this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

World News

38956 readers
1525 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
  • In short: Transgender woman Roxanne Tickle is suing social media platform Giggle for Girls after she was excluded from the women-only app.
  • She is alleging unlawful discrimination on the basis of gender identity while the app's founder has denied she is a woman.
  • What's next? The hearing is expected to run for four days.

A transgender woman who was excluded from a women-only social media app should be awarded damages because the app's founder has persistently denied she is a woman, a Sydney court has heard.

In February 2021, Roxanne Tickle downloaded the Giggle for Girls social networking app, which was marketed as a platform exclusively for women to share experiences and speak freely.

Users needed to provide a selfie, which was assessed by artificial intelligence software to determine if they were a woman or man.

Ms Tickle's photograph was determined to be a woman and she used the app's full features until September that year, when the account became restricted because the AI decision was manually overridden.

top 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (4 children)

I don't understand.

It's okay to discriminate against men but not transgender women?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (4 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I down voted, not because I disagree with the claim, but because it doesn't make any sense in the context and just reads as a knee-jerk dismissive response of a valid point.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It's true though. Gender is a performance, and as a woman your womanhood is always under scrutiny from everyone else. You can get your identity as woman taken from you if you don't "look woman enough". Which if you say have more masculine features, cut your hair short as a cis woman you become less woman. For example Butch lesbians are actually the most often de-womanized. Same goes for less masculine men. It's a box no one fits into perfectly and having certain genitals doesn't include or exclude you from either.

This person wanted a safe space where they wouldn't have to deal with cis straight men. Which makes it that if men want inclusion in such spaces they need to be better.

Another question for you all, why as cis men do you want inclusion in these spaces?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

So, what about those who are born with a uterus? Where can they go? What if they decide, only those who were born with a vagina at birth, are women and we want only those to be part of our organization? I mean, are they wrong?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

"trans women are women" is pointing out this isn't about men vs women but the given sex at birth.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

We all accept that trans women are not cis women. The obvious point by the poster was why is it okay to discriminate against men but not trans women?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I define a woman as a female who has a uterus, how should I define them?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

So if a woman has a hysterectomy, she is no longer a woman? What is she?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That's silly and you know it. She still had one to begin with. That's like saying "if a dude cuts off his penis, he's no longer a dude!"

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I define a woman as a female who has a uterus

Your definition. Has a uterus. You said nothing about a female who had a uterus.

And you haven't defined female.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It's not my fault that your definition excluded women who had a uterus at one time but didn't later.

How about women who have two X chromosomes but were born without a uterus? Not women?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

Oh brother...let's just agree to disagree...it's obvious what side of the issue you're on...

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Real /r/unpopularopinion moment.

I think the thing that the TERFs ultimately miss is that this person was initially welcomed in as a woman and treated as a woman by her peers. She did not disrupt the community or harass any of the participants, until she voiced support for Trans Rights.

It was at this point that a handful of moderators decided to interrogate her on her original gender and use that as an excuse to boot an active and in-good-standing member.

So she wasn't removed for "not being a woman". She was removed for "disagreeing with the political views of the admin".

Anyone familiar with Reddit politics should be able to sympathize.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

I don't understand? Reddit politics is ultra liberal, they would eat this women's app alive for discriminating against the trans.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yes you’re right the transphobes are taking over here

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

Lol...what? I've read like 3 comments saying that the app is in the right, the overwhelmingly majority are siding with the trans...

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

Your account is a day old so I’m thinking you’re arguing in bad faith and are likely transphobic.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

Why not just create a "trans" app and make your own people happy too?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

More the reverse. If you say "Girls Only" and then exclude a girl, you've violated your own terms of service.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

people actually don't have a job

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

It sounds like you’re trying to argue nobody should fight discrimination while there are still ditches to dig and toilets to scrub.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

A waste of everyone's time. Sounds like entitlement.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

It's entitled to exclude.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Wow an app based on gender descrimination is being sued for gender descrimination. I'm shocked

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You know what this means though? It means that no one ever needed to push back against it at all just not engage in it themselves. Cuz they just eat each other in a vacuum. Without some enemy to band together against like the boogeyman of boogeymen whitey, their inner chaos is all they're left with with no enemy to project it on, so they eat each other and everything just crashes and falls apart. No one needed to do anything, not even complain, just look at it in amusement and take another sip of their coffee and go about their day thanking god that's not you.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Did you forget you're not in your sleazy little far-right bubble?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'm not a right winger. I just see an ouroboros when I see it, it's the snake eating itself.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago
[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

I think she will win this. They didn't require a genital photo so what's even their proof? Arbitrary requirement anyways. Rules like that only leave people out. I understand the want for a space like that though. I hope this woman finds a space where she can feel safe.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I think she'll lose. Because regardless of the issue, a private company can terminate service at any time, for any reason.

It's also been upheld that a graphic artist who wants to design wedding websites can refuse to work with same-sex couples. What this means is, again, a company can pick and choose who to serve.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

a private company can terminate service at any time, for any reason

Not after they've accepted payment.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

Why not create an app for trans women?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

What’s the point of a woman’s only app (or any women’s only space) if they let anyone in simply based on them saying ‘I’m a woman’?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago

Maybe because everything about the space still caters to women's concerns, and the presumption for a random-ass social media app should be that your appearance doesn't determine your intent? If somebody's daily life is being a woman, then why the fuck should it matter which parts they have? Are you also going to exclude gay women, or women who cut their hair short, or women who choose not to have kids? After all, they're not having all the same issues that long-haired cis-het mothers have.

Not to mention it's a technologically stupid gate to keep. In what fucking world does it deter anyone who is willing to be dishonest?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago

Welcome to 2024, women can't have their own things anymore... (and I'm talking about REAL women, you know, the individuals have two X chromosomes).