Article with sums up where we are now

[happydays2345]

I found this article online, and thought I would share it.

It sums up brilliantly where we are now! 😊

aninjusticemag.com/mumsnet-how-poor-moderation-created-a-transphobic-swamp-adf391ccf9fc

Sorry, I lost interest at 'cisgender'.

"Second, the 2018 moderation principles created a false equivalency between the behaviour of trans-positive and anti-trans users, and in doing so failed to signal to the former that the domination of the latter was over."

Interesting language 😬

Oh dear. I get the very strong impression that the author is nowhere near as good at research as they like to think.

I've never seen the concerns listed in paragraph 9 (children taking hormones, people with penises accessing female only spaces etc) addressed.
As this is a predominantly female site used by mothers, I'd say these are legitimate concerns we have.

No way would I want my child started on a hormone treatment when the long term consequences are unknown.

Call me an extremist but I also wouldn't want my child to have such drastic surgeries which would render them infertile.

The most startling thing about that article is the claim it's a '9 min read'. Maybe TRAs have to say the long words out loud?

I lost interest when he described Hampstead as South London :D

To be honest I saw the stupid purple hair in the thumbnail and didn't even bother reading .

More telling us how horrible and mean we are I guess. Yawn.

Good to see we're still getting under skin. Keep it up vipers.

@aliasundercover

The most startling thing about that article is the claim it's a '9 min read'. Maybe TRAs have to say the long words out loud?

I thought maybe you were exaggerating, gave it a read at a reasonably brisk but not unusually skimmy pace, and it took less than two minutes :-/ I can see the use of an indication at the beginning of an article of how long it might take to read, but people's reading speeds vary a great deal and they seem to be leaving heavily towards one end of the reading-speed spectrum. Odd.

I lost interest when he described Hampstead as South London

I took this as meaning the protest at Dulwich Leisure Centre, which is definitely in south London.

Yawn

I wouldn’t even bother giving it the clicks/traffic.

Lol. Poorly written crap just isn't my thing dear. ☺️

#NoThankYou

@aliasundercover

The most startling thing about that article is the claim it's a '9 min read'. Maybe TRAs have to say the long words out loud?

Says a lot about today's reading standards.

@happydays2345 I'm sure there are some worthwhile points in this article, but it's so very biased, it's hard to take seriously.

For example, I've just had a look at the "how can we work towards debate" thread. I've got limited time, but from what I can see, the majority of responses there are some variation of the below example:

^"You can't have a debate if one side is #nodebate
If that's dropped then maybe we can start to debate."^

I agree wholeheartedly with that comment, and a fair article would have acknowledged that the #nodebate stance was indeed a barrier to constructive good-faith dialogue. Wouldn't you agree?

Is there an archive version? I really don’t want to click on an unknown link and give that article traffic.

Did you write it OP? Is that why you have created a thread for it.

@Melroses

"Second, the 2018 moderation principles created a false equivalency between the behaviour of trans-positive and anti-trans users, and in doing so failed to signal to the former that the domination of the latter was over."

Interesting language 😬

Maybe that is why the reading time is so high. The word salad aspect that is used to make it seem very clever.

I suspect the op did write it.

ahahahahahahaha

Oh, OK, I didn't know about that one... I wouldn't have read much further anyway :)

Men are threatened by women grouping together and talking. Nothing new here

This is pure apologetics. It's not designed to persuade non-believers, it's intended to paper over the cracks of a believer's doubts.

That's why it doesn't back a lot of things it says up (like the points @aliasundercover mentions) - you're meant to already believe the TRA line on those things.

archive.is/CRQYE

Archive version.

Archive version

👍