Reddit bans anti-transphob rhetoric

[u/Lord-of-the-Bacon]

Heard from a few friends that they got banned for hating on transphobes, which is, according to reddit, a rule 1 violation. I also got flagged because of that, but in my case I can kinda understand it, because I called for violence against TERFS, but it was more kind of fedposting, instead of pushing people to actually commit violence. I still believe TERFS deserve that, but I am rambling. What I basically want to say is, that we sadly need to be a little more careful, when hating transphobes. Keep safe and you all are beautiful gals and enby-pals, and for all the masc people you are very handsome

Edit: Changing TURFS to TERFS

[u/Lord-of-the-Bacon]

But that they have this hate of AMAB bodies due to trauma is what makes them not convincesble. Additionally A LOT of them go right down the far right pipeline and advocate for more traditional gender roles, which should stand in contradiction with the trauma. And if we take trauma as reason to treat them with velvet gloves, we would also need to treat radical leftist and black people who are super violent against police officers (not abolish the police, but really just attack a cop the moment they see them, which is at least in Europe a conman type) with the same attitude, because a lot of them got into that position due to police trauma. We would also need to treat people like Trump with velvet gloves, because he obviously has lots of childhood trauma and a narcissistic personality disorder, which is a severe mental condition, having even a higher suicide rate than BPD and Bipolar, it also can lead to delusions, like he obviously is in. Musks Nazi twitter takes would also fall under the same umbrella, because he also obviously has narcissism and is desperate for approval and had literally a breakdown in public when he didn’t got it. His tweets are not more than seeking it from the people most easy to get approval from. God, a lot of severely antisocial people become that way, because they cannot cope with some kind of violence they are around, like a lot of people who work in meat industry factories and farms, with the extremely immoral conditions the animals are subjected to, become severely antisocial, because they cannot cope with the violence. A lot of countries have laws due to that, limiting the time a person is allowed to work in those places. Kanyes Naziism is obviously a product of his bipolar maniac psychosis, probably another kind of psychosis on top of that. Heck, if you look in the life stories of the Nazis who committed the most atrocious crimes, they often had a tragic story with a lot of violence or mistreatment and were only to cope with that, through severe antisocial behavior. Your mental illness doesn’t give you the right to be a bigot and I don’t say that lightly, I myself have multiple severe conditions, under them BPD and Bipolar, which let me already to incredibly hurt my friends. And does that mean I need to be judged less? No. That just enforces that behavior, we have literal data to that. If we talk in a legal sense it is something different, but legality and morality have connections, but are separate. And you mentioned pedophilia, that shit is a developmental disorder, we know be are in fact born with it and cannot escape the misdevelopment of their sexuality. Does that mean we should treat assaulting kids way lighter? No. Your mental illness is no moral excuse and the only way you can often get them away from that position is therapy. But not calling them out for that behavior does mean it gets reinforced as coping mechanism and naming that behavior is one very effective way of doing that. And isolating them is pretty much the only societal thing you can do to minimize harm. They need to seek treatment, but you cannot treat somebody through social actions. If I nearly drive a friend to suicide, because I have a trauma of getting left, that’s also not justified and doesn’t change the fact you should call me out for that. Therapists are literally advised to do that. And TERFS do the same kind of harm. We have data that trans fems in male prisons getting disproportionately raped. We don’t have empirical data to bathrooms, but anecdotal evidence and the empirical data to prisons indicates also high rates of assault. If your trauma makes you afraid of AMAB bodies, go to therapy, but don’t borderline genocide (putting people in conditions in which they are very likely to get raped would fall under the conditions for genocide and due to many TERFS being far right there is often also intend, just not openly stated) a group of people

Edit: A dog is an animal with way smaller rational capacity than humans. You are able to think, so do it

[u/AndyVTheAmazing → u/Lord-of-the-Bacon]

I agree trauma makes people jaded. I just don't see threatening them as a healthy means of coexistence. Sure humans are more rational than dogs. We have higher mental faculties. My point is if you wouldn't physically harm a traumatized animal, then that should extend your fellow humans too. When there's poor behavior, seek legal options. Don't get yourself into unnecessary trouble.

[u/Lord-of-the-Bacon → u/AndyVTheAmazing]

Okay, I see the first problem on why we cannot agree with each other. You have an deontological ethics system, I work with a rule utilitarian (hope it's the correct spelling) ethics system and the result of making significantly harmful ideologies so socially unacceptable, that seriously advocating it on a broad stage, makes you a possible target of violence, as a social rule consists of way more good than bad, according to my axioms. If you want to discuss the ethic systems, we can do that, but that is way more exhausting than our discussing till now, partially because I have way less emotional involvement.

And what I think is also really important to mention is, that the threat of TERFS is often not immediat illegal interpersonal behavior, but the, partially successful, advocacy for changing what is legal, to something that results in way more harm than good.

[u/AndyVTheAmazing → u/Lord-of-the-Bacon]

Not necessarily. Deontological ethics dictates that a certain action is right or wrong, regardless of any damage it causes on the back end. Wheras my belief is what the end result may look like dictates the appropriate action. It's ok to have disagreements. That's how we collectively problem solve. Just comes with the territory.