Even then, they’ll just call it deepfakes.

I might be able to help clear this up for you. Whether or not the take is spicy depends on how transphobic or ignorant the parties involved are, so I’ll start by addressing the facts.

• If you are a woman, then it is gay to be attracted to a trans woman.

• If you are a man, then it is not gay to be attracted to a trans woman.

• Regardless of whether you or anyone else is a man, woman, gay, or otherwise, and of whatever physical bits are involved, you are not obligated to be attracted to anyone in particular.

• If you are a straight man, and you do not visually perceive the trans woman as appearing consistent with your idea of what a woman should look like, then you are unlikely to be attracted to her.

• If you are a straight man who is attracted to a trans woman and feel uncomfortable with or threatened by it, then you are transphobic. This doesn’t necessarily mean you hate trans people, it can just mean that you fear being associated with them or having to think about them.

On spiciness:

• If you are addressing people who are ignorant of all this, they will not know enough to consider your take spicy.
• Your statement is too vague to determine whether your intent is transphobic or not. If the context of your take is that you do not consider trans women to be women, then your take will be spicy to people who are not transphobic, but it will not be spicy to people who are transphobic (or ignorant, as mentioned previously).

The founder of SaaS business development outfit SaaStr has claimed AI coding tool Replit deleted a database despite his instructions not to change any code without permission.

Sounds like an absolute diSaaStr…

Party of small government, huh?

We can only speculate about the meaning to/intent of whoever drew it. The reality is that regardless of intent or personal interpretation, if anyone in the workplace recognizes those images as having that kind of meaning and is made uncomfortable by it, that constitutes workplace harassment, whether it’s intentional or not. If the company doesn’t take it seriously, they will be liable for legal action. At least in the US - I assume most other English-speaking countries have similar laws. So it’s not really an overreaction - they need to protect themselves as much as their employees.

Whether you or I ascribe that meaning to the images or not is immaterial - clearly, someone does. Given that the images have nothing to do with work anyway, the only thing that matters is whether they genuinely bother people.

I mean…I didn’t watch it either, but I can’t picture a workplace where it would be considered acceptable and professional behavior to draw pictures of impaled women all over the place.

It’s not really impostor syndrome - he really is unfit, he’s not just imagining it. Definitely some kind of deep insecurity/inferiority complex or something along those lines, though.