The discussion above implies that there may not be a party response due to “confidentiality” which seems odd when the party has defamed someone. I’d expect the ejectee would waive confidentiality.
Armand1@lemmy.world 8 hours ago
Whilst I’m a trans ally, I am a little sceptical on this one. I’m going to wait for the official response from the Green Party on this one before judging. So far we have seen no proof of any of this.
The lady in question is a bit of a bit of an inflammatory individual from the little I’ve seen from her socials.
mjr@infosec.pub 8 hours ago
ToastedRavioli@midwest.social 7 hours ago
Defamation requires some degree of lying to damage someones reputation, so this is not defamation.
Technically they suspended them for being elected and for the subsequent media interest, per their own words. Both of those things factually occurred
There is much that could be said about how fucked up that is, but it is also not defamation
captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
Yeah, seeing more info, I’ve got my doubts about her story, especially considering another trans member of the party is calling bs
SourGumGum@lemmy.world 19 minutes ago
I’ve got my doubts on that other trans women when she provides nothing beyond an anecdotal unrelated story and the person involved in kicking her out is extremely transphobic and backed by other transphobes.