238
Imane bomaye
(hexbear.net)
Good
For speech to be libel, it has to be false. However, medical records are private. Would Khelif have to forfeit her medical privacy to prove that their claims are false and therefore libelous? This seems confusing and I doubt she'd be willing to publish a DNA or testosterone test as she didn't go to the CAS after her '23 ban. Also, where's Lin in all of this? I'm surprised she wasn't the main target. None of this makes sense and I think the more I learn the less I'll understand.
Why wouldn't the burden of proof be on Musk, Dawkins, Raichik, and Rowling to prove they had a compelling reason to make the claim, aside from just vibes?
I only saw the Dawkins tweet, he was very specific and certain about his level of evidence, so much to use the term "undisputed".
Otherwise there's a chilling effect where women are all relentlessly bullied online until they publicize their medical records to prove they don't have abortions or alopecia or osteogelasia liquifaciens or w/e the new fearmongering is that week.
This is apparently a cyberbullying thing, not a libel thing. So after reading the French harassment laws, it doesn't matter if you said something entirely true or not. It just matters if the harassment is repeated and caused a decline in health and that you did it more than once. So Khelif doesn't need to prove anything, other than mean tweets made her sad.
On another note, I'm shocked that France has a law that says if you post more than one mean tweet about a politician you can go to prison for 3 years. 
load more comments
(3 replies)
this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2024
238 points (99.2% liked)
chapotraphouse
13498 readers
1091 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank
Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here
Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS