> The person in question probably suffers psychologically a great deal. Who wouldn't if they were dealt with the double-hand of gender-dysphoria and a pedophile father?

You don't get a pass on hiring your dad while he is being charged for sex crimes just because you are trans.

That's not what I'm trying to address. I said that I agree that deserves opprobrium!

What I have trouble with, is the idea that it's somehow okay for the whole world to deliver it in the form of an ungoverned internet mob.

Societies have limits to how much opprobrium you can receive. The reality is that she's probably getting tens of thousands of death threats. In most places you have an inalienable legal right to protection from such things.

I would say, if you are more than one level removed from the issue then you should be given consideration. If you are two or more levels removed then it should be not even on the RADAR

However given she is directly connected to the person at hand by willful association after knowing the issue she pretty much deserves no exception.

Frankly I could care less about her and more about how Reddit justifies hiring her knowing what they know about her.

Maybe Reddit can sell dispensations in the form of hiring people.

What i mean is, your post seemed to imply that the opprobrium should be less because she is trans. I think it should be equal regardless of your gender identity.

I think it's fairly clear that she's receiving far more opprobrium because she is trans.

No, but you get a pass because he was not yet convicted.

that is what a conviction means -- we should not punish people before it, nor should we punish people that associate with them

> That is what a conviction means -- we should not punish people before it, nor should we punish people that associate with them

It’s still bad judgement to hire someone who you are aware is being investigated for kidnapping and raping a 10 year old child when you are in a political party trying to get elected.

I mean it’s not a good look for a political party to play the “I knew he was being investigated for child rape, but we hired him anyway because innocent until proven guilty, even though he was actually guilty in the end” card.

> Does the world really stand to gain much exposing a fringe activist to the opprobrium of the entire world?

In this case, the person being shamed for endorsing pedophilia was hired to manage a communities of children. She hired a child rapist, married an admitted pedophile, and now (as demonstrated by this incident) has the power to control what media many children are exposed to.

I’ve no problem with her getting a job that doesn’t involve kids.

Q1: Should a psychologically suffering person be able to run for public office?

I would say yes.

Q2: If so, should a public figure that is psychologically suffering be safeguarded from any criticism

I would say no since being a public figure was a conscious choice.

Technically most Reddit staff would have to say that they were associating with pedophiles if they were around while Ghislaine Maxwell was one of the biggest and most active admins on the site.