all 21 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 101 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

If I get Guantanamo’d for being trans I just want to say: I regret nothing and you cannot force the transness out of me in any way that matters.

I already lived through growing up not even knowing what trans was in the deep south. If you want to deadname and misgender me, I already spent more than half my life doing that shit. That’s old territory I rewalk every time I talk to my siblings. I already know what anti-trans people think, nothing they say about trans people is new or surprising. Decades of it did not break me, and neither would being labeled a terrorist over my gender identity.

In summation: 🖕🏳️‍⚧️🖕

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    Listen, if I can't be the me I really want to be (a big, muscular and rich womanizer) due my own sheer laziness and lack of discipline, which would not at all impact me socially, economically or politically, then you can't be the you that you deserve to be 😡

  • source
  • parent
  • Those handicapable motherfuckers are determined to put us all in the gas chamber. If you can walk, please walk through the forest into Canada and escape. I know you can't necessarily use passports now but there are no border checks in the forest. Or get a friend to smuggle you out in the trunk of their car. Or pay a coyote to take you to Mexico on the return trip.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Hello.

    I’m a terrorist.

    I’m a terrorist because I advocate that all the rich people shouldn’t have all the money, and that all the poor people shouldn’t be slaves.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (10 children)

    Headline is somewhat deceiving. Still very very worrying. The push currently is to define trans advocacy as domestic terrorism, rather then to just outright define all trans people as terrorists. The way they are defining "gender ideology based extremism" is still extremely vague so I could definitely see them gradually extending the (or at least their treatment of the) definition of this.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Within the FBI:

    Under the plan being discussed, the FBI would treat transgender suspects as a subset of the Bureau’s new threat category, “Nihilistic Violent Extremists” (NVEs). (From Ken Klippensteins report)

    And with the heritage foundation report:

    The document takes pains to insist that the proposal would not label “all transgender individuals” as domestic terrorists. Instead, it claims it would only apply when someone is “motivated by an ideology that encourages, promotes, or condones violence” while “inciting unlawful violent action or threat.” But those qualifiers are deliberately elastic. Given the earlier definition of TIVE, even the most basic act of advocacy—like pointing out that anti-trans laws threaten transgender people’s existence—could be construed as “incitement.” The memo itself makes the danger plain: in its list of “typical characteristics” of supposed extremism, it cites a trans flag with the words “protect their right to exist.” (From erin in the morning)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The push currently is to define trans advocacy as domestic terrorism, rather then to just outright define all trans people as terrorists.

    How many trans people would not support trans rights? It's easy for them to claim any trans person is an advocate of trans rights and therefore a terrorist. There's no safety margin here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • “Terrorist group” is about conduct and purpose, not identity. Under 18 U.S.C. §2331, domestic terrorism = criminal acts dangerous to life + intent to intimidate or coerce a population or government. Being trans doesn’t satisfy any of that. Name the act. If one person commits a crime, that’s a criminal; it doesn’t auto-convert millions into “nihilistic violent extremists” (that’s kinda branding, not analysis). Where’s the act, the group, the stated intent to coerce? Also worth noting: trans folks are more often targets than offenders—see the Williams Institute victimization stats, 2021. Rebranding advocacy as “extremism” is just a backdoor speech ban, and it’ll boomerang onto any protest they don’t like. We shouldn’t let that slide.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    From the article: The group defines “TIVE” as “the belief that violence is justified against people who oppose [the trans community],” as well as the belief that opposing trans rights “itself constitutes a form of violence towards people who identify as [trans or gender nonconforming]... or poses an imminent threat to such persons’ emotional, psychological, or physical safety, including through self-harm or suicide.”

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    How can you be a nihilistic violent extremist? Like, real nihilistic people aren't fucking violent because nothing matters, so why bother... right?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Remember when a lady shopkeeper was shot for having a Pride flag outside the shop? Or when Canadian intelligence services reported they expected a rise in hatred-fueled domestic terrorism against trans people?

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Kash Patel has the biggest “I was bullied at school, but now I’m IN CHARGE of the bullies” energy I have ever seen.

  • source
  • 123 comments in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post
    68 comments in c/nottheonion@lemmy.world view that post
    23 comments in c/news@lemmy.world view that post
    22 comments in c/news@lemmy.world view that post
    6 comments in c/queer@szmer.info view that post