145
it’s going to hurt Meta’s bottom ~~line~~ eventually
Just hurting Meta's bottom is good enough for me
sentence I never thought I’d write
🤣 🤣
It is easy for many people to think trans wars is a distraction, scapegoating, or a genuine threat to the authoritarian world view. I ask you to carefully consider that anti-trans hate is genuine.
Nazis had prioritized Jewish genocide and pursued it to an irrational degree, even prioritized the genocide to actually winning the war. Some analysts say that this shows their war was always and primarily against civilian Jews.
We have evidence to think this is the case with trans people now.
The recent "anti-christian bias" order outright frames trans rights as an enemy of their ingroup.
Reed has covered the leaked Christian emails that show them believe trans people are demons and evil incarnation and want to wipe them from the face of the earth.
Rowling has been caught on tape saying she wants to minimize the number of people transitioning so that they have less work to do "special accommodations later" for trans people.
For those aware of the term Sonderbehandlung this leaves no doubt: trans people are their primary enemy, they have poured their millions into the pockets of nutjobs and politicians that will relieve them from having to live side by side with trans people.
Don't be fooled that this is just distraction and/or scapegoating by power-mongers.
They have a trans Holocaust in the making and they have already put the plot in motion. ACT NOW
Edit:
I realize I might have not responded directly to OP's question. See the following for my take.
My analysis linking Bathroom Bans as early signs of completely banning trans people out of public life https://lemmy.ml/post/25037664
I wrote this while still believing that anti-trans hate was an election-winning distraction. It partly responds to where anti-trans hate comes from https://lemmy.ml/post/24711061
In this sense many people are deeply transphobic, but billionaires have the resources to eradicate trans people from public life. The rest can only curse, badmouth, trash, verbally attack, workplace harass, fire, refuse healthcare, sexually or physically attack or mob-lynch trans people. Every transphobe does as much as they can get away with. Billionaire transphobes can get away with genocide so they're doing that.
Additional resources in support of the argument
Summary of early Holocaust course of events and why targeted people were not mobilized https://lemmy.ml/post/25008729/16208799
Erin Reed article on fundamentalist anti-trans lobbyists' leaked emails https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/2600-leaked-anti-trans-lobbyist-emails
Operating systems
I think the problem is in the opposite direction. Society is too ideologically homogeneous in being against socialism. The major narratives are controlled by nation-states and corporations, social media are infested with political advertisement and propaganda.
So, as others say, I believe it is sorta uninformed and middle-of-the-road fallacy to find a corner of the internet where you can speak your mind without being harassed by white supremacist trolls, and say we need more diverse views.
Right wingers have (had) Parlel, Gap, TruthSocial, now they have X, and Facebook, where they were also dominating and harassing in the past. No leftists and/or genderqueer person would survive a day at these platforms.
But Lemmy being primarily/explicitly leftist is the problem, and you suddenly are alarmed for echo chambers. This is not quite fair, now is it.
As for Lemmy per se, I don't think it is too homogeneous. I debate centrists and liberals every other day. And recent discussions showed that the amount of latent transphobia in the site is shocking, with people knowing next to nothing apart from 4chan/MAGA talking points.
How can this happen after all these years of activism and outreach. It is because of the ecosystem of echo chambers in the broader communications and media landscape. This discourse never reached those people.
Considering it was the position of major medical and professional organizations, it shows that the pathology lies with the existing social media and broader media enterprizes, with a prominently selective messaging.
Do I need to say that this led to widespread science-denialism for which mainstream platforms are clearly to blame?
If your inquiry is honest, then the only explanation is that the propaganda apparatus works so well, that the (relative) absence of the dominating narratives makes you anxious that you entered an echo chamber, when in fact you probably have been in an echo chamber so far.
Fellas is it gay to have sex with a woman?
This is not the first time that this paradox pops up. Couple years ago I heard the same thing for people who want assertive women, sexually speaking. So, any divergence from heteronormative roles in the most rigid sense is considered "gay".
As for your original question: Musk helps oppressive states enforce censorship on his platform .
His passion for free speech is only for white supremacists and conspiracy theorists now running rampant on his platform (there is a John Oliver segment about it).
He opposed an anti-hate-speech law in Ireland, although the law makes clear that it is still allowed to express unfavorable opinions and offend others, but forbids incitement to violence.
This shows he is not interested in defending "unfavorable reasoning" against the "woke" inquisitors, rather than advancing hate-speech and white supremacist causes in particular. This is not only a hypothesis, but a reported outcome of his actions with X/Twitter, which is now a nazi bar.
Don't forget Russel's tolerance paradox: If you tolerate nazis in order to defend freedom (of speech, political association, and the like), they will overtake the state apparatus and verbot freedoms for everyone, not only speech, but freedom of life as well.
He is doing exactly that, not only permitting, but promoting white supremacy, and at the same time treating the term "cisgender" for example as a slur.
This shows he is not all in for defending free-speech for all sides, but he is out to "destroy to woke mind virus" because it "stole his son from him".
Musk is a nazi apologist, a big cry baby, and a media gatekeeper who enforces censorship both as a platform owner and as a service to totalitarian states.
He is a national security risk, according to Wired.
IA is a pillar of internet activism, and an exceptional instance of the spirit of the web pioneers. No real hacktivist would take them on. These guys are spooks, black hat, or corporate actors.
We reached the point were robot drivers are dicks also
In fact, the American Psychological Association warns that manhood and masculinity are so construed by society's expectations, that being a man poses mental health risks itself.
There is a whole subdiscipline that focuses on 'counseling men".
Not to mention no one of this lot wants to have this discussion, either online or IRL.
https://www.apa.org/about/policy/boys-men-practice-guidelines.pdf
Imagine we joked about cisgender men suicide rates the same way we joke about transgender suicide rates.
Plus this statistic is flawed. It comes from an older study that does not even compare pre- to post- transition.
view more: next ›
This is some Gestapo/Stasi shit.
Like, all queer persons must go beyond Signal/Tor level.
This extends to the physical world: Plan ahead for escape routes and survival networks.
I will come back with this angle but, REMEMBER those mfers who always said "the NSA does not target you, so asking about anything more than Signal is paranoid/futile if ever the NSA targets you"?
REMEMBER that we said that some people have advanced threat models by default? Eg feminist activists, activists in third countries, queer people?
WHO is paranoid now, that being queer, pro-Palestine, and/or climate activists can have you on the watchlist?
This development only proves my previous points that the hordes of sock-puppets spamming the Privacy forum are fucking spooks. Pooping the conversation about advanced privacy and anonymity should qualify for permabans, IMHO.