you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]RippoffOfLoveSStraight | Overuses quotation marks 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Reddit is not a public service. As a private company, they're allowed to refuse service to anyone they wish. As much as I oppose their decision to do so, I 100% support their right.

[–]hinterlands[S] 31 insightful - 1 fun31 insightful - 0 fun32 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

They cannot refuse service to a protected class. Guess what homosexuals are.

Our spaces are being taken and reddit is complicit. They cannot refuse service on the basis of sexual orientation, which is the outcome of trans censorship of homosexual spaces.

[–]RippoffOfLoveSStraight | Overuses quotation marks 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I mean, you can sue Reddit for any reason, that doesn't mean there's a case to be made. And it sounds like to make that case you'd have to first argue that LGB erasure by the trans rights movement is a thing and all I can really say is good luck with that. Especially since Reddit's defense would likely be that transgender people are more worthy of the protected class status and that they banned gender critical subs to protect them. I just don't see Reddit losing that case.

[–]denverkrisMy pronouns are Vodka?/Yes!/please 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

There is no data to back up the assertion that trans are more worthy of being protected than women or homosexuals. So, that defense might be problematic, no?

[–]RippoffOfLoveSStraight | Overuses quotation marks 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I would hope so, but I don't think that's guaranteed.