For speech to be libel, it has to be false. However, medical records are private. Would Khelif have to forfeit her medical privacy to prove that their claims are false and therefore libelous? This seems confusing and I doubt she'd be willing to publish a DNA or testosterone test as she didn't go to the CAS after her '23 ban. Also, where's Lin in all of this? I'm surprised she wasn't the main target. None of this makes sense and I think the more I learn the less I'll understand.

[–] Tabitha@hexbear.net 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Why wouldn't the burden of proof be on Musk, Dawkins, Raichik, and Rowling to prove they had a compelling reason to make the claim, aside from just vibes?

I only saw the Dawkins tweet, he was very specific and certain about his level of evidence, so much to use the term "undisputed".

Otherwise there's a chilling effect where women are all relentlessly bullied online until they publicize their medical records to prove they don't have abortions or alopecia or osteogelasia liquifaciens or w/e the new fearmongering is that week.

[–] gay_king_prince_charles@hexbear.net 2 points 3 months ago

This is apparently a cyberbullying thing, not a libel thing. So after reading the French harassment laws, it doesn't matter if you said something entirely true or not. It just matters if the harassment is repeated and caused a decline in health and that you did it more than once. So Khelif doesn't need to prove anything, other than mean tweets made her sad.

On another note, I'm shocked that France has a law that says if you post more than one mean tweet about a politician you can go to prison for 3 years. france-cool

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments