@lucretia

> I also don't really see how blocking nazi instances is a slippery slope. Seems pretty level ground to me.

Because even left-wing feminists and gay rights activists are "nazis" now. Not to mention centrists and center-right people, who I may disagree with, but I don't think it's morally acceptable or even politically useful to oppress them by constantly slurring them as "nazis" and censoring them.

> Seems like you're keen to defend transphobes because, having reviewed your profile, you are one.

Indeed, as someone who feels very strongly about universal human rights and dignity, I am necessarily transphobic, and proudly so.

I would urge you to become one as well, if you care about women's rights, gay rights, science, and evidence-based health care.

It's ultimately better even for the human rights of people identifying as transgender, since tyrannical movements built upon the oppression of others always ultimately fail, and then cause the spread of a blanket hostility towards demographics associated with it.

See the recent rise in negative sentiments towards trans people despite the enormous political power the transgender movement has. It's an empty shell of a human rights movement that is wrecking its way through the modern world, and most people have had enough of it.

The same phenomenon can be seen in the Islamism vs. Islamophobia debate. Tarring anyone who's concerned with political Islam or Islamism as an "Islamophobe" does more harm than good. Moderate Muslims, like the ones I grew up with in Turkey, tend to agree that Islamism is a huge threat, and needs to be fought. This is why Turkey banned all religious symbols in schools and government institutions, including for example the Hijab, immediately when the secular Turkish republic was founded. It was a boon to Turkish women's rights and dignity that *not* wearing the Hijab was completely normalized through this measure.