RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation

Not to be confused with the Chicken coop.

Moderator noticeboard Welcome, BoN Use this talk page to contact the mods and report behavioral problems. The RationalWiki moderators are: Bongolian • CorruptUser • Techpriest • Plutocow • Spud • KarmaPolice

Archives for this page

Gingercat accused of transphobic whitewashing again

An earlier ATIM regarding this topic in June resulted in mutual agreement on the disputed page in question, and no punishment (RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation/Archive77#Repeated insertion of transphobic whitewashing into The Guardian article). @Gingercat has been accused again of transphobic whitewashing, and it has been suggested that a topic ban would be appropriate (User talk:Carthage#Whitewashing again). Bongolian (talk) 20:29, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Probably nil since I was the one that suggested the topic ban, but... yeah, I'd support it. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 20:52, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

I looked at the edit in question and what I saw was a request for evidence to back up certain allegations. Then again, that could be concern trolling (and even if it isn't, it could be naivety or some extremely odd blend of skepticism, pseudoskepticism, and credulity), so I'll take your word for it for now. --Luigifan18 (talk) 20:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

This was a case of politically-motivated white-washing as I explain here. At least with The Guardian case one could argue that there's some academic fuzziness over definitions of sex and gender. But Gingercat scrubbed the word "fascist" and mention of Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull's endorsement of the National Front from her article. The endorsement is public record. The NF being a fascist party is supported by the first sentence of its Wikipedia article. I also support a topic ban. Burnt Toast (talk) 21:31, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

The NF still exists? Learn something new every day! KarmaPolice (talk)

I support a topic ban. Carthage (talk) 21:13, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

[scrubbed former comment due to me being an idiot]. It's interesting - not outright whitewashing, more trying to throw on a lighter shade of grey. I am not sure it warrants any bans yet [much more subtle than previous, lack of knowledge on issue] but I do think it needs watching. KarmaPolice (talk) 21:16, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Okay, the case against Gingercat is a bit stronger than it first appears. Not only was the previous Guardian case and Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull case, but also Graham Linehan. I didn't search every single one of the pages they've touched, but the others ones so far look legit. But doesn't the cat have anything to day in their defence? KarmaPolice (talk) 15:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

graham linehan stuff that removed seems pretty innocuous to me. it left all relevent information that was in there before made the language used less lurid. id have no problem with the less lurid version. id also take issue with keen-minshull's supposed endorsement of the national front. ive not doubt shes a terrible person and has some right wing nationalist leanings, and may actually be a fan of the national front, but i do not believe that is tweet is an endorsement of the national front. aside from it would be endorsing an organisation that is effectively dead having dispersed amongst other current groups, the tweet is a provocation not an endorsement. they throwing a dilemma into our faces when they pit notorious neo nazi fuckwits from the 70s-80s against the PIE - the paedophile information exchange, who the NF protested against in the 70s. we are being asked pick aside - nazis or paedos. is a false dilemma because they are both vile and can pick neither. but it is a provocation not an endorsement, even they are right wing nut job. i dont know what point they are trying to make , there is no context to the tweet. something about liberal hypocrisy or something and we are supposed to be conflicted by. i like to see what the tweet was in response to tbh. it not an endorsement of the kind or strength as is being suggested. interestingly what gingercat had tried to replace it with was clear endorsements of islamophobic tweets and of tommy robinson's dogshit. i personally think thats a clearer indication of right wing nationalist support than the tweet gingercat tried to replace. it certainly wasnt whitewashing.

ive not looked at their other edits thus far, but i have a suspicion that gingercat may a be little too zealous in removing some of the hyperbole that is present in the our terf articles and has encountered push back from folk a little too zealous in defending it. something i have encountered when editting jk rowlings article. my advice to gingercat is to let it slide, they are a hiding to nothing here.

i personally am not a fan of some our trans related content. its appears to me to represent a brand of activism that empowers terfs more than it counters them, at the expense of winning over the wider public, to the detriment of trans rights. this isnt the place for me to go over all the issues i have with our content. but for a cause personally close to me, on this site of all places, it is painful to me that i can do no more than leave it be. i dont have the energy to do more. AMassiveGay (talk) 18:52, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

one more point the that nf vs pie tweet and how its not an endorsement. its not just provocation either imho. its trap. a really obvious one easily side stepped by anyone not so eager to relish the opportunity to score points by zeroing in on proof neo nazi sympathies. how does the tweet go again? back in the day to nf fought against PIE. choose your side. something like that. we blundered head first into it, pleased as punch we can call her a facist, a nazi, a racist, whatever we like. we have remained silent about the paedo part of the equation. thats enough for twitter fucknuts to say we have implicitly picked team paedo. its dogshit of course. but its twitter - dogshit is king. they dont care if we call them nazis or facists or what have you. they probably are and proud of it. im less comfortable with getting called a paedo. terfs and bigots and assorted trolls thrive on this shit. we do not, but we insist on playing their game with their rules when we can only lose. it hurts the trans cause. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:34, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Can we topic ban this guy too? This is five paragraphs of disingenuous waffle. The full Twitter convo is easy to find. KJK brought up the National Front and PIE unprompted in response to being correctly accused of supporting "fascist scum" over the "anti-fascists stopping them." It's a blatant example of the "groomer" attack. KJK resorted to transparent queerphobic slander because it's hard to deny her fascist sympathies when neo-Nazis have turned up to Sieg Heil at her rallies and she has persistently refused to condemn or disavow them. AMassiveGay conveniently left out the fact that Gingercat also scrubbed the word "fascist" from KJK's article. Which is apparently the same thing that happened in AMG's oblique reference to "editting^[sic] jk rowlings^[sic] article." I'm not gonna debate whether it it was fair to label JKR a "fascist" in 2023. (That label does seem a bit fairer now than it did then.) But KJK is absolutely a fascist. If your takeaway from this is "radical trans activists have gone too far," you shouldn't be within a lightyear of RW's coverage of gender and sexuality. Burnt Toast (talk) 20:43, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

…I really don't get a good feeling from Gingercat's complete silence here. By which I mean "I don't really think they give a shit about a topic ban, they're gonna carry on regardless". (Please prove me wrong.) --Luigifan18 (talk) 21:02, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

You're going to have to do better here with your citations, Burnt Toast. I really don't like sourcing contentious claims like "fascist" about living people from a random Twitter shit thread and a 2 hour unsourced Youtube spiel. It's relatively easy to source that neo-Nazis doing Nazi salutes have been present at her rallies. It's easy to document that Keen-Minshull has *many* ties with radical / populist right organizations. It's also easy to find that Keen-Minshull has successfully sued an Australian MP who called her a neo-Nazi. Documenting this is fine. But I personally am not comfortable with the "fascist" label unless it is pretty clear that such is the case. Currently I think the evidence is weak, and that leaves this article open to attack if such claims are left in. BobJohnson (talk) 21:07, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Please take care to note what link is what sourcing text. "[Neo-Nazis have] turned up to Sieg Heil at her rallies" has a link to a photo because as you point out that has been extensively reported. "[She has] persistently refused to condemn or disavow them" has a link to Shaun's vid because KJK's complicity is less well known. Shaun's vid is one of the best breakdowns I've seen. It includes screenshots documenting that KJK was advised in advance neo-Nazis planned to show up in Melbourne and refused to condemn them. KJK winning a libel suit isn't evidence of merit to her claims. British libel law is weird and she had a billionaire offering to cover her legal fees. Burnt Toast (talk) 21:28, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

you will note that i commented on only two of gingercats disputed edits and i said as much. i explained why i disagreed with the claim that they are were attempts at whitewashing. with keen-minshull's twitter post i went further and i explained why i disagreed with characterising it as an endorsement. folk are free to disagree. none of what you have said addresses my reasoning whether anyone agrees with it or not. note that i have not disputed their probable nazi sympathises. i said she probably is of that persuasions. i disputed that that one twitter post, devoid of context with the article, is neither a proof nor an endorsement of nazis. you will also note that even if i were to agree that these two edits by gingercat were whitewashing, it still would not be transphobic whitewashing. not calling a terf a fascist is not denying the transphobia of a terf. perhaps you shouldnt be editing gender and sexuality articles if you dont know. but dont worry i will leave you to it. i already said i had no intention of editing these articles. i can do without this exact bullshit every time i deign to disagree. and i mean it when i say this doesnt help. all we are doing with terfs and bigots is throwing bricks at each other. they feed of this drama while we alienate the general public, the people we should be focusing on to educate and inform and clear up misunderstandings they might have. there is not alot of that in our articles and what there is just isnt good enough. thats a win for the terfs. we hurt trans people with this shit. AMassiveGay (talk) 22:36, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

We would be hurting trans people by censoring our coverage of the anti-trans movement out of fear of being perceived as big meanies and/or getting hit with a SLAPP suit. There are multiple points of evidence supporting KJK's fash sympathies beyond that one tweet. Perhaps the most infamous was her telling armed men to patrol women's bathrooms in 2021. If you're unwilling to look at this evidence for reasons that amount to "I'm not watching a two-hour YouTube video," then maybe sit down and leave this topic area to folks who are. Burnt Toast (talk) 22:57, 6 September 2024‎ (UTC)

i repeat, i disputed a total of two edits. which you still dont address but choose instead to attack for me for something i have not said or implied. i have said that one tweet does not do what you think does. where i have said that this one tweet is not proof of her sympathies and therefore invalidates all other evidence proofing them? no where is where. i have not disputed calling her a fascist. other people have. ive said she probably is. ive made no comment on if we have enough to say definitively. there is plenty in the article that gives strong evidence to extreme bigotry of various kinds, more than enough for condemnation. why is a specific label for her bigotry required? what does it add to article? what does it lose by being just short of being definitive? will we all think terfs are good people because they might be not quite fascist enough to insist they are? and i repeat i have made no comment in either direction. and no, i am not willing to watch a two hour long youtube for evidence that should be in the article. if the evidence we require is not in the article it is a shit article. if we cannot support every claim we make evidence in the article, then it is not just a shit article, it is an article that can be dismissed because we make shit up. no one will be watching two hour youtube to confirm what the article should already be doing.

stoking up fear by overplaying the threat presented by these more extreme terf pricks who represent a tiny minority of terfs hurts trans people if they become more fearful than they need to be, become less visible as a result. it hurts trans people when misinformation is more likely spread by reasonable looking people making reasonable sounding concerns to the general public rather than the racist bigots warning of paedo rapists we have led them to expect aand we havent done enough it show who trans people really are to know any betterAMassiveGay (talk) 02:19, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

She is by the way not a TERF, because she's not even a feminist. She herself says she's not one, even if her rhetoric would be strongly suggestive that she sees herself as one. Chillpilled (talk) 02:25, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

It isn't "stoking up fear" to accurately report on the false claims and extreme rhetoric employed by transphobes. At this point cozying up to the far-right isn't limited to some "tiny minority" of lunatic fringe TERFs like Jennifer Bilek. J.K. Rowling has been retweeting Christopher Rufo and Libs of TikTok for well over a year. I'm sorry that you seem to have your head in the sand about this. But transphobes really are at this level of off-mask extreme, and it's not hypothetical that trans people are getting hurt. If you ask transphobes to listen to trans people, their families, and experts on trans issues, they'll scream and call you a death threat-supporting misogynist whether you're a combative furry on Twitter or a beloved celebrity asking very gently. There is nothing to be gained from trying to mollify transphobes or from humoring this kind of concern trolling over optics. Burnt Toast (talk) 03:43, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

'Keen-Minshull has successfully sued an Australian MP who called her a neo-Nazi'. I think that alone is enough to warrant treading very carefully, in light of certain incidents nobody shall be able to recall before long... KarmaPolice (talk) 21:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

English libel law [Scottish law is a bit different] is significantly stricter than American - in fact, is one of the top SLAPP destination of choice in the world. However, there's zero connections between England and the RMF, so English law [I believe] wouldn't apply [as they will tell the suer that the USA is the appropriate location to sue, as stated in the Defamation Act 2013]. This was in fact one of the reasons I declined to run to be on the RMF - I feared that as a UK citizen resident in England, this might create a tenuous link in which I could be in effect, forced to defend RMF in the Old Bailey. Now, we have a variant of 'Section 230' [in the previously mentioned Act] but it's a bit weaker and again, it would most likely having to me work all on my lonesome to fend off said SLAPP. So best not, hmm? KarmaPolice (talk) 21:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

That was a blatant SLAPP suit. Pesutto settled because he's on an Australian MP's salary while KJK had a billionaire offering to write her a blank cheque. British libel law places the burden of proof on the defendant, meaning that KJK didn't have to prove she wasn't a "neo-Nazi"/"Nazi sympathizer" etc., only that she this accusation damaged her reputation. I also believe the claim that prompted the lawsuit was that she had "invited" the neo-Nazis to Melbourne. There's an audio recording of her shrugging off a warning neo-Nazi groups might turn up in Melbourne ("people are free to turn up wherever they like" and "it's a free-speech event"). Tacit permission isn't an explicit personal invitation. So technically the claim she "invited" them wasn't a demonstrably factual statement. SLAPP suits rely on onlookers never peering beneath their proclamations of victory. Burnt Toast (talk) 22:16, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Shaun's video is an extensive breakdown of the subject, FWIW, but not everyone is willing to sit down and watch a 2 hour long video essay. Carthage (talk) 04:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Is he still making long-ass videos? Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 20:15, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Ja. Carthage (talk) 20:25, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Vote on topic banning Gingercat from gender-related articles

Ja

1. Carthage (talk) 22:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Sure. Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 23:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
3. Scream!! (talk) 23:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
4. I very nearly voted against this until I saw this user's first comment in this section of their last ATIM case. Specifically the quote: "on a website calling itself Rational Wiki one would expect it to follow biological science, in other words XX chromosomes = female and XY = male". This user is pushing an agenda in mainspace that runs counter to the wiki's mission, so a topic ban is appropriate. Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano^{Make a Reservation} 00:03, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

   …Oh. Oh, yikes. --Luigifan18 (talk) 00:06, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

5. Bigotry is not scientific. Twit. 😖 I'm still not sure if this Gingercat is naïve or transphobic. Either way, they need something in between a slap on the wrist and having their wrist smashed into paste with a sledgehammer. (And I shouldn't have to explain this, but "in between" means that a slap on the wrist (mere chastisement) is too light to get the point across and smashing the wrist into paste (permaban) is too harsh.) So I'm still not sure if a total topic ban is the right call, but letting them completely off the hook again certainly isn't. --Luigifan18 (talk) 01:42, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

   …In spite of my misgivings about a topic ban being warranted, I still think I should stick with my current vote because of @Gingercat's complete failure to even try to defend themselves, which seems to be indicative of depraved indifference towards RationalWiki's mission and conflict resolution procedure. If the topic ban passes, I do not foresee Gingercat making any attempts to honor it. I hope to be proven wrong. (Perhaps a short block is warranted, if only in order to make it clear that we're serious.) --Luigifan18 (talk) 22:49, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

6. —cosmikdebris ^talk stalk 14:49, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
7. Someone is trying to push a transphobic agenda and is besmirching ginger cats (including my beloved Jester Gingerbits of fond memory) while doing so. A topic ban is the least they deserve. Spud (talk) 15:11, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
8. for their own mental wellbeing. pushing some transphobic agenda is not what is going on here, whether one agrees with their edits or not. ^{— Unsigned, by: AMassiveGay / talk / contribs}

   We reached somewhere near the same conclusion, yet I decided to go to the other side... KarmaPolice (talk) 19:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

9. Burnt Toast (talk) 19:29, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
10. (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Natsuki Marx ♥ (talk) 20:24, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
11. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 15:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Nein

1. Their other work here seems okay and it's more greywashing than outright denialism [or a belief that the stuff was sensationalist]. Plus, I don't like topic bans because they are hard to actually enforce. I'd prefer to simply note their pattern of behaviour, point out 'we are watching you' and hope they quit doing it. KarmaPolice (talk) 15:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

   I want to agree with you, but I think Gingercat's silence here is rather suspicious… --Luigifan18 (talk) 23:14, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

   It's possible they've gone into hiding after seeing the dogpile, fearing they won't get a decent hearing. KarmaPolice (talk) 23:28, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

   Oh, I definitely know that feeling, but the silence is still unnerving. --Luigifan18 (talk) 00:40, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

2. The fact this editor also removed an attack on Owen Jones on his page tells me this editor probably doesn't have some big agenda since he's known for being a pro-trans columnist. The interpretation of KJK's tweet as a "clear" endorsement of NF also looked unfounded enough I changed it again myself after looking through the thread it's in (you could say she implied her support but that could just as well be your confirmation bias). Quibbling about who to label fascist or not is boilerplate stuff here although in KJK's case, she is bare minimum complicit with fascists. Chillpilled (talk) 22:13, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Ziege

1. I don't think I understand what's going on well enough to vote just yet. Luigifan18 (talk) 21:42, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

   Perhaps try reading the case presented? Carthage (talk) 23:42, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

   I tried looking at the last ATIM, and I still can't tell what's going on. Like, is this Gingercat simply overzealous in wanting RationalWiki to produce evidence to back up its claims, or are they actually trying to make transphobes look like they're not wastes of flesh? --Luigifan18 (talk) 23:59, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

   Well you got your answer now. So why not vote? Carthage (talk) 01:32, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

   Just chimed in. Again, I wasn't around for most of this havoc, but the "only two genders" nonsense was enough to make me rear back and think "This person needs to be re-educated on gender before they try talking about it again"… sure, you could make an argument about there only being two sexes (though that may or may not be wrong, depending on how one counts hermaphrodites), but gender is quite a bit more fluid complicated than that. Either this Gingercat is breathtakingly naïve, they haven't been educated properly, or they're transphobic (actually, those last two options are probably more of a set of concentric circles than a Venn diagram), and either way, they need… er, something in between a slap on the wrist and smashing their wrist with a sledgehammer.

   (And now I'm curious if I can try lumping TERFs into Buchanincel or if I should just stick with having it represent incels and white supremacy…) --Luigifan18 (talk) 01:50, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

   …So, uh, is @Gingercat gonna try to defend themselves? I still want to believe that this is a case of honest naïvety and dedication to genuine credibility rather than malicious transphobia, but the fact that this is the second ATIM vote on this subject (along with some of the comments I have heard of) make me a bit doubtful of that. --Luigifan18 (talk) 14:48, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

   Their edit history suggests they go weeks without an edit. Not everyone is very active on here. Chillpilled (talk) 01:46, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

   That'd be fair, but we reacted to their offending edits (including protecting the page they messed with) pretty quickly, so I'm not sure how they'd be unaware of what happened. --Luigifan18 (talk) 15:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

2. Why is this vote in German? Arcadium Trancefer (talk) 23:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

   More importantly, why wasn't it fully in German? [until I corrected it, obs] KarmaPolice (talk) 23:40, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

3. Considering they edited on the Andrew Tate page before I would've liked if it was "transgender-related topics" rather than "gender-related topics". Chillpilled (talk) 19:38, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

   I'd probably be fine with changing it to "gender identity-related topics". Plutocow (talk) 19:41, 6 September 2024 (UTC)