Wordpress bans 'deadnaming'

I wonder if twitter can ban me for using quotation marks when I'm forced to mis-sex people. For example, when referring to when a "female" rapists rapes someone with "her" penis.

So Jasmine Good sells penis news a sob story about being intersex and having been forcibly given testosterone injections by Good's father, but at the same time JG has fathered 8 children. There aren't enough emojis to convey how I feel about this.

Seven years in jail - that's a fifteen year sentence, at a guess - which is right up the top end of sentences for burglary, which would reflect the severity of aggravated burglary with a 102 year old victim. JG is clearly a very nasty and dangerous individual.

The word/s deadnaming - presumably devised by TDAs in that oh so familiar dramatic/nods to death style.

Nobody died. Nobody was re-born despite the gendered souls claptrap.

I plan to use 'formerly known as' I'm not using such a loaded phrase as deadnaming.

I'm married. Do you deadname me when you use my maiden name? That person no longer exists, so maybe I'll sue every organisation that asks for my maiden name. How very dare they.

And our favourite XY publication is straight on it

www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/11/23/twitter-misgendering-deadnaming-trans/

Anyone fancy a game of "spot the missing group in the list of groups protected from hate speech" in Mary's link? (There won't be a prize, I'm afraid, as it won't take you long and the result is all too predictable.)

Case here where a male transgender person who identifies as female was given a conditional discharge for the sexual abuse of a 13 year old boy.

Mirror link

The solicitor for Gina (formerly Gareth) Owen said: "She was literally a different person when she committed these offences."

Hey, if you can literally change your sex then your crimes can literally be committed by someone else, right?

Deadnaming so-called could be a great distancing mechanism for predators who want to disown their criminal history as is wiping all your previous criminal history from the net. It puts the rights of those with criminals histories above the rights of the innocent to carry out due diligence on an individual.

That's a good point Needsmoresleep (and by extension womanformerly). It's like the Khmer Rouge's year zero.

Exactly, and many cults members have new names - think of many far eastern sects, subsequently outed as money and sex making machines for male psychopaths - they rename their members. It's a great way of distancing someone from their families and their past - to be replaced by the proscribed history and thoughts of the cult leader.

Wrong again.
A woman who is allegedly extorting beauticians not being happy that her name etc etc...

My mistake. So the Wordpress ban is actually about a man who is allegedly extorting beauticians not being happy that his name is in the public domain.

*(£2,000)

it’s about a man who wants to force women to wax his scrotum and doesn’t like the fact his name is already in the public domain

This is actually a misunderstanding of what JY was up to. Last year Canada added gender identity and gender expression to the characteristics protected by federal human-rights law. So JY asked lots of beauticians (whilst presenting as a male, but telling them he was a transwoman) to wax his balls, but ignored the ones who said yes. He really, really didn't want the waxing. He just wanted to sue the beauticians who said "err, no, we can't do that because we have not had the training", complaining to British Columbia’s human-rights tribunal and alleging discrimination-- seeking damages of C$2,500 ($2,000) each. He successfully trapped 16 beauticians. That's a lot of money. So JY was using a trans identity to extort money.

But that would never happen.

If I get in trouble for using "he" a lot here, well he only claims to be a transwoman when asking for ball waxing, or asking ten year olds if she can help insert their tampons. Creep.

How do you determine malicious intent?

If you are motivated by maliciousness but I simply say that you said so and so’s birth name was whatever, we both ‘deadname’ that person, yet there was no maliciousness on my part.

"Does it count as malicious even if you are a woman who was the victim of a crime, and you talk about what happened to you?"

Presumably it will come to that.

The many victims of Stephen Terrence Wood/David Thompson/Karen White presumably won't be allowed to speak about their experience and use the name of the perpetrator. Presumably they won't be able to refer to the sex of the person who raped them either as that is deadsexing.

No doubt Karen White will have a new identity by now.

According to the stonewall definition I fall under the trans umbrella. Because I don’t identify with the gender of “woman”. So I could commit a crime under the name “Istand” and then decide that’s not my name. But I don’t have to tell anyone my chosen new name, right? The police have my legal name “Istand” for their prosecution. It’s in all the criminal proceedings. But that’s not my name anymore so media can’t use it to discuss my crime. That would be deadnaming. But I don’t have to provide the media with a name. So they have no name with which to identify the perpetrator of the crime I committed. They can’t call me a woman (because that’s an identity, not an actual physical thing anymore) and they can’t call me a man either because I don’t identify as either. So what do they say when reporting my crime? Suddenly we have lots of reports of unnamed people committing crimes.

I’m sure all victims would be appropriately ‘re-educated’ about what happened to them.

It probably does UpstartCrow. Maria Mac was told to call the odious yob who attacked her 'she' so presumably using the male name would be a no no.

It would no longer surprise me if it did, Upstart. Sadden, but not surprise. Look at the judge in the case of Maria MacLachlan's assault, instructing her to refer to the accused as "she" and then withholding compensation when Maria didn't/couldn't.

Does it count as malicious even if you are a woman who was the victim of a crime, and you talk about what happened to you?

Unsurprisingly it’s not about normal everyday trans people who want to go about their lives and don’t want their former name discussed, it’s about a man who wants to force women to wax his scrotum and doesn’t like the fact his name is already in the public domain.