Pudendum wrote:

Spinozasgalt wrote:

Pudendum wrote:Meghan said men and women were men and women. Yaniv claimed he was a female, and tweeted some sketchy-as-fuck stuff about his activities, while filing several human rights complaints against ladies who declined to shave his balls.

Meghan Murphy was banned from Twitter for misgendering a trans person. Just as you're doing here.

Not even the BC Human Rights Tribunal would support his claims. If he seemed to really be respectfully asking to be treated as a lady, it would be different, but he clearly was gaming the system to abuse vulnerable women.

You are welcome to treat him however you want. For myself, i would treat him as a dangerously aggressive mentally ill person.

Twitter, however, will treat a polite TERF as worse than him. (also their right)

Can you be respectful of a TERF? If so, what is their unifying disagreement with trans-rights?

Doesn't much matter to the case of Murphy how you would treat Yaniv. If you misgender someone on Twitter then you're going against their rules and they can ban you. And that's what they did to Murphy.

Pudendum wrote:
Weird. I've found some because they were deplatformed, and in most cases, I'm glad I did. It's good to know why a site is banning certain political or social ideologies.

Or if not why, at least knowing that they are doing it.

You'll dream up whatever reason suits your fancy, as you've made clear.

It looks like this 'milk' person is absolutely obsessed with me,

Looks like someone needs to get over themselves

The human rights tribunal established that Yaniv has a documented history of targeting non-white people, Muslims in particular. I've encountered Yaniv. Yaniv is a fucking frootloop. Yaniv is also a troll and dramallama.

The other thing established by the tribunal is it isn't discrimination for someone who waxes vulvas and assholes of women for a living to turn away a client who wants their balls waxed and that genital waxing isn't a protected gender-affirming service transwomen are entitled to receive from female-only service providers in BC.

The tribunal had nothing to do with gender or gendering or misgendering or whatever. It was about ball waxing and one very disingenuous complainant. I witnessed some of it. It was painful. My taxes contributed to it.

Twitter has a black-and-white rule that if someone identifies as trans, you use pronouns based on their sex and they report you, you get kicked off. No discussion. Context is irrelevant. Ya gone. That's why Murphy isn't on Twitter. That being said, I know Lindsay Shepherd had their account reinstated after calling Yaniv a man on Twitter in response to remarks about Shepherd's infertility due to having a septate uterus. So there do appear to be exceptions.

Rachel Bronwyn wrote:The human rights tribunal established that Yaniv has a documented history of targeting non-white people, Muslims in particular. I've encountered Yaniv. Yaniv is a fucking frootloop. Yaniv is also a troll and dramallama.

Yes, I think I remember a particular incident with a man wearing a "turban"?

I think that may have been the Orange Julius incident.

Yeah, that's the one.

Twitter's infringing on their inalienable right to misgender people! Help help, they're being oppressed!

Or the Tim Hortons incident. It's impossible to keep track of all the Yaniv complaints at this point. The bottom line is LOTS or brown people live here, many of whom are Muslim. Many Muslim women wear headwear associated with their culture. Many of the brown people who live here are also Sikh. Many Sikh men wear headwear associated with their culture.

Most of the people you encounter here working at the Tim Hortons or Orange Julius are brown, many of whom wear cultural headwear. Yaniv has spent years complaining on Twitter about these brown people, their headwear as well as their broken English. HOW DARE PEOPLE STILL LEARNING THE LANGUAGE HAVE LOW PAYING JOBS IN FOOD SERVICE? Yaniv has claimed these same people have sexually assaulted and refused to serve them. It's hard to believe when the mall's food court cameras show no such thing and you've got a documented history of trying to punish the Asian and South Asian communities here.

It's all terribly embarrassing. I want people to be able to bring human rights complaints to the attention of tribunals but Yaniv is abusing the system in hopes of personal gain and it makes me livid that my earnings contribute to the costs of this buffoonery.

SafeAsMilk wrote:

Pudendum wrote:
Weird. I've found some because they were deplatformed, and in most cases, I'm glad I did. It's good to know why a site is banning certain political or social ideologies.

Or if not why, at least knowing that they are doing it.

You'll dream up whatever reason suits your fancy, as you've made clear.

It looks like this 'milk' person is absolutely obsessed with me,

Looks like someone needs to get over themselves

Still nothing about the subject. I maintain that your flirting is innefective.

Not that I would discourage you. It's still a bit flattering, but it sounds like you are genuinely lonesome, so have at it. Consider my thread your 'safe space'.

Rachel Bronwyn wrote:
The tribunal had nothing to do with gender or gendering or misgendering or whatever. It was about ball waxing and one very disingenuous complainant. I witnessed some of it. It was painful. My taxes contributed to it.

Mine too.

He clearly has been aiming to exploit every horrible thing he can. I won't participate, nor will I worry if he judges me immoral for ignoring his lies.

Twitter has a black-and-white rule that if someone identifies as trans, you use pronouns based on their sex and they report you, you get kicked off. No discussion. Context is irrelevant. Ya gone. That's why Murphy isn't on Twitter. That being said, I know Lindsay Shepherd had their account reinstated after calling Yaniv a man on Twitter in response to remarks about Shepherd's infertility due to having a septate uterus. So there do appear to be exceptions.

It isn't clear at all, but it's their playhouse. They don't pretend to be unbiased. They (like any international corporation) always has to support the 'green' party. (meaning committments to money - not to be confused with the Canadian party of the same name)

Rachel Bronwyn wrote:Or the Tim Hortons incident. It's impossible to keep track of all the Yaniv complaints at this point. The bottom line is LOTS or brown people live here, many of whom are Muslim. Many Muslim women wear headwear associated with their culture. Many of the brown people who live here are also Sikh. Many Sikh men wear headwear associated with their culture.

Most of the people you encounter here working at the Tim Hortons or Orange Julius are brown, many of whom wear cultural headwear. Yaniv has spent years complaining on Twitter about these brown people, their headwear as well as their broken English. HOW DARE PEOPLE STILL LEARNING THE LANGUAGE HAVE LOW PAYING JOBS IN FOOD SERVICE? Yaniv has claimed these same people have sexually assaulted and refused to serve them. It's hard to believe when the mall's food court cameras show no such thing and you've got a documented history of trying to punish the Asian and South Asian communities here.

That doesn't sound too bad.

Some fat, disgusting lunatic occasionally shouting in a food court sounds absolutely PLEASANT compared to his other...activism.

Did you read about his 'pool party' debacle? I don't want to go over it, but if you find yourself about to defend his actions on anything, you should check that out first.

It's all terribly embarrassing. I want people to be able to bring human rights complaints to the attention of tribunals but Yaniv is abusing the system in hopes of personal gain and it makes me livid that my earnings contribute to the costs of this buffoonery.

I used to think the human rights commissions were good. They aren't.

Laws should be made which everyone can use. It was the way this system worked until quite recently. Yaniv without a special enforcement team (in the BC taxpayer funded human rights 'courts') would be a relatively harmless loon.

Open racism of that kind would be laughed out of a normal court. With this sort of 'lawfare' being such a new phenomenom though, it isn't always seen clearly. It deliberately plays on the sympathies of decent people, to abuse others. (in this case ass-waxers)

Pudendum wrote:

SafeAsMilk wrote:

Pudendum wrote:
Weird. I've found some because they were deplatformed, and in most cases, I'm glad I did. It's good to know why a site is banning certain political or social ideologies.

Or if not why, at least knowing that they are doing it.

You'll dream up whatever reason suits your fancy, as you've made clear.

It looks like this 'milk' person is absolutely obsessed with me,

Looks like someone needs to get over themselves

Still nothing about the subject.

What subject? That social media is out to get you?

Pardon me - a friend just provided me with correction. Yaniv's recent complaint was about the staff of a New York Fries. As I said, hard to keep track.

Twitter has rules about some things and none about others and they're applied inconsistently so it's hard to know wtf is going on. As you say, commitments to money will be the overarching control.

No one's owed a Twitter account - it's not a human right to be part of the Twitterverse - but acting like kicking someone off Twitter isn't a means of deplatforming isn't reasonable either. Of course it is. Twitter was a platform from which Murphy espoused ideas. They no longer have that platform available to them. They have been deplatformed. In light of the despicable shit Twitter allows people to say (looking at you, Jessica Yaniv), Murphy calling Yaniv "he" seems like peanuts. Twitter isn't required to be reasonable or unbiased though. They get to do what they want.

I don't really care. There are lots of platforms from which Murphy can still speak and they do.

I do care about Yaniv's continued ability to abuse people. I think the no parents allowed nude pool party for children idea was an intentional effort to troll though.

Rachel Bronwyn wrote:

I don't really care. There are lots of platforms from which Murphy can still speak and they do.

As long as one doesn't make the mistake of thinking they are fair or moral for their choices, it's fine.

I do care about Yaniv's continued ability to abuse people. I think the no parents allowed nude pool party for children idea was an intentional effort to troll though.

Why not have that discussion with him, on twitter?

I noticed the Milk-flirter forgot the subject of the thread. Maybe if he gets his shit together enough to read it, I'll comment.

Yaniv does what Yaniv does for attention. Look at responses to their tweets. They're close to 100% negative. Momma Yaniv's responses are the only exception.

But Yaniv keeps tweeting more and more outrageous things because Yaniv loves the response.

It's a great big game of troll and I'm not playing. Seeing Yaniv at the mall, shouting at elderly non-white people to get out of the way of their scoot-scoot is enough exposure for me, thanks.

Pudendum wrote:
I noticed the Milk-flirter forgot the subject of the thread.

No, I'd say my assessment of it was pretty accurate

Maybe if he gets his shit together enough to read it, I'll comment.

You'd probably just not answer the question and start blabbing about something else in a feeble attempt to distract from that failure, just like you did on the first page.

Weirdly, the OP is more obliged to be charitable to people like Yaniv than anyone else here.

"For myself, I am always suspicious of media smears (the more unified, the more suspicious) and try to hear from these individuals in their own words."

Absolutely, if it was just shit being reported about JY, we'd all be obliged to look deeper. Almost everything we know about Yaniv is from the horse's mouth though.

I am surprised and in a state of incredulity. 34 posts by our member from Yellowknife without a single mention of that unjustly deplatformed gentleman, Tommy Robinson.

Rachel Bronwyn wrote:Absolutely, if it was just shit being reported about JY, we'd all be obliged to look deeper. Almost everything we know about Yaniv is from the horse's mouth though.

Oh I think Yaniv is a racist troll among many other things. But I won't spend any time on her garbage with people like OP. Because they use her to attack trans people and that's what this is. That's what OP is doing in defending Murphy and TERFs. Pudendum (or Cunt, if he is that dude from Rationalia) is just bringing the usual "let me say 'free speech' enough so you don't notice I'm just trying to wedge some rightwing nonsense in here."

Twitter is obviously inconsistent, otherwise Graham Linehan would be banned too. But the rule against misgendering can stop a helluva lot of harassment and I'll take it. They just need more rules and implementation to get rid of nazis and predators and other horrible stuff on there.

Spinozasgalt wrote:They just need more rules and implementation to get rid of nazis and predators and other horrible stuff on there.

Not gonna happen. You can't deplatform the President of the United States of America.