all 27 comments

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 42 insightful - 4 fun42 insightful - 3 fun43 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

"It’s a private company, they can do what they want!" the bootlickers and the TRAs collectively wail, as they bully private companies to their whims.

No. Private companies can’t just do what they want. Is Reddit a platform or a publisher? If it’s a platform, then Reddit should not censor. If it’s a publisher, then Reddit should not be allowed to promote homophobia.

[–]florasisHOMOSEXUAL FEMALE/Pussy is my God and I'm monotheist 21 insightful - 1 fun21 insightful - 0 fun22 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do what they want, as long as it's what the TRA want.

[–]FediNetizenSuper-semi-bisexual (i.e. straight) 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They can do what they want, though. The lawsuit will do nothing but give TRAs ammo to laugh at GC people and waste money.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 21 insightful - 1 fun21 insightful - 0 fun22 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Have you searched to see if any firms are soliciting a class for anything gender related? I wouldn’t be surprised if some firms are gearing up based on the changes in the UK.

One thing I’ve also been meaning to do is to go to places like r/lawschool or if it’s too woke other places where some law student might see it and suggest note topics that have to deal with various trans legal issues. They are a minefield and I have a hard time finding relevant information on them. So they are perfect for a law student wanting an interesting case note topic.

This is on my mind because I’ve been wondering about how in the U.S. class actions can be launched against doctors and various health care providers who have dangerously abandoned their oath to do no harm. And pharmaceutical companies, and pharmacies, and if possible health insurance companies. Hell, I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a Forest Corrupt Practices Act case in there too with regard medical transition providers.

[–]RippoffOfLoveSStraight | Overuses quotation marks 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 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 -  (9 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.

[–][deleted] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Technically everyone is in a protected class since race is also a protected class. What protective class means is that they cannot discriminate based off of it. Someone might be able to go after Reddit for their new TOS though.

[–]MezozoicGayoldschool gay 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I am pretty sure their new TOS are illegal in European Union.

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

In USA homosexual people are not protected and can be discriminated on a basis of a sexual orientation in many instances, and in general laws there more supportive of private companies, than abused users. It can be possible in Europe, but maximum what it can achieve is only ban Reddit in Europe and maybe some fines.

As you can see, there no "sexual orientation" in list:

[–]FediNetizenSuper-semi-bisexual (i.e. straight) 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You seem to have missed the recent supreme court ruling. However, this lawsuit will still go nowhere, because reddit isn't refusing to allow gay people on the site; they're refusing to allow GC people to use the site, some of whom happen to be gay.

[–]MezozoicGayoldschool gay 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That is great news if it will holds true.

Reddit have banned lesbian subreddit which was "only for pussylovers" for "transphobia". Basically what reddit said is that just being lesbian - is being transphobic.

[–]FediNetizenSuper-semi-bisexual (i.e. straight) 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They cannot refuse service to a protected class

And they aren't. Reddit hasn't banned homosexual people and isn't refusing to serve them, either; there are still plenty of gay people on the site. What reddit actually banned was GC subreddits and GC viewpoints. That some of those GC people happen to be gay doesn't mean it's illegal to kick them off the site.

Being gay doesn't mean that no one can refuse to serve you. It means that no one can refuse to serve you for being gay. Which reddit isn't doing.

[–]insta 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

As a private company, they're allowed to refuse service to anyone they wish.

"Oppression is okay as long as it's not the government doing it."

Libertarianism isn't going to solve this. It's a joke of an ideology for people who view the world through kid's eyes.

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

Libertarianism isn't going to solve this.

Isn't this ideology is something similar to "fix your problems by yourself", and such things as protected minority there just can't exist?

[–]FediNetizenSuper-semi-bisexual (i.e. straight) 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's not oppression when a website doesn't let you be a part of their community because of your views. And that's really why they're not allowed, because of your views. You can be openly gay and still use the website; you just can't suggest that as a lesbian you have some reservations about putting some guy's limp cock in your mouth.

[–]RippoffOfLoveSStraight | Overuses quotation marks 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Having to type "" into your address bar instead of "" isn't oppression.

[–]insta 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Hey this is Wells Fargo just returning your call about that mortgage for your house; you're credit score looks great and your down payment is more than adequate, however unfortunately you did post Laverne Cox wasn't the most drop dead gorgeous babe of all time so unfortunately we aren't going to be able to process this loan for you. Feel free to reach out to other banks (which will reject you because of a shady ban list) & we have alerted Mastercard and they will be cancelling your line of credit. But bro, it's not the government doing it so it's totally not oppression or anything you should take seriously. If you have a problem with it, just sTaRt yOuR oWn BaNk

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

And just like that my worldview changed and everyone on the bus clapped.

[–]insta 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

everyone on the bus clapped.

Please try and update your jokes at least every 5 years.

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

Yeah but reddit & co control the vast majority of information media

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

i’ve actually been ruminating in this exact thought for a few weeks now. I feel like this could be an option.

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

This will go nowhere. It'll just lose you money and anyone who signs onto this will just later be doxxed and harassed by TRAs.

[–]divingrightintowork 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Arguably they've also attacked female woman... Though I'd have to talk to a lawyer, they could likely make an argument that they would have banned men for talking about female specific issues...

It's a bit of a doozy / complicated.. like gays always had the same rights as straight people, to marry the opposite sex. Though now straight people can also now marry people of the same sex.

[–]Three_oneFourWanted for thought crimes in countless ideologies 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We could find out exactly what excuse they used to ban us and prove that they are lying, and that homophobia is the only possible root to their actions