Gee whiz, I forgot that having money stops you from being hurt by people characterising you as a fucking wife-beating ragemonster who is plain evil and monstrous at every turn, misgendering you constantly, and using bigotry to justify it.

Gio's whole article used words on the internet to back up his claims. See, I can make reductionist points too.

Call me when you've actually done some reading on the real, material harm done to TMA people by assholes making callouts and lolcowing them on the internet. Or do you really just believe in 'sticks and stones can break my bones but names can never harm me?'

If someone uses bigotry to make their point, that deserves to be discussed, no? If someone is bigoted in their argument against another person, that deserves to be pointed out? Otherwise we're just giving bigotry a free pass?

You seem perfectly willing to let Gio's bigotry slide, because...Hussie was overly litigious about IP, and acted like a bit of an asshole around it. Which we can all agree is worse than anti-semitism. And transmisogyny. And making a callout post to begin with.

I'm not in the business of making callouts, thank you very much (and I hardly think my 23 followers will care - just as much of a nobody over here, mate). And maybe I'm fucking crazy, but I'd say that saying 'talking about Gio's bigotry is meaningless' is saying it's okay.

Can I quote you on that? Being bigoted is okay if you have a dispute with the person you're being bigoted to? That is the statement you are agreeing to here?

As to this...again, I'll admit that is in fact a comment on tone, so I was wrong in saying I hadn't commented on that, but...honestly, again, if you think the bigotry apparent in Gio's article is a-okay, I have nothing to say to you, because holy fucking shit.

Because if someone's overly litigious about IP, that totally makes it okay to be transmisogynistic to them! That's totally reasonable and proportionate!

So you're saying that Gio's whole 'the Gio-ish problem' subheader doesn't matter and any criticism of that is meaningless. Or that he refers to Hussie using crude transmisogynistic stereotypes. That's meaningless, and criticising it is meaningless too.

And it's not as shitty as the fucking anti-semitism and transmisogyny in the article as originally published. Bottom line.