Elon Musk, Twitter’s next owner, provides his definition of “free speech”

Amid Twitter buyout, Musk says free speech is simply "that which matches the law."

Read the whole story

 

[Uragan]

It's definitely the best time to be alive regardless of your identity. Never before have we had any real prospect of extending our lifespans beyond the fourscore and ten.. basically as long as we don't kill ourselves off, the future is incomparably more desirable than the present or past in the most fundamental sense.

I actually see life extension as more dystopian than anything. Almost certainly it will only be accessible to the richest of the rich. Can you imagine a world where Rupert Murdoch doesn't eventually die?

Giving up on that dream just because there are downsides is the worst form of nihilism - if you want to do that, it's your choice. We didn't stay in the caves because "only the rich will have houses"..

Caveat, I'm assuming you're talking more about an "eternal life" sort of thing, rather than simply improving technology so that people are more likely to live to current world record ages of ~120 years. I don't have a problem with the latter.

But assuming we're talking about eternal life, I don't see it as a dream. I think there's a good reason that people die and I don't think my opinion is nihilistic. Our society already has problems with stagnation in part because most governments are gerontocracies. Even a relatively widely distributed life extension would turn this into a lichocracy where nothing ever changes. If we look at scifi, it's very rare for extreme life extension to be seen as a good thing. In Star Trek it's explicitly shown as a bad thing. Ringworld is the one exception that comes to mind (where lifespans are measured in centuries, but the technology was developed centuries ago), but Niven does hint at how hard it was for society to adapt (I haven't read all the books, maybe he covers this more).

The Soviet Union fell, in part, because it was a gerontocracy... I wonder if the US is doomed to the same fate. (All empires eventually fall. I'm wondering if this will be a contributing factor to the US's inevitable collapse.)

 

[woodelf]

I'm opposed to censorship of what is called fake news or disinformation.

All that other moderation shit is probably fine, maybe even a good idea. I'm a little leery about it still, but since it is a private platform I have to agree it's not really my concern.

But to re-iterate my actual concern, it is the decision that something is fake news and then censoring a news site. In my opinion that is way out of line. Twitter has the power to make shit disappear. Sure that sounds terrific when its the NY Post and the story seems like horseshit, but how many political reversals before you regret your apathy?

I can tell you how many, 1.

So if you can think past next Thursday, you might sense a threat lurking in the background of corporate censorship.

You're operating under a massive misperception here. You think this is about "news I agree with" vs "news I don't like"—your line about "political reversals" and your hypothetical counter-example about DeSantis make that clear. That is the argument people who are upset about Twitter blocking the Hunter laptop talk are making. But that doesn't automatically mean that people who are ok with it being blocked are also making the same argument, but in reverse.

The actual argument on "the other side" isn't about preferring leftish-/progressive-biased news to rightish-/reactionary-biased news, nor is it about preferring news that shows leftish/progressive people and ideas in a good light to news that shows rightish/reactionary people and ideas in a good light. That's not the ideology at work when supporting Twitter's decision to throttle, and later block, the Hunter laptop stories. The ideology that supports that is about reliable journalism and factual info vs disinformation.

And I know you missed this distinction because your DeSantis hypothetical neglected to mention the truth value of the story. You didn't specify whether the hypothetical DeSantis bribery story was provably false, extremely dubious, probably true, or proven true. Because you think this is about political partisanship or political ideology. It's not. It's about information literacy and journalism.

And to give you my answer to that question: if it's the same kind of hole-riddled story-spinning as the Hunter laptop, yes, I'd prefer that social media platforms don't actively promote it, and take steps to actively stop its promotion. If it actually has solid evidence, I'd be upset if it was throttled or blocked. But if it is solid journalism, then it's not an equivalent to the Hunter laptop story. Because the measure of equivalence isn't "is it political?"; the measure of equivalence is "is it unfounded?"

 

[woodelf]

Maybe he's transphobic because he kind of looks like someone in the middle of transitioning. Sort of like Trump Jr's fiancé. Wouldn't change my opinion of them in the slightest if they were, might actually improve it to be honest -- especially for Trump Jr -- but there's plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons to dislike them that have nothing to do with their appearance.

Transphobic jokes to make fun of someone who's transphobic is a really shitty take.

You missed the point completely. Retrospectively I can see how it would be an easy mistake to make, but if you look a bit closer I say how it would raise my opinion of Trump Jr if he were dating a trans woman. We can talk about how enlightened we are, and how things shouldn't matter, but when faced with a situation where someone you're dating tells you they are trans... many of us would probably fail that challenge. Which just means we still have work to do before our actions are fully in line with our words. We are currently living in a transitional age. A few generations from now people probably won't even think twice about it, but basically all of us alive now straddle the period between complete rejection of the idea and complete acceptance. We were socialized with the idea that these things are wrong, and have since taken the conscious choice to reject that idea, but it's not that simple to fully internalize a new idea. It will be a constant effort probably for the rest of our lives.

...or you could've said "yeah, looking back at what I wrote, I intended to reinforce my pro-trans point, but I did it badly and ended up echoing anti-trans language. My bad. It's clear that even those of us who are trying to do better still fail sometimes. I'm sorry. I guess I need to keep working at this."

 

[ZippyPeanut]

I'm opposed to censorship of what is called fake news or disinformation.

All media, from the lowliest town newspaper to the globe-spanning empires, all of them review stories to see if they're fit for publication. They all have their own criteria, but they're generally looking for something that will play well to their viewers, is ideally true and won't cause repercussions to their company. They look for red flags that indicate a story should be shelved and maybe investigated a bit further before publishing.

All of them do it. Every single one.

Fact-checking is censorship! There should be no difference between so-called vetted, objective reporting and Weekly World News!

Isn't it weird how the ideologues who cheered Trump on when he called factual reporting "fake news!" and said that mainstream journalism was "the enemy of the people!" are now cheering so loudly when they think Elon Musk will tear down any semblance of "censorship" that could weed out news which is fake? It's almost like there's no internal consistency between what they endorse as long as they see that people they don't like are suffering.

Love it ! All the echo chambers going bonkers over a decision to promote free speech

I rest my case.

"Isn't it weird how the ideologues who cheered Trump on when he called factual reporting "fake news!" and said that mainstream journalism was "the enemy of the people!" are now cheering so loudly when they think Elon Musk will tear down any semblance of "censorship" that could weed out news which is fake?"

You mean these people? The Very Fine Ones?

I don't find it weird at all. They have a playbook, written by the gent below;

That's a great terrible quotation.

But be aware that it's not entirely Goebbels. See here: https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-fact ... SKBN2492TD.

Regardless, part of that quotation is especially concerning: “There was no point in seeking to convert the intellectuals. For intellectuals would never be converted and would anyway always yield to the stronger, and this will always be 'the man in the street.'” Yep. And I know a lot of intellectuals who will do just that. There are too many liberals and intellectuals who are physically unprepared and unwilling to fight if there was an fascist usurpation. This is where the Nazis have the advantage: they've taken full advantage of the Second Amendment.

 

[watermeloncup]

It's definitely the best time to be alive regardless of your identity. Never before have we had any real prospect of extending our lifespans beyond the fourscore and ten.. basically as long as we don't kill ourselves off, the future is incomparably more desirable than the present or past in the most fundamental sense.

I actually see life extension as more dystopian than anything. Almost certainly it will only be accessible to the richest of the rich. Can you imagine a world where Rupert Murdoch doesn't eventually die?

Giving up on that dream just because there are downsides is the worst form of nihilism - if you want to do that, it's your choice. We didn't stay in the caves because "only the rich will have houses"..

Caveat, I'm assuming you're talking more about an "eternal life" sort of thing, rather than simply improving technology so that people are more likely to live to current world record ages of ~120 years. I don't have a problem with the latter.

But assuming we're talking about eternal life, I don't see it as a dream. I think there's a good reason that people die and I don't think my opinion is nihilistic. Our society already has problems with stagnation in part because most governments are gerontocracies. Even a relatively widely distributed life extension would turn this into a lichocracy where nothing ever changes. If we look at scifi, it's very rare for extreme life extension to be seen as a good thing. In Star Trek it's explicitly shown as a bad thing. Ringworld is the one exception that comes to mind (where lifespans are measured in centuries, but the technology was developed centuries ago), but Niven does hint at how hard it was for society to adapt (I haven't read all the books, maybe he covers this more).

The Soviet Union fell, in part, because it was a gerontocracy... I wonder if the US is doomed to the same fate. (All empires eventually fall. I'm wondering if this will be a contributing factor to the US's inevitable collapse.)

Gerontocracy combined with oligarchy is a pretty scary combination. I think we can still turn things around, but prospects are looking dimmer and dimmer.

 

[Uragan]

It's definitely the best time to be alive regardless of your identity. Never before have we had any real prospect of extending our lifespans beyond the fourscore and ten.. basically as long as we don't kill ourselves off, the future is incomparably more desirable than the present or past in the most fundamental sense.

I actually see life extension as more dystopian than anything. Almost certainly it will only be accessible to the richest of the rich. Can you imagine a world where Rupert Murdoch doesn't eventually die?

Giving up on that dream just because there are downsides is the worst form of nihilism - if you want to do that, it's your choice. We didn't stay in the caves because "only the rich will have houses"..

Caveat, I'm assuming you're talking more about an "eternal life" sort of thing, rather than simply improving technology so that people are more likely to live to current world record ages of ~120 years. I don't have a problem with the latter.

But assuming we're talking about eternal life, I don't see it as a dream. I think there's a good reason that people die and I don't think my opinion is nihilistic. Our society already has problems with stagnation in part because most governments are gerontocracies. Even a relatively widely distributed life extension would turn this into a lichocracy where nothing ever changes. If we look at scifi, it's very rare for extreme life extension to be seen as a good thing. In Star Trek it's explicitly shown as a bad thing. Ringworld is the one exception that comes to mind (where lifespans are measured in centuries, but the technology was developed centuries ago), but Niven does hint at how hard it was for society to adapt (I haven't read all the books, maybe he covers this more).

The Soviet Union fell, in part, because it was a gerontocracy... I wonder if the US is doomed to the same fate. (All empires eventually fall. I'm wondering if this will be a contributing factor to the US's inevitable collapse.)

Gerontocracy combined with oligarchy is a pretty scary combination. I think we can still turn things around, but prospects are looking dimmer and dimmer.

I'd say we're more in a plutocracy than an oligarchy, but that's quibbling over nuance.

 

[nimelennar]

It's sure weird how a whole bunch of bigots and right-wingers have returned to Twitter in the last few days to see how far they can push shit.

It seems our "free speech, but of course I don't mean the bigotry kind" crusaders should be explaining that to the bigots if they meant their nonsense.

That's probably less fun than trolling, though.

They're just living up to their Christian religion.

In the Old Testament, there were bigots everywhere. Some books have chapter after chapter of nothing but bigots. They have to follow that example!

Edit: I have been informed that the word I am thinking of is "begat."

That one was actually pretty funny.
Thanks for the laugh!

You're welcome!

Truthfully, I had no idea whether or not that one was going to land, so, thanks for the feedback!

 

[woodelf]

"Free Speech" isn't just about the speaker, it's really about the listener. Free speech is my God-given right to determine what is fact, opinion, hearsay or just bullshit. Anyone can say whatever they want and all you idiots can argue yourselves in circles over what is and isn't, (or what "is" even means) but at the end of the day none of you or the people you believe be it Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump, Elon Musk or ANYONE has the right to tell me that 2+2 doesn't equal 4.

Not sold on your definition, but that's also not the concern with Musk changing Twitter's moderation policies. In fact, you've got it exactly backwards. Musk is arguing that everyone has the right to tell you that 2+2≠4. You're arguing it, too—that's what «anyone can say whatever they want» means.

Meanwhile, Twitter's current moderation policies are precisely based on the principle that people aren't allowed to tell you that 2+2=banana—they make mistakes and don't always live up to that principle, but that's what they're aiming for.

 

[woodelf]

Hooray Freeze Peach.

Spam is not illegal
Bots are not illegal
Russian disinformation is not illegal
Racial slurs are not illegal
Rants targeting transgender persons are not illegal.
Gross memes to dehumanize the targets of right wing hate aren't illegal.
Demanding that minorities go back to "their own countries" aren't illegal.
Falsehoods aren't illegal (except in very narrow circumstances).

So make them illegal by forcing politicians to change the law instead of private companies to support a political agenda.

Except for spam (which is commercial speech and this easier to regulate), it's nearly impossible to make any of those categories of speech illegal, due to the First Amendment. People have tried, for most of them.

As for passing a Constitutional Amendment... Yeah, good luck with that. I doubt you could even get enough support in both houses of Congress and in enough states, to pass something simple like an enforcement mechanism for the Emoluments Clause (which, as Trump demonstrated, is sorely needed, as he was able to ignore it without any penalty).

Don't be so blithe about Constitutional Amendments being unreachable. You only need the support of enough states. State legislatures can call for a constitutional convention and then ratify amendments without Congress, and we're very close to having the necessary 3/4 of states with the necessary GOP control to pull it off.

 

[aerogems]

It's sure weird how a whole bunch of bigots and right-wingers have returned to Twitter in the last few days to see how far they can push shit.

I saw a YouTube video the other day that showed the rise in followers for right-wing people is being mirrored by a (lower) fall in followers for left-wing people. I think it was Upper Echelon. This alone skews the politics of Twitter, and the sale hasn't even gone through yet (nor have any of Twitters policies changed). It also shows that there was nothing stopping the right-wing people. It was all just rhetoric for the voters.

Also, the whole 'right wing commentary gets buried' rhetoric turned out to be complete nonsense. Some people did a study, and...well, see for yourself:

Oh get out of here with your facts and reason! This is about the feels for the poor snowflake conservatives who are upset they are facing consequences for running around acting like a giant asshole. I know, I know... people who are not introspective can be at the center of a hurricane and somehow the damage they see all around them is someone else's fault, news at 11. So, the reason they're being banned clearly isn't because they're raging assholes, but because the secret liberal tech cabal is out to get them because they've been identified as conservative.

 

[aerogems]

I agree that Twitter shouldn't moderate too far beyond the law. If we want the same content moderation policies to stay, we simply have to make them law.

Which law? US? UK? China? Saudi Arabia? Russia?

 

[watermeloncup]

Hooray Freeze Peach.

Spam is not illegal
Bots are not illegal
Russian disinformation is not illegal
Racial slurs are not illegal
Rants targeting transgender persons are not illegal.
Gross memes to dehumanize the targets of right wing hate aren't illegal.
Demanding that minorities go back to "their own countries" aren't illegal.
Falsehoods aren't illegal (except in very narrow circumstances).

So make them illegal by forcing politicians to change the law instead of private companies to support a political agenda.

Except for spam (which is commercial speech and this easier to regulate), it's nearly impossible to make any of those categories of speech illegal, due to the First Amendment. People have tried, for most of them.

As for passing a Constitutional Amendment... Yeah, good luck with that. I doubt you could even get enough support in both houses of Congress and in enough states, to pass something simple like an enforcement mechanism for the Emoluments Clause (which, as Trump demonstrated, is sorely needed, as he was able to ignore it without any penalty).

Don't be so blithe about Constitutional Amendments being unreachable. You only need the support of enough states. State legislatures can call for a constitutional convention and then ratify amendments without Congress, and we're very close to having the necessary 3/4 of states with the necessary GOP control to pull it off.

A Constitutional Convention is scary as shit. The far right could use it to completely rewrite the Constitution due to its vague provisions. And you're right that we're very close to one being successful. Currently, there are 29 states with Republican control of the legislature, and 3 more with mixed control. It takes 34 states to call a Convention, and 38 to ratify its decisions. A red wave this year or in 2024 could push that over the edge to calling a Convention. Actually passing something is less likely since there are just enough very blue states, but it's still not impossible if the Democrats really shit the bed.

Lots of details here, in case anyone needs more things to be worried about.

 

[Sjoerd Verweij]

I was a little offended by being called a nazi because I find that really offensive. But whatever.

That's not "pointing out hypocrisy"; that's concern trolling. You're trying to call out people for violating a principle you've said repeatedly you don't believe in. If you don't believe there should be restrictions on free speech, then don't complain when people say horrible things to and about you. If you think there should be some limits (like, say, that whatever they're saying should have factual basis), then you actually are for moderation and limits on speech, so you need to change your stated position. Argue for the positions you actually believe; don't pretend to argue for positions that you don't believe.

Also, deliberately violating one's own principles to make a point—as several people appear to be doing to you—isn't really hypocrisy. It would be hypocrisy if these people didn't repeatedly acknowledge that what they're doing isn't what they truly believe, or if they (almost) never practiced what they preached, even when they were being sincere.

This. So, so much this.

 

[aerogems]

Maybe he's transphobic because he kind of looks like someone in the middle of transitioning. Sort of like Trump Jr's fiancé. Wouldn't change my opinion of them in the slightest if they were, might actually improve it to be honest -- especially for Trump Jr -- but there's plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons to dislike them that have nothing to do with their appearance.

Transphobic jokes to make fun of someone who's transphobic is a really shitty take.

You missed the point completely. Retrospectively I can see how it would be an easy mistake to make, but if you look a bit closer I say how it would raise my opinion of Trump Jr if he were dating a trans woman. We can talk about how enlightened we are, and how things shouldn't matter, but when faced with a situation where someone you're dating tells you they are trans... many of us would probably fail that challenge. Which just means we still have work to do before our actions are fully in line with our words. We are currently living in a transitional age. A few generations from now people probably won't even think twice about it, but basically all of us alive now straddle the period between complete rejection of the idea and complete acceptance. We were socialized with the idea that these things are wrong, and have since taken the conscious choice to reject that idea, but it's not that simple to fully internalize a new idea. It will be a constant effort probably for the rest of our lives.

You can change your behavior immediately if you choose. It doesn't take generations.

Don't mock people (even bad people) for their looks.

Donald Trump Jr. isn't going to read your comment at Ars. Nor is his fiance.

You know who might read your comment? A trans woman who is in the middle of transitioning.

Elon Musk won't read any of the comments here on Ars either, what's your point?

And you're still missing the point. Truly internalizing a new thought pattern and associated behavior takes a very long time. The further it is from what you were socialized in, the longer and more effort it takes. This is well documented in social psychology research.

Let me put it this way. I deal with depression. A common problem for depressed people is rumination. We will get stuck in infinite loops replaying various incidents over and over in our mind and beating ourselves up for not handling a situation better. Therapists will tell you that you need to make an effort to catch yourself when you start doing this and then to consciously reject those ideas. However, as anyone who has ever tried to do it will tell you, it's a whole lot easier said than done. It can take years of constant effort to even feel like you're making any progress at all, and decades to get to a point where you start doing it automatically. The same basic principle applies to any other thought pattern.

If you are dating someone, it's starting to get serious, and they then tell you that they are trans (pre or post-op, doesn't matter) can you honestly say that you would be able to tell them that it doesn't matter at all to you, and that you could do that reflexively, in the moment and actually mean it? Never once having even a scintilla of doubt or regret. I think most of us would probably have to answer no if we were being honest. Maybe given a little time to process the situation we would decide our feelings for the person transcend gender, and good for those people, but there would be that moment of hesitation. For a lot of people, it would be the end of the relationship. Many will rationalize it as the person not being honest with them, which is just a bullshit cop-out. None of this is even remotely fair to trans people, and I hope they will live to see the day when no one will give two shits about this sort of thing, but that day isn't today and likely won't be tomorrow. If enough people keep working at it, the day will arrive eventually, however.

 

[Fancy Internet Person]

Maybe he's transphobic because he kind of looks like someone in the middle of transitioning. Sort of like Trump Jr's fiancé. Wouldn't change my opinion of them in the slightest if they were, might actually improve it to be honest -- especially for Trump Jr -- but there's plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons to dislike them that have nothing to do with their appearance.

Transphobic jokes to make fun of someone who's transphobic is a really shitty take.

You missed the point completely. Retrospectively I can see how it would be an easy mistake to make, but if you look a bit closer I say how it would raise my opinion of Trump Jr if he were dating a trans woman. We can talk about how enlightened we are, and how things shouldn't matter, but when faced with a situation where someone you're dating tells you they are trans... many of us would probably fail that challenge. Which just means we still have work to do before our actions are fully in line with our words. We are currently living in a transitional age. A few generations from now people probably won't even think twice about it, but basically all of us alive now straddle the period between complete rejection of the idea and complete acceptance. We were socialized with the idea that these things are wrong, and have since taken the conscious choice to reject that idea, but it's not that simple to fully internalize a new idea. It will be a constant effort probably for the rest of our lives.

You can change your behavior immediately if you choose. It doesn't take generations.

Don't mock people (even bad people) for their looks.

Donald Trump Jr. isn't going to read your comment at Ars. Nor is his fiance.

You know who might read your comment? A trans woman who is in the middle of transitioning.

Elon Musk won't read any of the comments here on Ars either, what's your point?

And you're still missing the point. Truly internalizing a new thought pattern and associated behavior takes a very long time. The further it is from what you were socialized in, the longer and more effort it takes. This is well documented in social psychology research.

Let me put it this way. I deal with depression. A common problem for depressed people is rumination. We will get stuck in infinite loops replaying various incidents over and over in our mind and beating ourselves up for not handling a situation better. Therapists will tell you that you need to make an effort to catch yourself when you start doing this and then to consciously reject those ideas. However, as anyone who has ever tried to do it will tell you, it's a whole lot easier said than done. It can take years of constant effort to even feel like you're making any progress at all, and decades to get to a point where you start doing it automatically. The same basic principle applies to any other thought pattern.

If you are dating someone, it's starting to get serious, and they then tell you that they are trans (pre or post-op, doesn't matter) can you honestly say that you would be able to tell them that it doesn't matter at all to you, and that you could do that reflexively, in the moment and actually mean it? Never once having even a scintilla of doubt or regret. I think most of us would probably have to answer no if we were being honest. Maybe given a little time to process the situation we would decide our feelings for the person transcend gender, and good for those people, but there would be that moment of hesitation. For a lot of people, it would be the end of the relationship. Many will rationalize it as the person not being honest with them, which is just a bullshit cop-out. None of this is even remotely fair to trans people, and I hope they will live to see the day when no one will give two shits about this sort of thing, but that day isn't today and likely won't be tomorrow. If enough people keep working at it, the day will arrive eventually, however.

You may want to go back to the basics of your therapy.

The subject at hand is the behavior of insulting people's appearance (specifically by saying they look like your idea of transgender women during transition).

It takes a lot of work to change patterns of thought.

It doesn't take much time to be accountable for your behaviors (the things you do, like making posts on Ars) and to alter them.

ETA: The distinction and interactions among feelings, thoughts, and behavior is fundamental to Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, there's lots of material available on the topic.

 

[Uragan]

Maybe he's transphobic because he kind of looks like someone in the middle of transitioning. Sort of like Trump Jr's fiancé. Wouldn't change my opinion of them in the slightest if they were, might actually improve it to be honest -- especially for Trump Jr -- but there's plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons to dislike them that have nothing to do with their appearance.

Transphobic jokes to make fun of someone who's transphobic is a really shitty take.

You missed the point completely. Retrospectively I can see how it would be an easy mistake to make, but if you look a bit closer I say how it would raise my opinion of Trump Jr if he were dating a trans woman. We can talk about how enlightened we are, and how things shouldn't matter, but when faced with a situation where someone you're dating tells you they are trans... many of us would probably fail that challenge. Which just means we still have work to do before our actions are fully in line with our words. We are currently living in a transitional age. A few generations from now people probably won't even think twice about it, but basically all of us alive now straddle the period between complete rejection of the idea and complete acceptance. We were socialized with the idea that these things are wrong, and have since taken the conscious choice to reject that idea, but it's not that simple to fully internalize a new idea. It will be a constant effort probably for the rest of our lives.

You can change your behavior immediately if you choose. It doesn't take generations.

Don't mock people (even bad people) for their looks.

Donald Trump Jr. isn't going to read your comment at Ars. Nor is his fiance.

You know who might read your comment? A trans woman who is in the middle of transitioning.

Elon Musk won't read any of the comments here on Ars either, what's your point?

The point is: Don't be a dick.

If you have to attack a person's being and are unable to focus on their argument to make your point, don't do that.

 

[nimelennar]

Hooray Freeze Peach.

Spam is not illegal
Bots are not illegal
Russian disinformation is not illegal
Racial slurs are not illegal
Rants targeting transgender persons are not illegal.
Gross memes to dehumanize the targets of right wing hate aren't illegal.
Demanding that minorities go back to "their own countries" aren't illegal.
Falsehoods aren't illegal (except in very narrow circumstances).

So make them illegal by forcing politicians to change the law instead of private companies to support a political agenda.

Except for spam (which is commercial speech and this easier to regulate), it's nearly impossible to make any of those categories of speech illegal, due to the First Amendment. People have tried, for most of them.

As for passing a Constitutional Amendment... Yeah, good luck with that. I doubt you could even get enough support in both houses of Congress and in enough states, to pass something simple like an enforcement mechanism for the Emoluments Clause (which, as Trump demonstrated, is sorely needed, as he was able to ignore it without any penalty).

Don't be so blithe about Constitutional Amendments being unreachable. You only need the support of enough states. State legislatures can call for a constitutional convention and then ratify amendments without Congress, and we're very close to having the necessary 3/4 of states with the necessary GOP control to pull it off.

That's something of an exaggeration.

Assuming that ratification of a constitutional amendment doesn't require gubernatorial sign-off, Republicans have full control of 28 state legislatures.

That's only 56%; they're ten states short of having enough control to unilaterally pass an amendment. Say they get the three split states, Alaska, Nebraska, and Minnesota, to get them to 31; can you credibly name seven Democratically-controlled states that are in danger of flipping to have Republican control of both houses, to get them the rest of the way there?

 

[O/Siris]

SO the hell what? The blogger's speech was not suppressed in any way, shape, nor form.

Only because musk was not in a position to do so. He now will be and has a track record of retaliating against speech.

Free speech is not freedom from consequence.

Musk has made no effort to even attempt having said speech suppressed nor removed. What he said, effectively, is "you can leave the store now."

That is NOT a violation of free speech in actuality nor free speech in principle. He is under no obligation whatsoever to server people who insult the people working for Tesla.
Not even as a free speech matter.

 

[Hack-n-Slash]

SO the hell what? The blogger's speech was not suppressed in any way, shape, nor form.

Only because musk was not in a position to do so. He now will be and has a track record of retaliating against speech.

Free speech is not freedom from consequence.

Musk has made no effort to even attempt having said speech suppressed nor removed. What he said, effectively, is "you can leave the store now."

That is NOT a violation of free speech in actuality nor free speech in principle. He is under no obligation whatsoever to server people who insult the people working for Tesla.
Not even as a free speech matter.

Is Twitter under an obligation to serve people who incite riots at the Capitol?

 

[graylshaped]

I'm opposed to censorship of what is called fake news or disinformation.

All media, from the lowliest town newspaper to the globe-spanning empires, all of them review stories to see if they're fit for publication. They all have their own criteria, but they're generally looking for something that will play well to their viewers, is ideally true and won't cause repercussions to their company. They look for red flags that indicate a story should be shelved and maybe investigated a bit further before publishing.

All of them do it. Every single one.

Fact-checking is censorship! There should be no difference between so-called vetted, objective reporting and Weekly World News!

Isn't it weird how the ideologues who cheered Trump on when he called factual reporting "fake news!" and said that mainstream journalism was "the enemy of the people!" are now cheering so loudly when they think Elon Musk will tear down any semblance of "censorship" that could weed out news which is fake? It's almost like there's no internal consistency between what they endorse as long as they see that people they don't like are suffering.

Love it ! All the echo chambers going bonkers over a decision to promote free speech

I rest my case.

"Isn't it weird how the ideologues who cheered Trump on when he called factual reporting "fake news!" and said that mainstream journalism was "the enemy of the people!" are now cheering so loudly when they think Elon Musk will tear down any semblance of "censorship" that could weed out news which is fake?"

Regardless, part of that quotation is especially concerning: “There was no point in seeking to convert the intellectuals. For intellectuals would never be converted and would anyway always yield to the stronger, and this will always be 'the man in the street.'” Yep. And I know a lot of intellectuals who will do just that. There are too many liberals and intellectuals who are physically unprepared and unwilling to fight if there was an fascist usurpation. This is where the Nazis have the advantage: they've taken full advantage of the Second Amendment.

I am a liberal, with a black belt and weapons.

I am also 6' 4", and when my alt-right neighbor confronted me about "You Democrats destroying the country" in front of my kid, he shut up very quickly when I walked over to him and invaded his personal space to suggest he not do that in front of my kid.

Fucking snowflake. He was flying a Texas flag in front of his house for a while, and we would both be happier if he just moved there.

 

[graylshaped]

SO the hell what? The blogger's speech was not suppressed in any way, shape, nor form.

Only because musk was not in a position to do so. He now will be and has a track record of retaliating against speech.

Free speech is not freedom from consequence.

Musk has made no effort to even attempt having said speech suppressed nor removed. What he said, effectively, is "you can leave the store now."

That is NOT a violation of free speech in actuality nor free speech in principle. He is under no obligation whatsoever to server people who insult the people working for Tesla.
Not even as a free speech matter.

Is Twitter under an obligation to serve people who incite riots at the Capitol?

Musk will let us know. I deleted my Twitter account many years ago. He shall gain no profit from me.

 

[O/Siris]

SO the hell what? The blogger's speech was not suppressed in any way, shape, nor form.

Only because musk was not in a position to do so. He now will be and has a track record of retaliating against speech.

Free speech is not freedom from consequence.

Musk has made no effort to even attempt having said speech suppressed nor removed. What he said, effectively, is "you can leave the store now."

That is NOT a violation of free speech in actuality nor free speech in principle. He is under no obligation whatsoever to server people who insult the people working for Tesla.
Not even as a free speech matter.

Is Twitter under an obligation to serve people who incite riots at the Capitol?

After just being told that context matter, this is just an asinine response. ON THE DAY THAT HAPPENED, I called every participant an insurrectionist and that they deserve no such protection.

Incitement to violence is not protected speech even if brought to Constitutional discussion.

 

[Urist]

Maybe he's transphobic because he kind of looks like someone in the middle of transitioning. Sort of like Trump Jr's fiancé. Wouldn't change my opinion of them in the slightest if they were, might actually improve it to be honest -- especially for Trump Jr -- but there's plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons to dislike them that have nothing to do with their appearance.

Transphobic jokes to make fun of someone who's transphobic is a really shitty take.

You missed the point completely. Retrospectively I can see how it would be an easy mistake to make, but if you look a bit closer I say how it would raise my opinion of Trump Jr if he were dating a trans woman. We can talk about how enlightened we are, and how things shouldn't matter, but when faced with a situation where someone you're dating tells you they are trans... many of us would probably fail that challenge. Which just means we still have work to do before our actions are fully in line with our words. We are currently living in a transitional age. A few generations from now people probably won't even think twice about it, but basically all of us alive now straddle the period between complete rejection of the idea and complete acceptance. We were socialized with the idea that these things are wrong, and have since taken the conscious choice to reject that idea, but it's not that simple to fully internalize a new idea. It will be a constant effort probably for the rest of our lives.

You can change your behavior immediately if you choose. It doesn't take generations.

Don't mock people (even bad people) for their looks.

Donald Trump Jr. isn't going to read your comment at Ars. Nor is his fiance.

You know who might read your comment? A trans woman who is in the middle of transitioning.

Elon Musk won't read any of the comments here on Ars either, what's your point?

And you're still missing the point. Truly internalizing a new thought pattern and associated behavior takes a very long time. The further it is from what you were socialized in, the longer and more effort it takes. This is well documented in social psychology research.

Let me put it this way. I deal with depression. A common problem for depressed people is rumination. We will get stuck in infinite loops replaying various incidents over and over in our mind and beating ourselves up for not handling a situation better. Therapists will tell you that you need to make an effort to catch yourself when you start doing this and then to consciously reject those ideas. However, as anyone who has ever tried to do it will tell you, it's a whole lot easier said than done. It can take years of constant effort to even feel like you're making any progress at all, and decades to get to a point where you start doing it automatically. The same basic principle applies to any other thought pattern.

If you are dating someone, it's starting to get serious, and they then tell you that they are trans (pre or post-op, doesn't matter) can you honestly say that you would be able to tell them that it doesn't matter at all to you, and that you could do that reflexively, in the moment and actually mean it? Never once having even a scintilla of doubt or regret. I think most of us would probably have to answer no if we were being honest. Maybe given a little time to process the situation we would decide our feelings for the person transcend gender, and good for those people, but there would be that moment of hesitation. For a lot of people, it would be the end of the relationship. Many will rationalize it as the person not being honest with them, which is just a bullshit cop-out. None of this is even remotely fair to trans people, and I hope they will live to see the day when no one will give two shits about this sort of thing, but that day isn't today and likely won't be tomorrow. If enough people keep working at it, the day will arrive eventually, however.

You should really just quit digging.

You can spend all day rationalizing your transphobia with roundabout pseudo-psychology, blaming depression, your socialization or weather or not you think society truly deep down accepts trans people, but that doesn't change the fact that at the end of the day it is just transphobia.

Your little dating hypothetical thought experiment framing trans people as inherently dishonest and "most people" (read yourself) as inherently unaccepting is frankly pretty insulting to all parties involved.

Want to be an ally? sometimes it is better to just STFU.

 

[ZippyPeanut]

I'm opposed to censorship of what is called fake news or disinformation.

All media, from the lowliest town newspaper to the globe-spanning empires, all of them review stories to see if they're fit for publication. They all have their own criteria, but they're generally looking for something that will play well to their viewers, is ideally true and won't cause repercussions to their company. They look for red flags that indicate a story should be shelved and maybe investigated a bit further before publishing.

All of them do it. Every single one.

Fact-checking is censorship! There should be no difference between so-called vetted, objective reporting and Weekly World News!

Isn't it weird how the ideologues who cheered Trump on when he called factual reporting "fake news!" and said that mainstream journalism was "the enemy of the people!" are now cheering so loudly when they think Elon Musk will tear down any semblance of "censorship" that could weed out news which is fake? It's almost like there's no internal consistency between what they endorse as long as they see that people they don't like are suffering.

Love it ! All the echo chambers going bonkers over a decision to promote free speech

I rest my case.

"Isn't it weird how the ideologues who cheered Trump on when he called factual reporting "fake news!" and said that mainstream journalism was "the enemy of the people!" are now cheering so loudly when they think Elon Musk will tear down any semblance of "censorship" that could weed out news which is fake?"

Regardless, part of that quotation is especially concerning: “There was no point in seeking to convert the intellectuals. For intellectuals would never be converted and would anyway always yield to the stronger, and this will always be 'the man in the street.'” Yep. And I know a lot of intellectuals who will do just that. There are too many liberals and intellectuals who are physically unprepared and unwilling to fight if there was an fascist usurpation. This is where the Nazis have the advantage: they've taken full advantage of the Second Amendment.

I am a liberal, with a black belt and weapons.

I am also 6' 4", and when my alt-right neighbor confronted me about "You Democrats destroying the country" in front of my kid, he shut up very quickly when I walked over to him and invaded his personal space to suggest he not do that in front of my kid.

Fucking snowflake. He was flying a Texas flag in front of his house for a while, and we would both be happier if he just moved there.

Well, then,... I admire you even more than before knowing this. Good on you for doing this. Stop the bullying and aggression as soon as it starts.

We have at least four things in common: 6' 4" height, liberal, weapon ownership, and the a fearlessness (or at least willingness) for needed confrontational defense.

I really appreciate it that he now knows that "democrat" is not synonymous with "coward" or "snowflake."

Keep up the good fight.

 

[Snark218]

And you're still missing the point. Truly internalizing a new thought pattern and associated behavior takes a very long time. The further it is from what you were socialized in, the longer and more effort it takes. This is well documented in social psychology research.
r.

Internalize your thought patterns on your own time. You're making the perfect the enemy of the good. We (as in, online communities that are open to trans people ) are being asked to display basic respect for trans people, their lived experience, and their human and civil rights. That means (to name a few examples but absolutely not limited to these) not making them the butt of jokes and insults, refraining from telling them that science invalidates their existence, that they're delusional and a threat to themselves and others, or that you're not willing to call them by the name and pronouns that match their identity. And those are all choices you can begin making immediately, today, regardless of the internal work you may need to do in the course of becoming fully accepting. Showing respect, or failing that simply not saying anything, is a pretty low bar to clear.

 

[Deleted member 817175]

I think you guys may be being a little harsh on aerogems. The joke was in poor taste but his subsequent remarks show he's at least engaging in some self-reflection on this point.

I can't speak for others. I'm at a stage in my life where the possibility of being in a new romantic relationship with a trans person or otherwise simply isn't very likely to come up ever again. At least for me, he's right: I can't honestly say I know how I'd react in that situation, especially because I've never really thought about it. Implicit bias is a real thing, working through them takes a lifetime if you've grown up saturated in them, and at least he's being honest on that.

 

[Hack-n-Slash]

SO the hell what? The blogger's speech was not suppressed in any way, shape, nor form.

Only because musk was not in a position to do so. He now will be and has a track record of retaliating against speech.

Free speech is not freedom from consequence.

Musk has made no effort to even attempt having said speech suppressed nor removed. What he said, effectively, is "you can leave the store now."

That is NOT a violation of free speech in actuality nor free speech in principle. He is under no obligation whatsoever to server people who insult the people working for Tesla.
Not even as a free speech matter.

Is Twitter under an obligation to serve people who incite riots at the Capitol?

After just being told that context matter, this is just an asinine response. ON THE DAY THAT HAPPENED, I called every participant an insurrectionist and that they deserve no such protection.

Incitement to violence is not protected speech even if brought to Constitutional discussion.

Is Twitter under an obligation to serve people who post about football?

 

[s73v3r]

Well you haven't given any other examples yet, so that leaves me to judge your argument on the basis of you being upset that Twitter wasn't letting ISIS members post propaganda.

That's it, apparently. That's the one thing you can think of that you wish you could post on Twitter and can't, is pro-ISIS sympathies.

Weird.

Meghan Murphy, a Canadian feminist writer and journalist. She was banned from Twitter for tweeting against transgender people, all she said is "Men aren't women".

Ahh, there it is. Every fucking time with you assholes.

It amuses and saddens me that what these dolts beat around the bush for so long about their nebulous unacceptable speech seems to always end up being transphobia when the mask finally slips. I'm certain that TERF bullshit is really only the tip of the iceberg with these bigots, as they actually believe that transphobia is still acceptable enough in society to bring up as a valid example of "banned speech" when the standard strawman example of "Hunter Biden's laptop" falls flat.

I'm not a transphobe.

I do think the suppression of hunter bidens laptop no way a straw man.

To claim that is what it is shows you aren't serious about democracy, which I said earlier and you proved willingly.

With apologies to the original poster of this, who's name escapes me, when you claim that the Hunter Biden laptop is something serious, then you need to consider each of these questions:

Is it confirmed that the computer with that serial number belonged to Hunter Biden?
Is is confirmed that he flew to NY during the time specified as when he dropped it off?
Is it confirmed that he visited the repair shop in question?
Is it confirmed that the hard drive was installed on the computer confirmed to belong to Hunter Biden?
Is it confirmed that the copy of the hard drive was/is a perfect reproduction of the computer at that date?
Is it confirmed that some emails are from Hunter Biden?
Is it confirmed that ALL emails are from Hunter Biden?
Is it confirmed that at no point in time was the computer connected to the internet?
Is it confirmed that the hard drive/copy was inaccessible to anyone before it was given to Rudy Giuliani?
Is it confirmed that no changes were made to the hard drive/ copy after it was in Giuliani’s care?
Is it confirmed that the emails confirmed to be from Hunter Biden contain proof of illegal actions?
Is it confirmed that Joe Biden was involved in any of the confirmed illegal actions?
Is it confirmed that Joe Biden has prevented an investigation into his son?

If even one of those is in doubt, then the entire story falls apart.

FYI, that's Snarky Robot logic you're quoting.

Thanks! For the life of me, I could not remember their name.

 

[Uragan]

Maybe he's transphobic because he kind of looks like someone in the middle of transitioning. Sort of like Trump Jr's fiancé. Wouldn't change my opinion of them in the slightest if they were, might actually improve it to be honest -- especially for Trump Jr -- but there's plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons to dislike them that have nothing to do with their appearance.

Transphobic jokes to make fun of someone who's transphobic is a really shitty take.

You missed the point completely. Retrospectively I can see how it would be an easy mistake to make, but if you look a bit closer I say how it would raise my opinion of Trump Jr if he were dating a trans woman. We can talk about how enlightened we are, and how things shouldn't matter, but when faced with a situation where someone you're dating tells you they are trans... many of us would probably fail that challenge. Which just means we still have work to do before our actions are fully in line with our words. We are currently living in a transitional age. A few generations from now people probably won't even think twice about it, but basically all of us alive now straddle the period between complete rejection of the idea and complete acceptance. We were socialized with the idea that these things are wrong, and have since taken the conscious choice to reject that idea, but it's not that simple to fully internalize a new idea. It will be a constant effort probably for the rest of our lives.

You can change your behavior immediately if you choose. It doesn't take generations.

Don't mock people (even bad people) for their looks.

Donald Trump Jr. isn't going to read your comment at Ars. Nor is his fiance.

You know who might read your comment? A trans woman who is in the middle of transitioning.

Elon Musk won't read any of the comments here on Ars either, what's your point?

And you're still missing the point. Truly internalizing a new thought pattern and associated behavior takes a very long time. The further it is from what you were socialized in, the longer and more effort it takes. This is well documented in social psychology research.

Let me put it this way. I deal with depression. A common problem for depressed people is rumination. We will get stuck in infinite loops replaying various incidents over and over in our mind and beating ourselves up for not handling a situation better. Therapists will tell you that you need to make an effort to catch yourself when you start doing this and then to consciously reject those ideas. However, as anyone who has ever tried to do it will tell you, it's a whole lot easier said than done. It can take years of constant effort to even feel like you're making any progress at all, and decades to get to a point where you start doing it automatically. The same basic principle applies to any other thought pattern.

If you are dating someone, it's starting to get serious, and they then tell you that they are trans (pre or post-op, doesn't matter) can you honestly say that you would be able to tell them that it doesn't matter at all to you, and that you could do that reflexively, in the moment and actually mean it? Never once having even a scintilla of doubt or regret. I think most of us would probably have to answer no if we were being honest. Maybe given a little time to process the situation we would decide our feelings for the person transcend gender, and good for those people, but there would be that moment of hesitation. For a lot of people, it would be the end of the relationship. Many will rationalize it as the person not being honest with them, which is just a bullshit cop-out. None of this is even remotely fair to trans people, and I hope they will live to see the day when no one will give two shits about this sort of thing, but that day isn't today and likely won't be tomorrow. If enough people keep working at it, the day will arrive eventually, however.

Let's take a step back here. You said that Musk is probably transphobic because he's looks like someone who is in the process of transitioning. And then went off on a tangent about Kimberly Guilfoyle also looking like someone who is undergoing the same process.

First off, what kind of logic is that? Are you suggesting that people who look like they could be transitioning are transphobes? By extension, do you believe that all effeminate men are all gay? What about butch women? Are they all gay too?

Secondly, why bring up Ms. Guilfoyle at all since she and Donald Trump Jr. are immaterial to the discussion at hand? The person at hand is Elon Musk.

Musk's transphobia is probably partially because the mother of his two youngest children is now dating Chelsea Manning, a trans woman, and partially because he's just a reactionary asshole, who's probably been transphobic for a long time now.

 

[graylshaped]

I rest my case.

"Isn't it weird how the ideologues who cheered Trump on when he called factual reporting "fake news!" and said that mainstream journalism was "the enemy of the people!" are now cheering so loudly when they think Elon Musk will tear down any semblance of "censorship" that could weed out news which is fake?"

Regardless, part of that quotation is especially concerning: “There was no point in seeking to convert the intellectuals. For intellectuals would never be converted and would anyway always yield to the stronger, and this will always be 'the man in the street.'” Yep. And I know a lot of intellectuals who will do just that. There are too many liberals and intellectuals who are physically unprepared and unwilling to fight if there was an fascist usurpation. This is where the Nazis have the advantage: they've taken full advantage of the Second Amendment.

I am a liberal, with a black belt and weapons.

I am also 6' 4", and when my alt-right neighbor confronted me about "You Democrats destroying the country" in front of my kid, he shut up very quickly when I walked over to him and invaded his personal space to suggest he not do that in front of my kid.

Fucking snowflake. He was flying a Texas flag in front of his house for a while, and we would both be happier if he just moved there.

Well, then,... I admire you even more than before knowing this. Good on you for doing this. Stop the bullying and aggression as soon as it starts.

We have at least four things in common: 6' 4" height, liberal, weapon ownership, and the a fearlessness (or at least willingness) for needed confrontational defense.

I really appreciate it that he now knows that "democrat" is not synonymous with "coward" or "snowflake."

Keep up the good fight.

I would rather we be decent and polite neighbors, despite differing political approaches, than fighting, but I think I made it clear that if he wants to talk smack about me in front of my kid, the video evidence from his many invasive cameras will test the boundaries of my umbrella liability policy.

 

[Uragan]

I think you guys may be being a little harsh on aerogems. The joke was in poor taste but his subsequent remarks show he's at least engaging in some self-reflection on this point.

I can't speak for others. I'm at a stage in my life where the possibility of being in a new romantic relationship with a trans person or otherwise simply isn't very likely to come up ever again. At least for me, he's right: I can't honestly say I know how I'd react in that situation, especially because I've never really thought about it. Implicit bias is a real thing, working through them takes a lifetime if you've grown up saturated in them, and at least he's being honest on that.

Hard. Pass.

Multiple people called aerogems out on the bad "joke" and they doubled down on it and went on wild tangents that had nothing to do with the original call out.

The subject of dating a trans individual (and the introspection that may come from doing so) has nothing to do with why Elon Musk is a transphobe.

Edit: Additionally, aerogems isn't engaging on any self-reflection on the reasons why they were called out in the first place. So, I'm not necessarily sure why you're praising them for something tangentally related to the topic at hand, at best.

 

[Hack-n-Slash]

Thanks! For the life of OpMe, I could not remember their name.

ftfy

 

[s73v3r]

SO the hell what? The blogger's speech was not suppressed in any way, shape, nor form.

Only because musk was not in a position to do so. He now will be and has a track record of retaliating against speech.

Free speech is not freedom from consequence.

Really? Because you've been arguing the opposite the entire time. You don't think anyone should face consequences for what they post on Twitter, for instance.

Musk has made no effort to even attempt having said speech suppressed nor removed. What he said, effectively, is "you can leave the store now."

Nope. What he did was produce a chilling effect on others who would criticize Tesla. And he applied consequences for someone's speech that he himself claim should not exist. As such, he's a hypocrite and an asshole.

 

[ZippyPeanut]

I rest my case.

"Isn't it weird how the ideologues who cheered Trump on when he called factual reporting "fake news!" and said that mainstream journalism was "the enemy of the people!" are now cheering so loudly when they think Elon Musk will tear down any semblance of "censorship" that could weed out news which is fake?"

Regardless, part of that quotation is especially concerning: “There was no point in seeking to convert the intellectuals. For intellectuals would never be converted and would anyway always yield to the stronger, and this will always be 'the man in the street.'” Yep. And I know a lot of intellectuals who will do just that. There are too many liberals and intellectuals who are physically unprepared and unwilling to fight if there was an fascist usurpation. This is where the Nazis have the advantage: they've taken full advantage of the Second Amendment.

I am a liberal, with a black belt and weapons.

I am also 6' 4", and when my alt-right neighbor confronted me about "You Democrats destroying the country" in front of my kid, he shut up very quickly when I walked over to him and invaded his personal space to suggest he not do that in front of my kid.

Fucking snowflake. He was flying a Texas flag in front of his house for a while, and we would both be happier if he just moved there.

Well, then,... I admire you even more than before knowing this. Good on you for doing this. Stop the bullying and aggression as soon as it starts.

We have at least four things in common: 6' 4" height, liberal, weapon ownership, and the a fearlessness (or at least willingness) for needed confrontational defense.

I really appreciate it that he now knows that "democrat" is not synonymous with "coward" or "snowflake."

Keep up the good fight.

I would rather we be decent and polite neighbors, despite differing political approaches, than fighting, but I think I made it clear that if he wants to talk smack about me in front of my kid, the video evidence from his many invasive cameras will test the boundaries of my umbrella liability policy.

I grok.

 

[Deleted member 807857]

Maybe he's transphobic because he kind of looks like someone in the middle of transitioning. Sort of like Trump Jr's fiancé. Wouldn't change my opinion of them in the slightest if they were, might actually improve it to be honest -- especially for Trump Jr -- but there's plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons to dislike them that have nothing to do with their appearance.

Transphobic jokes to make fun of someone who's transphobic is a really shitty take.

You missed the point completely. Retrospectively I can see how it would be an easy mistake to make, but if you look a bit closer I say how it would raise my opinion of Trump Jr if he were dating a trans woman. We can talk about how enlightened we are, and how things shouldn't matter, but when faced with a situation where someone you're dating tells you they are trans... many of us would probably fail that challenge. Which just means we still have work to do before our actions are fully in line with our words. We are currently living in a transitional age. A few generations from now people probably won't even think twice about it, but basically all of us alive now straddle the period between complete rejection of the idea and complete acceptance. We were socialized with the idea that these things are wrong, and have since taken the conscious choice to reject that idea, but it's not that simple to fully internalize a new idea. It will be a constant effort probably for the rest of our lives.

You can change your behavior immediately if you choose. It doesn't take generations.

Don't mock people (even bad people) for their looks.

Donald Trump Jr. isn't going to read your comment at Ars. Nor is his fiance.

You know who might read your comment? A trans woman who is in the middle of transitioning.

Spoiler

Elon Musk won't read any of the comments here on Ars either, what's your point?

And you're still missing the point. Truly internalizing a new thought pattern and associated behavior takes a very long time. The further it is from what you were socialized in, the longer and more effort it takes. This is well documented in social psychology research.

Let me put it this way. I deal with depression. A common problem for depressed people is rumination. We will get stuck in infinite loops replaying various incidents over and over in our mind and beating ourselves up for not handling a situation better. Therapists will tell you that you need to make an effort to catch yourself when you start doing this and then to consciously reject those ideas. However, as anyone who has ever tried to do it will tell you, it's a whole lot easier said than done. It can take years of constant effort to even feel like you're making any progress at all, and decades to get to a point where you start doing it automatically. The same basic principle applies to any other thought pattern.

If you are dating someone, it's starting to get serious, and they then tell you that they are trans (pre or post-op, doesn't matter) can you honestly say that you would be able to tell them that it doesn't matter at all to you, and that you could do that reflexively, in the moment and actually mean it? Never once having even a scintilla of doubt or regret. I think most of us would probably have to answer no if we were being honest. Maybe given a little time to process the situation we would decide our feelings for the person transcend gender, and good for those people, but there would be that moment of hesitation. For a lot of people, it would be the end of the relationship. Many will rationalize it as the person not being honest with them, which is just a bullshit cop-out. None of this is even remotely fair to trans people, and I hope they will live to see the day when no one will give two shits about this sort of thing, but that day isn't today and likely won't be tomorrow. If enough people keep working at it, the day will arrive eventually, however.

If I'm dating someone and it's getting serious, then they told me they were trans - no, it wouldn't even cross my mind to reject someone I care about *that* much over something as silly as they used to be a guy. In fact, I'm pretty sure it would just make me care about them even more for having the strength to go through what they almost certainly did.

Edit: Spoiler out the comment that's already on this page multiple times.

 

[mpfaff]

Maybe he's transphobic because he kind of looks like someone in the middle of transitioning. Sort of like Trump Jr's fiancé. Wouldn't change my opinion of them in the slightest if they were, might actually improve it to be honest -- especially for Trump Jr -- but there's plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons to dislike them that have nothing to do with their appearance.

Transphobic jokes to make fun of someone who's transphobic is a really shitty take.

You missed the point completely. Retrospectively I can see how it would be an easy mistake to make, but if you look a bit closer I say how it would raise my opinion of Trump Jr if he were dating a trans woman. We can talk about how enlightened we are, and how things shouldn't matter, but when faced with a situation where someone you're dating tells you they are trans... many of us would probably fail that challenge. Which just means we still have work to do before our actions are fully in line with our words. We are currently living in a transitional age. A few generations from now people probably won't even think twice about it, but basically all of us alive now straddle the period between complete rejection of the idea and complete acceptance. We were socialized with the idea that these things are wrong, and have since taken the conscious choice to reject that idea, but it's not that simple to fully internalize a new idea. It will be a constant effort probably for the rest of our lives.

You can change your behavior immediately if you choose. It doesn't take generations.

Don't mock people (even bad people) for their looks.

Donald Trump Jr. isn't going to read your comment at Ars. Nor is his fiance.

You know who might read your comment? A trans woman who is in the middle of transitioning.

Elon Musk won't read any of the comments here on Ars either, what's your point?

And you're still missing the point. Truly internalizing a new thought pattern and associated behavior takes a very long time. The further it is from what you were socialized in, the longer and more effort it takes. This is well documented in social psychology research.

Let me put it this way. I deal with depression. A common problem for depressed people is rumination. We will get stuck in infinite loops replaying various incidents over and over in our mind and beating ourselves up for not handling a situation better. Therapists will tell you that you need to make an effort to catch yourself when you start doing this and then to consciously reject those ideas. However, as anyone who has ever tried to do it will tell you, it's a whole lot easier said than done. It can take years of constant effort to even feel like you're making any progress at all, and decades to get to a point where you start doing it automatically. The same basic principle applies to any other thought pattern.

If you are dating someone, it's starting to get serious, and they then tell you that they are trans (pre or post-op, doesn't matter) can you honestly say that you would be able to tell them that it doesn't matter at all to you, and that you could do that reflexively, in the moment and actually mean it? Never once having even a scintilla of doubt or regret. I think most of us would probably have to answer no if we were being honest. Maybe given a little time to process the situation we would decide our feelings for the person transcend gender, and good for those people, but there would be that moment of hesitation. For a lot of people, it would be the end of the relationship. Many will rationalize it as the person not being honest with them, which is just a bullshit cop-out. None of this is even remotely fair to trans people, and I hope they will live to see the day when no one will give two shits about this sort of thing, but that day isn't today and likely won't be tomorrow. If enough people keep working at it, the day will arrive eventually, however.

As someone that still dates and is closer to 40 than I'd like, I've found trans people are pretty upfront with their identity. It's incredibly dangerous for them to even agree to meet someone without that person first knowing and being okay with that fact. I would think keeping it to themselves until things got serious would be pretty rare.

You have to make an effort to be better, it's not something that just comes. I deal with depression and I wouldn't use it as a crutch to justify doing or saying something that bothered someone. I have, I've said jokes that I didn't realize would hurt someone and when I find out I feel terrible and try to make amends knowing that someone being offended was my fault, not their's. If you said something that you find out from someone else is hurtful then just take that and try to be better.

You don't have to date trans people or go out of your way to make friends. But at the very least, the decent thing. to do is to be an ally.

 

[Adreaver]

Maybe he's transphobic because he kind of looks like someone in the middle of transitioning. Sort of like Trump Jr's fiancé. Wouldn't change my opinion of them in the slightest if they were, might actually improve it to be honest -- especially for Trump Jr -- but there's plenty of perfectly legitimate reasons to dislike them that have nothing to do with their appearance.

Transphobic jokes to make fun of someone who's transphobic is a really shitty take.

You missed the point completely. Retrospectively I can see how it would be an easy mistake to make, but if you look a bit closer I say how it would raise my opinion of Trump Jr if he were dating a trans woman. We can talk about how enlightened we are, and how things shouldn't matter, but when faced with a situation where someone you're dating tells you they are trans... many of us would probably fail that challenge. Which just means we still have work to do before our actions are fully in line with our words. We are currently living in a transitional age. A few generations from now people probably won't even think twice about it, but basically all of us alive now straddle the period between complete rejection of the idea and complete acceptance. We were socialized with the idea that these things are wrong, and have since taken the conscious choice to reject that idea, but it's not that simple to fully internalize a new idea. It will be a constant effort probably for the rest of our lives.

You can change your behavior immediately if you choose. It doesn't take generations.

Don't mock people (even bad people) for their looks.

Donald Trump Jr. isn't going to read your comment at Ars. Nor is his fiance.

You know who might read your comment? A trans woman who is in the middle of transitioning.

Elon Musk won't read any of the comments here on Ars either, what's your point?

And you're still missing the point. Truly internalizing a new thought pattern and associated behavior takes a very long time. The further it is from what you were socialized in, the longer and more effort it takes. This is well documented in social psychology research.

Let me put it this way. I deal with depression. A common problem for depressed people is rumination. We will get stuck in infinite loops replaying various incidents over and over in our mind and beating ourselves up for not handling a situation better. Therapists will tell you that you need to make an effort to catch yourself when you start doing this and then to consciously reject those ideas. However, as anyone who has ever tried to do it will tell you, it's a whole lot easier said than done. It can take years of constant effort to even feel like you're making any progress at all, and decades to get to a point where you start doing it automatically. The same basic principle applies to any other thought pattern.

If you are dating someone, it's starting to get serious, and they then tell you that they are trans (pre or post-op, doesn't matter) can you honestly say that you would be able to tell them that it doesn't matter at all to you, and that you could do that reflexively, in the moment and actually mean it? Never once having even a scintilla of doubt or regret. I think most of us would probably have to answer no if we were being honest. Maybe given a little time to process the situation we would decide our feelings for the person transcend gender, and good for those people, but there would be that moment of hesitation. For a lot of people, it would be the end of the relationship. Many will rationalize it as the person not being honest with them, which is just a bullshit cop-out. None of this is even remotely fair to trans people, and I hope they will live to see the day when no one will give two shits about this sort of thing, but that day isn't today and likely won't be tomorrow. If enough people keep working at it, the day will arrive eventually, however.

If I'm dating someone and it's getting serious, then they told me they were trans - no, it wouldn't even cross my mind to reject someone I care about *that* much over something as silly as they used to be a guy. In fact, I'm pretty sure it would just make me care about them even more for having the strength to go through what they almost certainly did.

For me, it depends. I'm a straight cis man, so there isn't really much room for deviation in terms of what kind of anatomy I'm sexually interested in. If you don't have that anatomy, sorry, not interested. I'm happy to be friends, I'm happy to fight against the bigots that try to deny LGBTQ people basic rights, but I don't think having a sexual preference for a given kind of genitalia makes me a bad person.

Pre-op vs post-op makes a huge difference here.

 

[DarthSlack]

"The Wokes"

The stupid, it burnses.

 

[ZippyPeanut]

I think you guys may be being a little harsh on aerogems. The joke was in poor taste but his subsequent remarks show he's at least engaging in some self-reflection on this point.

I can't speak for others. I'm at a stage in my life where the possibility of being in a new romantic relationship with a trans person or otherwise simply isn't very likely to come up ever again. At least for me, he's right: I can't honestly say I know how I'd react in that situation, especially because I've never really thought about it. Implicit bias is a real thing, working through them takes a lifetime if you've grown up saturated in them, and at least he's being honest on that.

"I'm at a stage in my life where the possibility of being in a new romantic relationship with a trans person or otherwise simply isn't very likely to come up ever again."

A lot can be read into that. I hope you are well.

.