Libs of TikTok - parent's email account disabled by Google after complaining about a book

[UltraLiteLife]

I'm not up on Libs of TikTok but if this is remotely accurate, it's disturbing. NB: not seen the contents of the email.

Received this from a follower. The book "Jack not Jackie" was in her kid's elementary school in LA. When she emailed the school about it, Google immediately disabled her email account! Unbelievable.

https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1763299481397715151

Somebody's posted this in the comments.

It's not happening.
If it is happening, it's rare.
If it isn't rare, it's good!
If it's good, you should support it!!
If you don't support it, you'll be punished... <-- You are here.

I call bullshit, utter bullshit.

Libs of TikTok is source of stochastic terrorism that's already got schools and hospitals closed due to bombthreats incited by its lies, which of course it Raichik can plausibly deny because she didn't tell anyone to do it....

Google doesn't spy on everyone's account and disable it for saying things that aren't woke. Honestly they don't have that much time on their hands. Anyone could screenshot an 'account closed' email and blank out the email address, or if it's theirs it could have been for any other reason.

Please don't spread LoTT's dangerous lies.

Just because Libs of TikTok is transphobic, it doesn't mean they are your friend. They are anti-women, anti-gay and spreaders of poisonous misinformation. This is just nonsense.

Don't think I'll be putting the book mentioned in this ("Jack not Jackie") on my reading list

"In this heartwarming picture book, a big sister realizes that her little sister, Jackie, doesn't like dresses or fairies-she likes ties and bugs! Will she and her family be able to accept that Jackie identifies more as "Jack"?
Susan thinks her little sister Jackie has the best giggle! She can't wait for Jackie to get older so they can do all sorts of things like play forest fairies and be explorers together. But as Jackie grows, she doesn't want to play those games. She wants to play with mud and be a super bug! Jackie also doesn't like dresses or her long hair, and she would rather be called Jack."

Heaven forbid a girl with a name that's already gender-neutral should have short hair and be interested in bugs without being transed.

I call bullshit, utter bullshit.....Google doesn't spy on everyone's account and disable it for saying things that aren't woke.

This. If the account was disabled for emailing a school it will be about a hell of a lot more than a complaint about a book.

I don’t understand what the mechanism would be for the claim to be true.

How could you possibly know that your account had been suspended because you’d emailed the school? Why not because of any other email you’d sent?

How would Google come to hear about it to immediately disable the account?

The book sounds like it’s promoting the most stereotypical nonsense about gender imaginable. But that’s almost beside the point. This just sounds like conspiracy theorist nonsense.

The problem with this approach, is it really often isn't about 'a hell of a lot more' than the thing that it is about.

What sorts of emails would justify closing any google account?

I bought a thing on Amazon and for months, google and you tube linked accounts bombarded me with ads relating to that thing. If you think that they can't flag key words across platforms then you are incredibly niave.

But I really don’t believe that they are targeting people this way.

I use my gmail account to sign in to MN. So it’s linked and Google could easily make that link. And I say a lot of things that TRAs don’t like on here.

Loads of us do. If it were the kind of conspiracy being implied, there’d be a lot of weird MN Google account suspensions.

I just don’t believe this isn’t libs of tok tok creating a the leftist media are conspiring against us narrative.

We haven’t seen the email here for a start. It may well have been outright abusive and offensive. And that may be a pattern for the person whose Google account has been suspended.

Objecting to the book (and I think most of us here do object to it, on the basis that it’s peddalling most regressive kinds of gender stereotypes to young children who cannot think critically about them) does not mean being reasonable about that objection.

If the email were actually sensible, reasonable and innocent, we’d have seen it. Because it would bolster the conspiracy. The fact the text sent doesn’t feature prominently suggests that seeing the text might detract from the Google are discriminating against me claim.

You have single handedly done the Narcissist's prayer woke version in succinct fashion so well done!

No. I haven’t.

What I’ve said is that I’m not willing to believe a politically driven social media account’s version of events - especially when they have provided no evidence of the woke conspiracy against them.

If nothing else, we are talking about an account that behaves in exactly the way you are criticising in relation to their political opponents.

I think we should all be questioning the accounts of ‘oppression’ we encounter on social media, even if we are inclined to sympathise with (elements of) the political agenda behind those claims. Libs of Tik Tok have an agenda. And they’re as faithful to the truth as the very online TRAs they oppose.

’all I did was email about a problematic book’ may well be the narcissistic prayer of the alt-right anyway.

The people who reported and banned the account are just as subject to:
That didn't happen.
And if it did, it wasn't that bad.
And if it was, that's not a big deal.
And if it is, that's not my fault.
And if it was, I didn't mean it.
And if I did, you deserved it.

All we know is that a social media account with a clear political agenda claims that a woman was unfairly banned by Google for merely raising an objection to a book. I’m no more inclined to believe their victimhood narrative than a TRA’s.

Throwing around narcissism as a concept doesn’t help women’s rights.

They were really the only person with a gmail account to complain about this book? I highly doubt it, I’ve seen posts on here where people have (quite rightly) contacted schools about using that book.

Why would her account have been “immediately” suspended, google aren’t reading everyone’s emails and what sort of key word could she have used

Sounds like complete bullshit.

Like pps I'm skeptical of the claim that Google shut down the email of this person for the reason claimed. It seems unlikely.

I don't know about any schools but Boston Children's Hospital was not shut down. It was on lockdown for a short time after the police meandered over to check it out. Libs of Tiktok reposted videos from Boston Children's own website. Those particular posts were not lies.

Stochastic terrorism is another word that's losing its meaning from being tossed around so freely.

You've got receipts I assume, that Libs of Tiktok 'is source of stochastic terrorism that's already got schools and hospitals closed due to bombthreats incited by its lies'?

Because otherwise you are also 'spreading dangerous lies', no?

Libs of TikTok is source of stochastic terrorism that's already got schools and hospitals closed due to bombthreats incited by its lies, which of course it Raichik can plausibly deny because she didn't tell anyone to do it....

That’s quite the libel and defamation case you’re pumping out there PP. I hear Libs of TikTok sues so I do hope you can evidence all of this.

Got the feeling this is one to watch... i’ll get my popcorn.

I'm slightly sceptical about this - it seems unlikely. I haven't heard of Google suspending anyone else's accounts for wrongthink.

Having said that, it seemed implausible that Rachel Meade would be disciplined by her employer and regulator for making very mild gender critical remarks on her personal Facebook, and that happened, so you never know. (Along, I should add with all the other women targeted for believing biology is real, eg Maya Forstater, Kathleen Stock, Jo Phoenix, Allison Bailey, Rachel Rooney, Rosie Kay etc etc etc)

Not really the point of the thread but the names they've chosen for the protagonists are very dated.

If the only evidence they've got is a photo of the book and a screenshot of a generic Google blocking notification, that's not proof of anything.

Beware of those feeding you inflammatory stories with nothing to back them up.

Those two photos could just as easily be used to say "I was banned from Google for trying to buy this book".

'NBC News unearthed a concerning pattern: approximately 33 instances were identified where institutions or individuals criticized by Raichik subsequently faced bomb threats or other forms of violent intimidation. These incidents, spanning from November 2020, affected schools, libraries, hospitals, small businesses, and elected officials across 16 states, Washington, D.C., and Ontario, Canada'

https://www.advocate.com/news/chaya-raichik-nbc-stochastic-terrorism

And also guys, calm down, I'm not accusing Raichik of literal terrorism . Stochastic terrorism means spreading hate likely to harm others that you can then plausibly deny, which I am happy to label Raichik as because its what she does and I am far from the only person saying this of her. S

Here's another receipt @nothingcomestonothinghttps://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/09/02/lgbtq-threats-hospitals-libs-of-tiktok/

Also I don't think I have to quake in my boots about Ms Raichik's lawyers being in touch, as she just loves being called a stochastic terrorist because she thinks it was made up for her (it wasn't)https://www.mediamatters.org/libs-tiktok/libs-tiktok-creator-chaya-raichik-celebrates-being-labeled-stochastic-terrorist

Are you an American by any chance?

LOL. Does no one these days know that correlation is not causation? From the article:

'On average, these threats materialized several days following Raichik’s posts'

Right, I'm declaring here and now that the vegan Flora is horrid. If next Thursday someone rings up the Flora factory and says their vegan spread is shit, is it my fault?

Same article:

'the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which has noted a general increase in such threats against public institutions.'

So, there's a general increase? But the increase is the responsibility of a SM activist? So not general? Or...what?

See if the claim was that Google was discriminating against its own staff for wrongthink, I’d be inclined to believe that.

But this just feels like online posturing and bullshit. I’d want proper evidence before believing this social media shite.

Incidentally, I think the term ‘stochastic terrorism’ is classic 2020s hyperbolic and catastrophising terminology. It’s language intended to confuse and to conflate saying things (some) people disagree about or feel is a bit mean with mass murder for political aims. It’s not helpful terminology in the least.