241–250 of 505 posts
Quoted post unavailable.
Something tells me that a lot of the people who've spent the last ten years insisting that "they're a private company, they can do whatever they want" are going to change their minds about that.
https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/28/23428132/elon-musk-twitt...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's the article: https://babylonbee.com/news/the-babylon-bees-man-of-the-year... There's also a lot more history as well. Elon has done a [serious] interview with the Babylon Bee before [1] and also propped them on Twitter [2]. When they were banned he contacted the head of the site to confirm they had been suspended, and even mentioned to him that he might have to buy the site to fix their behaviors. [3] That was…
Quoted post unavailable.
It isn't a satire website. It's a bigotry website that hides behind satire. They're the bully in school who knows how to play the faculty to make their targets look like the aggressor but grown up and far past any excuses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless he's transgender, he can't be deadnamed. There isn't a moral contradiction to explain. The entire point of deadnaming someone is to cause them harm. Full stop. No one is trying to cause Ye harm by clarifying that he used to be called Kayne West. If you want a non-trans equivalent, old racists used to insist on calling Kareem Abdul Jabbar and Muhammad Ali by names they had rejected to make a point about how lit…
> If you want a non-trans equivalent, old racists used to insist on calling Kareem Abdul Jabbar and Muhammad Ali by names they had rejected to make a point about how little they thought of them. exactly, so how is this any different? a black man legally changes his name because he considers his old name to be his "slave name", and almost every headline about him refuses to acknowledge this change. how is this differe…
I'm not sure what this paragraph is trying to convey. Are you under the impression that Ye changed his name because it was his 'slave name'?
>this is the crux of my question: why is "right to not be deadnamed" exclusively a trans "right"? what would make you think that?
I'm not sure why the word "right" is being used here, but I "think that' because words having meaning in the English language and deadnaming by definition is when you "call (a transgender person) by their birth name when they have changed their name as part of their gender transition."
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=deadnam...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not "absolutely true in the scientific sense", except at the "I have an understanding of high school level biology and sociology" sense. Sex and gender are both significantly more complex than just chromosomes, genitalia, or organs. If you are interested, I'm happy to dive into a good faith discussion of where the science actually falls.
Not really, no. Sex, scientifically, is determined by the kind of gametes an organism produces in sexual maturity. Males produce small sex cells, females produce large sex cells. There is no overlap among mammals (i.e. human sex is “binary”) Gender is a concept made up by feminists with no consistent definition, use mainly to confuse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, you don't have free speech here either. Mods will absolutely come in and remove content and ban you for many of the same things Twitter will.
Not entirely untrue, but the difference is that here, if someone posts "I really hate [group of people] and I wish they'd die" it's generally considered breaking the rules, but on twitter whether or not this statement breaks the rules depends on what group of people you targeted.
Look no further than this same thread where people argue that twitter simply enforced their TOS and people get downvoted whereas others are publicly arguing that they should be able to make fun of minorities (read make shitty remarks and pass them off as jokes wink wink nudge nudge). It’s all a dog whistle.
I imagine this will do a speed run of unbanning -> turning into a cesspit of toxicity because ‘free speech’ -> lots of people leave because it’s so unpleasant. It’ll be fun to watch though, as someone that’s never valued the site.
> turning into a cesspit of toxicity because ‘free speech’ Twitter is already a cesspit of toxicity because of the lack of free speech. This won't make it any worse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Transphobia is pretty clearly against twitters rules. They weren't really banned, they were locked out until they deleted their tweet. All they had to do was delete the tweet.
The argument that a person can be a different gender than the one that all their physical biology points to is absolutely not an open-and-shut case. I know many people believe that it is, but that doesn’t mean that there aren’t valid opposing arguments. To me, that means that you shouldn’t be banned for contesting the idea of transgenderism. I think a more reasonable argument is that people should be allowed to prese…
While I'm mixed on the ban, this is a mischaracterization of what they were banned for. They were banned for misgendering a specific person not questioning transgenderism. There is a significant distinction between questioning an idea and targeting a specific person.
Great, they should have never been banned to begin with.