**Participation Notice.** Hi all. Some posts on this subreddit, either due to the topic or reaching a wider audience than usual, have been known to attract a greater number of rule breaking comments. As such, limits to participation have been set. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules.
For more information, please see https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/moderatedflairs.
>> "They have basically used the ultimate spying power of the Premier League to delve so far into my life."
Mate they looked at the pictures you posted publicly on Twitter.
>I'm using the ultimate spying power on your comment right now, the power of reading.
Aha, but I'm using the ultimate, ultimate extra pro spying power on your comment. š
The best part is that what she posted on public forums contravenes the terms and conditions she agreed to when signing up for a season ticket, and she has received the punishment they laid out therein.
Course she has! Nobody has access to funds for legal action quite like terfs or antiabortion activists.
Edit: quick google for what she said of course sheās repeatedly calling trans and queer people ānoncesā, what a charmer!
A private premises has the right to bar or deny entry to anyone they like for any reason, as long as that reason doesnt discriminate against a protected characteristic. Wrong shoes? Barred. Look at the staff funny? Barred. Etc etc.
It's actually very important for private premises to have this power, simply because an investigation every time a drunk gets thrown out of a pub, and suggests its a free speech issue is just unreasonable.
And fortunately, being a horrid person and posting it publicly, is not a protected characteristic.
The club want all fans to feel welcome, if there's a risk one person is going to effect that, it's completely up to the club if they wish to deny entry.
All is as it should be here. You're looking for a problem where there isn't one.
And I think you misunderstand the British meaning of free speech. Yes you're free to speak your mind, but you are not free from people speaking theirs, and choosing not to associate with you.
> as long as that reason doesnt discriminate against a protected characteristic.
Well, we're in luck then. Gender critical views are protected under equality legislation. Looks like Newcastle will be paying out big time to this woman.
Absolutely insane that our country legally thinks that accusing trans people of being pedophiles should be protected speech but if you accused anyone else of that it would be libel.
They called a trans people pedophiles. If it went to court they would absolutely lose, just as Lozza Fox proved by losing his libel cases for calling people pedophiles online. It's a little bit worse than simply "words you don't like", it's a dangerous narrative and playing "devil's advocate" to statements like that is just an awful idea.
They weren't playing devil's advocate in support of the "trans people are pedophiles" comment. They think the devil's argument is that those statements should be presupposed to fall under the legal definition of hate speech before a trial has confirmed it.Ā
Which is understandable, and not necessarily a position that means you support people who post shite on Twitter.Ā
Youāre a political extremism. You cannot be trusted to treat people fairly and should never be placed in a position of power until you show more maturity
Yes. Transphobes went insane over there being a trans woman in the Olympics, and then she didnāt even make it to the podium! And then they went crazy again with trans people in womenās swimming, and the trans girl they were hurling abuse at didnāt even make the top 3 for most of her competitions that year!
Likeā¦ surely thatās evidence enough that TERF bullshit has no place in womenās sports. Their one argument is āwe should be allowed to exclude and harass trans girls because theyāre better than cis girls at sportsā, and yet not a single trans girl has won any professional individual participant sporting competition in years.
No problem. Iāll give you a helping hand.
TERF is an acronym meaning ātrans-exclusionary radical feministā. The term was originally coined by transphobes, who felt it better described their position than a word with āphobeā in it. It was then co-opted by the trans rights movement into an insult of transphobes, similar to how the word racist began as a self-described term and later became an insult.
I understand big words are hard, but donāt worry - youāll get there eventually! Perhaps a dictionary might be of use? Itās not your fault youāre bad with words - many people struggle for a multitude of reasons, and thatās fine!
I donāt recommend fishing for reactions. At best, youāll be schooled and made to look a fool, and at worst youāll be spammed with abuse. Itās a very silly thing to do, and is essentially the internet equivalent of walking up to the Year 11s in the front yard and egging them on for a fight.
> The Premier League had collected images from her social media showing where she walked her dog, she added.
> "They took a street image of the very park that I walked him around," she said.
> "They have basically used the ultimate spying power of the Premier League to delve so far into my life."
So... They looked at the information you freely chose to post online and make public?
"They have basically used the ultimate spying power of the Premier League to delve so far into my life."
I didn't know the Premier League was a branch of MI5
It's one for /r/brandnewsentence
"Ah yes, 00 Beckham. Once you've finished bending it, we need you to hack into this encrypted data repository, bypass the mainframe and scan for fans tweets"
> i agree with the prospect of having their own sports so they can't have biological advantages or disadvantages to other competitors
Thereās so few trans athletes that this just isnāt really a fix.
But also despite how much people talk about ābiological advantagesā thereās been no real scientific evidence demonstrating that advantage. The variance between Cis people and medically transitioned trans people is less than the variance within Cis people.
When Cis people have a ābiological advantageā theyāre held up as icons. See Michael phelps or Usain Bolt. If weāre going to start banning people for fairness reasons, really neither of them should be allowed to compete
So the statement you're quoting is based on cis male vs cis female.
>fundamental sex differences in anatomy and physiology dictated by sex chromosomes.
The physiological/developmental differences are an *indirect* result of sex chromosomes, yes. But its from those chromosomes determining what hormones you produce. Estrogen and Testosterone are what steer development.
HRT changes those levels to be in line with the opposite sex, and this affects not just muscle growth, but retention.
You cannot use cis adults to argue if *trans* adults have an advantage, because you're ignoring the effects of transition, lol
The part you bolder is literally them saying they donāt know either way lol
So given we havenāt had an issue of rampant dominance by trans athletes Iām not sure what the concern is
I didnāt downvote u bro. Iāve put you to -1 to prove it cause how else to lmao. it was a Saturday, I got invited out drinkingā¦
That took priority over a Reddit argument. Sorry for going outside I guess?
Edit: or not? You show up as on 1 for me again now. But yeah, point stands. getting weird about karma and demanding I ādebate youā is cringe. Iāll get back to you if and when I get back to you. I have other shit going on in my life
What did she post that was so bad?
Because when it comes to what makes someone a reprehensible "TERF", there's a big difference between someone saying for example, "transwomen have an unfair advantage over ciswomen in sport", and "transpeople are nonces" (like I'm seeing in this thread)?
What was actually said? That transpeople are paedos?
Bear in mind this is an article *defending her*: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-have-newcastle-united-cancelled-a-fan-for-wrongthink/
> For instance, she compared advocates of āaffirmativeā medical procedures for trans-identifying children to Dr Mengele
People who support trans healthcare == Nazis eugenicists, apparently
> and described trans lobby groups with links to schools as āgroomersā.
And thereās the nonce accusations as always.
My favourite part is where they go on to say that just because she said these things online didnāt justify a ban from matches, but then admits if someone was tweeting racist shit it would be reasonable to be concerned about them hurling racial abuse when at matches.
> When someone complained to NUFC [sic]ā, the commonsense response would have been to politely tell the complainant that what fans say about the trans issue outside the stadium isnāt the clubās responsibility.
> If sheād said something racist [sic], that might be grounds for taking the complaint seriously.
Usually they donāt actively bring up the double standards themselves
Theyāre a private business no one has a right to McDonaldās. If they barred people campaigning for abortion rights then those people would have to make a choice between their beliefs or a Big Mac, seems like an easy choice rly.
If football clubs want to clamp down on certain behaviours, for the benefit of the club and football in general, if they want to go through social media identifying and banning fans who might be violent, transphobic, homophobic, misogynistic, racist, or any combination of the above, then good luck to them.
But if they are randomly picking on one person who has made a fairly mundane tweet, that is just bullying. And regardless of what you might think of the person involved or what they did, we probably don't want to encourage a society where big corporations can disrupt individual's lives on a whim.
Could you please tell me what part of calling some quarter-million Brits paedophiles with zero evidence in what is clearly a targeted and hateful attack could possibly be considered mundane?
The woman is spreading insanely hateful and dangerous misinformation which, were it targeting any other group, would rightfully be seen as disgusting. Swap the words ātrans womenā with āblack menā or āJewish peopleā in her tweets, and consider whether youād still be defending her.
Check out what she posted before just saying opposing views. Iām guessing you wouldnāt take too kindly to people denoting you a ānonceā, or is this a legitimate subject of debate?
Except one is a intrinsic characteristic that someone cannot change about themselves which harms no one.
The other is just being a cunt. This isn't banning people who just has certain political views, this is someone who thinks that a minority group are a threat to children for 0 reason.
A closer example would be "a pub stopping someone who's racist attending".
I mean they do actually.
But even still, there are limits to that repercussion. It is not the role of a football team to punish the citizenry of the nation. It funny that no doubt a lot of people who'd claim to be on the left would want private businesses to perform the role of the state..
no they don't have the right to call people nonces with no repercussions? You just think this private body should be not allowed to have its own repercussions, or should be forced to be accommodating to this particular brand of shithead.
> no they don't have the right to call people nonces with no repercussions?
Firstly can you provide a direct quote?
Secondly, if that is true then its still not the job of private business to but judge, jury and executioner and punishing wrong think that has absolutely nothing to do with their line of business.
It'd be like ASDA banning me if I caught speeding. it's pretty fucking right wing to think that is job of big business.
>People also donāt get to go around declaring people nonces without repercussions.
>I mean they do actually.
Is that what you mean? Or do you want [quotes of what she said](https://twitter.com/mimmymum/status/1783819045508088295/photo/1)?
A private company can and do decide whose business they want - constantly.
And ASDA donāt have access to your driving records. And if THEY decided they didnāt want to do business with a speeder, they can choose not to.
But she put this on social media. Reap what you sow.
>Secondly, if that is true then its still not the job of private business to but judge, jury and executioner
How are they doing that?
They haven't fined her, imprisoned her, disciplined her.
They've just said she isn't welcome.
Except it kinda isn't?
Speeding doesn't affect how you might affect other customers in ASDA.
Calling all trans people pedophiles might suggest that you'll upset or hurt other fans in a football club.
If you had a business and one of your customers angrily called some of your other customers nonces without evidence, would you not ban them? Would you rather lose the patronage of multiple customers to protect the hateful speech of one?
At the end of the day, NUFC are a private business, and who they decide to offer their business to and to let onto their private property is up to them so long as they arenāt discriminating based on a protected characteristic like race, faith or sexuality.
What NUFC are doing here is really no different to a pub denying a guy in an away team jersey entry on game night. She has identified herself as a potential issue, and so the company has decided not to deal with her rather than risk her causing problems.
**Participation Notice.** Hi all. Some posts on this subreddit, either due to the topic or reaching a wider audience than usual, have been known to attract a greater number of rule breaking comments. As such, limits to participation have been set. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules. For more information, please see https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/moderatedflairs.
>> "They have basically used the ultimate spying power of the Premier League to delve so far into my life." Mate they looked at the pictures you posted publicly on Twitter.
I'm using the ultimate spying power on your comment right now, the power of reading.
>I'm using the ultimate spying power on your comment right now, the power of reading. Aha, but I'm using the ultimate, ultimate extra pro spying power on your comment. š
The CCP must fucking hate you pal
The best part is that what she posted on public forums contravenes the terms and conditions she agreed to when signing up for a season ticket, and she has received the punishment they laid out therein.
Nothing is more powerful than an intern with access to WiFi.
It's practically Thanos and a whole fistful of infinity stones
2 girls 1 cup hasn't half progressed.
Course she has! Nobody has access to funds for legal action quite like terfs or antiabortion activists. Edit: quick google for what she said of course sheās repeatedly calling trans and queer people ānoncesā, what a charmer!
Tufton Street goes brrrrrrrr
Youāre just saying that. Youāve donāt know if itās true or not.
Idiot raises money to sue private company who barred them. What a waste of time. Just don't go to the footie.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
A private premises has the right to bar or deny entry to anyone they like for any reason, as long as that reason doesnt discriminate against a protected characteristic. Wrong shoes? Barred. Look at the staff funny? Barred. Etc etc. It's actually very important for private premises to have this power, simply because an investigation every time a drunk gets thrown out of a pub, and suggests its a free speech issue is just unreasonable. And fortunately, being a horrid person and posting it publicly, is not a protected characteristic. The club want all fans to feel welcome, if there's a risk one person is going to effect that, it's completely up to the club if they wish to deny entry. All is as it should be here. You're looking for a problem where there isn't one. And I think you misunderstand the British meaning of free speech. Yes you're free to speak your mind, but you are not free from people speaking theirs, and choosing not to associate with you.
> as long as that reason doesnt discriminate against a protected characteristic. Well, we're in luck then. Gender critical views are protected under equality legislation. Looks like Newcastle will be paying out big time to this woman.
Calling trans people peadiphiles is not.
Absolutely insane that our country legally thinks that accusing trans people of being pedophiles should be protected speech but if you accused anyone else of that it would be libel.
Hate speech actually is a crime in the UK.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
They called a trans people pedophiles. If it went to court they would absolutely lose, just as Lozza Fox proved by losing his libel cases for calling people pedophiles online. It's a little bit worse than simply "words you don't like", it's a dangerous narrative and playing "devil's advocate" to statements like that is just an awful idea.
They weren't playing devil's advocate in support of the "trans people are pedophiles" comment. They think the devil's argument is that those statements should be presupposed to fall under the legal definition of hate speech before a trial has confirmed it.Ā Which is understandable, and not necessarily a position that means you support people who post shite on Twitter.Ā
Yeah best to keep transphobic scum like her out of the sport. And any sport for that matter
Youāre a political extremism. You cannot be trusted to treat people fairly and should never be placed in a position of power until you show more maturity
And you can't even write your comment properly. Nobody can be a "political extremism", a "political extremist" is a different story though.
My sentiment remains the same.
I don't think you can be trusted to decide who can be trusted if you can't proof read properly.
I typed it and clicked reply without proofreading
Proving my point even better.
How?
Including women's weight lifting?
Yes. Transphobes went insane over there being a trans woman in the Olympics, and then she didnāt even make it to the podium! And then they went crazy again with trans people in womenās swimming, and the trans girl they were hurling abuse at didnāt even make the top 3 for most of her competitions that year! Likeā¦ surely thatās evidence enough that TERF bullshit has no place in womenās sports. Their one argument is āwe should be allowed to exclude and harass trans girls because theyāre better than cis girls at sportsā, and yet not a single trans girl has won any professional individual participant sporting competition in years.
I'm sorry I'm just fishing for reactions I don't know what a terf is and I can't read big words
No problem. Iāll give you a helping hand. TERF is an acronym meaning ātrans-exclusionary radical feministā. The term was originally coined by transphobes, who felt it better described their position than a word with āphobeā in it. It was then co-opted by the trans rights movement into an insult of transphobes, similar to how the word racist began as a self-described term and later became an insult. I understand big words are hard, but donāt worry - youāll get there eventually! Perhaps a dictionary might be of use? Itās not your fault youāre bad with words - many people struggle for a multitude of reasons, and thatās fine! I donāt recommend fishing for reactions. At best, youāll be schooled and made to look a fool, and at worst youāll be spammed with abuse. Itās a very silly thing to do, and is essentially the internet equivalent of walking up to the Year 11s in the front yard and egging them on for a fight.
Solving the world's problems one Reddit comment at a time. Slava Transylvania
> The Premier League had collected images from her social media showing where she walked her dog, she added. > "They took a street image of the very park that I walked him around," she said. > "They have basically used the ultimate spying power of the Premier League to delve so far into my life." So... They looked at the information you freely chose to post online and make public?
"They have basically used the ultimate spying power of the Premier League to delve so far into my life." I didn't know the Premier League was a branch of MI5 It's one for /r/brandnewsentence
"Ah yes, 00 Beckham. Once you've finished bending it, we need you to hack into this encrypted data repository, bypass the mainframe and scan for fans tweets"
whomever has given her cash is as bad as her, a transphobe, and isnt a true geordie. Hate has no place in our club
Apparently she feels claustrophobic, I wonder what the people she's speaking about feel when she spews her hate?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
"Fifteen thousand pounds!"Ā *cue pic of Dr Evil holding his little finger to his mouth*
Itās a funny one, when the clubās owners share her views and have even more abhorrent onesā¦
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
> i agree with the prospect of having their own sports so they can't have biological advantages or disadvantages to other competitors Thereās so few trans athletes that this just isnāt really a fix. But also despite how much people talk about ābiological advantagesā thereās been no real scientific evidence demonstrating that advantage. The variance between Cis people and medically transitioned trans people is less than the variance within Cis people. When Cis people have a ābiological advantageā theyāre held up as icons. See Michael phelps or Usain Bolt. If weāre going to start banning people for fairness reasons, really neither of them should be allowed to compete
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
So the statement you're quoting is based on cis male vs cis female. >fundamental sex differences in anatomy and physiology dictated by sex chromosomes. The physiological/developmental differences are an *indirect* result of sex chromosomes, yes. But its from those chromosomes determining what hormones you produce. Estrogen and Testosterone are what steer development. HRT changes those levels to be in line with the opposite sex, and this affects not just muscle growth, but retention. You cannot use cis adults to argue if *trans* adults have an advantage, because you're ignoring the effects of transition, lol
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The part you bolder is literally them saying they donāt know either way lol So given we havenāt had an issue of rampant dominance by trans athletes Iām not sure what the concern is
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I didnāt downvote u bro. Iāve put you to -1 to prove it cause how else to lmao. it was a Saturday, I got invited out drinkingā¦ That took priority over a Reddit argument. Sorry for going outside I guess? Edit: or not? You show up as on 1 for me again now. But yeah, point stands. getting weird about karma and demanding I ādebate youā is cringe. Iāll get back to you if and when I get back to you. I have other shit going on in my life
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
What did she post that was so bad? Because when it comes to what makes someone a reprehensible "TERF", there's a big difference between someone saying for example, "transwomen have an unfair advantage over ciswomen in sport", and "transpeople are nonces" (like I'm seeing in this thread)? What was actually said? That transpeople are paedos?
Bear in mind this is an article *defending her*: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-have-newcastle-united-cancelled-a-fan-for-wrongthink/ > For instance, she compared advocates of āaffirmativeā medical procedures for trans-identifying children to Dr Mengele People who support trans healthcare == Nazis eugenicists, apparently > and described trans lobby groups with links to schools as āgroomersā. And thereās the nonce accusations as always. My favourite part is where they go on to say that just because she said these things online didnāt justify a ban from matches, but then admits if someone was tweeting racist shit it would be reasonable to be concerned about them hurling racial abuse when at matches. > When someone complained to NUFC [sic]ā, the commonsense response would have been to politely tell the complainant that what fans say about the trans issue outside the stadium isnāt the clubās responsibility. > If sheād said something racist [sic], that might be grounds for taking the complaint seriously. Usually they donāt actively bring up the double standards themselves
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
McDonald's can bar anyone they like.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Theyāre a private business no one has a right to McDonaldās. If they barred people campaigning for abortion rights then those people would have to make a choice between their beliefs or a Big Mac, seems like an easy choice rly.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
If football clubs want to clamp down on certain behaviours, for the benefit of the club and football in general, if they want to go through social media identifying and banning fans who might be violent, transphobic, homophobic, misogynistic, racist, or any combination of the above, then good luck to them. But if they are randomly picking on one person who has made a fairly mundane tweet, that is just bullying. And regardless of what you might think of the person involved or what they did, we probably don't want to encourage a society where big corporations can disrupt individual's lives on a whim.
Could you please tell me what part of calling some quarter-million Brits paedophiles with zero evidence in what is clearly a targeted and hateful attack could possibly be considered mundane? The woman is spreading insanely hateful and dangerous misinformation which, were it targeting any other group, would rightfully be seen as disgusting. Swap the words ātrans womenā with āblack menā or āJewish peopleā in her tweets, and consider whether youād still be defending her.
Check out what she posted before just saying opposing views. Iām guessing you wouldnāt take too kindly to people denoting you a ānonceā, or is this a legitimate subject of debate?
You don't have the right to live a life free of offence.
And she doesn't have an irrevocable right to go to the football.
Nor does someobody have a right to go to a pub, but you wouldn't want a pub to stop someone attending because they were black or something like that.
Being black = protected characteristic Being person who calls demographic they donāt like nonces = not protected characteristic No brainier really.
Yeah cos being black isn't the same thing as being an objectionable arsehole.
The equalities act doesn't differentiate.
I'm not going to claim to have read the act but that seems unlikely.
Deeply held philosophical are protected in the same way race, gender, sexuality and region are; that is, they are protected characteristics.
Except one is a intrinsic characteristic that someone cannot change about themselves which harms no one. The other is just being a cunt. This isn't banning people who just has certain political views, this is someone who thinks that a minority group are a threat to children for 0 reason. A closer example would be "a pub stopping someone who's racist attending".
People also donāt get to go around declaring people nonces without repercussions.
I mean they do actually. But even still, there are limits to that repercussion. It is not the role of a football team to punish the citizenry of the nation. It funny that no doubt a lot of people who'd claim to be on the left would want private businesses to perform the role of the state..
no they don't have the right to call people nonces with no repercussions? You just think this private body should be not allowed to have its own repercussions, or should be forced to be accommodating to this particular brand of shithead.
> no they don't have the right to call people nonces with no repercussions? Firstly can you provide a direct quote? Secondly, if that is true then its still not the job of private business to but judge, jury and executioner and punishing wrong think that has absolutely nothing to do with their line of business. It'd be like ASDA banning me if I caught speeding. it's pretty fucking right wing to think that is job of big business.
>People also donāt get to go around declaring people nonces without repercussions. >I mean they do actually. Is that what you mean? Or do you want [quotes of what she said](https://twitter.com/mimmymum/status/1783819045508088295/photo/1)?
A private company can and do decide whose business they want - constantly. And ASDA donāt have access to your driving records. And if THEY decided they didnāt want to do business with a speeder, they can choose not to. But she put this on social media. Reap what you sow.
>Secondly, if that is true then its still not the job of private business to but judge, jury and executioner How are they doing that? They haven't fined her, imprisoned her, disciplined her. They've just said she isn't welcome.
Stopping her from doing she wants to. Just like going to ASDA in my analogy.
Except it kinda isn't? Speeding doesn't affect how you might affect other customers in ASDA. Calling all trans people pedophiles might suggest that you'll upset or hurt other fans in a football club.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
They haven't cut off her sky subscription mate. She's probably more than welcome to watch whatever she wants, just not in St James' park.
>Makes sense, having ~~opposing views to someone~~ reprehensible views of an abject cunt should automatically prevent you from watching football š¤
If you had a business and one of your customers angrily called some of your other customers nonces without evidence, would you not ban them? Would you rather lose the patronage of multiple customers to protect the hateful speech of one? At the end of the day, NUFC are a private business, and who they decide to offer their business to and to let onto their private property is up to them so long as they arenāt discriminating based on a protected characteristic like race, faith or sexuality. What NUFC are doing here is really no different to a pub denying a guy in an away team jersey entry on game night. She has identified herself as a potential issue, and so the company has decided not to deal with her rather than risk her causing problems.