It makes me think of that Stone Henge thing just recently. That was such a despicable shit show that people have been calling it a false flag to distance it from actual activism.
Since OpenNIC resolvers are user-run, doesn't that mean a bad actor could theoretically pop up at any time and log any request that goes through them?
Rowling owns the rights to the Harry Potter IP, a fact that can easily be verified using multiple sources with a simple search. As such, she makes royalties on every single use of the IP.
And BTW, no one denied that she makes any money from it, they just denied that it matters.
I also never made the claim that denying that she makes money makes you an "outright transphobe" (a phrase I also never said, despite your quotes.) I stated that denying the relevance or existence of transphobia is the same as a tactic used by racists.
Everything you just said, and everything you attributed to me, actually only happened in your own head. At first I thought you might just be confidently incorrect, but the absolute depth of your lies makes the truth clear.
Opaquely lying like this is also a tactic used by various types of bigot. It's called a "straw man argument," is an unethical tactic that adds nothing to the debate, is a favorite of bigots everywhere, is generally applied when one has no real argument, and is only effectively applied in far less obvious manners than this.
I see your position, my response was more a vent about the thread in general up to this point, and people like a few users up there (who I chose not to name), who would prefer to pretend the matter doesn't exist at all. I wouldn't consider people like that allies. They're closer to the group of racists who like to claim that racism doesn't exist any more. In fact, this thread follows the description of "refuting" found in this article very well.
The fact is, that was my point from the beginning. It literally started with "No, Harry Potter and transphobia are not totally separate issues," (albeit in a sarcastic manner returning the energy I was initially met with) which is a concept that immediately drew vitriol.
Your response seemed genuine, but also seemed to miss the point, which is why you caught my venting.
Edit: Right here is the absolute most out-and-out example of what I'm talking about in this thread. A comment made up strictly of easily verifiable falsehoods. An obvious, poorly-thought-out straw man argument, and users are still upvoting that despite how blatant it is. There is a genuine transphobia problem in this thread.
Not at all. In fact, denial is a common tactic. See the "racism doesn't exist" crowd for a prime example. I think you'll find it's full of racists.
Put simply, a terf owns the IP, money flows back to her. Outright denial of this fact is borderline transphobic itself.
I came up with an idea recently so I just have to ask: are you a false flag? Your behavior doesn't serve to make anyone more open to your position. In fact, it serves the exact opposite purpose. So, really, are you a false flag trying to make people less receptive to veganism as a whole or what?