this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2024
1589 points (98.7% liked)

Enough Musk Spam

2207 readers
158 users here now

For those that have had enough of the Elon Musk worship online.

No flaming, baiting, etc. This community is intended for those opposed to the influx of Elon Musk-related advertising online. Coming here to defend Musk or his companies will not get you banned, but it likely will result in downvotes. Please use the reporting feature if you see a rule violation.

Opinions from all sides of the political spectrum are welcome here. However, we kindly ask that off-topic political discussion be kept to a minimum, so as to focus on the goal of this sub. This community is minimally moderated, so discussion and the power of upvotes/downvotes are allowed, provided lemmy.world rules are not broken.

Post links to instances of obvious Elon Musk fanboy brigading in default subreddits, lemmy/kbin communities/instances, astroturfing from Tesla/SpaceX/etc., or any articles critical of Musk, his ideas, unrealistic promises and timelines, or the working conditions at his companies.

Tesla-specific discussion can be posted here as well as our sister community /c/RealTesla.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid 65 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I hate to say it, but until trans people are normalized in American society, pointing out that his daughter is trans is probably necessary for people to understand why Elon says he lost his son.

[–] [email protected] 43 points 3 months ago (2 children)

You’re not wrong, but I think we all really wish you were.

Sad thing is, clarifying Elon’s hatred by pointing his daughter is trans, gives credence to his take in some folks’ eyes.

The conversation maybe ugly, but it still has to be had.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName 21 points 3 months ago (2 children)

He thinks the school system did this to his child, and he's on a mission to stop the woke because of it.

You cant get that across when you just say his daughter.

[–] 5too 10 points 3 months ago

But you don't have to get that across in every discussion of her, either - that moves from discussing his vendetta over to defining her by it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

You cant get that across when you just say his daughter.

That's why you read the whole article, not just the headline

[–] Nerrad 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It also factors into Elon's hatred of 'woke mind virus'. Her transition has become an important event to explain him and their relationship. Sadly we rarely discuss her outside of an Elon context. At least so far.

[–] TSG_Asmodeus 31 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Is it though? It just legitimizes it as a reason to separate her from other women. Until I see "So-and-So's cis-gendered hetero daughter" I think we can agree it's singling them out, not highlighting something in good faith. For example, and this is the BBC's:

Elon Musk: Billionaire's daughter cuts ties with her father | BBC

She's a woman, who from what I can see is emancipated from her father. He's a sack of shit, she's voicing that. That's the story.

[–] FlyingSquid 14 points 3 months ago (2 children)

That doesn’t explain why. And the why here is important. Essential.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

He didn't lose a son because she is transgender. He lost a child because he's a shitty father. And he thinks he lost a son because he is also a transphobe who refuses to accept her daughter. The why isn't her gender, the why is Musks transphobia and shitty parenting.

IMO if you want to normalize trans people you should treat them like people and not stick a huge "transgender" sign above them.

[–] FlyingSquid 4 points 3 months ago

If a lazy American just reads that Musk's daughter disowned him, they're not going to understand why and they will be less inclined to read on. I'm afraid that's just how things are.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Headlines don't typically contain the entire context. You have to actually read the article for the why.

[–] FlyingSquid 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

And Americans often don't read past the headlines.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That's not what we're talking about.

[–] FlyingSquid 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Seems to me like that's exactly what we're talking about- explaining things simply to lazy Americans.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

We're talking about whether or not it's dehumanizing to constantly other trans people in a way that doesn't apply to cis people. You kinda seem like you just want an argument though.

[–] FlyingSquid 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It looks more like what you were talking about than what anyone else was talking about:

On top of that, the person I initially responded to agreed with my point.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] FlyingSquid 6 points 3 months ago

That's absolutely not how that expression is used. At all.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

I think a big difference here is that you keep saying that this legitimizes him or his behaviour. That does not seem at all obvious to many of us.

Pointing out these facts provides context for those of us that don’t know. I do not believe it legitimizes anything. If you see it that way, you are probably on the extreme end of the issue ( either side ).

This is not an accusation. I can feel your genuine concern that it legitimizes his statements. I want to reassure you that it does not. The people that will take it as evidence of legitimacy do not need a reason to feel right. So who cares what they think?

It never would have occurred to me that her gender or gender history somehow supported Elon Musk until you started to say so.