• 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.