Yaniv's been in the Economist, the American Conservative, the Spectator and at least six other sources.
And, the American Conservative, like the National Review and Weekly Standard, is a mainstream conservative publication. The Spectator absolutely is mainstream.
The Economist didn't name him, but named the screenshots. The American Conservative named him and the screenshots, as did the Spectator.
So I think if the Economist actually named him specifically, that'd be a smoking gun that reddit admins couldn't deny. The Economist is absolutely a mainstream publication. But that the Economist tried to soften the controversy by avoiding naming the troon themselves, and instead just letting the troon's words speak for themselves. I like the approach, but reddit will definitely jump on it as an excuse to keep censoring people. "surely there must be some good journalistic reason why they didn't name this brave transwomyn! (and it certainly couldn't be that the screeching of politically correct dipshits isn't worth the trouble)"
I don't know much about the Spectator, but I noticed that the article in question was written by Julie Bindel. I don't know much about her either, but having been around the farms for a bit, I know she's one of the big anti-tranny supervillains or some shit. (Heh, also, I love the section on her wikipedia page about
Gender, bisexuality. Whoever composed that page seems to be trying to conflate Ms Bindel's goofy comments about bisexuality with the very real problems that transgenderism pose.)
I'm sure they'll whine about that and try to undermine the legitimacy of the Spectator's article in that context.
The thing is, this isn't our first time at the reddit rodeo. Lolcow discussion is a pain in the ass on reddit specifically because the go out of their way to snuff "bullying" and generally "being mean". Doesn't matter the context.
Awhile ago we got a big migration of people from reddit because of
Russell Greer. (Dude's a weird creep who's sued the state of Utah to try to legalize prostitution, as we as sued several pop stars like Ariana Grande and Taylor Swift.) You'll notice a lot of the original content has his name censored. That's because we snagged the initial screencaps from reddit.
Now, throughout all this, don't get me wrong. I don't mean to say you shouldn't try to get reddit to stick to their own rules. I think you really should try. We might be pleasantly surprised if reddit finds a spine once in awhile and actually upholds its rules.
Or! Maybe we can get a major publication to quit fucking around and just say it explicitly: Jonathan Yaniv is a pedophile with a menstruation fetish who's exploiting feel good gender laws to get intimate access to private women's only spaces.
Good video but he probably shouldn't have used that picture of him in the bathroom since that can be DMCA'd by Jonathan Yaniv.
No, Jonathan Yaniv doesn't own the copyright on that video. In all likelihood (I don't know Canadian law that well) government processes are almost certainly public domain, or maybe the copyrights are held by the state.
