Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

Who gives their drama to a journalist, other than to create a bigger drama, or to drum out sympathy?

Going to the news has been such an important part of holding powerful people accountable that it has been called the 4th estate, is a huge measure for freedom of a population used by the UN, and is enshrined in the first amendment of the United States.

It's very, very often that someone was only able to hold a powerful person accountable after it makes news.

How is Zenimax considered “powerful people?”

They hold zero political sway whatsoever, it would be the same as taking any business to court over wrongdoing.

There are countless suits processed against much larger and more politically aligned companies every day that are successful without a trip to the 4th estate.

Are you really trying to claim a billion dollar corporation isn't powerful?

Journalism is a great tool to push for justice on a party that is entrenched in their group.

Journalism is a powerful tool that has helped workers secure rights against powerful corporations.

There is more power than political power. And the idea that a super wealthy billion dollar corporation has no more influence in the US than a lone citizen is just completely false.

Kiyakotari wrote: »

One of the first signs that a nation is becoming authoritarian is often the loss of journalistic freedom and liberties, as a free press is one of the ways in which the powerful are held to account.

Yup. It's one of the most reliable indicators.

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

Who gives their drama to a journalist, other than to create a bigger drama, or to drum out sympathy?

Going to the news has been such an important part of holding powerful people accountable that it has been called the 4th estate, is a huge measure for freedom of a population used by the UN, and is enshrined in the first amendment of the United States.

It's very, very often that someone was only able to hold a powerful person accountable after it makes news.

How is Zenimax considered “powerful people?”

They hold zero political sway whatsoever, it would be the same as taking any business to court over wrongdoing.

There are countless suits processed against much larger and more politically aligned companies every day that are successful without a trip to the 4th estate.

Are you really trying to claim a billion dollar corporation isn't powerful?

Journalism is a great tool to push for justice on a party that is entrenched in their group.

Journalism is a powerful tool that has helped workers secure rights against powerful corporations.

There is more power than political power. And the idea that a super wealthy billion dollar corporation has no more influence in the US than a lone citizen is just completely false.

When it comes to court cases, your evidence, if strong enough, supported by any diligent attorney, will win you a case, unless you’ve destroyed your credibility.

Reaching out to a journalist did more damage for her case, than good, because now it’s not just a ZOS attorney fine-tooth combing through events, he has an entire video and multiple interviews to pick apart.

Reaching out to the press was a bad idea in her particular case.

But, your original argument was that reaching out to the press is trying to create drama. That is false. Often press attention is the one of the best tools a person has to hold the powerful accountable and the idea we should automatically dismiss what she says because she went to the press is absolutely wild.

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

The more I read posters explaining their struggles with changing their names, the more I'm befuddled that this is still such a pervasive issue long after women entered the workforce in large numbers.

Like, rhetorical question for the sake of humor here, was this software written for men, by men, in a magical world where nobody changes their legal name?

Like, this is not an unreasonable or uncommon request.

It really goes to show that while most everyone who wants to change their legal name has to go through a similar hassle, the current systems are frequently inefficient and or even incapable of handling such a normal request in a timely manner.

Can't we expect better?

There are so many businesses running on archaic software, that it’s enough to make you wonder how anything in this world makes any progress.

Hate to go back to it, but 2012 servers? In 2023?

Where is our funding going to?

That's not the worst analogy (though all analogies break down eventually, so I shan't push it too far.)

Some people make progress only when they have to, like when ZOS had to replace PC/NA hardware due to a fault. Suddenly performance improved like plenty of players had been predicting it would, and ZOS adjusted the upcoming hardware upgrades as best they could accordingly.

So that's one reason I'm not too bothered if companies are being held accountable for timely accomodations for legal name changes by trans people in particular. It's something that logically should've happened long before this for the sake of the much larger workforce of newly married/divorced women. Companies who are proactive about it will only benefit everyone who has a legal name change for any reason. But when companies are pushed into progress only because they have to, hey, everyone who has a legal name change for any reason still benefits.

AzuraFan wrote: »

Carcamongus wrote: »

This starts during gestation, when the brain develops into a gender which isn't the same as the physical one.

Source? I ask because there's no such thing as a male and female brain. It's an outdated, sexist view that isn't supported by science.

Having said that, of course nobody just wakes up and decides to be trans. I just hate to see statements made with no sources to support them.

(Source for my statement that there's no such thing as a male and female brain: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763421000804 - a comprehensive review of decades of research around this question. Conclusion: the only significant difference between a male and female brain is size - males tend to have larger brains.

There is one study that concluded that transwomen have brains more similar to females than males, but that's been debunked because it didn't control for sexual orientation - where studies have shown that there are differences between the brains of lesbians and straight women, and the brains of gay men and straight men. As stated in the conclusion of a recent paper (2021) called "Brain structure changes associated with sexual orientation":

The findings aid the understanding of the neurobiology of sexual orientation and emphasizes the need of including or controlling for potential effects of the sexual orientation of participants in neuroimaging studies.

You can read the full paper here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7930173/

As I mentioned, the one study about the brains of transwomen that's widely quoted didn't control for sexual orientation, which is why its results have been dismissed.

Sorry to get so technical, but I see this thing about male vs. female brains and trans people having brains of the opposite sex so often that it's irritating. Don't just repeat what you've seen in a tweet or something - do your research!)

The source is a video I saw 6 years ago that I can't for the life of me find. Considering that's a long time, I concede my memory may have distorted the information. However, I did find a statement by the same person from the video, a Brazilian psychiatrist who's the chief of a clinic for transgender children and teenagers, which should clarify that while I probably chose my words poorly, a person is born trans and one of the possible reasons is the way the brain develops in utero.


"For example: why is a person trans? 'The child is born that way. It's believed there is a biological basis, although it's not known which one,' says the medical doctor Alexandre Saadeh, who works with gender variability since 1990.
There is ongoing research about genetic chromossomal matters, intrauterine brain development and hormonal influences. Environmental factors, such as environmental influence, are also being studied, as they may contribute to the transgender manifestation, concludes the doctor."

The source is this article, in Portuguese: https://www.uol.com.br/universa/reportagens-especiais/especial-criancas-trans/#page5

This isn't a scientific article, but I know the doctor and I'm sure he wouldn't object to pointing me towards more academic sources, if need be. At fault here was my memory; I don't spread unverified garbage collected from social networks.

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

Carcamongus wrote: »

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

freezinggrey wrote: »

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

Tyrobius wrote: »

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

I_killed_Vivec wrote: »

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

Why do I have people messaging me that there are characters in this thread trying to push this weird narrative that anyone unwilling to crusade against a company they’ve always known to be inclusive over a one-sided and incomplete story makes them “transphobic” or filled with hatred?

None of any of my posts, or the vast majority of people posting here in opposition to being blindly lead, have had anything to do with the person going through a transition, and everything to with the very real possibility that there is a dishonest narrative being pushed, and it’s important to look at the situation from both angles.

From the sound of these interviews, Faren had full access to their account but refused to access it due to it bearing a resemblance to their “dead name” and willfully fell behind schedule.

Be honest with yourselves here.
There’s more to this story.

Blindly lead (sic)... ""dead name""... be honest with yourself, you just can't help yourself can you?

Is it not blind? Where’s the direction? What’s the focus? Who are we looking at to pay for this alleged discrimination?

Regarding “dead name,” that’s not a term used around here, it’s “old name” or simply described as a name you no longer use.

Intentionally dead naming and misgendering someone is explicitly an anti-trans slur and is hate speech. This is very basic stuff.

Who said it was intentional?
Very basic assumptions.

Stop beating a dead horse while you’re at it, you don’t know the whole story, and won’t, until it’s ran due process.

You’re taught as early as middle school law, that people are innocent until proven guilty. This isn’t Salem and you’re not the townsfolk.

Continuously deadnaming someone, whether its intentional or not, is a form of harassment which is illegal in Maryland. Not only that, but retaliating against someone for filing a complaint is also illegal under that same law.

Though, I can't see how repeated deadnaming wouldn't be intentional. To take a page from your book; you're taught as early as elementary school that when someone tells you to stop, you're supposed to stop.

How do you even know they were being “dead named,” word of mouth?

You read pages on the internet.

Until it’s processed as conclusive evidence, it’s hearsay.

You literally hear the manager tell her to just go by her deadname at one point in the recordings. The evidence is all there. Perhaps actually listen to it.

Suggesting you go by your “dead name” is different than harassing someone by calling them it after they said they didn’t want you to do that.

Carcamongus wrote: »

Even worse, there have been posts that… claimed trans folks want special treatment...

Amusing. You’re inserting “trans” where it doesn’t belong to create a narrative about victimization.

How often does it sound like Zenimax makes exceptions to its account policy? From all of the “evidence” if you can even call it that, you can clearly see it’s a hassle, period. Not because they were adjusting it for someone transitioning, that’s more of the same weird narrative. If the process was done regularly, it wouldn’t have been such a nightmare. Regardless of whether Leona is trans, or not, they were inconveniencing their employer.

That’s the bottom line.

You can turn it into whatever you want about how “oh it was because of the transition, or this, or that” but it doesn’t detract from the reality that it is overwhelmingly likely their transition had nothing to do with it, and you gaslighters are trying to fuel a situation you know not even half of, with motive.

Good job quoting a piece of my post and completely taking it out of context. I wasn't referring to Leona, but to another post that indeed accused trans people of wanting special treatment. The term "trans" belongs because that's what the post referred to. The only narrative about victimization is in your imagination. I did point out not taking her claims at face value and the rest of my post wasn't even about her case, but the awful things people said in this discussion.

You accused me of awful things, for having an opinion on her article, which is that it puts too much emphasis on uniqueness, and less on her rights as a United States citizen to a safe working environment, it comes off as an emotional hit piece.

Who gives their drama to a journalist, other than to create a bigger drama, or to drum out sympathy?

I complained that someone said trans people wanted special treatment. My claim is that, in general, they just want to be treated like people. That's not special treatment. Of what exactly did I accuse you? Were you the one who said trans people want special treatment? If so, that's a disrespectful generalization.

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

Who gives their drama to a journalist, other than to create a bigger drama, or to drum out sympathy?

Going to the news has been such an important part of holding powerful people accountable that it has been called the 4th estate, is a huge measure for freedom of a population used by the UN, and is enshrined in the first amendment of the United States.

It's very, very often that someone was only able to hold a powerful person accountable after it makes news.

How is Zenimax considered “powerful people?”

They hold zero political sway whatsoever, it would be the same as taking any business to court over wrongdoing.

There are countless suits processed against much larger and more politically aligned companies every day that are successful without a trip to the 4th estate.

Are you really trying to claim a billion dollar corporation isn't powerful?

Journalism is a great tool to push for justice on a party that is entrenched in their group.

Journalism is a powerful tool that has helped workers secure rights against powerful corporations.

There is more power than political power. And the idea that a super wealthy billion dollar corporation has no more influence in the US than a lone citizen is just completely false.

When it comes to court cases, your evidence, if strong enough, supported by any diligent attorney, will win you a case, unless you’ve destroyed your credibility.

Reaching out to a journalist did more damage for her case, than good, because now it’s not just a ZOS attorney fine-tooth combing through events, he has an entire video and multiple interviews to pick apart.

Right, because a poor person has the same access to top notch attorneys as billion-dollar corporations. I know of a particular case in which a big bank lost and the next step is to calculate how much it has to pay to thousands of mostly poor and middle-class people. The big bank simply refuses to accept it owes anything and its team of generously-paid attorneys clog the lawsuit with appeal after appeal, forcing the plaintiffs' diligent attorneys to spend far more time refuting baseless claims than the team spent creating them. I've seen cases where credibility wasn't an issue, nor was the legal representation, and judges ignored reams of evidence.

Law is about what should be and indeed your evidence, if strong enough, supported by any diligent attorney, should win you a case. Reality, unfortunately, isn't pretty like that.

AzuraFan wrote: »

Gwahiir wrote: »

AzuraFan wrote: »

Most children who grow up to be gay/lesbian are gender non-conforming.

Sounds like bs to me, got evidence to back that up?

Sorry, I didn't express what I meant properly. What I should have said is that a child who is gender non-conforming is more likely to be gay/lesbian than a child who is gender conforming.

A couple of sources (there are more):

https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037/0012-1649.31.1.43

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5657573_Sexual_Orientation_and_Childhood_Gender_Nonconformity_Evidence_From_Home_Videos

Yeah that sounds more believable. You got it the other way around the first time.

Shepoffire wrote: »

[snip]

Too true. I've read near most of the comments in this dumpster fire, and Some People just take the prize for the craziest mental gymnastics to justify their point. A lot of hypocrisy, misconstruing (purposeful or otherwise) to make oneself a victim,
and just an overall pall of willful ignorance.

Some people just want to believe that any and all calls of foul play are immediately and inherently false, and those that made it are liars and thieves, simply looking for attention or a quick payout, or something to that effect. How can you genuinely believe that everyone is a flopper? That those that are already marginalized and attacked on a near daily basis by the average person all the way up to politicians that are supposed to represent these people and then willingly introduce legislature that is nothing but harm? How cold-hearted and jaded must you be?

And then there's just the awful anti-trans comments.... Nie lubię ludzi transfobicznych. Nie jesteś moim przyjacielem.

[Edited for Quote]

Just checking in: I've not been reading everything but I've skimmed through a few times.

Am I right in thinking ZOS have made absolutely no comment on this and so far are letting the claims stand with no objection?

ezmaye wrote: »

Danikat wrote: »

Just checking in: I've not been reading everything but I've skimmed through a few times.

Am I right in thinking ZOS have made absolutely no comment on this and so far are letting the claims stand with no objection?

So far they have been quiet. They are in a tough spot. If they close the post then the eso community would be outraged that they are being silenced. If they moderate the posts then they could be accused of trying to silence their "opposition" or being disrespectful to the LGBT community.

I don't envy the moderators of this forum!

I assume the moderators could get guidance from someone higher up. It's not just on this forum, there's been quite a few articles about it and discussions on other gaming forums.

At the moment it looks like they have no objections - they're admitting that yes, management and HR were allowed to bully an employee out of the company and nothing's being done to address that, at least not publicly. By now I'd expect at least a statement that they're aware of the situation and will be investigating any wrong doing. Something to imply the individual staff involved are not representative of how ZOS, or Zenimax Media, treat their employees.

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

You pick and choose who the transphobes and bigots are and then proceed to say they all need to disappear. Yeah, I’m sure you’re definitely not on any government watch lists. 😂

An existence isn’t political, when you compound your worker’s rights by stating you have additional ones, it becomes that way.

Oh good, the old "and who gets to decide who's a bigot" defence. Funnily enough, no-one who actually has decent opinions is concerned about that. I'm not worried about someone accusing me of being racist, because I'm not. I'm not worried about being called a homophobe, because I'm not. This isn't some "first they came for the socialists" thing. Being a decent person is not a difficult job.

And yeah, I probably am on a few government watchlists, because I'm vehemently outspoken about how godawful mine and others have been on this and many other topics. My government is sleeping with actual fascists while hiding behind a veneer of "won't somebody please think of the children?!" to say some of the most vile anti-trans propaganda without outright saying "let's kill them all." Screw the lot of them, regardless of how often they'll say exactly what you just did.

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

An existence isn’t political, when you compound your worker’s rights by stating you have additional ones, it becomes that way.

Extra protections are to make vulnerable people equal, not to make them superior to others. Women have more protection than men by a lot of these same reasons, as do disabled people. This is not a bad thing and it's only political because people want to make the lives of others worse.

Tyrant_Tim wrote: »

There are more people agreeing with my post that uses that word, than on your original post, keep that in mind, it’s usually a tell-tale sign you don’t know your audience.

Ha, oh, wonderful, the "more people agree with me, so I'm morally right on all counts" argument. Forgetting, intentionally, of course, the numerous atrocities justified throughout history because someone could get more people ranting and screaming.

And I'll just say it again. I'm part of the ESO playerbase. I've interacted with it a lot. This audience can be absolute garbage when it comes to LGBT+ issues. You'll have dimwits screeching about how evil LGBT+ are during a ZOS-sponsored Pride parade. Clearly, we are not dealing with the intellectual cream of the crop here. There's multiple posts here that are absolutely unfiltered transphobia that have more people saying "AwEsOmE" than people being actually human beings. Does that mean we should abandon all decency and just go full transphobe? No, to hell with that.

What constitutes transphobia just so we are clear?