[–] girl_undone [speaking as mod] 59 points (+60|-1) - sticky

I know this is pedantic but what are mods for: Please follow the Sitewide Guidelines which are rules in this circle:

Use descriptive titles

A post title should tell people what they’re clicking on before they click on it. Avoid vague titles, clickbait titles, and editorializing in the title. Do not plead for clicks or votes. If you're linking to a news article or a blog, make the title of your post the title of the article or blog post, or at least include it. Your opinion or interpretation of the link should not replace the link’s original title. Put your commentary in the comments section.

And while I'm here I would just like to correct the piece where it says we considered moving to Saidit. That was not on the table. We considered using the same software as Saidit, which is based on an old version of Reddit's software from when it was open source, but we did not due to a security issue. I always shot down the idea of moving to another platform run by people we couldn't trust or rely on. Women's right to talk about issues that concern us shouldn't be held hostage by the men who own these various websites.

[–] Fury [OP] 37 points (+37|-0) Edited

They have changed the title of the article since I first posted the link. The original title included the phrase “hate groups”. Original Title: “Reddit’s Banned Hate Groups Are Still Here”

[–] ComplicatedSpirit 54 points (+55|-1)

Now it’s “The Secret Internet of TERFs”.

Yeah, totally dark web stuff here. 🙄

[–] Rodham 25 points (+25|-0)

Wonder how long it will be before Kaitlyn Tiffany gets cancelled for platforming TERFs. I imagine our numbers are about to go up, thanks to Ovarit getting namedropped in a mainstream publication. Godspeed mods

[–] bellatrixbells 15 points (+15|-0)

Some of it is when you see the rape and murder fantasy of some TIMs.

[–] Veneficca 6 points (+6|-0)

I subscribe to their nightly newsletter and saw that title at #5 of the "Most Popular" section. For a second, I thought they ran another batshit article before realizing what happened.

[–] girl_undone 29 points (+29|-0)

Yeah when they chronically change the titles you can't win with us. XD

[–] PotatoParameter 17 points (+17|-0)

Thank you! Ive been looking for the original title.

[–] Fury [OP] 9 points (+9|-0)

There are two archive links of the original article in posts in this thread.

[–] amoonshapedgirl 194 points (+194|-0)

"She became convinced that gender is fixed"

Literally no-one is saying that. We're saying gender is g a r b a g e.

[–] [Deleted] 139 points (+139|-0)

People who hate 'terfs' don't even understand what we believe. Same old same old.

[–] yikesforever 98 points (+98|-0)

The clearest example is JK Rowling. it's been astonishing seeing how people twist and just outright lie about what she said and everyone believes it when you can just go and read what she said for yourself and see it's not true. Like she shows so much compassion for trans people. It just happens she also cares about women. Which apparently most people don't.

We're evil for caring about women.

[–] MsTig0 20 points (+20|-0)

That's why it's so important for them to block and screech nodebate. When someone reads what Rowling etc. actually said, it just isn't enough to be all outraged about.

[–] RadfemBlack 9 points (+9|-0)

That’s what frustrates me the most. Irdc about disagreements so much as I do willful ignorance. Ffs go educate yourself on a stance if you disagree with it, at very least 🤦🏾‍♀️

[–] Alecto 108 points (+108|-0)

Sex is fixed. Gender is a tool of the patriarchy for oppression.

[–] femuhnist 12 points (+12|-0)

Yet another person who doesn't know the difference between sex and gender. You'd think, for all that they talk about gender, that they'd learn this.

[–] Dark_Mercy 106 points (+106|-0)

And that line about not wanting transwomen to exist... granted that was a quote. But my goddess, we just don't want them in our single-sex spaces. Yet, we have the bad faith arguments.

[–] pennygadget 76 points (+76|-0)

Apparently, not wanting a male in the locker room when you undress is akin to calling for a transgender genocide

[–] femuhnist 19 points (+19|-0)

They can't say what we actually want, because what we actually want is so fucking boring. We want women's bathrooms to stay as bathrooms for women. We want women's sports to include only women athletes. We don't fucking want murder and mayhem.

[–] boudica 90 points (+90|-0) Edited

Most who are against us are the ones who are actually "conflating sex and gender," as they claim we do all the damn time. The use of "gender" to be a nicey-nice word for "sex" has confused them, but imo that's by design.

Then there are the bad-faith TRAs who 100% understand our position, but are just anti-feminist at their core. They work to confuse the rest of the brainwashed TRAs, so that all they ever hear is how evil and conservative we are, and how we apparently believe in gender (no), uphold traditional gender roles (lol no), and kill thousands of trans folx every day...

They project their own absurd beliefs onto us and then act as if we're the absurd ones. They project male aggression, the male need for power, and male violence onto us, because they know if the truth could actually be clearly seen - a bunch of aggressive men threatening women until we concede to their demands - they'd have far less support from the left. They have to keep up the veil of ignorance and deceit, or they'd just look like the typical MRAs they actually are.

[–] Boudicaea 43 points (+43|-0)

If you tell people not to conflate sex and gender anywhere on reddit, you'll get a rain of downvotes. I know, I've done it!

[–] Huld4 20 points (+20|-0)

I've been terfing around in some subreddits (I will not be specfic so TRAs won't be after me that fast).

No bans just yet. It's weird. I'm openly against TRA narrative. I left during banwave and have just been here since then.

[–] Les 19 points (+19|-0)

This is crazy to me, because a few years ago the idea that sex and gender are two different things was a solid tenet of transgender beliefs. Even most modern TRAs will say the same. Except when you actually get to talking in depth you realize what they mean by "sex and gender are different" is that sex should be replaced by gender identity.

[–] 7yearbitch 79 points (+79|-0)

SEX IS FIXED, KAITLYN. how does one miss the point that badly? and in The Atlantic? i would expect better.

[–] MakeThatDough 23 points (+23|-0)

i stopped reading NYTimes because of this whack-a-mole TWAW nonsense, moved to The Atlantic, now I can't bear to read this newspaper either.

[–] goneharolding 17 points (+17|-0)

The worst part for me personally is that she makes her living creating this garbage. At least I didn’t see any typos...

[–] bye_kevin 71 points (+71|-0)

This article is frustrating because you can tell the writer researched a lot but they miss the mark on some important things and they couldn't help but pepper the article with passive aggressive jabs on top of the openly negative opinion.

[–] TerfSedai 106 points (+106|-0)

I mean, from an editorial perspective, sounds like the author had an agenda going into the piece, and then wrote toward confirming her existing bias.

[–] PumpkinSpiceVagina 76 points (+76|-0)

Seriously, it's not a coincidence that the sociologist she picked out to be the "expert" about what a fringe wacko group we are happens to be well known TRA Grace Lavery. Doesn't even mention until 2/3 through that Lavery is trans and then cries about how hard it is for trans people to be online like they aren't actually running the show in reality.

[–] yesisaiditxx 17 points (+17|-0)

Totally— btw I remember seeing your username on a screenshot on gender cynical and I was like hey there she is I’ve seen her around <3

I assume people enjoy reading things that have a snooty passive aggressive but “serious” tone for how prevalent it is.

[–] crazyangryfemale 35 points (+35|-0) Edited

Right. She started with a conclusion, then researched to confirm that conclusion. Not really the way research is supposed to work. Her tone is so out-of-place with the quotes she got from Fain. As a writer I know that without awareness of myself or others, my writing will fail. Every time. This wasn’t just a lack of self-awareness, though it was lacking—it was a rejection of certain standards that keep journalism sacrosanct. There’s no point to journalism if the standards that have kept it balanced, neutral, fair are ignored in favor of bombastic & inciting speeches. People in New York used to say it was dead long before any of this occurred. It’s just sad.

My ex-girlfriend is a journalist—she works for a metropolitan paper. I’ve thought to approach her for a while about this. We’ve kept in touch since breaking up years ago (she’s the one that got away) & I trust her. After Suzanne Moore was disrespected I wanted to bring this up, now I think I’ll have to. At least try. [edit: corrected name]

[–] Notgonnastop 19 points (+19|-0)

And the decision to include nothing, nothing at all, from Ovarit mods is most telling, especially now having seen the correspondence trail - the author couldn't so so and maintain the 'hate group' accusation.

[–] Boudicaea 25 points (+25|-0) Edited

Yeah like quoting that user who got catfished on reddit into trying to join a GC LBT sub? They actually did set a trap for her! GenCyn even has a post where they gloated about it.

[–] femuhnist 14 points (+14|-0)

I honestly don't think she probably spent more than 30 minutes here at Ovarit, if that. She quoted the most high profile TIMs on Twitter. This was already her backyard, there's no research here.

[–] OrneryStruggle 1 points (+1|-0)

The writer researched so much she claims all feminists are 'gender critical' lmao even though modern libfeminism is literally about how gender supercedes every other aspect of lived reality.

Load more (9 comments)
[–] Alecto 147 points (+147|-0)

where tens of thousands of members, predominantly women, were devoted to the insistence that trans women are not women.

She's framing it like we're the ones who are insane to believe men cannot become women.

If you came here from the Atlantic article, please, have a look around. All you'll see are feminists pointing out male behavior and how it negatively affects women.

[–] yikesforever 80 points (+80|-0) Edited

Transwomen are not women. There is nothing wrong with being trans that people should need to erase the trans identity of a trans person.

Instead, letting males into women's spaces is hurting women. Women are being raped in women's prisons by male inmates who call themselves women. Progress, for men's dicks.

[–] [Deleted] 42 points (+42|-0)

This is what I don't get. Somehow they want to be 'trans' and yet... 'not trans'... all at the same time??!

[–] Fury [OP] 40 points (+40|-0)

That’s a symptom of autogynephilia. The fantasy is shattered if they can’t force others to non-consensually participate in their sexual fetish.

[–] Veneficca 73 points (+73|-0)

Yes, welcome Atlantic readers who read the article and thought, "Wait, other women see through this bullshit too?"

[–] yesisaiditxx 48 points (+48|-0)

Yes, hello there. If you want an invite code and can prove you aren’t a troll, message me :)

[–] Alecto 32 points (+32|-0)

You should tell them what platform to message you on.

[–] yesisaiditxx 37 points (+37|-0)

Oh you’re right they can’t message on here without an account!

My no longer active old reddit account is this same username yesisaiditxx. I’ll check it periodically now just in case :)

[–] worried19 37 points (+37|-0)

Trans women are trans women. Why is that a controversial statement?

My focus has always been on the current plight of GNC women and girls. That's what brought me to Ovarit. I'm not even that interested in trans women as a topic for discussion. For the record, I happen to like many trans women and have no problem with old-school transsexuals. I hate how people like the author think we hold some personal animosity against a group of people merely because we don't believe they can literally change sex. It wasn't even controversial to believe that biological sex is fixed 5 or 10 years ago.

[–] remquarqk 30 points (+30|-0)

Right? Biological men =/= women. It's as simple as that.

Load more (1 comment)
[–] boudica 127 points (+127|-0)

On these sites and others, they use many of the same trolling tactics as other internet-based fringe political movements to disrupt conversation, skew reality, and make the internet another dangerous place for trans women through doxing and harassment. Anti-trans activists have used social media to call out specific trans women who use women’s bathrooms, for instance, labeling them “predators” and “pedophiles,” and promising to resist them by any means necessary—be it pepper spray or pistol.

Wow, they used Naomi Wolf levels of fact checking for this writing.

Yeah, sure, we're the ones trolling, sending hate and threats, doxing and harassing, and "skewing reality."

LMAOOO the projection is off the charts. They are really flailing as their movement is chipped away bit by bit.

[–] xyzpdq 106 points (+106|-0)

Guess I'm not cool enough. I haven't been invited on any of Ovarit's doxxing and trolling missions.

[–] tamingthemind 64 points (+64|-0)

I feel like the missions are planned at the same meeting where the gay agenda is ratified

[–] Thrillcheesier 59 points (+59|-0)

Ovarit's doxxing and trolling missions are tough to participate in. The camo clothing alone, what with the glitter, sequins, makeup, and anime iron-ons, is really expensive.

[–] Veesdottir 19 points (+19|-0)

I found that funny too. It's only a matter of time before they accuse us of sending rape threats and CP to TIMs. Who does their research? I hope that people look us up and discover that there's another valid point of view on this topic. It may not be as profitable to pharmaceutical companies, but it's worth the conversation for women.

[–] ComplicatedSpirit 79 points (+79|-0) Edited

Who have we doxxed or harassed? I’m confused. The closest person I could think of was that idiot professor who advocated raping women as punishment, and that’s only because he was a fucking college professor of social work and it wasn’t right that he be in his position, teaching how to perform therapy, if he also thinks that women deserve to be raped if they step out of line.

And all we did was write to the dean expressing concern. We didn’t “dox” him; nothing that he didn’t make publicly available himself as part of his own Twitter accounts and social media presence - the very Twitter account in which he advocated rape - was used to figure out who needed to be contacted in order to express that concern.

If that’s all this asshat can find, then please explain, how contacting a university dean after one of their professors advocated violent rape as punishment for women who did things he didn’t like - not even crimes or violent acts themselves, mind you, not that that would be an excusable position in any way, but believing a woman should be raped for wrongthink - and that same professor is the one that is educating future therapists on how to treat victims of trauma - please explain how that’s doxxing and harassment. That’s like writing a letter to Trump at 1600 Pennsylvania, calling him out for his sexual assaults, and then having someone claim that he’s being “doxxed and harassed”.

[–] boudica 58 points (+58|-0)

They are probably pulling the tactic of equating GC feminists with the whole of places like KiwiFarms. They think everyone who is "against" them is a monolith, and that there couldn't possibly be a diversity of opinion on why genderism is bullshit.

KiwiFarms does "dox" people, but I've only ever followed threads where the "doxing" is just compiling information that is already publicly available. (Okay, there was that one zoo sadist thread [don't ask if you don't already know, trust me, you don't want to know] where a KFer tracked down a puppy killer IRL, but hey, I can't completely hate on that either...)

Some of them seem to think that "doxing" is just posting what they've said and commenting upon it. I've rarely seen actual trans people doxed at KF, and when they do it's usually only because KF is adamant at proving someone is claiming trans status in extremely bad faith (for example Jake Alley AKA "Secret Gamer Girl").

And it's interesting that the writer didn't mention a troll cesspit like KF, but outs a black woman's forum who has a hard enough time trying to fight of racist trolls that infiltrate it.

[–] ComplicatedSpirit 29 points (+29|-0)

I’ve literally never heard of KiwiFarms. I mean, I know kiwis have to come from somewhere, and the fruit is absolutely delightful, but I simply cannot be held responsible for what takes place on digital agriculture.

But yeah, it’s just the kind of “This is a TERF site, and TERFs want to end trans people, eat trans children, and force you to be a lesbian. They doxx people, they harass people, they poison the water supply, they leave dirty socks out when you’re expecting company over. So yeah, TERF site.”

[–] [Deleted] 5 points (+5|-0)

Yes. It's so obvious by the capture of major industries and groups by the trans brigade, that it's the trans brigade with all of the power, not women.

[–] RawSienna 15 points (+15|-0)

Yeah, that p.o.s. shouldn’t be anywhere near students.

[–] lucrecia 75 points (+75|-0)

Lol, the author's the one who's not-so-subtly trying to start a harassment campaign against the upstream devs.

[–] [Deleted] 18 points (+18|-0)

Yeah that’s why I asked people not to share what ovarit was using so openly.

[–] OrneryStruggle 1 points (+1|-0)

Oh is that why that was so heavily emphasized in the article. It seemed too esoteric to be of interest.

[–] Fury [OP] 68 points (+68|-0)

It’s all projection. Their entire lobby is like a Borg of Trump’s personality disorders.

[–] yesisaiditxx 47 points (+47|-0)

I was going to post that same quote. So ridiculous. And again you only said “trans women” which further proves our point that people are only concerned with the men’s desires here and no one gives two shits about “trans men” because they aren’t as violently vocal, they’re female, their medical transition isn’t as carefully considered (or comfortable to acknowledge given its obvious greater danger), and it doesn’t get you as many cool points.

Also I can’t comprehend how someone could earnestly say WE “skew reality”.

[–] boudica 28 points (+28|-0)

And again you only said “trans women” which further proves our point that people are only concerned with the men’s desires here and no one gives two shits about “trans men”

This was one of the things I noticed on the beginning of my journey towards peak trans. When they started telling females (TIFs) that they have "male privilege" and that males (TIMs) are now the most oppressed of all, that made me sit up and think. This movement is truly all about male power.

Load more (7 comments)
[–] margerydaw 125 points (+125|-0)

When I asked Bou about Ovarit’s use of his code, he told me, “They’re nice people,” and that they’re currently one of the most active communities on Throat.

Shoutout to Ramiro Bou for being the chillest possible person when the reporter was clearly hoping for something more juicy.

[–] chromodorisrex 61 points (+61|-0)

I genuinely chuckled at that. Way to go MK, way to go mods. I have been impressed by this site leadership from the moment of the GC ban.

[–] xyzpdq 120 points (+120|-0)

Welcome to anyone who is viewing Ovarit after having read that article.

[–] thedarkhorse 60 points (+61|-1)

Yes, this is all good advertising. It was a happy day when I looked up 'What is a terf?' and discovered this great community.

[–] MaryHatch 46 points (+46|-0)

Right? I'm not upset about this at all. The more the merrier.

[–] lucretiamott 9 points (+9|-0)

Today was a good day. The community feels very energized and cohesive right now, feels like everyone's jelling together on the same wavelength. Meanwhile the TRAs grow more desperate by the day.

[–] bye_kevin 117 points (+117|-0)

Oh nice, I see Lipstick Alley is officially pegged as a terf hive next to OvarIt and Mumsnet. smh all those white feminists.

Well, thanks for the free advertisement.

TERFs constitute “a minority of a minority of feminists,” says Grace Lavery, a UC Berkeley literature professor and writer.

You really don't have to be a terf to look at Grace Lavery and see a narc autogynephile but if that what makes him sleep at night...

[–] Rodham 98 points (+98|-0) Edited

The L Chat (though not mentioned) is pretty terfy honestly, though it's a hot mess.

So, to recap. Communities full of:


-POC women


Are the hate groups we should be writing articles about.

[–] bye_kevin 28 points (+28|-0)

Exactly. But I think it's a good thing L chat wasn't mentioned because it's anonymous and therefore an easy target for TRA brigading.

[–] Rodham 21 points (+21|-0)

LChat has a weirdly special place in my heart. I mean it's such a dumpster fire but fun as hell to read through.

[–] Fury [OP] 69 points (+69|-0)

It’s interesting to me that they’re monitoring Lipstick Alley.

[–] NewMa 64 points (+64|-0)

That makes me wonder if it's because Lipstick Alley is about black women's voices and Ovarit is about [who knows!] women's voices and it's a lot easier to attack women than it is black women because that makes you racist.

Like, reclassifying women as terfs makes us attackable.

They have a harder time doing that with Lipstick Alley.

[–] [Deleted] 49 points (+49|-0)

Yes, I'm shocked they dragged them into this. Wonder what Lipstick Alley has to say about being called 'white feminists'??!

[–] Fury [OP] 42 points (+42|-0)

Lol. There are several instances of this idiot writer contradicting herself in this article. One of them is, yes, claiming a site she admits is for black women is a hate group spouting “white feminism”. Another is admitting ‘feminism has always been critical of gender” and then incorrectly claiming MK believes ‘gender is fixed’.

[–] MadSea 18 points (+18|-0)

I’m sorry for my ignorance but isn’t lipstick alley mostly non-white women?

If so, lol. These fools lie about everything. It’s the only way their cult ideology works.

[–] diapason 12 points (+12|-0)

In the author's defense, she at least didn't actually call them that as far as I could tell upon re-reading

[–] chromodorisrex 27 points (+27|-0)

I monitor them because they’re hilarious and have no chill, so refreshing

[–] Calico 21 points (+21|-0)

That’s honestly disturbing. Why don’t these creeps ever keep tabs on transphobic men, who are way more likely to harm someone?

I guess they’re not actually oppressed if their only true enemies are everyday women with basic common sense.

Was about to say- why is a white libfem stalking a <mostly> black female celebrity gossip forum?

[–] bye_kevin 36 points (+36|-0)

The white feminists comment was a sarcastic reference to how often even black women get accused of being white feminists if they're not on board the TRA train, but yeah, there is something iffy about a white woman monitoring a space for black women.

I got the sarcasm in the first sentence but yeah, considering LSAs strong dislike for non black lurkers and trolls (especially since it was discovered that a noted white supremacist has an account there), I thought it was weird that she would bring that forum into a mostly white liberal audience.

[–] grrrandma 27 points (+27|-0)

Kaitlyn Tiffany has never clicked on Lipstick Alley, or she would not have called it a "beauty forum".

[–] au_dela 17 points (+17|-0)

That wording stood out to me, too! It seemed a little disparaging, like she was reducing a website for really diverse discussion into a bunch of shallow, bigoted black women.

[–] Hooplaboopla 1 points (+4|-3)

He (the author) is studying all women's spaces so he can learn how to mimic females.

The author's personal fetisization of women drives him to relentlessly watch women.

I assume only a man would be dumb enough to write something so self-serving, but I could just be underestimating women.

This is easy evidence that at least this ovarit user does not doxx. Ha.

[–] cupcakes_and_shiraz 14 points (+14|-0) Edited

Wait...the author is a TIM?

ETA: She's not a TIM. Her IG has pics of her as a little girl. Unfortunately she is female.

[–] pennygadget 41 points (+41|-0)

Oh nice, I see Lipstick Alley is officially pegged as a terf hive

I guess this article proves that Black women are officially lower on the Opression Pyramid than rich White men in skirts. How woke...

[–] chromodorisrex 34 points (+34|-0)

When the best they have to attack women in their own spaces is the creepy agp abuser “Grace” (Joe) Lavery I know they, once again, have nothing. Joe can call himself a lady all he likes but he is so obviously a huge, cruel man these spicy quotes about the terves are hollow

[–] RawSienna 19 points (+20|-1)

Yep. He’s grotesque and is taking a job from a deserving person.

I hope these enabling propaganda factories (aka “universities”) get their funding pulled and suffer the same fate as Evergreen.

No parent should pay extortionate sums of money to have their kid indoctrinated with a useless grievance degree.

Load more (2 comments)
[–] Rodham 98 points (+98|-0)

Is the goal here really for women to have no spaces at all of their own?

[–] Fury [OP] 67 points (+67|-0)

The loss of women’s spaces, safety and ability to organize are collateral damage on the road to commodification of the human body.

[–] Rodham 58 points (+58|-0)

There are so many male dominated spaces online. Why does the one that is actually geared toward women inspire so much ire?

[–] [Deleted] 23 points (+23|-0)

We REALLY need to talk more about that particular part of the big pharma/transhumanist/trans lobby agenda...

[–] Fury [OP] 18 points (+18|-0)

I noticed on the Atlantic masthead that they lump Technology, Health and Science into one department...

[–] Rag3 25 points (+25|-0)

The goal is to force us to get in line with the gender ideology and to shut up.

Sorry. We can’t put that genie back into the bottle.

[–] Omina_Sentenziosa 18 points (+18|-0) Edited

Oh, we can have all the spaces we want... as long as we have ladydique supervision as well!!!!

At this point I just think they get off on "putting us in line".

[–] Verdandi 17 points (+17|-0)

Yes, despite the fact they were totally OK telling us to simply go make our own spaces.

But when we did that they lost their goddamn minds.

[–] MakeThatDough 15 points (+15|-0) Edited

yes, also another goal is for us to STFU look down, keep walking, act pleasantly, have no feelings, have no opinions, just like schools tried to socialize us to do, just like the Handmaid's Tale

Load more (1 comment)
[–] gcfemale 94 points (+94|-0)

Hahahahhahahaha "Reddit is not an echo chamber if you remove all of women"! Hahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha

[–] MonstrousRegiment 91 points (+91|-0)

Just came from there. Interesting that this appeared in the same publication that hosted the open letter signed by JKR and others denouncing cancel culture.

Truly, truly sometimes it seems so hopeless. Then I look at the UK where an impartial, humane examination of the puberty blocker issue resulted in a sane decision.

They can call us a hate group all they want. They can make shocked faces at the idea that trans women are men and trans men are women. But reality is our friend.

[–] boudica 33 points (+33|-0) Edited

The Atlantic goes back and forth, and honestly is truly showing "both sides" (even if I think this genderist "side" is complete drivel...). I even thanked them for posting Helen Lewis' article about the ridiculous hate and threats JK Rowling was receiving a few of months ago, because they were one of the only mainstream publications to do so.

They have even been called terfs by quite a few TRAs, for keeping Helen Lewis and Jesse Singal as writers, and for... well, here's a recent example.

It'll be interesting to see how the TRAs suddenly about-face yet again now that The Atlantic has published an anti-terf opinion piece.

[–] RisingUp 17 points (+17|-0) Edited

JFC that article. A model’s photo was used in a context they had pre-approved, but accompanied by text that wasn’t about them! Oh no!

If this had happened to a non trans person, literally no one would care. But because the model was trans there are handwringing articles and transphobia accusations instead of shoulder shrugging and “maybe modelling is the wrong gig for you.”

(Though I suppose they probably had to portray themselves as a victim to deflect hate from their lovely “community.)

[–] antandro 8 points (+10|-2) Edited

I'd agree with you, but the article is riddled with factual inaccuracies, absurd conflations, and clear misinterpretations of what sources have said (e.g. MK Fain, who has posted the entirety of her conversations with the author). But even more egregious than this, it is shallow. For example, it somehow smushes both The_Donald and Ovarit together into the category "hate group", without bothering to examine the ridiculous broadening of the term "hate": which characteristics do these really have in common? The same goes for the term "toxic": Reddit is placed as the ultimate objective arbiter of what is "toxic" and what is not, which is just ... lazy. Seriously. There are multiple articles out there about how utterly subjective and laughable Reddit's moderation can be, and this journalist has apparently not read a single one of them? And as for what isn't allowed here, well, there's a sidebar on every single circle that I've ever visited that lays out some explicit rules, and the site guidelines themselves promote civility (...with the possible exception of /o/Radfemmery, which is more for letting off steam). There are trans and detrans people here, and I've appreciated the thoughtful posts from both of these groups.

I'm absolutely fine with Ovarit being presented as what it is. It's not for everyone. People who explicitly or implicitly disagree with the premises of radical feminism will find themselves to be uncomfortable here, and that is fine. They may even disagree with the contention that Ovarit represents most women. And that, for example, is an interesting thing to write about. It has depth. It investigates the underlying issues, it interrogates the idea of "toxicity", it is relevant and worthy of the Atlantic. And it seems to me that the author had all the sources to write about something in-depth, and instead chose to push out Yet Another Buzzfeed Piece where all the Right-Thinking People can get together and cluck their tongues at the Nasty People Who Aren't Like Them At All. The standard of journalism in such an article is shockingly low and I am surprised that it actually passed through an editor with two braincells to rub together. It adds nothing whatsoever to discourse. What a missed opportunity!

Having said that, /u/boudica points to an important underlying issue here: both-sides-ism. Perhaps some editor thought "Gosh, some articles here are being called 'TERFy'! Let's put out some 'anti-TERFy' ones!" ... and this article is the result. This is, unfortunately, what "balance" has come to mean in some parts of the field and it's a very lazy and superficial understanding of what journalistic balance is. For any editors reading this: "balance" is about balancing the issues, not about balancing reader perceptions. If you don't understand that, you really shouldn't be in an editorial position.

[–] Rodham 32 points (+32|-0)

Another new study was written about today in the Guardian about fairness in sports. It seems like sanity, especially on some of these cut-and-dry, obviously-biological-men-have-some-advantages-in-sport issues, is returning.

[–] [Deleted] 27 points (+27|-0)

Indeed. This is like the 'Benjamin Butterworth gasp' of articles...

[–] remquarqk 17 points (+17|-0)

But reality is our friend.

This is the key. No matter how long these gender debates last, eventually reality will always win. It just might take a while.

[–] JewishRadFem 89 points (+89|-0) Edited

We don't challenge one another here? LOL, that's one of the main reasons I love Ovarit, if I say something dumb then I'm usually asked to clarify, and we talk about it like normal people. TRAs really can't stand that we center women and not men in their little men's rights movement.

...And I'm sorry, they think that we're the ones skewing reality?

[–] Rodham 70 points (+70|-0)

I've disagreed with women here and on GC a fair amount. The thing is, women on the whole tend to be less toxic when they disagree and less bad faith about it. I've never felt that toxic edge when disagreeing with women here.

[–] yikesforever 36 points (+36|-0)

I rarely ever feel the need to downvote here. Which is something I do aplenty on other sites when men respond to me..

[–] raddaughter 24 points (+24|-0)

Exactly, almost everyone I've encountered on here has been respectful even in disagreement. I think I've downvoted maybe three comments out of the thousands I've seen.

[–] gnarlyfem 36 points (+36|-0)

Same. Even when I’ve disagreed with most of the comments in a thread, I’ve still felt comfortable enough to comment my opinion. On places like Reddit, I wouldn’t bother because it would just get condescending, if not outright abusive, replies from neckbeards and incels. I know I’ll get a thoughtful reply and interesting debate on Ovarit.

[–] LasagnaRossa 23 points (+23|-0)

True, true. I sometimes like to be the devil's advocate and tell something controversial and never once I've been bullied in this site. Disagreement with politeness (but firmness) is possible.

[–] bumpyjerboa 20 points (+20|-0)

I always appreciate disagreement here, especially when we get into discussions of US politics. I actually feel like I have learned things.

They hate us cause they ain't us!

[–] remquarqk 4 points (+4|-0)

There are defnitely some educated political ladies on here capable of carrying nuanced discussions. It's cool to see.

[–] MakeThatDough 11 points (+11|-0)

probably because we don't threaten to rape one another when we disagree!

more than 3 people in a conversation without anyone getting rape threats? clearly a hivemind.

[–] Lawful 26 points (+26|-0)

Yeah, this exactly. Cheers to every woman on here and especially on GC who ever corrected me about something, you're gems. Where else does someone politely disagree and source their argument even half as often?

[–] Verdandi 9 points (+9|-0)

Hahaha, right?! I know I have some unpopular opinions here, but it doesn't matter in the long run. I enjoy the very spirited debates here because it's a beautiful thing to see women passionate and articulate about something so important. These are issues that affect us quite intimately and women SHOULD challenge each other and debate with passion.

Load more (96 comments)