Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

BigG moderator wrote (edited )

The multiple instances of TERFing in there directly violate this site's ToS re: transphobia. A disclaimer has been added before the link can be clicked due to this.

Anyone whining about divisiveness while defending TERFs is full of shit.

  1. It also amazes us that obvious parallels with right-wing politics are not seen, not least in the way feminists dismissed as ‘feminazis’ is reflected in the current use of the word ‘fascist’ against radical feminists by trans rights activists, as well as slogans calling for ‘terfs’ to be killed regularly cropping up in anarchist spaces both online and real world. It is shocking that the violence of this misogyny is being celebrated, not condemned.

  2. the creation and use of loaded terms intended to provoke an emotional response (‘triggering’, ‘feeling unsafe’, ‘Terf’, ‘fascist’);

10

squattable OP wrote

hi moderator

1 if the discussion of the term TERF leads to articles being censored then i think you really have to think a bit about what you are doing. the terms of service state:

Content is prohibited if it: Promotes white supremacy, homophobia or heterosexism, transphobia or cisgenderism, misogyny or patriarchy, classism, ableism, body shaming, antisemitism, Islamophobia, colonialism or age discrimination.

is this article really defending TERFs? i feel like i must be reading this text with different goggles on. i honestly would not post it if i thought it was promoting transphobia. the only bit that caused me concern was the diss of Freedom.

2 i linked the original text by the authors (who i'm not connected to by the way, i just found it an interesting read) - you've now linked to a repost on 325, that seems a weird way to deny attribution

3 cheers for at least communicating your reasons even if i don't really agree with them

−1

BigG moderator wrote (edited )

1

if the discussion of the term TERF

This isn't a discussion about the term TERF. It's a TERF writer claiming that trans people that oppose TERFs are misogynistic i.e. they are saying that trans women aren't women, and in the same breath are accusing trans women of violence towards cis women. It's the very definition of transphobia.

2 I was on mobile. After I deleted the link, I decided to add it to your post with a disclaimer for transparency. I searched for the title to find the link and that 325 site is what came up. The text is the same so I don't think it matters.

since this has 8 downvotes and not a single upvote other than your own, maybe you should reconsider your viewpoints.

If you have a complaint about this moderator action, you can voice it in f/meta.

2

squattable OP wrote

wowzers i think you are kinda proving the point of the article

1 you have seriously misunderstood this piece if you think it is a transphobic article written by a TERF

2 errr ok maybe better to reinstate the original link instead of a repost but indeed it's the same text

3 LOL i don't base my viewpoints on upvotes but that is an amusing thought

−1

BigG moderator wrote (edited )

1 you have seriously misunderstood this piece if you think it is a transphobic article written by a TERF

Consider yourself warned for transphobia and gaslighting. One more incident equals a ban from f/anarchism.

2 errr ok maybe better to reinstate the original link instead of a repost but indeed it's the same text

Give me your wordpress link and I'll replace the other link. Makes no difference to me. No one here has shit enough politics to buy what you're selling.

1

squattable OP wrote

Haha wield your banhammer if it helps you.

There's the link again. https://wokeanarchists.wordpress.com/2018/11/25/against-anarcho-liberalism-and-the-curse-of-identity-politics/

FYI i took up your invite to discuss this on /meta

1

BigG wrote (edited )

That wordpress doesn't have any other content on it, it's brand new. How did you even find that blog if it's not yours? If you wrote it, why not just own up to it instead of pretending you're somehow impartial?

1