GenderCritical does not belong on Saidit. The moderators are determined to not follow site rules.

submitted by bobbobbybob from self.SaidIt

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 6 fun5 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 6 fun -  (5 children)

After just five hours on this site, and being excited to have returned to the older days of Reddit, with freedom of speech, I have already received my first, permanent ban from a sub, /s/GenderCritical. Even Reddit did not manage to have me banned this quickly.

According to the rationale, I was banned for my supposed gender:

Accounts that post here and are known to be male will have their ability to post here removed.

This is the rule I will be acting in accordance with now. Please note that this is in no way a condemnation or endorsement of your contribution, and it's not a punishment, it's simply meant to keep the space functioning as it's meant to. And again, remember that you're free to post elsewhere if you like on this topic. The "other discussions" tab can make it easy to find discussions on the same topic in different subs so I'd encourage you to use that (I think posting a link to this post will do it) if you want to make it easy for interested people to find your discussion on this topic too. You should still be able to view the content of your comment on your userpage if you would like to post the text elsewhere.

https://saidit.net/s/Gender_Critical/comments/5ap2/the_kreung_tribe_of_cambodia_has_a_tradition_of/kg45 (http://archive.vn/DRiqr)

Here is another one of my comments: https://saidit.net/s/Introductions/comments/5c3l/reddit_still_hates_women/kfv6 (http://archive.md/Imq0F)

That is precisely the argument I had made about freedom of speech and how sites always slip back into censorship. https://saidit.net/s/whatever/comments/5b3f/welcome_reddit_ban_wave_refugees/kfhf

It seems this was with the same user as the person who later banned me. Apparently, we have a more fundamental disagreement about freedom of speech. I find this behavior incredibly hypocritical. They complain censorship in one place, just to enforce it in the next place. It is not that they despise censorship, it is just that they are upset that it is not their flavor of censorship, not against those people they dislike, and not them in charge. These are precisely the types of people who will vie for places of authority on this site. We always ask in amazement "How could this happen? How did it get so bad on site X?" This way. We do not care, so those who do care, who do vie for authority are the ones who end up calling the shots.

What now? What should be done in response to this? I say, let's prove the strength of our ideals. Censorship should be met with more freedom. Censorship should not be met with more censorship. I say, the best thing to do is use our freedom of speech. Dear moderator of Gender Critical, you might have packaged your rationale with pretense of politeness, but it is abundantly clear to me why: at this stage, your power on this platform is still weak. As censorship increases, the gloves will come off, and you will be just as vindictive as anyone else practicing identity politics. Your character, in the claims of women's oppression and victimhood you make, are abundantly clear. You are an identitarian and an authoritarian in waiting. You got a taste of your own medicine and you did not like it. But, instead, you did not learn your lesson, you are seeking to replicate what you left behind in another place.

I am sorry, but this will put us on a path of conflict. I condemn this hypocrisy and if this is site is not supposed to end, in a few years, the same way as Reddit now, we must root out censorship in its inception, expose it, and condemn it. Consider this my reading of the riot act to you, /s/GenderCritical. It is either me or you. There will not be both on this site. If it is you, I will gladly pack my bags, go elsewhere, encourage as many as possible to follow me, and ridicule you for the hypocrites you are in any place that still values freedom of speech. We are on the war path.

Anyone who would like to link to this post can find an archived version under, in case this post will be deleted for some form of damage control: http://archive.md/68LBi (https://saidit.net/s/SaidIt/comments/5cb2/gendercritical_does_not_belong_on_saidit_the/kg8k)

I encourage you to spread this.

PS: There are two subs, one with and one without underscore. Gender_Critical vs. GenderCritical. Please pay attention to it.

[–]joeytundra 38 insightful - 2 fun38 insightful - 1 fun39 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

After reading some of your other comments how you think women are some of the most coddled people on the planet..I can see why you were banned. Clearly women aren't coddled and protected if all men have to do is declare they identify as women and demand women allow any man into spaces and change her language so she's not allowed to talk about her own biology. It's us men that are the most protected. You are acting very entitled. Saidit like Reddit have their own subs. If you come in acting like women have it made when they don't and are under attack, you've been in too many MRA circles online and watching too much porn. We need to wake up to what's really going on here. Why are there many different circles online filled with contempt towards women and to the point where random women have been murdered by 8chan and 4 chan members after getting their dose of validation for hating women and porn ads all over the place? We're being lied to by a bunch of groomers. Why is a gay male involved with MGTOW? GROOMERS AND THEY ARE GROOMING US to turn us effeminate. Women aren't doing this to us...men are and you don't know what their orientation really is online. Some of the speeches coming from MRA circles sound an awful lot like how gay men perceive women as a threat. "Pussy pass" for example...that's what gay men think women have but if you open your eyes women don't really have that. There is a penis pass. Think of how much we can get away with. They even make up lies about statistics.

They want us addicted to violent porn, effeminate porn, addicted to anal...women don't benefit from that. Calling men white knights for even defending a woman as a shaming tool? Straight men don't come up with that. Bitter males that view women as their competition do.

You can hate women all you want but I'd much rather defend a woman's honor than go sniff a dude bro's ass online for thumbs up and validation. That is a trap.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

You can call me hateful all you want. Then you did not understand the points I was making or looked into the claims I was making. Women are the most protected class, out of biological reasons. Women are also the moral arbiters in our society, which is a huge part of why we had such a rush towards the left, why women can start movements like MeToo and MRA can hardly get legislative change passed. Gay men also do not have the social impact you claim. Our automatic in-group preference is for women, not gay men. Women, the sisterhood as I called it, decide what is program, who has moral ascendency in the end, even when it comes to black people or migrants. They are the biggest voting block and have most social cohesion. Any discrimination you can find or allege in society, against minorities such as black people, is stronger against men than that minority.

I will probably comment on this topic many more times, so follow my account. But to play the same tired games of alleging hate, that I will probably have very little patience for. I do not like identity politics and if you want to debate me, debate the arguments I present, not me as a person. I will not be silenced for the gender people think I have (although, I still do not think I have even disclosed that conclusively) and I will not engage discussions about my mental state. You are not my therapist. If Hitler had said 2+2 is 4, it would still be four, no matter how hateful he was, so buzz off with your nonsense. If this is a site where this type of argumentation flies, I might as well go back to Twitter or Reddit.

You can have this idiocy on every mainstream social media platform. If all you are coming here for is to transform this place into the same sort of hug boxes, with the same intellectually weak identity based ways of argumentation, then all you are here for is entryism, not freedom of speech.

Starr, Sonja B. “Estimating Gender Disparities in Federal Criminal Cases.” American Law and Economics Review 17, no. 1 (2014): 127–159.

Hugenberg, Kurt, and Sabine Sczesny. “On Wonderful Women and Seeing Smiles: Social Categorization Moderates the Happy Face Response Latency Advantage.” Social Cognition 24, no. 5 (2006): 516–539.

Rudman, Laurie A., and Stephanie A. Goodwin. “Gender Differences in Automatic In-Group Bias: Why Do Women like Women More than Men like Men?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 87, no. 4 (2004): 494.

https://archive.org/details/fraudoffeminism00baxerich

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women-are-wonderful_effect

I will not repeat all of the points I made, though. You can look at how the sisterhood ostracizes women who go against the narrative, such as Erin Pizzey, Cassey Jaye, etc. but it is still women, in the end, who will call the shots, which is why the transgender trend will be quite short-lived, as soon as women are hurt, such as in sports and why the media's narrative is about trans-women, not trans-men. This is about women, not transgender people, primarily, or we would not hear this little about women transitioning to men. Read my post. It's linked and I will probably keep talking about this until I am censored on this site as well.

[–]joeytundra 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Gay men do in fact have tons of influence. These orgs have billionaire backers which gay men have been the main beneficiaries. If gay men don't like a comedian like Kevin Hart telling a joke 10 years ago...they have the power to cancel him. Then claim they will do the same to Ellen the lesbian for forgiving him. Gay men get their power by pretending they don't have power...then feigning oppression when they are openly celebrated. You should look at what gay men have written about in the past. Explain why most of it has come to pass? You will also see NAMBLA still mentioned in 1987 when this was written. Still using the same techniques.

http://library.gayhomeland.org/0018/EN/EN_Overhauling_Straight.htm

A little from the link

[2] PORTRAY GAYS AS VICTIMS, NOT AS AGGRESSIVE CHALLENGERS.

In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be cast as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to assume the role of protector. If gays are presented, instead, as a strong and prideful tribe promoting a rigidly nonconformist and deviant lifestyle, they are more likely to be seen as a public menace that justifies resistance and oppression. For that reason, we must forego the temptation to strut our "gay pride" publicly when it conflicts with the Gay Victim image. And we must walk the fine line between impressing straights with our great numbers, on the one hand, and sparking their hostile paranoia-"They are all around us!"--on the other.

A media campaign to promote the Gay Victim image should make use of symbols which reduce the mainstream's sense of threat, which lower it's guard, and which enhance the plausibility of victimization. In practical terms, this means that jaunty mustachioed musclemen would keep very low profile in gay commercials and other public presentations, while sympathetic figures of nice young people, old people, and attractive women would be featured. (It almost goes without saying that groups on the farthest margin of acceptability such as NAMBLA, [Ed note -- North American Man-Boy Love Association] must play no part at all in such a campaign: suspected child-molesters will never look like victims.)

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Yes, gay men might have an amount of influence that is not in proportion to their numbers. Like women. Or maybe certain people in the media. But gay men are also a tiny minority of men.

Do you think these things through before you type them?

[–]joeytundra 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Numbers don't matter when you have power. Also numbers are inflated with the organizations because it's not just gay men in those organizations so politicians take notice of the numbers.