Australian Government tells Reduxx to remove article - NB this is a repost of a thread removed for (unkowningly) breaking guidelines.

[IwantToRetire]

Just to start by saying the MNHQ have accepted that I unintentionally broke guidelines when I copied and pasted the opening paragraphs from an article in a newspaper ie it included a phrase that guidelines say is not acceptable. So following paragraphs edited (just hope I have got it right):

The Australian government has instructed a news outlet to remove or heavily censor an article that “offended” an individual living in the country.

Reduxx, an independent media project dedicated to exposing gender ideology, received a notice from Australia’s eSafety Commissioner on April 28. The notice alerted them to a complaint made about an article they published on April 1.

The article, “Thousands of Complaints Filed After Trans YouTuber Allowed To Play On Women’s Football League, Reportedly Injured Players,” revealed the identity of the person who had been the subject of mass complaint after reportedly injuring female players at a football game while playing on the women’s team.

https://www.thepublica.com/australian-government-instructs-news-outlet-to-delete-article-offended-trans-activist/
.

Twitter also seemed to have received a legal notice and did comply - which may or may not be related to the fact that the Australian eSafety commissioner (Julie Inman Grant) used to work for twitter.

Since then another story about the actions of the eSafety commissioner in Australia has emerged. https://reduxx.info/australia-police-warn-woman-over-comments-about-trans-activist-as-esafety-commissioner-continues-censorship-rampage/

So I had originally posted wondering how any such notice could be put into effect ie Reduxx is not based in Australia. Is there some global legal system that can make an internet platform conform with the law in any country. How would this work. Many people living under oppressive regimes rely on websites or forums to post information about what is happening in their country.

But also raises the issue of how much power can an individual complaint have when what is said to be disrespectful by one country will have different responses in other countries who have their own cultural norms.

Is this the start of virtual cultural imperialism?

don’t mind me, just enjoying the opportunity to post some vintage Magdelen Berns

I mean, he did actually expose an actual conspiracy! Along with two others. But let's not let that get in the way of anything.

I didn't say they get the balance right.

But in the current climate where most other social media platforms would just ban us, this is better.

Have found some of the comments a bit baffling, so maybe my attempt to do a quick synopsis of what has happened has confused some.

The person concerned is not accussed of anything.

The issue is about trans women in sport.

As far as I am aware trans women in sport are usually happy to be identified and to talk about what it has meant to them to be able to participate in women's competitions.

So if you are included in a women's team as a transwoman you identify yourself.

The complaints were against the association for allowing the inclusion of a trans woman.

“Biological adult males and it’s not just one, it is several, are playing in NSW women’s state league competitions, which contain teenage girls and young women. Shame on those clubs, who have discarded any morals they might have had, just to sign these things, so as to be able to win, where’s the dignity? You put winning above respect for the competition,” the NSW NPL Banter Page wrote in a post today.

So the eSafety Commissioner seems to trying to apply some sort of Emporer's New Clothes pretence and presuming to tell people in other countries to collude with this make believe.

It isn't a tiny minority.

In this case it was. One individual made a complaint.

I haven't had time but it seems it might be one of those situations where the person appointed to a post has their own agenda, not forgetting they previously worked at twitter who were automatically blocked women who tweeted about sex based rights, and that maybe all that this is about. And signifigant that twitter even with its new owner listened to her.

It isn't the UN compelling language. The UN like other institutions has been infiltrated by those with a trans / queer agenda. So even if TRAs are the most sophisticated entriests, how is it that so many institutions just fall under their spell?

No you are missing the point.

They put someone in a role to monitor this and action it, because it is part of the UN sustainability declaration, to achieve gender equality and Australia are fully signed up to it.

The aim is for males who say they are women to not suffer any issues. As any publicity showing this will be used against them at the UN.

There is a desperate rush to be the first country to be the best at gender equality. They don't give a shit about actually doing anything worthwhile, it is about meeting the UN goals.

I am not in Australia so have no idea whether UN Goals are high on their Governments agenda.

And very much doubt that those who demonstrated against KJK LWS tour had the UN in their mind.

But either way, the UN Goals only exist as they do, because the TRA queer agenda has been infiltrated into the UN.

Which brings us back to the underlying problem, why do so many people in so many institutions let themselves be walked over by the agenda of a tiny minority, that is only for a tiny minority.

Nobody would tolerate a minority religion being allowed to dictate how everyone should think or behave in public and private life. But somehow people have allowed this TRA.
.

The concept of an eSafety Commissioner doesn't seem to have been set up with an concerns about what the UN does or does not want.

The eSafety Commissioner (eSafety) is Australia’s independent regulator for online safety.

We are the world’s first government agency dedicated to keeping people safer online.
We started operations in 2015 as the Children's eSafety Commissioner and we are now at the forefront of the fight against online risks and harms faced by adults as well as children.

We are a fast-growing team of educators, investigators, lawyers, policy analysts, technology experts, digital specialists and other professionals who share one goal – a safer and more positive online experience for all Australians.

Australia's eSafety Commissioner is Julie Inman Grant. Ms Inman Grant has extensive experience in the technology industry, having held senior public policy and safety roles with Microsoft, Twitter and Adobe.

https://www.esafety.gov.au/about-us/who-we-are

@AlisonDonut for that link. Very interesting, lots to ponder and think about. I'm going to share the link with people in my rl so that we can discuss it.

I really don't get how people can dismiss an argument without actually hearing what was said because of who said it.

UN Goals:

Yes folks, Incest in Peace with the United Nations.

WTF?

Alison

I thought you were posting a spoof!!!

The SM team will be grilled tomorrow I think! Up over night. 7 hours and still counting.

I know...it had been up for 5 hours when I saw it.

What does that mean?

Indeed. This individual has been a militant activist for years. They would have accumulated many friends.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/2892440-Are-Genital-Preferences-Transphobic?reply=68650621

type apparently

meant to say 'InvestInPeace'

which would make a lot more sense!

Well, they would say that wouldn't they?

the UN are properly captured and using policy to encourage all sorts of shit

I do not think they are intentionally promoting incest via twitter

quite aside from anything else, its hardly effective, is it?

Hmmm. A typo? Surely the world would have informed them of it within minutes.

Maybe a bit of boundary pushing and/or humour?

This is interesting

But what I was wondering was whether some powers have been extended to crack down on child trafficking and other forms of online CSE -and these are being used in other ways?

A Freudian slip, perhaps

I can't actually find any hard evidence on publicly available websites that any players were actually injured. Does anyone know more?

Given they are trying to censor reduxx it does raise a question of is there no evidence because it didn’t happen or because it has been censored?

There would be no injuries caused by a male as no male was ever there ladies. You must have been mistaken, this is a ladies league.

Indeed. Why go out of your way to censor something that's patently not true. Why wouldn't you just threaten to sue for defamation?

Or just get the league/sporting federation to release a general statement regarding player injuries?