This shit would be too on the nose for Black Mirror.
There was an ad about stopping a bill that would allow people to repair their own car, and this was the exact reason the manufacturers gave for why its a bad idea to let independent people or shops from being able to work on the car.
Literally the exact same scenario.
Worth noting that if anyone thought the LG TV privacy issues where bad wait until you hear how bad cars are. Especially teslsa. Telsla employees are allowed to snoop on all your recordings, and on video openly joke about it as if its a normal okay thing for a thing to do.
this is why you don’t want “smart” anything
Well thats horrifying
Trying to feel bad for a tesla owner here
And people on hexbear still get pissed when i state the simple fact that men can never be trusted, only taken out from a safe distance.
Removed by mod
What was originally said here to warrant this wall of “not all men” text under a post about an abusive man harassing his ex?
I think that’s such a bad way to read and represent what I said that I don’t want to answer your question. Doesn’t feel like I’ll get fair consideration if I do and I worry about being hanged with my own words. But you’re speaking as a mod right? Green username? And I’m not, so if I’ve got unfriendly moderator attention on me already I guess I have to respond.
I don’t have the exact text as I blocked her and then I heard she deleted her account after arguing with someone else, but she said something like “and people on hexbear still get mad at me for saying men can never be trusted, only taken out at a distance”. She’s not suggesting taking men out for ice cream. She’s not qualifying or limiting the scope of the advocation of killing men at a distance to only abusive men either – I wouldn’t have complained at all if she had included a single-word reasonable qualifier, as I also support very strong action against abusers. It’s not fair to speak so generally and then invoke “not all men”, and it’s not fair to blame me for her miscommunication, if indeed she miscommunicated. I didn’t believe she miscommunicated though, given other comments I’d seen of hers.
If that’d been the first time I saw something like that from her I wouldn’t have said anything. But I’d already held my tongue previously and was out of patience this time. The last time was on some post a month or so ago where there was a lot of genuinely good discussion about the roots of bad behavior on the part of so many men, however there were also some dogshit comments, one of which was from this poster being vocal about being proactively hostile toward men in order to make women feel safe, (behavior which certainly doesn’t make me, a trans woman, feel safe when I encounter it irl for the reasons I complained about). And then there was another commenter in that post who said " death to men" which, again, does not feel like it fosters a safe environment for any woman who also cares about men.
In general I think some subset of “the left” needs to reckon with pretending that being toxic is liberatory.
Okay I’ve now had a chance to review her deleted comments as well as re-reading your comment and the rest of the thread. This is a post about an abusive ex remotely stalking and harassing a woman by remotely controlling her car, a nightmare scenario for the victim and anybody who empathizes with her and you chose these grounds to try to re-litigate an old complaint and you started it out with literally “not all men” in response to her brief vent about this, and it doesn’t get better from there with you comparing her arguments to abusive bioessentialist TERFs and asking if this is just white people brainworms.
I’m removing all remaining comments in this thread for violations of rules 4 (misogyny), 5 (harassment, demeaning), and rule 14 (not being charitable). Reach out to me if you’d like further clarification.
The bear site is important enough to me I don’t want to catch a site ban on this hill. You have removed my comment and I don’t think it’s worth the effort of escalating to an appeal for its reinstatement. The support I’ve gotten about it has been enough for me, and given that SEG deleted her account and comments my comment doesn’t stand as well without the context of hers. What I feel I must do, however, is voice what objections I have to the charges and how you’ve characterized what I said.
On rule 14: I will withhold a plea on this one because I mostly followed the spirit of the rule (which you didn’t see) for quite some time before visibly failing to follow the letter (which you did see). I actually did try to be very charitable to SEG and other commenters who’ve expressed similar (problematic, imo) sentiments by striving hard to understand where they were coming from and not saying anything previously. But over time, repeated incidents filled in the gaps wherein that charity lay, and it became harder for me to keep giving her the benefit of the doubt. I was as charitable as it felt possible to be given that longer context, but by the time I hit my breaking point that was technically not charitable anymore even though I was being quite restrained in my objections. I consider this a flaw in the rule: There is hypothetically some line between charitable interpretation and outright tolerating bad behavior, and we users have no way to divine where the mod team thinks it is. Although I will note, the mod team regularly does not follow that rule (interpret charitably) when it comes to people of color expressing their feelings about Israel, and that has led to at least 3 POC users leaving the site forever in recent memory so I’m frustrated to see that rule being thrown at me in this context.
On rule 5: I plead mostly not guilty to harassment. When I did complain about how I felt about her comments elsewhere, I went out of my way not to refer to SEG by name, not to single her out, not to quote her verbatim so it wouldn’t be easy to find that she was the one who said the offending things, and to focus on the content without vilifying those who said it. Part of that was so as not to risk fomenting any sort of harassment campaign against her! But it was also because I was bothered less by her than by what multiple people, of whom she was just one, were saying, and wanted to grapple with those ideas rather than beefing with the people who happened to be voicing them. And yet, multiple people have messaged me in support, saying they have also blocked or considered blocking SEG before due to a history of toxic behavior from her. If there is a mass of people against her now, it is her doing, not mine.
I will, however, cop to “demeaning”, specifically on my use of the word “idiotic”; I think that was excessive and I regret that one. (I argue that a charitable read of my comment would let that one slide, but it still doesn’t meet my own standards and I would take back that words if I could).
On rule 4, I plead absolutely not guilty. I am not interested in reaching out for an explanation either, as you’ve twisted what I said so grossly that I would have trouble taking your analysis seriously. I think I am familiar with the theoretical framework I’d get in response, anyway. I have read plenty and engaged in many discussions around misogyny in efforts to make my offline communities safe spaces for non-men over the last decade, and I have seen both the successes and the human costs of the failures of these theoretical frameworks. I’ve tried to internalize the ideas that would have let me not be bothered by the extended history of these kinds of comments, and I have not been able to because they contradict other leftist principles I hold. I don’t think this is misogyny, it’s having a different angle and perspective on the matter that is still firmly situated in leftist principles, in listening to west asian and south asian and east asian and black communist women discuss the intersections of gender and feminism and class and imperialism. Asking if this is just white people brainworms doesn’t come out of nowhere, and if anything your dismissal of those objections only reinforces my concerns.
And on that note, I am in an awkward position because, again, I had other people of color respond to my non-targeted complaints sympathetically and in agreement, some (femmes!) even going further and saying things that would probably catch flack for “misogyny” if an overzealous mod saw it. I’m tempted to pull up specifics but I am not going to call them up or pull their comments in as I do not want them getting into hot water. We have been steadily losing POC users due to what is generally considered “cracker bullshit” and I do not want these comrades, some of whom face even more challenges offline than I do and are thus in an even more precarious position than I, getting directly embroiled in this online conflict and feeling more convinced to delete their accounts to protect their own peace. I guess I’ll have to be the lightning rod, but I don’t want to get site-perma-banned over this.
Miscellanea:
A clarification: the person I cited did not think of themself as a TERF and in fact had much more in common with SEG’s views on gender than with mine. That you are now accusing me of misogyny while dismissing my concerns only reinforces my points.
I also think it’s mean and dismissive to call my attempts to communicate clearly “a wall of text”. I usually type from a computer and on a computer screen it doesn’t look like a ton of text.; Fuck me for trying to communicate clearly, thoroughly, and with some nuance instead of just condensing it all down into pithy zingers I guess?
And with that, there you go, my comment’s gone, you win, I’ve voiced my objections, and I think I’m ready to move on from this. In fact, I’ve learned my lesson and will consider switching over to just blocking people instead of contesting their problematic ideas so I don’t get mods breathing down my neck again. I don’t feel the need to clarify any of my points as they already stand on their own and I don’t know what I could even add, and they’re still in the modlog for anyone who’s curious. I also don’t feel interested in discussing this with you further given your characterizations of me; I simply post this comment to defend myself in the eyes of others, not to change your view of me. Will I automatically catch a ban from any comms you moderate if I block you? I don’t feel good about you seeing comments from me in the future given that you are a mod and have been, in my opinion, unfairly on my case about this, but I don’t know if it’s a rule violation to block mods.
I just want you to know that I agree with you 100% and think that this is a poor decision by moderation. I still remember the early stages of the Syrian refugee crisis when there were a lot of loud voices advocating for deporting “fighting age males” back to what was at the time an active war zone cloaked as concern about the safety of (white) women. Site staff failing to distinguish between this and Reddit style “not all men” handwringing is extremely disappointing.
Thank you, the support means a lot to me!
Yeah, the Syrian refugee crisis is a good example, thanks for bringing that up! I did see disgusting islamohassian bigotry and outright racism cloaked in white feminism, but I didn’t know about the deporting “fighting age males” thing. That’s heinous. That’s calling for killing refugees with extra steps, and with teeth!
the harassment removals in this mess are wild, i saw no harassment.
I appreciate your feedback, I will be re-reading this after I’ve slept. Maybe I was wrong in how I interpreted some of this and I’m open to that but I wanted to quickly address two things quickly before I go to bed:
- You will not get hit with any comm bans if you block me, you just won’t see anything from me. I just tested it myself. However I will still see your comments, not because I’m a mod but because that’s how blocks work on lemmy for all users (I don’t like this but it’s how it is)
- A site ban was never on the table for any of this from me, and I don’t have the power to hand one out even if I had wanted to. Only an admin can I believe. Even a temp comm ban would only come after repeated offenses unless it was bad enough to skip a few steps in the escalation policy outlined in the CoC.
Thank you for the clarifications and outlining what the stakes are here. In light of those, I don’t think me blocking you is warranted at this point so I will not. I have a very busy day tomorrow and the next and will probably not be available for much communication til late, but I also don’t have more to say here. Peace
I have been following this thread with the issues raised by two users which weren’t addressed by the user that deleted their account.
I have had a few altercations with Serial where she conflated what I initially said. Stating things which weren’t true and using it as a way to be confrontational. I seen a repeat of this behaviour here which is why I had been following this thread to see if any moderation would be taken against Serials behaviour and to see a moderator basically burying the evidence I find quite damning.
By the time I got here Serial had deleted her account and the comments, so obviously there are no comments of hers to remove. No reports were made either. The evidence is still very much available in the modlog where the mod deleted comments can be read.
I personally made a report on her last comment which she deleted after.
If a woman venting in a thread about an incredibly abusive man makes you literally pull a “not all men” diatribe, I find it very hard to engage with that.
I don’t want to come off as dismissive about the role of white womanhood in racism. I’m aware how men of color are demonized and i do not participate in that. Go through my post history when you’re already at the point of firing up the whisper networks to talk behind the back of the bad trans woman. I’m not gonna comment on gender in nonwhite communities, as that’s not my place, but i do need to point out that you are pulling the usual trick to shut trans women up by insinuating we’re all white homonationalists who want to bomb Palestine. Did you also call me a terf somewhere in there? I’m sorry, but I lose focus at times when I get confronted with overused arguments, I think it’s the ADHD.
Edit: wow you legitimately went there, you seriously told a trans woman how much her arguments remind you of terfs. You really did that. How do you keep looking in the mirror after that? I’m serious, how can you do that? How the fuck do you live with hurling that accusation at another trans girl?
With a few hours distance, i do see that you put effort into that post and i think you do deserve a good faith engagement with what you have to say, like i’m really taking the parts about white women tears and worthy victims to heart, i give that serious thought, these are in themselves valid objections - but please look at the context in which you are raising them. Seriously. I stand by my point that i will not spare the feelings of privileged classes. I shut the fuck up when comrades of color feel the need to vent about crackers because as a trans person, as a queer person, and yes also as a woman i know what it’s like to face systemic oppression. And i gotta be honest with you, i expect the same leniency when i go off about men in a thread that is literally about a guy who terrorized his ex for 4 years, continued to exert control over her in the most mundane parts of her day to day life, pretended to abduct their child and had a history of domestic violence towards her that led to the breakup in the first place.
How can you see that and scold women for not being nuanced enough because you’re lucky enough to be blessed with a father who isn’t an abusive piece of shit? Do you think i don’t know good men? My brother is the best ally i could wish for, he’s always had my back. I’ve stood side by side with men (well, with one man, anybody else was trans women and nonbinary people, but i do appreciate that guy’s contribution) when chuds tried to raid my favorite queer bar. And there’s men on here that i regularly have good, pleasant, productive discourse with. Of course individual good men are out there. That does not stop patriarchy from existing and patriarchy only exists because a majority of men uphold and practice patriarchal control all the fucking time. Focussing on individuals instead of systems is pure, undiluted liberalism. Your “not all men” sensibilities effectively mean you refuse to hold men as a class accountable for patriarchy, for a central support structure of capitalism. You need to reckon with that.
Removed by mod
How elsea am i supposed to read this take here within the context of her post:
Are you even serious in your delineations? I’ve been deliberately abused by someone whose attitude on the matter boiled down to “your transness is real but it doesn’t matter if you’re trans: if an afab abuses you and you get mad about being abused, then you don’t actually care about women”. I guess that ends up being transmisogyny by definition but it’s still weaponizing this “mEn R eVuL” bullshit. But you know what, it’s not just about trans women being misgendered,
That outright says “i don’t buy that you don’t include at least some trans women in this.” And why the part about “Palestinian men not being worthy victims”? Were have i said anything to that extent? Who is putting words in whose mouth here?
She can’t even be arsed to defend this herself, and i’ve had an awful day, i’ve full-on dissociated for half of the evening because i’ve got my back up against the wall and have no idea what to do about it, but sure, go ahead, add some more to the online drama, it’s such a welcome distraction from not getting healthcare.
And why? Because i refused to engange in “not all men” bullshit. That’s literally her stance, that women HAVE to make sure we use that antifeminist dogwhistle and even that is not enough for her:
I used to think the excuse of “when we say men we don’t mean all men, just the bad ones” was meant seriously, but turns out it’s way easier to use it as a very convenient excuse to never learn any trigger control and never grapple with their own capacity to be abusive than to actually put those words into practice.
And that’s not even getting into all the implications about me being “abusive” and “unsafe” that she keeps repeating. Have you never seen how trans women get ostracized? When she loads an entire wall of text up with stuff like that and lets it drop that she’s been inquiring about me behind my back, what am i supposed to think of that? Because she did that, too, she outright says so, as you could have noticed when reading her post three times over.
At this point, i can’t believe i didn’t report that post.
Removed by mod
I think her point is more about essentialist thinking, and I don’t think it’s a fair interpretation to construe her as comparing you to a terf.
You’re seriously telling me that “i have a hunch you would count some trans women as actually men” is NOT comparing me to a terf? Are you fucking kidding me?
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Patriarchy exists as a system by men, for men, against women and other people who aren’t men. You are victim blaming when you are calling me “sexist”. What’s next, will you call black people racist for saying they can’t trust white people? Will you pretend that cisphobia could ever be a thing that exists because trans people find it hard to trust cis people?
No matter how much liberals write oppression off as an individual bias that some people just have against members of other groups, we can only look at these things through a systemic lens. Men as a class have structural power over women as a class. Look at the statistics for sexual violence, for domestic violence, look who does these things and who is affected by them. It’s overwhelmingly something that men do to women. Yes, it’s not 100% of the time something that men do to women, but that’s besides the point. We live in a system that not only hands men the power to be abusers, but that routinely protects them when they do and that encourages them every day to inhabit that role. The same can’t be said about women. It just can’t.
“You thought you’d get away with this. I am in your car. I am in your maps”
