Just like this endless, stupid argument that "social contagion" must only be understood to have the most neutral meaning an academic could possibly use for it and not the meaning Jesse's thousands of TERF followers obviously use it for
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @TylerMoody and
Fine, Jesse has never "stalked" anybody, he's just behaved obsessively toward them on the Internet in a way that made them feel uncomfortable and violated Are you satisfied? Do I need to pay a fine to the Word Police or can I get off with a warning?
1 reply 1 retweet 72 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @TylerMoody and
This is a perennial theme from concern trolls on this website People refuse to recognize that abusive behavior is a spectrum, with criminally liable behavior just on the most extreme end of it It's black-and-white, everything is either Totally OK or Not OK
3 replies 8 retweets 79 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @TylerMoody and
And then *they* act like *they're* the ones taking the issue more seriously than you for this kind of carping Like how the time Amber Frost was snottily chiding people for "making light of rape" by using the adjective "rapey" to describe creepy/unsettling behavior
1 reply 1 retweet 34 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @TylerMoody and
"Rape is a very serious violent physical attack on someone and you're reducing it to just using words in tweets!", etc Disingenuous bullshit complaints -- people word-policing, ironically, to try to stop other people word-policing ("How can mere WORDS be like RAPE")
1 reply 2 retweets 28 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @TylerMoody and
Anyway I remember the time Jesse specifically flipped out on me over this, specifically *because* I used language to indicate he wasn't literally a criminal ("He lowkey stalks every trans woman he comes in contact with")
1 reply 2 retweets 38 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @TylerMoody and
Like he went on this ridiculous rant "Lowkey?! LOWKEY?! HOW DO YOU LOW-KEY STALK SOMEONE BREAKING INTO SOMEONE'S HOME, FOLLOWING THEM IN YOUR CAR, LEAVING THREATENING NOTES IN THEIR MAILBOX HOW CAN THESE ACTIONS BE LOW-KEY?!"
1 reply 1 retweet 34 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @TylerMoody and
I mean yeah Jesse those aren't lowkey stalking, those are highkey stalking Lowkey stalking is the stuff you can do without leaving your office chair at home, that isn't in any sense illegal, but, you know, still sucks Look it up on Urban Dictionary, sheesh
2 replies 1 retweet 48 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @TylerMoody and
(Anyway, for the peanut gallery, ever since the amended Violence Against Women Act of 2013 the criminal definition of "stalking" is actually pretty expansive Which is as it should be, even if it makes "classical liberals" unhappy)
2 replies 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @TylerMoody and
(In theory all you need to do to prove a charge of "cyberstalking" is prove someone committed at least two separate acts online "intended to cause emotional distress" Which, you know, if actually enforced would get a lot of people thrown in jail)
1 reply 2 retweets 11 likes
(The problem, of course, is that white guys with journalism jobs get a fuckton of leeway in practice when defending themselves against the charge of "intending" to cause emotional distress Hardworking journos never intend to do anything bad, they're just doin' their jobs)
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @TylerMoody and
(And, of course, in a courtroom when proving the presence of emotional distress it has to be something that would distress a "reasonable person" They changed the wording of this from the older terminology "the reasonable man test" but the older name is still more accurate)
0 replies 1 retweet 10 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.