by trans prisoners. The paper is known for pedaling transphobia because it sells. If they were genuinely concerned about safety, I'm sure they would have also added in the number of attacks on trans (which if I recall were 9 times more frequent, not that numbers matter too much as one attack either way is one too many).

Which brings us immediately back to whataboutery!

km991148 wrote: »

I was trying to see beyond that and clearly stated one does not mean the other. The opposite of an implication that they do

Why would it need to be said? Do you think those who disagree with you mistakenly think themselves transphobes and need your post to tell them they are not?

km991148 · 25-03-2021 2:28pm

GreeBo wrote: »

With respect, I cannot accept that, it would be like randomly saying "I dont blame all Germans for the war, but all the Nazis were german"
It serves no purpose other than to antagonise other posters.

Which brings us immediately back to whataboutery!

Why would it need to be said? Do you think those who disagree with you mistakenly think themselves transphobes and need your post to tell them they are not?

And equally, with respect, I don't really care if you accept it. I've said my piece, I'm not going back and forth all day.

I'm sorry I have antagonised you. It wasn't my intention.

suicide_circus · 25-03-2021 5:54pm

Aimee Challenor sacked by Reddit i see

volchitsa · 25-03-2021 6:51pm

suicide_circus wrote: »

Aimee Challenor sacked by Reddit i see

I found this link (apols if it's been posted already)

https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/mci3z8/whats_going_on_with_aimee_challenor/

This seems to be a requote of the OP, which has already been removed by Reddit, but this is still visible.

There's further information and of course reactions on down the reddit thread.

Reddit recently hired a new admin, Aimee Challenor, who had previously been a politician in the UK. Aimee is publicly tied to two different instances of supporting pedophiles.

The first, her father raped and abused a child, in the house Aimee was living in. After being arrested and charged for the crime, but before being tried and sentenced, Aimee hired her father to be her campaign manager for elections with the Green party, and gave a false name to the party on the paperwork. When this was found out, she claimed ignorance of the extent of his crimes, and was removed from the party for safeguarding failures.

The second, her husband is an open pedophile, who posts erotic fiction about children. Aimee had joined the Lib Dem party, and was removed when her husband tweeted that he "Fantasized about children having sex,sometimes with adults, sometimes kidnapped and forced in to bad situations". Both Aimee and her husband claim that the twitter account was hacked at that time.

The fact that she is trans has meant that she is a prime target for harassment or as a demonstration by TERF/hard right groups of how "terrible" trans people can be. This lead to Reddit (per their claims) secretly enabling protections, that all posts on Reddit would be automatically scanned, and if it was detected to be doxxing Aimee, it would result in an automatic ban. After however long of running undetected by the userbase, the automatic doxxing protection proceeded to ban a moderator of r/UKPolitics who posted a news article, as Aimee Challenor was mentioned by name in the article. r/UKPolitics went private and shut down to figure out what was happening, and the admins reinstated the mod's account. r/UKPolitics then re-opened and posted a statement, that the shutdown was due to a ban, the ban was caused by an article including a line that referenced a specific person who now worked for Reddit, and that they were specifically requesting people not post the person's name or try to find out who the person was, as site admins would issue bans for that.

Word of getting banned for saying "Aimee Challenor" spread quickly, and other OOTL posts show some of the results of that - many people repeating her name and associations and support for pedophiles, and a small few (notably significantly less) removed comments. The admins put out a statement on r/ModSupport, stating that the post had "included personal information", that the ban was automated, not manual, and that the moderation rule had been too broad and was being fixed. People who can post on r/ModSupport (you must be a moderator, or your comments are automatically removed) immediately took issue with every part of the statement, as:

-There had been a number of manual removals and direct edits of comments by reddit staff as the incident escalated (The second being something u/Spez was previously guilty of, and said he would lock down to prevent abuse of during the T_D issues) -The ban and post deletion on r/UKPolitics had been hours after the post, not immediate (which would be expected of an automated process) -Nobody believed that Reddit was automatically scanning the contents of every link to check for blacklisted words (Edit, striking this part out, looks like the text of the article was copied in to a comment which is what was scanned.) -The definition of "personal information" had just changed so much that posting the name "Joe Biden" could be considered doxxing -Reddit had not commented at all on the "open support for pedophiles" part

Many moderators also raised complaints in the post about their personal issues with being doxxed, and that they had been reaching out to Reddit staff about consistent harassment and doxxing of their mod teams with no help given by Reddit, or wondering why these protections weren't enabled for them. One notable post states that inaction from Reddit staff with regards to doxxing resulted in a situation so bad that they were forced to contact the FBI in the USA and the RCMP in Canada to resolve the situation.

This continued to rapidly escalate, and a group of mods started pushing for a temporary blackout of their subreddits, something that has forced Reddit's hand with regards to responding to issues before. The list has been changing through the night, as different subreddits join in or leave the blackout, either protesting the censorship, protesting Reddit's perceived proxy-support for pedophiles, or (in many cases) both.

Gender Identity in Modern Ireland (Mod warnings and Threadbanned Users in OP)

Comments