Australia’s most popular bargain web forum has been thrown into chaos after a transphobic documentary was voted the most popular “deal” over the weekend, prompting an all-out war between the website’s commenters.
On Friday night, OzBargain user Arkan posted a link to conservative US media company The Daily Wire’s What Is A Woman? “It’s the movie they really don’t want you to see,” the user wrote.
The 2022 documentary follows host Matt Walsh as he puts the film’s title to different interviewees in his pursuit to critique what he calls “gender ideology”. It’s been criticised as spreading misinformation about trans people by LGBTQIA+ media and groups.
When the film was released for free to coincide with Pride Month after previously being available only on The Daily Wire’s paid subscription streaming service, What Is A Woman? was posted to OzBargain, between deals like free Amazon Prime when signing up for a credit card, cheap torches and sports shop sales.
The deal immediately rocketed to the top of OzBargain’s front page with hundreds of votes as commenters quickly broke out into skirmishes with hundreds of comments debating the film’s contents and whether it was, in fact, a deal.
Some comments in defence of the film veered into homophobia and transphobia, including a reference to a banner held up by neo-Nazis at anti-trans speaker Kellie-Jay Keen’s Melbourne protest. Others pointed individuals towards conspiracy-filled alt-tech platforms like BitChute and other fringe websites. Moderators deleted some extreme comments.
OzBargain founder Scott Yang told Crikey the deal website is no stranger to conversations around controversial topics: “As much as we want to focus the site on shopping and finding bargains, people do bring in their own agenda every now and then. Religions, firearms, politics, sexuality — you name it.”
Yang dismissed claims by some users that there had been inauthentic behaviour — like one person who implied another user was part of a foreign interference operation because they claimed not to know about the television show Home and Away — by saying the website showed that most people responding were established OzBargain members.
Some members argued that posting the documentary, which was released for free over the weekend, shouldn’t qualify as a deal and was allowed to be posted because it aligned with the forum moderator’s views. One user even repeated the same type of deal but for a different, less controversial documentary. His post was deleted, he wrote, and his account was given a warning for trolling.
A moderator defended the warning by saying that the warning was warranted because “when someone’s intention is not posting a bargain, e.g. … a post to prove some point in another thread then it’s considered trolling”.
Yang said the site’s rules allow discussions to stay, even though the moderators don’t agree with the views: “While we don’t agree with many things that have been discussed (yes, moderators are different individuals with their own opinions), we also agree that we aren’t really the arbitrator of right and wrong (other than what has been defined in the guidelines which focus on posting deals).”
This documentary was free on Twitter over the weekend. I watched it and thought it was a well-made, fair and respectful take on this polarising subject. It’s always good to see both sides.
That is transphobic – there is ONLY one side coz…reasons.
Thanks Cam. I’d only heard about this outfit recently and now I know to avoid it.
Your headline says it all: ‘OzBargain war breaks out over transphobic documentary ‘deal’’ You used the word transphobic, so, please tell us whether you have watched the documentary and whether you still think it transphobic? I watched it and thought it revealed some damning indictments of the people pushing for young people to take dangerous drugs and undergo horrific mutilations to their bodies. Please tell us Cam, what is a woman? Or is it transphobic to ask?
Agree Nigel. Thanks for posting. Yes exactly! What exactly is transphobic about stating scientific biological and observable fact?
It’s a piece of media created to stir up fear, hatred and discrimination against transsexuals by someone with a long history of doing so, for no other reason except because of his feels.
Transphobia is its raison d’etre.
Indeed. These people never mention the far greater number of cis people that seek labiaplasty, breast reductions or implants, rhinoplasty, pec implants, etc. If they’re so concerned why are they totally silent on all the other cosmetic surgeries?
They also often claim their concern is for the rights and safety of “real women”, yet are typically (as in this case) raving misogynists with gender stereotyped views that could be most politely described as anachronistic and rigid.
oh yes, most of the people they harass in toilets are cis women that don’t fit gender stereotypes
That is possibly the most irrelevant argument I have ever seen in any context.
It’s a speciality of P/S.
really, they claim to be concerned about surgical interventions but literally ignore the vast majority… and that’s irrelevant?
Just guessin’ but probably because they are stupid adults making stupid choices – ain’t freedumb grand!
https://www.advocate.com/transgender/2022/9/28/more-teens-get-breast-implants-trans-top-surgery
LOL.
“While genital surgery on minors is exceptionally rare […]”
Other than the ~2/3 of male babies that are circumcised ?
they also tend to support dehumanisation of intersex kids and encourage surgeries on intersex babies because their ideology does not allow for variations of sex characteristics.
“Transphobia is its raison d’etre.”
Please explain.
It exists because of transphobia, and to perpetuate it.
Cannot explain any more clearly.
Circular syllogism is always solecism, symptomatic of solipsism.
It always puzzles me that transphobes can’t just own their transphobia. If you literally reject the idea that the social category of gender (e.g. woman) can exist separately to the biological category of sex (e.g. female), you reject transgender people a priori and believe they should not exist.
That’s what transphobia is, but transphobes always seem super keen to avoid being called transphobic. It’s almost like on some level they accept that wanting a particular group of people not to exist is cruel and hateful.
And always aligns with sexist ideals – trans women are declared to be predators simply for being trans and trans men are viewed as perpetual children. At it’s core is a hatred of gender nonconforming people generally. They promote the parental and societal rejection of all kids that don’t fit gender stereotypes, not just trans kids.
And as I’ve said before, it’s kind of surreal to see these “arguments” rolled out again when they were used the same ways about homosexuals decades ago (gays are going to assault you in the toilet, want to get near to your kids because they’re paedophiles, etc).
Does make it quite clear that the real issue is not fitting into the nice easy buckets of “boy” and “girl”, though.
Yes. I have also thought the same thing about racists. I wonder if it might boil down to the simple fact that human beings aren’t born hating so there is always something innate hate mongering has to resist.
Hi Nigel, I am a tech reporter reporting on the broader controversy so I referenced appropriate critiques of the documentary if you’re interested in the evidence for this assertion. However, since you asked, a simple definition is a woman is someone who identifies as one. Thanks!
thank you for your reply, I think it was worth watching though.
Not a worry, always happy to chat about my reporting.
An even simpler one is that a woman is a person born female. People born with penises are not women. Even if their penises have been cut off.
Everyone I know was born a baby.
A baby who was either male or female – do try to keep up.
And the babies grew old. They changed, and lost their baby teeth.
Some had facelifts and nose jobs and hair transplants and dental implants. And people tell them they look young for their age as though failing to realise they were born babies.
Cher sure looked young for her age before she died. She didn’t look like a baby, though. Not since probably she was a baby.
Cher seems to have Turned Back Time – still above ground & kickin’ it.
not really, intersex people exist and were born intersex. besides, gender nonconforming people shouldn’t have to carry ID just to use the toilets
Still obsessed with puhlic toilets – you really need to have your prostate checked.
As a cis woman I do not have a prostate. unfortunately, you’re still struggling to accept women can wear trousers and have short hair.
Three weeks ago you claimed to be tranx under threat of violence.
Fluid?
Three weeks ago you posted a comment that showed some level of intelligence.
Not something of which you could be accused.
I never claimed to be trans
“Oh what a tangled web they weave, who try to deceive… ” – read your own confused ravings.
You just can’t escape being mistaken for a man, even when it’s someone misinterpreting your words rather than your physical appearance, apparently. 😀
So many contradictory claims no wonder you can’t keep the nutty narrative straight.
No woman with any self respect would use the deliberately derogatory term ‘cis’ to describe herself.
Q.E.D.
Circular argument (example):
“No woman with any self respect would use the deliberately derogatory term ‘cis’ to describe herself.”
Therefore, a woman who describes herself as ‘cis’ would not be a self-respecting woman.
Only trouble with circular arguments is they’re wholly dependent on the definitions imposed by those making the circular argument. And this circular argument in particular is made not by a self-respecting woman, but by a man defining women and presuming he’s right.
Any word on whether those identifying as Napoleon are really little Corsican warmongers?
You have previously claimed (to believe) that men give birth which is even crazier than the statement above.
You have previously claimed women can smell cis men and trans women, yet you have never explained why women get it so wrong when they harass women that don’t fit conservative prejudices regarding gender expression…
That is a simply absurd definition.
And a simple definition of a teenager, aborigine, haemophiliac etc also someone who identifies as one?
The current social contagion craze in the UK is troubled kids presenting as dysphoric due to identifying as a different race. How soon will they be aping (sic!) the tabloid B/S about furries and claim that they are a different species?
Because, of course, as predicted way back when (thanks Barnaby Joyce and assorted Murdoch hacks), gay marriage would lead to people marrying cats and dogs.
Except it didn’t.
Be patient, it will come (sic!) when the current derangements are no longer sufficiently insane.
So… a convicted sex offender can self-ID as a woman and then go into women’s change rooms 1 minute later?
It’s a great Doco, much see viewing
Watch the Wokies squirm when they cant even answer a basic easy question.
Unfortunately they won’t watch it, despite needing to do so more than normal people.
Avoiding sources promoted by neo-nazis and conspiracists strikes me as a rational approach. They aren’t people who’ve proven themselves to be objective.
Better to go for reliable sources produced by people who use objective, research-based evidence.
indeed, the guy objected to the Little mermaid not being white on the basis that fish people would “scientifically” wouldn’t be Black. he also supports men marrying girls because of “nature”