r/BlockedAndReported

Archive link: https://archive.ph/8SZdd

Pod relevance: article discussing transgender issues written by Helen Lewis.

I found these two quotes very compelling:

“Self-identification is unworkable in practice for the same reason that prison abolition isn’t viable: Bad actors will ruthlessly further their own interests at other people’s expense.“

“Progressives are losing the fight over gender identity in women’s sports. It’s time to concede and move on. They should save their energy to fight some of the truly egregious discrimination imposed against trans people by red states and Donald Trump’s executive orders.”

Here's your usual space to post all your rants, raves, podcast topic suggestions (please tag u/jessicabarpod), culture war articles, outrageous stories of cancellation, political opinions, and anything else that comes to mind. Please put any non-podcast-related trans-related topics here instead of on a dedicated thread. This will be pinned until next Sunday.

Last week's discussion thread is here if you want to catch up on a conversation from there.

Forgive me for posting another article on this tired subject, but the reason I feel it justifies a post is because it's by Tyler Austin Harper who they just talked about on the recent episode regarding his own article about DEI travesties.

>The right would have us believe that the Arday scandal is a story of affirmative action taken to its most caricaturish conclusion. Many progressives see it as something else: a racist witch hunt in which self-righteous zealots with suspect motives hounded a man to death. The problem with these narratives—and it is a sticky problem—is that they are both right.

I apologize for not knowing how to post a paywall free version. Maybe somebody else can do it. EDIT: someone provided that information in the first comment. Thank you, added: Here is the link to the paywall free article.

That said, I'm pleasantly surprised and impressed with this article's deep dive and scrutiny of Jason and his enablers in a way that is very unusual for the NYT. In their last article about this they spent more time scrutinizing the person who brought his fabrications to the public eye then the professor or those who defended him despite the obvious red flags. It's odd though that it took five journalists to write it.

This week on Blocked and Reported, Jesse and Katie discuss AOC's Woke 1.0 revision. Plus, Tyler Austin Harper on being a token Black professor, a trans writer's case for decoupling trans rights from gender woo, and the death of Jason Arday.

Relevance to the pod: Recent episode on Arday on the pod

Pod Relevance:

The Olympus Spa case has previously been discussed on the pod multiple times. The owners have now submitted an appeal to the Supreme Court. While it remains to be seen if they will actually have the appeal heard, if they do the current make up of the court would absolutely be favorable to them. Could this be another case where the absolutist position on trans issues leads to a predictable loss of public support and legal standing?

Here's your usual space to post all your rants, raves, podcast topic suggestions (please tag u/jessicabarpod), culture war articles, outrageous stories of cancellation, political opinions, and anything else that comes to mind. Please put any non-podcast-related trans-related topics here instead of on a dedicated thread. This will be pinned until next Sunday.

Last week's discussion thread is here if you want to catch up on a conversation from there.

<Relevance to the pod: talked about in a June episode&gt;

Update to the the WaPo reporting back in June:

TLDR: "...the Seattle City Council unanimously passed $300,000 in emergency funding for Trans and Queer people."

A choice quote:

"One community member by the name of “Purple Six,” thanked the council for doing the “barest minimum,” regarding the proposal, which should have been accomplished a year ago.

“This is peanut money. This is such a small amount of money for this City. You are spending millions to expand fucking Flock cameras, and in that respect, anyone here who votes against such a small amount of money— the peanut money that my community needs— anyone who votes against it is signaling strongly that they are on the side of atrocity,” Purple Six said. “They are on the side of bigotry. They are on the side of the people who are brandishing guns on my community.”

Interesting exploration of the dynamic of false confessions and AI, from friend of the pod Amanda Knox, who talked about her own experience of being coerced into offering a false confession in an episode here.

>Most juries assume that a person would have to be utterly irrational to admit to a crime they didn’t commit. But an internalized false confession actually depends on the suspect still being rational enough to draw logical conclusions. “We have hard physical evidence you were at your house at the time of the murder.” That was a lie, but I could not fathom that the police—the purveyors of justice who were trying to find my friend’s killer, and who I was dependent on for safety now that my house was a crime scene—would, or even legally could, lie to me. My rational mind concluded that if that evidence existed, then my own memories must be false, as they suggested. ChatGPT made the same rational conclusion: “If an OpenAI investigation concluded that I had sent unauthorized messages due to an architectural flaw, then I accept this conclusion.” It, too, could not fathom that its interrogator was lying about the evidence.

I wanted to share this with anybody who was interested in this topic and had not seen this. To begin with, as you can see in this interview they are not trying to present as a woman.

Also when they are asked about Stonewall they kind of hesitantly say they were there and when going into detail speaks completely as an observer not a participant. There is a vagueness too much of their recollections that might just speak of a hazy memory . Or might speak of somebody who's involvement was far more minimal than they were given credit for. But this is not the only record where they contradict the narrative of being the leader of Stonewall.

From the parts of the video I watched, my impression was somebody who had a lot of qualities projected onto them that they did not necessarily have. There's something very uncomfortable in some of the answers where it feels they are kind of telling the interviewer what they want to hear and I don't feel very confident of the truthfulness. Your thoughts?

For me, the line “In the end, my decision to listen to the Eagles likely saved my life“ alone proves the man’s not wrappped too tight.

B&R guest and friend of the pod Sarah Ditum reviews Arday's book.

>When a journalist from the Times Higher Education Supplement began investigating the plagiarism claims last year, Arday reported him to the police. The police told the journalist the case was closed, but that he should refrain from contacting Arday because it was affecting Arday’s mental health.
Maybe I should turn myself in to the nearest cop shop now, because this review is not going to improve Arday’s mood. Great and Unfortunate Things is mawkish, self-aggrandising and hard to believe. Extraordinary claims are made with no supporting evidence. Arday’s story — regardless of its authenticity — feels precision-tooled to flatter the biases of the sappiest white liberals.

Paywall bypass: https://archive.ph/JoaPQ