Self censorship

[darthmongoose]

She was labelled a transphobe for stating that sex is biology, not a societal construct. This is science that has been settled for almost a hundred years. Pointing out that trans rhetoric that both gender and sex are societal constructs flies in the face of science is not transphobia, it's basic scientific literacy.

Incorrect, modern scientists will tell you that "biological sex" is WAY more complex than the basic "xx or xy chromasones" theory people came up with many years ago and is taught in high schools as a basic child-level intro to this stuff. In fact, there are not two sexes...

https://www.joshuakennon.com/the-six-common-biological-sexes-in-humans/

She wrote a book about a MALE serial killer using cross dressing as a tactic to lure victims. The killer in her book does not identify as female - he puts on a dress when he goes hunting and pretends to be one.

Yes and that's exactly what the problem is: The idea that any trans woman could be labelled as "actually a man, really" and both treated as a threat, refused access to women's bathrooms, sent to a men's prison etc. Is the problem. There's a good Contrapoints video on this, so I'll let an actual Trans person talk about it.

She does not think that trans woman are just men disguising themselves. She does, however, point out that there are male sexual predators who abuse the modern acceptance of transgendered people in the United Kingdom to gain access to women's spaces by claiming that identity, in the case of women's prisons, this places the inmates of those prisons at risk. This is not a hypothetical, by the way - this is a very real current problem.

I can't read all this article due to a paywall, but what is visible of the actual text seems to be full of weird numbers and some slightly dodgy definitions to push a certain narrative... I mean, it's The Times, so I'm not surprised... my parents stopped reading that paper after it was acquired by Rupert Murdoch and became a lot more biased than it used to be...

Let me just do some maths here... Over the course of 8 years...across 9 prisons... (wait, hang on...) there were a total of 124 "sex attacks", 7 of which were by trans women... So it's less than 1 a year... and also there were... 7 incidents at 9 prisons? Reading the report this was based on from the UK Ministry of Justice, it seems that only 6 of the cases the attacker was trans, the 7th just having a trans person "involved" and also it gets really weird because the other dates and numbers don't align with the article, making me question its veracity... Especially the fact that it doesn't mention two of the attacks were committed by one person, which further throws that "five times more likely" stat into question.

And THEN just before the article vanishes into the mists of paywall, it says that one of the perpetrators IS NOT TRANS, but a cross-dresser!? (There's no way I'm giving money to Rupert Murdoch to find out what it says, but that is quite infuriating...).

COMPARE: In one just year, ELEVEN trans men were assaulted by cis men!

Eleven transgender inmates sexually assaulted in male prisons last year

Oh and...

Trans women are still incarcerated with men and it's putting their lives at risk...

And

https://www.npr.org/2022/10/04/1126801351/trans-rights-transgender-inmates

Your ideas are frankly, dangerously misinformed and out of date. This is exactly why self-censorship may be necessary; because it's so easy to consult limited, biased sources and show your entire arse by means of simple ignorance or being behind the times on the latest research and discourse.

[NickRowler]

She was labelled a transphobe for stating that sex is biology, not a societal construct. This is science that has been settled for almost a hundred years. Pointing out that trans rhetoric that both gender and sex are societal constructs flies in the face of science is not transphobia, it's basic scientific literacy.

Dude, don't be simping JK Rowling. People call her transphobic because she partners with anti-transgender groups and is besties with the new Suffragette movement in the UK which is an extremist radical feminist movement that is very anti-trans (as well as anti-men). She also praised an anti-trans film which was ironic because it was made by someone who who hates feminist (and heck women in general).

People are not upset with her saying sex is biology. All transpeople and allies know that people have XX and XY chromosomes. Being trans is more about social identity, not what is in your chromosomes. Wearing dresses, makeup, what we call people, gendered hair styles, etc. None of that is biological, it's something society decides.

Plus, no one cares what bathroom I use. No one has ever gave me a hard time. People using the restroom isn't some sexy time thing like TERFs make it out to seem.

[BOMB]

Here we go. Why does it always come back to talking about Trans stuff. Ironically, I think your making a point against yourself here because had this been a few years ago, people would be telling you to censor your ideas promoting or advocating for Trans stuff. Now days it's the opposite. Even if you think this is a product of different generations, new people still had to speak out against old people. Even if you think these new ideas were always the right ideas, someone had to voice them.

There are several things to be said about the sources you've used to help you're argument, but because this was meant to be a discussion on censorship rather than Trans ideology, I'm not going to go into them.

[darthmongoose]

I brought up several examples of times where self-censorship might not be a bad thing. Robert was the one who decided to make it all about "Trans stuff", focusing on it exclusively in his response.

[TAMAnnoying]

Alright listen: if you melons turn this into another fucking Is jkrolling a turf I'm calling the mods. Get the fuck back on topic @darthmongoose @Freemints30 @RobertBMarks @NickRowler

Second

I really think you need to rethink you definition of "censorship" @darthmongoose

CENSORSHIP is NOT "I will not indulge and fuck children" it's "I will not tell people I'm a pedophile" which is 100% bad for not just the person but for society.

The idea of not being allowed to talk about things cause its "ugly" or "uncomfortable" is how we get to the point where we tell our gay cousin "look just don't tell Grama cause then everyone has to deal with her feeling weird and you don't want that!" Rather then having a god damn conversation and just getting your baggage out.

Does it need to be in their books? Maybe!? Who knows its gonna really depend on what the book is about! Is it about dealing with being a pedo and NOT being a shit head and confirming to society without endangering either yourself or children? I think that's great! But if people say it can't be in book stores because the soccer moms are upset about it then no one's really able to have a conversation then.

Conversation are important even if they're as fucking stupid as "the earth is flat" why? Because then you have a chance to CONVINCE the idiot who things it's flat that it isn't.

[BOMB]

I'm not saying you brought it up, I'm just always surprised by how easy it goes there now days. It's the topic of the century I suppose.

[BOMB]

I second this, and if I could send you a pie I would.

[Freemints30]

Dude I wasnt the one who brought the topic up. In fact was i still was talking about censorship but you do you . I'm sorry I have little tolerance for misinformation and bigotry that has hurt soo many people. Maybe I should just lie down and go "yup true". But I guess some folks here do have that privilege. Of being enablers

Personally I dispise censorship I dont trust any human to have a consistent values or what's right or wrong.

I generally say write what you want and not be a dick head and know who you are appealing to.

[Junohugger]

I love this, "everybody shut the FUCK UP about something I've decided is off topic! By the way, here are my opinions about it........"

[Junohugger]

You're right, it should be censored, shouldn't it.

[darthmongoose]

I really think you need to rethink you definition of "censorship" @darthmongoose

CENSORSHIP is NOT "I will not indulge and fuck children" it's "I will not tell people I'm a pedophile" which is 100% bad for not just the person but for society.

The idea of not being allowed to talk about things cause its "ugly" or "uncomfortable" is how we get to the point where we tell our gay cousin "look just don't tell Grama cause then everyone has to deal with her feeling weird and you don't want that!" Rather then having a god damn conversation and just getting your baggage out.

Does it need to be in their books? Maybe!? Who knows its gonna really depend on what the book is about! Is it about dealing with being a pedo and NOT being a shit head and confirming to society without endangering either yourself or children? I think that's great! But if people say it can't be in book stores because the soccer moms are upset about it then no one's really able to have a conversation then.

But this is the point. The topic is "SELF-censorship"; it's about what we, as creators, choose to put in our work, right? And that might be something about our beliefs, or something we believe is important to discuss, or to present as potentially sympathetic in the face of often being presented as problematic, disgusting or wrong.

So, for example, CLAMP, a manga circle I'm actually generally a fan of, have made quite a few comics that involve pairings between adult characters and minors. A noteworthy one is that in Cardcaptor Sakura, there's a subplot between side characters in which a teacher and one of his students, who is aged 11 are betrothed to be wed when the girl is old enough, and they act like a couple. It's presented as though this is fine, harmless, even beautiful.

The question is, "is that okay? Should they have included that in their work? Or is that glamourising grooming?"

That's the question we as creators have to ask ourselves about this stuff, especially when it's around a subject like paedophilia. There are plenty of other anime and manga with similar themes or sexualised-looking depictions of underage characters. The whole point of this thread is to discuss where the responsibility lies: With the creator...or the audience? And there's no one right answer. I personally believe creators have responsibility but... obviously other people have different ideas, but I don't think my comment on Paedophiles not reflecting their feelings in their work was in any way off-topic just because your belief (which by the way is the same as mine) is "no, they shouldn't because that stuff is awful and wrong."

[But_a_Jape]

If conversation is important no matter how stupid, ugly, or uncomfortable it is, then why is bringing up a writer's unfiltered thoughts about a controversial debate considered "off topic" in a thread about self-censorship?

[Azifri]

But TAM didn't continue on the off topic, they went back to the topic of censorship, which is what the thread is about

[BOMB]

I wouldn't censor it, but I do find it an annoying and grading topic regardless of what side people stand on, it's been talked to death but keeps popping up and killing conversations in a lot of places.

I would never tell anyone they can't talk about something, but would I perhaps suggest they filter how much they talk about it? Maybe. But there is a difference between censorship and filtering.

[Junohugger]

And what was the part that was "off topic" Azifri? Write it out for me.

[Azifri]

Gosh, no! I stopped writing long responses on forums long ago ^^ But you can re-read.

[BOMB]

Because the conversation was beginning to be more about JkR and Trans stuff than it was about censorship.

[NellieVP318]

Anyway, getting back on topic. Self-censorship is a tricky area period. The bottom line, it's too much of a guessing game to figure out what to censor at this day and age. Your mileage will vary depending on audience.

[NickRowler]

If conversation is important no matter how stupid, ugly, or uncomfortable it is, then why is bringing up a writer's unfiltered thoughts about a controversial debate considered "off topic" in a thread about self-censorship?

This. I feel like JKR is a perfect example of how just running your mouth can lead to a lot of people being turned off by their work. I guess it is the catch-22 of a creator, do you state your opinions or stay quiet so you don't upset people. I feel like social media and bad press has lead to people avoiding media and boycotting stuff.

Like the whole Captain Marvel is another example of this. The statements the actress made pissed people off and a lot of people avoided watching the film.

I think it's also the thing I sort of dislike about social media. Everyone feels entitled to put their two cents into every topic no matter how misinformed they are on a topic. And I think it just causes the spread of a lot of misinformation. When the conversation about transpeople is being dominated by people who know nothing about transpeople or hate them it leads to people parroting back BS.

[Junohugger]

This is the thing? Like, her whole deal that Darthmongoose detailed is a GREAT example of the dynamics of self-censorship, be they arguments for or against. This idea that just because it's a flashpoint for heated opinions doesn't make it any less apt a case study. But because it has "Trans stuff" in it oh now it's out of bounds and us queers can't be trusted to behave when talking about it... it's so very interesting how all of a sudden a bunch of people are like "HOW DARE YOU BRING THIS UP WE WERE HAVING A LOVELY DAY" it's just like... uh huh.