Seon
Not An Evil Liar
In addition, murder is justified as being wrong because it’s a violation of our fundamental positive right to life, liberty, and happiness. Thus, can also be categorized as activity that violates our freedoms.
[RD] JK Rowling and Explicit Transphobia
- Thread starter Cloud_Strife
- Start date
- Status
Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
We've been over this. It's not about opinions, it's about libel and slander and harassment.
I think it's logically consistent, but it's not a rationale axiom. Intimidation is in the mind of the recipient of the speech. By making intimidation the reasonable restraint on speech, it creates a system where intentionally misconstruing your political opponent creates a valid way of shutting them up. Especially in a Common Law system, it cooks 'rewarding bias' into the system. I don't need to get a judge to agree that it is intimidating, I just need to convince a judge to act as if it's reasonable to say that it is intimidating.
The majority of us are from countries where freedom of expression is extremely high on our bill of rights. So to create the legal ability to easily overcome this by using something nebulous like 'intimidation' drastically lowers the bar. And once hate speech is codified, it then becomes an uphill battle to undo any badly written precedent. It's a bit like saying that anti-blasphemy laws are going to protect Freedom of Religion.
A hate speech law is going to be very different from an institutional regulation. 'Forcing' police officers to use the chosen gender as true (barring exceptional circumstances) needn't be a law, but merely a condition of employment.
Seon
Not An Evil Liar
That would be a valid criticism of my point, yes. Ultimately, I tend to agree that the ‘intimidation’ requires a rigorous basis of proof by empirical study. I tend to favor rules that make it easier to change names or banning state employees (who should be held under higher standard of behavior) from employing these things. I acknowledge that it would require a higher burden in the private world.
However my larger point is that the basis of our laws and morality does not require us to make exception-cases. All laws are laws and morals are morals because they are consistent, so I tend to take offense at statements implying that “justice” has to be won through unfair and inconsistent means.
As a matter of fact, there is a logically consistent way to demonstrate why hate speech And crime is wrong and worse, given similar result to the victim as a comparable crime.
However my larger point is that the basis of our laws and morality does not require us to make exception-cases. All laws are laws and morals are morals because they are consistent, so I tend to take offense at statements implying that “justice” has to be won through unfair and inconsistent means.
As a matter of fact, there is a logically consistent way to demonstrate why hate speech And crime is wrong and worse, given similar result to the victim as a comparable crime.
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,374
And here I am walking into the mine field again... but someone ought to tell you this: that was the situation until others decided to stand up for transpeople. Frankly, transpeople can't stand up for themselves alone, they're too small a group on their own. Utterly marginal. As a group they're politically irrelevant, and glued themselves to lesbians and gays to get anything at all, and then were adopted together with the L and G (and a token B that no one ever cared about) as a pet cause by the "alt-left". One among many and discardable, something I was always keenly aware of. You weren't strong enough politically to win anything and you aren't strong enough to alone defend any of what you already have.
More recently, transpeople have apparently managed to make many among the lesbians hate them, and some among the gays have rather unkind words about them also. Which you do not hear because they leave the "LGBT" associations rather than engage in visible conflicts there. I see a crap-storm coming that has been years in the making and I am not happy at all about it. At the heights of the absurd, arguments over mere words - which, I'll grant, are in fact shows about who holds more influence - are undermining what was once genuine solidarity. But it goes further, and I won't go further here, it's not worth my time - you don't believe anything that goes against your ideas. Divided we fall, but some more than others. You'll find that most people who can walk out from last stands, walk out.
Crezth
i knew you were a real man of the left
LGBT associations were created by LGBT people, not some "alt-left" conspiracy. Jesus. People have agency in securing their own rights. And your disgusting little anecdote about transpeople deservedly provoking the ire of their former allies has no bearing whatsoever on whether trans people should be protected. People don't only deserve rights once you've decided you're comfortable with them.
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2010
- Messages
- 8,873
You say this like its a bad thing for marginalised people to help other marginalised people.
That’s Bingo! As a “token B” its hilarious how quickly transphobes also turn out to be biphobes also. It just goes to show how gay and lesbian TERFs just privileged bigots that hate anyone who aren’t exactly like them. They usually hate each other also but are willing to put up with each other enough to do a big crap on other marginalised people. It is utterly self-defeating and even if it wasn’t it is utterly disgusting.
People in the LGBT community can be really quite terrible to bisexuals, pansexuals and other non-monosexuals. Usually we don’t get it as bad as transpeople. Why do you act like this is a good thing?
“Alt-left” in this context meaning “people with empathy”.
LGBT people came together because we face similar types of oppression. It is and continues to be a sound tactical decision but more importantly it is simply the right thing to do. Privileged, usually financially well off, usually white gays and lesbians have decided to abandon transpeople (and sometimes bisexuals) to the wolves because they’ve won a few victories. Often they even align themselves with said wolves in attempt to garner sympathy. They are bigoted detestable moronic cowards.
Abandoning the fight for trans rights is incredibly stupid because if the TERFs and reactionaries ever win, the reactionaries will quickly turn their claws to their former allies. Because reactionaries are never sated, no amount of blood will ever fill their stomachs. Reactionaries love to divide and conquer, its their favourite tactic. Together we stand, divided we fall.
Even if abandoning trans people was tactically sound, it would still be an utterly abhorrent thing to do. I will never voluntarily associate myself with a movement that is happy to abandon its most vulnerable members for a supposed tactical advantage. That’s evil.
God I wish they would just quietly leave and shut up. Instead they do a big piss on the community and then team up with people like the Heritage Foundation to spread transphobic propaganda.
A crapstorm caused entirely by people like you.
Its quite ironic to see someone who said that nobody cares about my rights to complain that they are not being shown solidarity. If you fail to show solidarity with two out of the four letters then why should you expect them to show solidarity towards you?
Privileged gays and lesbians who undermine bisexual and trans activism are not comrades. They are bigoted traitors and should be treated as such. And I shall treat them as such.
aelf
Ashen One
I just want to make an observation that it's always the same names that pop up, and I have no idea why people still entertain them. A few of them mask it very well, but whenever you see them pop up in these discussions, it's always just to bait people while appearing neutral (i.e. concern trolling).
People make a big deal about being civil and giving these culprits the benefit of the doubt, but we've been at this for years. Not sure what's left to say at this point.
People make a big deal about being civil and giving these culprits the benefit of the doubt, but we've been at this for years. Not sure what's left to say at this point.
Last edited:
Cloud_Strife
Deity
Yeah, we clearly have multiple societies that have 'hate speech laws' despite our protection of Freedom of Expression. So, there must be some hurdle where the harm is shown to over-come the civil liberty. You make a good point about 'intimidation'. I don't think you can fully test hate-speech laws against intimidation. But then I guess civil assault damage is basically a function of intimidation.
Hate speech laws will be there (as well) so that the victim doesn't have to wonder if escalating the violence pre-emptively is necessary. The reason why civil assault is a tort (partially) is because it forces someone else to react to counter a threat, where we don't want the resulting over-reaction to cause harms as well.
This video's long, but I think it covers JKR's transphobia, and how to interpret her works (which I still love) in the face of it.
For someone who isn't trans, she really gets it.
For someone who isn't trans, she really gets it.
Seon
Not An Evil Liar
https://twitter.com/sims/status/1277381145706053632
Probably the thinnest skin response from JKR. Unfollowing Stephen King and deleting her praise of him for saying “transwomen are women.”
Probably the thinnest skin response from JKR. Unfollowing Stephen King and deleting her praise of him for saying “transwomen are women.”
That she had praise for Stephen King tells me all I need, she has poor taste
Seriously, though:
Rowling is just a writer. She had made the mistake (not just now, but apparently since forever) to be commenting on social/political issues, and got what inevitably would come as a result.
Just cause someone is a writer, or even a very famous writer, doesn't mean they have a more valid opinion than anyone else on subjects outside of their immediate knowledge.
I think she is being cannibalized over this, but again: it is the way it goes, and a public figure should never get involved into political debates if they want to avoid this kind of already lost war.
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
That's very fine that you think her first mistake was to talk about politics.
Now do you think her politics being open transphobia was a mistake?
Now do you think her politics being open transphobia was a mistake?
I don't share her view, but I won't be cannibalizing her. I really doubt she is going to ever leave this behind either.
JohannaK
Heroically Clueless
Nobody's asking you to chop off her right hand and eat it raw, or even cooked with a side of fava beans and a nice chianti.
It's a very simple question that does not require a complex answer. Either hers is a bad opinion or it is valid. Not that all bad opinions aren't necessarily valid, it's just in this case, it is bad because denies either the existence or the rights of a whole class of people.
It's a very simple question that does not require a complex answer. Either hers is a bad opinion or it is valid. Not that all bad opinions aren't necessarily valid, it's just in this case, it is bad because denies either the existence or the rights of a whole class of people.
If you don't get that I don't agree with her view after I spelled it out three times, it's your problem.
So what was the point you were getting at? Why the comments about her being eaten alive (I'm guessing, from cannabalised)?
Because she is just another person, and having a bad view shouldn't end your entire career.
I don't even care about her as a writer, just find this situation sad.
Cloud_Strife
Deity
She has a massive, impressionable audience. Her words and views carry weight.
- Status
