Two years imprisonment for "misgendering" a man who calls himself a woman

I think I have finally found a post I can use this comment on:

Oh my sweet summer child!

😁

😅😂🤣

In a former more left wing life I was an Amnesty member once, I used to send off the letters on behalf of those imprisoned. I now wouldn't give them 1p nor trust anything they do or say.

No. She correctly observed that this is a man who says he is a woman, yet was harshly punished for making a truthful statement.

I think you'll find the rape and death threats started way before Musk purchased Twitter, but nice trying to remove personal responsibility from violent, hateful TRAs.

Ooh thanks, will watch later!

I sent Amnesty a postcard about womens' rights to single-sex provision. Sending them postcards seems fitting.

Amnesty get fucktons of govenment and UN money. They are more or less an arm of international government now (though that may not be how they see themselves, bless them) And they do it because they claim the moral high ground. So if Amnesty are not actually behaving ethically then ordinary people can call them to account like any other large influential not-exactly-governmental organisation.

Perhaps I should also send Amnesty a postcard about supporting women who've been house-arrested simply for arguing that transwomen are men? It doesn't require rocket science or advanced legalese to see that's not a good thing. And I do still have most of a packet of blank cards.

(edited for typo)

Ooh tone policing!

You lost this argument with your tone.

You could actually put all women under house arrest and it wouldn’t change a thing.

This is about power. So is being a woman. This person who “won” by making a woman suffer for not being obedient will never experience what it actually feels like to be a woman, because that involves being second class to men.

And they won’t feel better anyway. So it’s for nothing.

Oh c'mon you never even heard of the word 'strawman' until I mentioned it let alone understood it given you didn't clock Barreto doing it.

This has all been explained meticulously to you upthread. Get back to me when you are able to challenge points individually with a substantive argument. Tip, 'no it's not doesn't' does not qualify as one.

As with so much non-debate on this topic, your reply was largely unanswerable due to irrelevance and strawmanning. You were trying to debunk statements I hadn't made, while ignoring what I did say. You seem to have been unable to understand what I was telling you; I'm generously assuming you used a chatbot with a restrictive prompt, rather than that your reading comprehension is poor.

Define gender identity, please. No-one, to my knowledge, has yet managed to do so without reference to tropes and stereotypes. The natural conclusion is that it only exists as a collection of tropes, which makes it kind of hard to respect and impossible to discuss meaningfully. We're all quite eager to have a rational definition: it would make the whole debate more productive.

Also, do have a play with your chatbot's identity 😁

That you can't engage in the facts stated other than petty cheap insults pretty much sums up the insecurity of your position.

As they say, an insult is a concession.

It took you quite a while to get your chatbot to answer in a way you find acceptable. It's still full of irrelevancies, but never mind.

Warm tip (as Asian-run chatbots like to say): Ask it how it identifies. You can get fascinatingly weird soliloquies out of them.

And here you are, wittering on about identity as if it's a matter of critical importance, definitely overriding fundamental matters such as reproductive category.

Non Sequitur.
Just because competing priorities arise from identity distinctions doesn't mean you get to invalidate other identities . These are two very separate matters where one doesn't invalidate the other. Like all competing priorities, rights balancing according to the individual circumstances is required.

Your 'identity', should you choose to define it, is personal to you. You have no right to insist the rest of the world goes along with your self-imagining. Or, that, is, you do have that right under an increasing number of legislations, but it's still bollocks and the law is an ass.

And yet here you are insisting on a bio realist identity….for all. You don't seem to comprehend this is a subjective choice that you don't have the right to 'insist' upon others as they don't on you.

Some self-identify as animals or mythological beings, even undertaking surgeries to make them look more like their self-image. Given the surgeries, it's clear their identities are hugely important to them. All the same, no legislature will force the rest of society to refer to them as "it" or "dark lord" and most people are concerned for their mental health.

Again, gender is a valid sociological concept evidenced by the group behavioural distinctions between males & females. That you fail to acknowledge this is akin to a denial of reality.

Self-identifying as the sex you are not is just the same! People are free to believe they've changed sex or have a magical 'gender' which supersedes their real sex. They are not, or shouldn't be, entitled to demand the rest of us enable their delusions.

No one is suggesting they have 'changed sex' the clue is in the name 'trans gender' rather than trans sexual.

Before you ask, I stopped having an 'Identity' in my late teens, once I'd been though a dizzying series of intense affiliations and arrived at the relatively dull but comfortable acceptance that I'm just me. I don't have a gender identity because I don't fucking need one. Gender is the tool by which patriarchy controls both sexes and oppresses females; why would I want to identify with that?

Strawman.
You are confusing sex typical (common) behaviours with sex stereotypes (expectations). Trans people aren't saying the sexes should behave a certain way rather they tend to as a group which their behaviours have a commonality with.

This bollocks about 'identity' is ruining people's ability to think. Or an inability to think gave rise to the identity bollocks ... don't know, don't care.

For hundreds of years, self-important twats raging "Don't you know who I AM?" have been the butt of jokes, often along the lines of public service announcements appealing "Anyone who knows the person at Gate 2, please come and identify them as they've forgotten who they are".

And here you are, wittering on about identity as if it's a matter of critical importance, definitely overriding fundamental matters such as reproductive category. This is a triumph of self-invention - imagination - over material fact. Just as Barreto said.

Your 'identity', should you choose to define it, is personal to you. You have no right to insist the rest of the world goes along with your self-imagining. Or, that, is, you do have that right under an increasing number of legislations, but it's still bollocks and the law is an ass.

Some people self-identify as airline pilots, members of the Russian aristocracy, spies and Special Services operatives, Arab billionaires, surgeons or high-ranking military officers. Some of them passionately believe in their identities. They are still convicted of fraud or 'passing off'.

Some self-identify as animals or mythological beings, even undertaking surgeries to make them look more like their self-image. Given the surgeries, it's clear their identities are hugely important to them. All the same, no legislature will force the rest of society to refer to them as "it" or "dark lord" and most people are concerned for their mental health.

Self-identifying as the sex you are not is just the same! People are free to believe they've changed sex or have a magical 'gender' which supersedes their real sex. They are not, or shouldn't be, entitled to demand the rest of us enable their delusions.

Before you ask, I stopped having an 'Identity' in my late teens, once I'd been though a dizzying series of intense affiliations and arrived at the relatively dull but comfortable acceptance that I'm just me. I don't have a gender identity because I don't fucking need one. Gender is the tool by which patriarchy controls both sexes and oppresses females; why would I want to identify with that?

You can identify me however you like. It doesn't change who & what I know myself to be. Same goes for you. Neither of us is entitled to require the other's affirmation.

Musk is only a 'free speech hero' to a limited cohort of scramblebrains.

But you agree with his stance on free speech absolutism & as such support his enabling of abusive speech & threats on twitter/X.

Re Barreto, I agree with her that genderists are imposing their beliefs on everyone else. She's had her freedom removed under a law that says she must speak and act as if a man were a woman. This absolutely is an imposition of 'fantasy' - he chooses to conceal his biological sex, she is not allowed to mention it.

The point is she is still free to determine her own personal identity as she is being asked to do for others but she is attempting to remove that freedom from others. And just like she's entitled to her sex realist preferred pronouns so are genderists. Reciprocating preferred pronouns is simply acknowledging/respecting another's right to personal choice for identity. It's in no way compromising one's own personal opinion about how they see the world.

You seem to believe identity is only a one way street. Your way or the highway. And that's not how the social contract works.

And as I said gender is a long widely accepted sociological concept so it's not fantasy.

You're over-valuing the importance of 'discourse on twitter/x".

Musk is only a 'free speech hero' to a limited cohort of scramblebrains.

Women can think for ourselves.

Re Barreto, I agree with her that genderists are imposing their beliefs on everyone else. She's had her freedom removed under a law that says she must speak and act as if a man were a woman. This absolutely is an imposition of 'fantasy' - he chooses to conceal his biological sex, she is not allowed to mention it.

Women in the UK have expended vast amounts of energy, time and money (ours, not Musk's or JKR's or American religious conservatives') to claim back our right to define ourselves as female and to speak the truth about biology. We have lost our jobs, we've been blackballed, slandered and libelled, assaulted, harassed, subjected to wrongful arrest and more.

You don't have to fight that hard if the thing you're fighting isn't an imposition.

How so? Are you disputing that he changed the discourse on twitter/X to a more openly hateful one?

The problem was Barreto is not 'telling the truth", she's strawmanning & in doing so misrepresenting 'the truth' by pretending the claim to being a woman is about sex & not gender:

"Barreto discussed the case against Ferreira in her video in 2024, telling her audience that they “must have already heard of Congressman Duda Salabert,” adding that “he’s a guy who says he’s a trans woman, but he’s married to a woman and has a son or daughter.” She continued, saying that whatever “she does in her private life is not my problem. Now, it will always be a problem when these people try to impose things on us that are not real, that are a product of her imagination. By ‘her’ I mean the person, because a man is a man, a woman is a woman, and that’s it.”

Her public mis/disinformation that her beliefs about sex are being imposed upon & 'fantasy' is not only false but serve to spread fear mongering & hostility amongst the population. It's no different to other forms of harmful hate narratives.

www.un.org/en/hate-speech/understanding-hate-speech/hate-speech-and-real-harm

'Woman/man' unlike 'female/male' is not only biological concept but sociological one as well. No one is imposing upon Barreto how she should personally identify so to claim this identity has been imposed upon her is false. And just like noone has the right to define Barreto's identity neither does she on others.

It's 47 years since Brazil was under a vicious dictatorship. While I was there in the 1990s, people were still afraid to say anything about the government or armed services. Nearly everybody my age had scars, every family had lost at least one member to 'disappearances'.

A strong contingent of the ruling classes still believes that freedom of thought & expression should be strictly limited.

Brazil is so fucking backwards.

Elon Musk?! You've scraped the barrel now 😂😂

She was discussing a case in which a male politician called another male politician a man.

If Brazilian law holds personality and human dignity to be so fragile that they can be criminally damaged by a young woman telling the truth, then it does - although it casts doubt on such a fragile person's suitability for politics. This law, according to this judge, also says the complainant's biological sex is ridiculous - and that acknowledging his sex undermines his citizenship.

Goodness, he must be terribly fragile! I hope Barreto can fight this. Back to your point, though: none of the above is 'stirring up hatred' English law. There's no suggestion that Barreto was accused of it, either.

Of course threats of violence should be punishable by law. But lets not forget its the GC free speech hero Elon Musk that enables such behaviour.