Why r/GenderCritical was banned by Reddit

Is that a 'yes' you are against abuse of women, but all the abuse of women on other subs of Reddit, the smoke bombs thrown to try to prevent women meeting, the hundreds of abusive messages sent to JKR are okay, or not so not okay that you can be bothered to actually engage with the reality of the impact of them on women?

That's not really a yes then, is it? It's actually somewhere between 'no' and 'I don't give a shit'.

" No, because it attacks what I am, not what I believe"

I think this is the crux, the entire trans movements thinks that belief = being.

You may see yourself as a woman, but others are under no obligation to share your perception.

If you feel so attacked because others don't perceive you the way you perceive yourself, I suggest you get therapy.

And that is meant as friendly as possible, I've been there myself, around 1.5 years long.

But you do not go around pretending others are denying what you 'are'. That is absolutely a lie. And a really shameful, manipulative one to get them to submit to your view of yourself.

So why can you not just disown people who send disgusting and abusive tweets, MadBadDaddy? You said, "As much as I might want to disown them, if they are trans then they are my 'lot'."

You clearly choose to have them as your lot; it is not obligatory, any more than anyone with red hair cannot condemn and refuse to be counted with a red-headed terrorist or red-headed fascist or a red-headed cat-torturer or a red-head who picks his nose and eats it....

So why cannot a trans person of whatever gender disown trans extremists who behave in a disgusting way?

They can. They can choose to condemn others behaviour, explicitly condone it or ignore it, which amounts to the same thing.

I still don't get it. I do not identify with all women whatever they do: I don't just wish to disown, I do disown (eg) female persons who take their young children to join ISIS and then glorify the disgusting murder and sexual enslavement of other women, for instance. A Roman Catholic can disown members of the IRA and their behaviour, and disown sexually abusive priests who use the Church and their position to gain access to the children they abuse; a Muslim can disown Muslim murderers and extremists. So why cannot a trans person of whatever gender disown trans extremists who behave in a disgusting way?

I am sure you would disown a man in his early twenties who with no provocation from her struck a woman in her mid sixties and knocked her to the ground; certainly I don't suppose you would condone his behaviour, because you don't come over as the sort of person who thinks that is ok. Would his claiming to be female (in spite of the male muscles and the male beard and the male genitals and the male hormones, not to mention the premeditated intent) make his behaviour in some way acceptable and mean that you identify with him? Why?

Are you against women being abused?

That sounds very much like a 'yes' then.

If you're not against women being abused, and are okay with any sort of behaviour as long as the perpetrator identifies as trans, then they are your lot.

Nice.

MadBadDaddy
It hasn't exactly done my lot any favours, has it?

Now I am getting confused. Who exactly are "my lot", again? Because the people it has done no good are clearly the people who have targetted JKR with repulsive tweets and shown themselves up; are you identifying with them?

I have to say I'm pretty unimpressed with feminists doing the same thing and using a tragedy for similarly weak reasons.

I'm sure I'm not the only one here who is pretty unimpressed with you full stop. It's your side who let off smoke bombs outside Grenfell Tower, not radical feminists.

I can't believe you, who made a really tenuous link from Grenfell to someone saying "bean counters" was a slur, and claimed to be "triggered" because for some reason you associate that with the Grenfell fire, can't see how inappropriate and objectionable it is for "activists" on your side to seek to intimidate women by letting off smoke bombs outside Grenfell Tower.

One of the speakers at the meeting was a female firefighter who was at Grenfell, btw.

And the reason that the GC Reddit site was banned is that it was full of women thinking for themselves and making allegiances which, even for a site as happy to turn a blind eye to all sorts of horrors, was just too much for Reddit.

Stop causing harm and nasty women cant weaponise it.

...about trans rights, I mean, not about women's rights
Yes, they are two different things.

Thelnebriati Word for word, trans people say the same thing

Yes, we know. It's a false comparison.

I don't know anything about smoke bombs

Perhaps you should keep up with what's going on over on that right side of history of yours?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8095107/Thugs-set-smoke-grenades-shadow-Grenfell-Tower-Labour-transgender-rights-row-deepens.html

There is a comparison you could make between removing the existing rights of gay people using Clause 28, and trying to remove women's rights now.

In both cases, its us supporting human rights, and another side trying to remove them.