• Krafty Kactus
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        8 months ago

        Counterpoint: It’s just not harassment.

        “In general, civil harassment is abuse, threats of abuse, stalking, sexual assault, or serious harassment by someone you have not dated and do NOT have a close family relationship with, like a neighbor, a roommate, or a friend (that you have never dated).”

        https://www.courts.ca.gov/1258.htm

        • casual_turtle_stew_enjoyer@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          If we are to interpret explainer text meant to inform the public as word of law such as you have:

          The civil harassment laws say “harassment” is:

          • Unlawful violence, like assault or battery or stalking, OR
          • A credible threat of violence, AND
          • The violence or threats seriously scare, annoy, or harass someone and there is no valid reason for it.

          The actions described in the green text could be interpreted as a credible threat of violence that is seriously annoying/scaring the individual, as they specifically mention how brave it is for trans people to show themselves in public, when the victim has never initiated the discussion or topic and has made clear both that they do not qualify for the classification and are uncomfortable with the label. This, by your logic, would make it civil harassment.

          • Krafty Kactus
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            8 months ago

            You know what else could be considered a threat of violence? Literally anything by your standard.