all 19 comments

[–][deleted] 23 insightful - 1 fun23 insightful - 0 fun24 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Honestly? After this week --- security, security, security. I have confidence that we can work the rest of the details out as needed. 🤦🏻‍♀️

[–]FediverseNetizen 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah I feel like reddit is really shooting themselves in the foot. How can you invest in creating a community if it might be banned under some new set of rules later anyways?

[–]oldpinewoods 17 insightful - 2 fun17 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

I don't like the idea of letting just anyone participate in the main GC forum. There was a reason r/GC discouraged participation from men/trans/detrans.

They should be allowed to join the GC site though and have sections specifically for them. (Detrans, LGB, men etc.)

But mainly, the site should be for women/radical feminists.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Same here. It's obvious there are a LOT more men with free time out there to troll and doxx women online. Allowing them to come in would quickly overwhelm moderators and turn the sub into a shouting match.

[–]Lyssa 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

This depends if it should be a radfem site first and foremost or a kind of lobby and support group for gender critical activities and opinions.

I lean strongly towards the latter but of course it's not for me to decide.

Just my two cents: People like Graham Linehan, the Gender Critical Dad and also "classic transsexuals" like Debbie Hayton have done a lot to clarify and solidify my stance on the gender movement. If the main objective of the site is to fight the gender cult we should include everybody willing to help.

There could still be a sub just for women or just for the discussion of other aspects of feminism.

[–]oldpinewoods 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

r/GC was a radfem sub first and foremost. I don't see why that has to change?

I don't mind men joining the site, but just like with r/gcguys, they should have their own section to discuss. Not every woman wants to hear their opinion.

Anyway, it's up to the mods whatever they decide, but I'm not sure I would want to join a gc radfem site that doesn't center women's voices.

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

It does not have to. It's a decisions the mods need to make.

Each approach has it's advantages and disadvantages. A "single issue lobby" approach would possibly gain a critical momentum really fast now with the JKR debate peaking people left and right. But it - obviously - would be less of a "digital home" for radfems.

A digital home would have its obvious advantages (above all being the new home for GC community) but can easily turn into a dead end without a large platform like reddit drawing in readers from other communities. I'm neither young nor new to the internet. I've seen it happen 2-3 times before.The start is euphoric "Yeah, our new place! Our castle, our rules!" and then the participation twindles over the months and years because you don't reach a wider audience and there comes a point when the veterans have posted anything they had to post and discussed anything they had to discuss.

Full disclosure: I was a long time lurker of Gender Critical and used its ressources to educate myself on the transgender issue. I was not an active participant because I was afraid the association would make me less effective dropping the points and breadcrumps on other boards (mostly the autism community which I'm part of and which is a HUGE target for all things transgender).

[–]112223sps 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A lot of active users. GC had a lot of people, hope to get most of them back

[–]c3ll0 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I can't see how the site would make any sense if TiF were allowed. There would be endless arguments about whether or not women have the right to even call themselves women.

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

So you're essentially asking for a whole separate subreddit where anything goes?

Trans and men have GCG, GC Debate. Gender Critical is a women's space, by women for women to discuss gender critical feminism. "Free speech" is being used to justify taking a Gender Critical Feminist space and allowing anyone and everyone to participate and say whatever they want. At that point, why even have the space at all?

No, I say it's strictly moderated. Gender Critical ideology only. Female dominated or exclusive. Anything short of that is a major step backwards. If you want different subs, create them. Don't water down GC to satisfy people who aren't even GC.

[–]DangerJelly 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

women only (including TIFs). No sealioning or bad-faith questions. More discussion of radfem issues as well, not just the gender stuff. Keep men out. Permanently. If they want to learn something they can read and discuss it elsewhere on one of the infinite platforms that exist for them.

[–]Barfie 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

• I agree that the primary sub needs to allow anyone to participate and anyone to allow to speak their view. I posted a giant wall of text a day or two ago explaining why.

• only one separate sub is needed to serve as an echo chamber. And no. I don't agree with you that it should be a TiF inclusive space. That will defeat the whole point of it.

[–]Irascible-harpy 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's a Gender Critical Subreddit! You wouldn't make the primary subreddit for veganism include debates over why veganism. There are external subreddits for debate. If you include opposing positions, considering most of the internet disagrees with GC in one way or another, then the space isn't GC at all.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

the primary gendercritical forum/sub (whatever you call it) would allow for anyone to participate, female, male, trans (no matter if they're genderactivists), and detrans... all would be allowed as long as the posts were at least loosely tied to the topic of sex/gender

Risking allowing basement-dwellers to overwhelm moderators. Unless they play very nicely, I would not allow men and aggressive trans to participate.

[–]deity 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I want neovaginadisasters back

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

Would like to see it be accessible over TOR, utilize 2factor via apps (Authy, etc.) and hard tokens (Yubikey, etc.), and not use go*gle's captcha system (use hCaptcha instead if necessary).

Due to how violent and vicious trans-activists are, we need the ability to be anonymous. No way am I ever going to join a Discord chat or a Zoom call to discuss resisting a hate-movement that spray paints death threats on rape shelters.