Imagine running a story about abortion and not adding any female commentary, racial equality and not boosting black voices. SMH
this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2024
224 points (99.6% liked)
Ghazi
659 readers
4 users here now
A community for progressive issues, social justice and LGBT+ causes in media, gaming, entertainment and tech.
Official replacement for Reddit's r/GamerGhazi
Content should be articles, video essays, podcasts about topics relevant to the forum. No memes, single images or tweets/toots/... please!
Community rules:
Be respectful and civil with each other. Don't be a jerk. There is a real human being on the other side of your screen. See also the Blahaj.Zone Community Rules
No bigotry of any kind allowed. Making racist, sexist, trans-/homo-/queerphobic, otherwise demeaning and hateful comments is not ok. Disabilities and mental illnesses are not to be used as insults and should not be part of your comment unless speaking of your own or absolutely relevant.
No gatekeeping and being rude to people who don't agree with you. Leave “gamer” stereotypes out of your comment (e.g. sexless, neck bearded, teenaged, basement-dwelling, etc). Don't compare people to animals, or otherwise deny their humanity. Even if you think someone is the worst human on the planet, do not wish death or harm upon them.
No "justice porn". Posts regarding legal action and similar is allowed, but celebrating someone being harmed is not.
Contrarianism for its own sake is unnecessary and not welcome.
No planning operations, no brigading, no doxxing or similar activities allowed.
Absolutely no defense of GamerGate and other right-wing harassment campaigns, no TERFs and transphobia, racism, dismissing of war crimes and praise of fascists. This includes “JAQing off”, intentionally asking leading questions while pretending to be a neutral party. This also applies to other forms of authoritarianism and authoritarian or criminal actions by liberal or leftist governments.
NSFW threads, such as ones discussing erotic art, pornography and sex work, must be tagged as such.
Moderators can take action even if none of the rules above are broken.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
But such is The Tradition
Darn. I guess those employees all signing an open letter saying the NYT was anti trans might have some merit
The Times also covered President Joe Biden’s speech to a Pride celebration at the White House without speaking to any of the trans people who attended.
Why is this one considered a knock against them? Were they not supposed to cover this? The vast majority of the article is quoting Biden's speech, which is decidedly not an anti-trans talking point.
This is being held up as on par as speech by DeSantis in the same paragraph.
Biden's catholic ass doesn't give one single fuck about the LGBTQ+ community
I don't care what he personally believes. He made a statement today in support of trans Americans, so that's a pretty big win.
idk a win to me would be that my friends don't have to crowdfund for their healthcare
You're trying to pin a problem no U.S president of recent memory would have even attempted to solve on Biden?
He is complicit, yes
This sounds nonsensical. Not every article needs pop-vox commentary from specific members of a community.
It's a bizarre metric to create and then use to try and attack a broadsheet newspaper.
The NYT is not just a newspaper, it styles itself as "the paper of record". So yes, it is perfectly valid to set high standards for it.
In that regard it is not too high a standard to require that a paper that writes about a certain community talks to members of that community. You cannot write a credible article about (let's say) Los Angeles and only quote people from New York. For any newspaper that would be considered absurd and lazy.
I can see both your and @BananaTrifleViolin s point.
You're not wrong, but neither is he. If there's an article about some piece of anti-trans legislation that would effect trans people, I think pretty often the interviews on "how do you feel about the legislation" would get similar answers: "I don't like it and I'd like to have the same rights as other people"
Tangentially related sketch
That's only if you assume that trans people can't have legal or other specific knowledge to contribute. Trans people come from all walks of life and it's not hard to find people who could tell a newspaper about historical precedence, provide medical background information or do political analysis. It's not just about people's feelings after all.
If they're providing objective analysis, it shouldn't really matter where it comes from?
I'm sure the New York Times is trying to get the best objective information on a subject. If the experts they find aren't trans, should they then look specifically for experts on the matter, who also happen to be trans?
I've noticed it a few times myself. Maybe it's time to unsub. 🤷