Kat is ruining people's days, every day with her bigotry. She doesn't just spout it from her own page, she actively searches for trans people and their allies and goes to their comments to call them disgusting, moronic, and child abusers because she is so, so afraid of her own gender identity that all she can do to avoid those thoughts is constantly bully and attack other people.
I don't want to read her mind-numbingly stupid hate speech on my beloved Substack every damn day. How is this ok??
Yes, you are saying what we are all thinking inside. I am with you 100%
I tried to outline my reasoning for not moderating here in my own comment section *this time* - it stands to serve as an example - this is what a TERF believes, this is the mentality we are dealing with, and this is what it looks like when they spin out, particularly when faced with facts. This is what cognitive dissonance looks like to the outside observer.
This is what we must learn to identify even in its more subtle forms, and this is what we must learn to stand against. With compassion, love, empathy as our strength, our unity and resolve, armed with facts and science, I feel we can learn from this and stand tall, proud, and stronger together!
But remember, if she is ruining your day, then she wins :)
Your responses are beautiful and your patience is impressive. I don't disagree with your approach at all for as long as Kat is here, actively hurting people. Leaving her comments up lets Substack and everyone know exactly who she is.
And also, I look forward to the day when she isn't hurting anyone I care about anymore!
Nobody is answering your questions because they are sealion questions. They are a distraction from the actual point. As PITT has said multiple times, YOU are the one making an extraordinary claim that defies scientific and medical consensus. Therefore, the onus is on YOU, not anyone else, to prove your claims, and your repeated insistence on asking these questions does not do that.
If we keep shifting the burden, maybe they will eventually bite so I can "win" - except this is not about winning or losing, nor is this about right or wrong. This is about people's lives, making a better future for our kids, how we want to evolve as a people, society, and culture. For me, this is about science, data, facts, and how we as parents, people, LGBTQIA+ folks might want to consider moving forward based on those facts. How we can bring people together. Hopefully, bring some parents out of the echo chambers and back to the dinner table with their trans kid.
"I asked simple questions. That's not 'sealioning.'" Actually, Kat, it is the very definition of sealioning. What you are doing here is a textbook example of sealioning. If someone didn't know what sealioning is, and wanted an example, your tactics would be perfect for that lesson.
Look guys. Someone told Kat when she was a little kid that boys have penises and girls have vaginas. And so it is utterly impossible that this is not true, no matter how many millions of peoples' experiences do not align with this, no matter how many thousands of peer-reviewed, rigorous scientific studies across many decades and cultures show that gender is nuanced.
Kat knows better.
Thank goodness she was here to set the record straight. Getting all of us on the same page with what 5-yr-old Kat understood about gender is WAY more important than doing anything about the epidemic of suicide among those suffering from gender dysphoria.
Hi Kat, just so you are aware, your argument contains several logical fallacies and misrepresentations that undermine its validity:
Hasty generalization: You make broad claims about complex legal and psychological concepts without providing sufficient evidence.
Begging the question: You assume your conclusion ("There is no such thing as 'gender identity'") in your premises without providing evidence.
False dichotomy: You present a simplistic binary view of sex and gender, ignoring the complexity recognized by modern science.
Ad hominem: Labeling those who disagree with you as "mentally ill" attacks character rather than addressing arguments.
Appeal to nature: Claiming immutability of sex doesn't address the validity of gender identity or the ethics of gender-affirming care.
Your misrepresentations include:
Oversimplifying the legal concept of hate speech. While "hate speech" isn't a legal term in U.S. law, speech that incites violence or discrimination is often restricted.
Conflating sex and gender, which are distinct concepts in modern scientific understanding.
Characterizing gender-affirming care as "chasing an unobtainable goal," which misrepresents the intent and outcomes of these treatments.
I have these on copy/paste now, it is like clockwork. Even this bit:
A productive discussion on these complex topics requires engaging with the nuanced scientific understanding of sex, gender, and identity, rather than relying on oversimplifications and logical fallacies. Your argument fails to address the actual evidence and ethical considerations involved in these issues.
Come on, Kat. I know you know better, because I've had this same argument with you before. At the time, I actually thought you were asking in good faith, so I gave you sources that explained why your take on this is not accurate. You've already been given the info you're requesting, so why would anybody here bother themselves with going to the trouble again, knowing you won't acknowledge it anyway?
It was this, if memory serves. Kay popped up on a thread insisting that Imane Khelif should provide proof that she's female. I don't remember the exact argument anymore, but Kat was making an argument similar to the X/Y drivel she's posted here.
![People with Inconvenient Truths about Transphobes [PITT]](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_80,h_80,c_fill,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep,g_auto/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F704ba0db-3e10-4112-9364-c2f224d0cfae_500x500.png)
@Substack HOW IS THIS NOT HATE SPEECH!!?
Kat is ruining people's days, every day with her bigotry. She doesn't just spout it from her own page, she actively searches for trans people and their allies and goes to their comments to call them disgusting, moronic, and child abusers because she is so, so afraid of her own gender identity that all she can do to avoid those thoughts is constantly bully and attack other people.
I don't want to read her mind-numbingly stupid hate speech on my beloved Substack every damn day. How is this ok??
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24WYoGQhiBs SCNR.
This made me LOL - thank you!
Unfortunately, Substack doesn't have a problem with hate speech. They're fine with it.
Yes, you are saying what we are all thinking inside. I am with you 100%
I tried to outline my reasoning for not moderating here in my own comment section *this time* - it stands to serve as an example - this is what a TERF believes, this is the mentality we are dealing with, and this is what it looks like when they spin out, particularly when faced with facts. This is what cognitive dissonance looks like to the outside observer.
This is what we must learn to identify even in its more subtle forms, and this is what we must learn to stand against. With compassion, love, empathy as our strength, our unity and resolve, armed with facts and science, I feel we can learn from this and stand tall, proud, and stronger together!
But remember, if she is ruining your day, then she wins :)
Love conquers all <3
Your responses are beautiful and your patience is impressive. I don't disagree with your approach at all for as long as Kat is here, actively hurting people. Leaving her comments up lets Substack and everyone know exactly who she is.
And also, I look forward to the day when she isn't hurting anyone I care about anymore!
You and me both, Allyson, you and me both <3
Nobody is answering your questions because they are sealion questions. They are a distraction from the actual point. As PITT has said multiple times, YOU are the one making an extraordinary claim that defies scientific and medical consensus. Therefore, the onus is on YOU, not anyone else, to prove your claims, and your repeated insistence on asking these questions does not do that.
If we keep shifting the burden, maybe they will eventually bite so I can "win" - except this is not about winning or losing, nor is this about right or wrong. This is about people's lives, making a better future for our kids, how we want to evolve as a people, society, and culture. For me, this is about science, data, facts, and how we as parents, people, LGBTQIA+ folks might want to consider moving forward based on those facts. How we can bring people together. Hopefully, bring some parents out of the echo chambers and back to the dinner table with their trans kid.
"I asked simple questions. That's not 'sealioning.'" Actually, Kat, it is the very definition of sealioning. What you are doing here is a textbook example of sealioning. If someone didn't know what sealioning is, and wanted an example, your tactics would be perfect for that lesson.
This is not longer good faith engagement and is not escalated to trolling.
You need to cool your heels and head for a bit, maybe touch some grass.
Once you are out of time out, maybe you will feel like being more civil and rational. Enjoy your 24 hour break.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Argumentum_ad_nauseam
Look guys. Someone told Kat when she was a little kid that boys have penises and girls have vaginas. And so it is utterly impossible that this is not true, no matter how many millions of peoples' experiences do not align with this, no matter how many thousands of peer-reviewed, rigorous scientific studies across many decades and cultures show that gender is nuanced.
Kat knows better.
Thank goodness she was here to set the record straight. Getting all of us on the same page with what 5-yr-old Kat understood about gender is WAY more important than doing anything about the epidemic of suicide among those suffering from gender dysphoria.
What would we ever do without you, Kat!?
ЁЯЩД
Hi Kat, just so you are aware, your argument contains several logical fallacies and misrepresentations that undermine its validity:
Hasty generalization: You make broad claims about complex legal and psychological concepts without providing sufficient evidence.
Begging the question: You assume your conclusion ("There is no such thing as 'gender identity'") in your premises without providing evidence.
False dichotomy: You present a simplistic binary view of sex and gender, ignoring the complexity recognized by modern science.
Ad hominem: Labeling those who disagree with you as "mentally ill" attacks character rather than addressing arguments.
Appeal to nature: Claiming immutability of sex doesn't address the validity of gender identity or the ethics of gender-affirming care.
Your misrepresentations include:
Oversimplifying the legal concept of hate speech. While "hate speech" isn't a legal term in U.S. law, speech that incites violence or discrimination is often restricted.
Conflating sex and gender, which are distinct concepts in modern scientific understanding.
Characterizing gender-affirming care as "chasing an unobtainable goal," which misrepresents the intent and outcomes of these treatments.
I have these on copy/paste now, it is like clockwork. Even this bit:
A productive discussion on these complex topics requires engaging with the nuanced scientific understanding of sex, gender, and identity, rather than relying on oversimplifications and logical fallacies. Your argument fails to address the actual evidence and ethical considerations involved in these issues.
If youтАЩd actually read the literature youтАЩd have your questions answered. What are you afraid of?
Why do you need anyone to answer when you already know everything? So you can scream your hate? Lol.
Come on, Kat. I know you know better, because I've had this same argument with you before. At the time, I actually thought you were asking in good faith, so I gave you sources that explained why your take on this is not accurate. You've already been given the info you're requesting, so why would anybody here bother themselves with going to the trouble again, knowing you won't acknowledge it anyway?
Was this on the bimodal sex characteristic spectrum, or on something else? I am curious, would like to see what you shared/wrote!
It was this, if memory serves. Kay popped up on a thread insisting that Imane Khelif should provide proof that she's female. I don't remember the exact argument anymore, but Kat was making an argument similar to the X/Y drivel she's posted here.
https://www.genderinclusivebiology.com/newsletter/poster-beyond-xx-and-xy
Oh, nice! I have seen the graphic before, but never knew the source material of it - thanks for sharing! This is helpful, I appreciate it!
Outnumbered, outflanked, good riddance