4 posts at a time ? Are you trying to flood me out here ?
Sorry, I wasn't trying to waldo you. I wrote the first post while I was waiting for Linz to get showered. And then the second post because she had to do her hair. Then the third post while I was waiting for her to pick out her outfit. Then another post because she had to do her makeup. Then I went and did other stuff because she had to choose a different outfit and redo her hair and makeup. I didn't intend for it to come off like a stampede, it just kind of turned out that way.
I... suppose so. But is that why coverage of this case was necessary ? To expose Yaniv as a predator and bad actor ?
I think the case needed to be covered regardless of whether the plaintiff was a well-meaning saint or a conniving predator. Most of the international articles surrounding this case didn't refer to Yaniv's predatory history at all; the basics of the case (essentially, "trans-woman wants beauticians to be legally compelled to handle her male genitals") were in their own right sufficient to bring attention to the case. Even if Yaniv had a squeaky-clean history, the essentials of the case were still upsetting to many people.
I don't think that's what I saw in the coverage. If the coverage was "look at this bad person ! and they are now abusing the HRC system" that's far different than "look what happens when we enshrine transgender rights ! freaks like this surface in our midst !"
My issue (and I believe Brown and Rogan's) was about the circusifying of rights questions by the right-wing mudslingers.
So as I mentioned before, I think the mainstream news outlets were pretty restrained in what they reported about Yaniv. And as I said above, I think that the basis of the complaint itself was sufficient to draw attention and raise concern about the outcome of the case. This was unavoidably controversial.
Publicity concerning Yaniv's behavior resulted in more victims coming forward, as already discussed.
I think declining to report on Yaniv's history of predatory behavior gave readers an inaccurate picture of Yaniv's so-called activism.
I think that Yaniv's history of predatory behavior gives insight into possible motivation for why he targeted these women.
The aestheticians claimed in their defense that they were concerned that having Yaniv in their homes was unsafe; his predatory history is certainly relevant to that defense.
Also, whenever women raise safety in regard to trans people in women's spaces, trans people and their allies always claim that concerns are unfounded, that it's a myth, that it never happens. But that isn't true, we can point at Yaniv as an example, and there are others as well. Often crimes committed by trans-women are reported as crimes commited by women. Headline says "Woman arrested in child p0rn bust", and when you look at the mug-shot it's a stubble-faced individual with long hair. "That never happens" is a false narrative, and declining to report on it gives trans allies a pass to keep making that false claim. Nobody is claiming that all transgender individuals are criminal, but pretending that none of them pose a threat to women is dishonest and dangerous.
For what though ? For saying trans women are really men ? Did they all say the same things ?Aren't you putting all of these people in the same box now ?
For any number of thought-crimes. Some big, some small. It's not all the same box, but there's a general theme: if you catch the ire of the trans-allies mob, you're going to face consequences.
Meghan Murphy of course has been banned from Twitter and protested everywhere she attempts to speak. When she spoke at the Toronto Public Library in fall 2019, the CBC Radio's Carol Off had Toronto's head librarian Vickery Bowles on her show for a public struggle-session, during which Off likened Bowles' decision to allow Murphy to speak at the library to allowing Neo Nazis to speak at the library. And if you saw the video of the night of the speech, you saw SJW types yelling at attendees, inviting them to kill themselves or telling them to "bleed out"... some of them even had a little mock-up guillotine for beheading TERFs.
I guilted you into watching a Meghan Murphy talk; while you said you found it terribly boring, I don't think you saw anything during the talk that warrants comparison to Nazis. After Murphy's talk, Toronto's mayor and some of the city councillors vowed to take action to stop Murphy from speaking there again. Late in 2019, Toronto trans-woman and activist Julie Berman was murdered. Toronto's SJW community was quick to blame Murphy. "Thanks Meghan Murphy!" "This is what happens when you let TERFs speak in your city!" Who killed Berman? Was it an angry feminist moved to violence by Murphy's talk? As it turns out, it was a non-binary pen!s-person who was a member of Toronto's LGBT2SQIA+ community. Not a TERF, not somebody who listened to Murphy.
Arielle Scarcella was a popular lesbian Youtube video personality. Now she's "Arielle TERFcella" and persona-non-grata in LGBT circles, for the terrible crime of telling trans activists to stop trying to bully lesbians into dating pen!s-people.
The JK Rowling affair is ongoing, and we can all watch the ongoing witch-hunt. But it's not just about public figures and public speaking events and social media personalities. It's little things that won't make the newspapers.
BC_Cheque being scared to hit the "like" button on the wrong Tweet is one tiny example. Don't let people know you read the wrong thing! You could get in trouble.
One I saw recently was from a yoga forum on Reddit. A woman was quitting her yoga studio and was asking for suggestions for self-study. Asked why she was quitting, she explained that her studio had recently welcomed a new trans woman, and while she had initially been supportive, she found herself showering with that person one day and found them staring at her with a raging erect!on... she didn't feel safe and didn't think she could ever go back there. Someone told her "You should complain! That's not acceptable behavior, trans or not." She said "If I complain people will say I'm transphobic."
I don't follow yoga forums, but that one was spotted by TERFs and noted on the Gender Critical Feminists community on Reddit. Which has now been erased, because Reddit decided that gender-critical feminism is "hateful". Reddit's GC had been a place for women to share similar stories... a teenage lesbian who had been banned from her school's LGBT after she said no to dating a "trans girl" and was deemed a transphobe. A woman who's PCOS group had been ruined by a trans woman who didn't actually have ovaries but joined the group so that they could police everyone's language. A woman whose trans acquaintance grabs her boobs and says "oh, it's just us girls here!" when she objects. Women sharing experiences like this is too "hateful" to be allowed at Reddit. That's gone now.
It's been said (and I've said it here before) that the purpose of a witch-hunt isn't to kill one witch, it's to scare everyone else into compliance.
Wow. 3600+ words..
She makes some great points, actually
I thought that it was a thoughtful essay that deserves more consideration than being dismissed as "Rowling's transphobic comments". And yet, that's how it has been depicted (just as Murphy's talks have been depicted as transphobic hate speech). Last week Rowling Fed-Exed her RFK Foundation "Glimmer of Hope" award back to the RFK Foundation after their director denounced her "transphobic comments" in an open letter that didn't address one iota of what Rowling wrote.
but also she seems to think that the amount of abuse that happens on Twitter is germane to the discussion, which it isn't. Twitter is a **** show.
Twitter is an abomination, but it's also apparently an important medium for expressing views.
There's a long list of well-known women who've been run off of Twitter due to harrassment from idiots, not just trans allies but incels and gamergaters and alt-right goons as well.
-k