TikToker who exposed Jeffrey Marsh hounded bullied

[DerekFaker]

Meet the new progressiveism. A muslim woman being hounded and bullied for criticising a white man.

This is disgusting. I hope she and her family are going to be ok.

Where is the video where he specifically tells children to message him via patreon?

Where is the video where she is 'discussing trans people'.

To be honest, though, I don't see why she isn't allowed to discuss trans people. Lots of people discuss trans people, all the time.

I didnt say she did?

Ah, you mean the one where he has his teeth gritted and says 'stop telling trans people they're inspirational'.

I see.

So it's MARSH who was discussing trans people.

Yes, it should be irrelevant. Which is why she should have made a standalone video voicing her concerns.

What do you mean "a standalone video"? She would need to include clips of his videos.

Which bit of pigeon chess are we at now?

Although a quick scroll through her videos and she has made her stance on trans rights clear with her 'funny' reaction videos to pronouns etc.

Which is her right to do.

Which is her right to do.

Yes. So do Ricky Gervais and Dave Chappelle. Pronouns are an endless source of comedy to most people, frankly.

Still waiting for any evidence that isn't spliced clips from a right winger YouTube account....

Bingo. That's your rebuttal for JM's behaviour is it? That it is called out by a right winger?

Yes, it should be irrelevant. Which is why she should have made a standalone video voicing her concerns.

Giving the evidence of his own words presumably, which is what she did.

She didnt, she fucked up, because all it's done is egg on the transphobes.

Transphobic to call out the predatory, grooming behaviour of someone who is trans, back to the sacred caste again.

She could have just made a video saying 'Hey, I have worries about this person - here are some things they have said that i think are safeguarding issues' but she didnt, she made a video (presumably for humour) stitched with one of JMs videos where they discussed trans people, so she could mock their speech from the video.

Rightyhoo.

Anyway, to get back to the thread.

Has anyone tagged Ricky Gervais to try and alert him to this?

@Seasonofthewitch83 back to Twitter please - I think you'll find all the MRA's/TRA's over there, there's a good boy 😁

she made a video (presumably for humour) stitched with one of JMs videos

Yes, that's how people, including trans activists, make Tiktok reaction videos.

jesus wept!

Of course you claim there’s no evidence. I knew that’s what you’d come back with.

point 6 would be Marsh deletes/makes private the videos.

If anyone could be bothered hunting around, but of it will be stitched with criticism of Marsh’s behaviour.

just marsh. And individual. Not all trans people either. You seem determined not to comprehend this.

This is the problem with lionising self appointed influencers and activists and giving them cult status as representatives of whole groups of people. People simply will not allow them to be criticised when their actions deserve it.

Woman, thanks.

She chose that video to accuse him of being a groomer.

Err that will be because he is a groomer. He's posted no end of videos appealing to children; your parents fucked up, go no contact, I love you, I'll be your family etc etc.

Combine this with the message TRA's send out that society wants to deny trans people's existence or "genocide" them then it's perfectly understandable that confused teens would want to find a sanctuary and hey presto here's Jeffrey to be your loving internet mum.

You don't seem to understand the difference between being a groomer and a predator. Predators will nearly always groom or capitalise on grooming done by others but groomers pave the way for predators and abusers without necessarily engage in abuse directly. Some adults can unwittingly participate in grooming because they have been groomed themselves.

Whatever JM's motives he is grooming children and that makes children vulnerable to predators and abusers.

Stop making excuses for a creepy them.

Because she put together the components of this individual's videos that led her to believe that this individual is acting inappropriately towards children???

I am not sure just how much clearer we can make this.

She didn't 'stitch' together disconnected components to make it look like this person was saying something they were not. That would be clearly 'fake' and dishonest.

But now you are claiming that using a well known video technique that involves no 'faking' or even splicing off to misrepresent is her acting in a way that makes her responsible for the actions of people who cannot control their violence inclinations with the confident:

"She made the video for clicks and likes. Its now bit her firmly in the backside."

and

"You don't think her choosing to stitch a video that JM made about trans people to accuse him of grooming wouldn't then create a massive pile on that all trans people are sexual predators?"

By the way, I don't believe she or anyone else on this thread has made the claim of 'all trans people are sexual predators'. However, it is a very well known tactic, the cognitive distortion of using overgeneralisation, blaming and polarisation. And is very obvious when you see it in action.

"Why?"

Why? To bring this male individual's behaviour online and their actions to public attention.

And it doesn't mean that any person should have to be scared of threats in doing so.

Woman ... hmmm maybe, maybe not. In the meantime pop off back to Twitter TIA

Marsh's Patreon WAS aimed at children as well as adults.

And it was open to under 18s until Marsh changed that.

Her video actually had a snippet of Marsh encouraging children to subscribe to Marsh's patreon.

Again, you are confidently making claims about video content that you have not seen and that video content has been deleted because of the threats agains Shumirun.

Says you who admits that they had not seen the videos discussed, and was not aware of the videos that were being discussed and cannot conceive that a male individual who has been accused of grooming has quickly changed their social media settings, including ... retrospectively changing the age on their patreon.

And we will simply continue to point out the facts that you entered into a thread without doing your own research, and that content has been removed from public access and that settings have been changed.

So, you posting 'Still waiting for any evidence that isn't spliced clips from a right winger YouTube account....' is actually working against you at this point.

Err that will be because he is a groomer. He's posted no end of videos appealing to children; your parents fucked up, go no contact, I love you, I'll be your family etc etc.

You don't seem to understand the difference between being a groomer and a predator. Predators will nearly always groom or capitalise on grooming done by others but groomers pave the way for predators and abusers without necessarily engage in abuse directly. Some adults can unwittingly participate in grooming because they have been groomed themselves.

I remember that paedophile saying that even if they don't get to abuse the child, at least they would have prepared her for the next pedo.

Whatever JM's motives he is grooming children and that makes children vulnerable to predators and abusers.

No getting away from it. And people who have it spelled out a zillion times and still disagree are part of the problem.

A standalone video?

What does that mean? Please explain that exactly.

Because to me, this reads that she should have created an 'unevidenced' video where the evidence was not embedded in her video and could then be easily discredited.

So, no. She did not make this about 'trans' people, she did make this about a 'male' person who was acting in a way that has been recognised as grooming by others as well.

However, you continue to make this about 'trans' people.

And again, go and find the video yourself.

I have watched it. Others have watched it as they have also confirmed that they have.

When someone says that freedom of speech does not mean there would be no consequences it should not mean that the speaker can now expect their children to be threatened and their car to be wrecked.

Yet this is what is happening in some parts of social media. Like "nice family you have here, too bad if something happened to it". Then the first person who spoke will silence herself...

This sounds like (dis)organised crime threats to me, and a major problem in some parts of political Twitter and other similar places, and also predominantly aimed at women who speak up.

That freedom of speech and speaking might have consequences is supposed to mean that others use their freedom of speech to argue back at the points the first speaker made.

I am furious about the organised crime type of threats, and thousandfold more when they are aimed at innocent bystanders in the debate, such as young children.

If she chose that video, then it was relevant to him posting inappropriately where children could access the video.