Joanne Rowling and other TERFs (1 Viewer)

The substance of the letter is correct.

I think it's a misreading to see it as specifically about the Rowling situation. I'm sure it would have got a fairer hearing if she and a few others weren't involved. Cancel culture means accepting market logic as the ultimate arbiter of academia and the arts. That is intellectually unhealthy and actually very right-wing.

It was a huge mistake for the left to cede defending free speech to angry bald men on YouTube (never mind trying to get people fired from their jobs, which is wrong whoever's doing it). The current state of public debate is so far removed from everyday lives and views, it's almost bizarre.
 
More people need to realise that Twitter does not = the world.

If thousands of people take to the streets, it’s a movement. If a self righteous little shut-in gets 1,500 retweets for telling you you’re cancelled, it’s actually OK to ignore them.
 
That is not in any way a defence of Rowling and her awful views BTW, more of a general observation. It trivialises the important stuff when we take everything that people purport to be offended by with equal weight.
 
Mugatu said:
The substance of the letter is correct.

I think it's a misreading to see it as specifically about the Rowling situation. I'm sure it would have got a fairer hearing if she and a few others weren't involved. Cancel culture means accepting market logic as the ultimate arbiter of academia and the arts. That is intellectually unhealthy and actually very right-wing.

It was a huge mistake for the left to cede defending free speech to angry bald men on YouTube (never mind trying to get people fired from their jobs, which is wrong whoever's doing it). The current state of public debate is so far removed from everyday lives and views, it's almost bizarre.
Click to expand...

A good chunk of the people signing it are TERFS or otherwise problematic (as in harmful not just someone to disagree with). If the others put their name on it without making an effort to actually know who else is signing it then that’s on them.

Also there’s no way that this is not about the Rowling thing, you’d have to be very insulated to not know about the debate and then co-sign a letter with her saying it’s illebral (:manson:) to criticize them.

No one has cancelled Margret Atwood, she’s just annoyed that she got some flack for some comments.
 
Phoenix said:
A good chunk of the people signing it are TERFS or otherwise problematic (as in harmful not just someone to disagree with). If the others put their name on it without making an effort to actually know who else is signing it then that’s on them.

Also there’s no way that this is not about the Rowling thing, you’d have to be very insulated to not know about the debate and then co-sign a letter saying it’s illebral (:manson:) to criticize them.

No one has cancelled Margret Atwood, she’s just annoyed that she got some flack for some comments.
Click to expand...

I just think it's better to respond to the argument on its merits, instead of focusing on the people making it. I'm not a fan of guilt-by-association.

I didn't interpret it as about JK Rowling because the examples alluded to were different to her circumstances, particularly the people who lost their jobs. If she thinks her tweets fall within the scope of what the letter is talking about, then that seems like a bit of a reach, as VoR was saying.

There are few signatories who I'd say have been truly cancelled either (apart from Salman Rushdie, a fatwa is the ultimate form of cancellation), but that's missing the point. They're speaking up for people who don't have their kind of insulation from professional consequences.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RS
Mugatu said:
Cancel culture means accepting market logic as the ultimate arbiter of academia and the arts. That is intellectually unhealthy and actually very right-wing.

It was a huge mistake for the left to cede defending free speech to angry bald men on YouTube (never mind trying to get people fired from their jobs, which is wrong whoever's doing it). The current state of public debate is so far removed from everyday lives and views, it's almost bizarre.
Click to expand...

Someone's been watching Jonathan Pie (or that's a coincidental summary of his latest video)
 
Indie said:
Someone's been watching Jonathan Pie (or that's a coincidental summary of his latest video)
Click to expand...

All my own work! I think I've complained about the ANGRY NEWS RANT artform on here before, it's not really my thing.
 
To continue my tirade against BBC News, today they say:

The appearance of Harry Potter author Rowling's name among signatories comes after she recently found herself under attack online for comments that offended transgender people.
Click to expand...

Fuck off. They didn't offend only transgender people. There's also a not subtle implication in the word "offended" that transgender people are being sensitive - it puts the emphasis on their reaction rather than what JK has been saying. I hope it's just lazy journalism but suspect it's not
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SDF
Mugatu said:
The substance of the letter is correct.

I think it's a misreading to see it as specifically about the Rowling situation. I'm sure it would have got a fairer hearing if she and a few others weren't involved. Cancel culture means accepting market logic as the ultimate arbiter of academia and the arts. That is intellectually unhealthy and actually very right-wing.

It was a huge mistake for the left to cede defending free speech to angry bald men on YouTube (never mind trying to get people fired from their jobs, which is wrong whoever's doing it). The current state of public debate is so far removed from everyday lives and views, it's almost bizarre.
Click to expand...


Trans people on their only available public forum: "PLEASE stop telling people its ok to bully us and discriminate against us. Please stop lying about us. We are literally dying out here because of you".

Mugata - "Be quiet, you're deintellectualising the discourse"

You're such a cunt.
 
Mugatu said:
The substance of the letter is correct.

I think it's a misreading to see it as specifically about the Rowling situation. I'm sure it would have got a fairer hearing if she and a few others weren't involved. Cancel culture means accepting market logic as the ultimate arbiter of academia and the arts. That is intellectually unhealthy and actually very right-wing.

It was a huge mistake for the left to cede defending free speech to angry bald men on YouTube (never mind trying to get people fired from their jobs, which is wrong whoever's doing it). The current state of public debate is so far removed from everyday lives and views, it's almost bizarre.
Click to expand...
The substance of the letter is not fucking correct.

People who have said vile things are moaning that they're facing repercussions, dissenting voices or calls for cancellation under the pretence of being fearful that the LIBERAL AGENDA is silencing any voice that's not from the left. Which is not the case at all. The whole thing is totally disingenuous and barely even makes a coherent point.

It doesn't deserve "a fair hearing" FFS. It's literally a circle jerk of old privileged people whining that the world is changing and they can't say any old shit they like anymore sans consequences.

Shame, by the way, on the 8 people who liked that post.
 
Phoenix said:
:goodgrief:

Click to expand...



As someone on that thread pointed out, JK Rowling blocked Stephen King when he disagreed with her.

The thing that really really riles me is this notion that basic human rights are a matter of discourse, something to play debating football with. Usually the people who do this aren’t personally affected by the issue.

I think a better solution is to suggest that opinion forums such as twitter have a requirement for you to put your real name and basic info. Imagine how fewer trolls we would get if people were actually held accountable for their words.
 
Jark said:
Shame, by the way, on the 8 people who liked that post.
Click to expand...

This is the point where we are at risk of this devolving into the left eating itself yet again as a purity test.

It can both be true that Rowling is entirely wrong and is using her platform in a dangerous manner, and that more generally there are issues with which the way we deal with mistakes, ignorance, and debate. These two things should not be conflated, and it is certainly unacceptable to misrepresent Mugatu's points or to write off those that agreed with them or at the very least saw some merit in what he said.
 
@ZenGiraffe makes a fair point insofar as the right wing know how easy it is to get the left wing squabbling. The right have normalised corruption, incompetence and immorality in politics while the left battle over worker's rights, trans rights, BLM etc.
The right wing have weaponised the battle for purity very successfully in the US and the UK - Corbyn wasn't anti-semitic but was deemed unsuitable because he wasn't sufficiently anti-anti-semitic. Meanwhile, the US has Trump party due to the left-wing handwringing over e-mails and her involvement in certain foreign policy decisions.
Andy Zaltzman recent said on The Bugle that you rarely get what you vote for but you almost always get what you fail to vote against. I don't know if that was a quotation or a particularly asture observation but either way, it holds.
 
ZenGiraffe said:
This is the point where we are at risk of this devolving into the left eating itself yet again as a purity test.

It can both be true that Rowling is entirely wrong and is using her platform in a dangerous manner, and that more generally there are issues with which the way we deal with mistakes, ignorance, and debate. These two things should not be conflated, and it is certainly unacceptable to misrepresent Mugatu's points or to write off those that agreed with them or at the very least saw some merit in what he said.
Click to expand...
This is true - I can agree with Jark that the letter is largely a self-serving exercise by people with large platforms to attempt to stop people criticising their views, and also agree with Mugatu that the popular arm of global right wing politics have managed to own the narrative over 'freedom of speech', framing it as people to their left being scolds who try and shut down debate (ignoring when their own side does this of course). I think the bottom line is that the signatories of the letter absolutely should be free to say what they like, but everyone else should also be free to criticise them as much as they like (even on Twitter, sorry JK).
 
octophone said:
Trans people on their only available public forum: "PLEASE stop telling people its ok to bully us and discriminate against us. Please stop lying about us. We are literally dying out here because of you".

Mugata - "Be quiet, you're deintellectualising the discourse"

You're such a cunt.
Click to expand...

Congratulations on finding literally the least charitable possible reading of my comment (which I'm sure has nothing to do with your own dislike of me). Censorship of trans and left-wing content could also quite easily apply to what I said in that post. Obviously I'm against both.

Jark said:
The substance of the letter is not fucking correct.

People who have said vile things are moaning that they're facing repercussions, dissenting voices or calls for cancellation under the pretence of being fearful that the LIBERAL AGENDA is silencing any voice that's not from the left. Which is not the case at all. The whole thing is totally disingenuous and barely even makes a coherent point.

It doesn't deserve "a fair hearing" FFS. It's literally a circle jerk of old privileged people whining that the world is changing and they can't say any old shit they like anymore sans consequences.

Shame, by the way, on the 8 people who liked that post.
Click to expand...

The letter isn't specific enough about examples, I'll accept that. I don't think it's especially well-written and Rowling's name being on it perhaps lends towards a certain interpretation of what it's about. There are also several people involved with it who I like and have read before (Chomsky, Jilani, Karp etc.), so I'm personally confident that their presence outweighs her involvement.

The third paragraph specifically says that the risk of cancellation is particularly chilling for those who don't have the platform or reputation of many of the signatories. Many of the vague examples concern lesser-known people who wouldn't necessarily have their open letter discussed as much. That is entirely correct, which is why that was one of the main things I took away from the piece.

Shaming people for liking an innocuous post about cancel culture as an unwelcome extension of capitalism is just proving my point, so thank you for that.
 
Mugatu said:
Congratulations on finding literally the least charitable possible reading of my comment (which I'm sure has nothing to do with your own dislike of me). Censorship of trans and left-wing content could also quite easily apply to what I said in that post. Obviously I'm against both.
Click to expand...

One ad hominem attack, one "I'm the real victim here" and one "Obviously" for something that was by no means obvious from the original posts.

HOUSE!
 
octophone said:
One ad hominem attack, one "I'm the real victim here" and one "Obviously" for something that was by no means obvious from the original posts.

HOUSE!
Click to expand...

I criticised cancel culture for its right-wing impulses in the original post, read it again.

And if I'm playing the victim for not responding well to getting called a cunt then so be it. I don't think I've ever called you one.
 
I don't think anyone needs to be called a cunt here, we're all on the same side of this particular "debate"

Except Kala of course. Massive TERF.
 
octophone said:
@ZenGiraffe makes a fair point insofar as the right wing know how easy it is to get the left wing squabbling. The right have normalised corruption, incompetence and immorality in politics while the left battle over worker's rights, trans rights, BLM etc.
The right wing have weaponised the battle for purity very successfully in the US and the UK - Corbyn wasn't anti-semitic but was deemed unsuitable because he wasn't sufficiently anti-anti-semitic. Meanwhile, the US has Trump party due to the left-wing handwringing over e-mails and her involvement in certain foreign policy decisions.
Andy Zaltzman recent said on The Bugle that you rarely get what you vote for but you almost always get what you fail to vote against. I don't know if that was a quotation or a particularly asture observation but either way, it holds.
Click to expand...

The problem is that the right rarely needs to explain their actions, they can be open with being what the left accuse them of, and their voters love them for it, whereas the left is trapped in its own purity test because nothing seems to be progressive enough. It’ so easy for the right to exploit that and cancel culture is a part of that explotation.
 
I don’t really know what the original issue is about and what TERFs really are. Could someone summarize it, please?
 
TERF stands for trans-exclusionary radical feminist - they're basically feminists who don't accept that trans women are women, but are actually men who want to infiltrate women's spaces (presumably to try and assault women). They also believe that trans men are just confused women and are victims of the patriarchy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RS
Oh dear, I was going to ask if that was the reason behind it, because we have a ”famous” feminist here that has been airing such views, but thought it might be too simple/stupid.

It just shows how stupid fundementalists of any kind are, but again, why is it even an issue, are trans rights compromising women’s rights?
 
Slightly OT but just to add some FURTHER READING, ABSOLUTE QUEEN Nesrine Malik has written a piece in the Guardian about the myth of the free speech crisis and has also addressed the letter directly in this 4-hander opinion piece (warning, contains traces of JONATHAN FREEDLAND). Interestingly, the fourth writer in that piece is a signatory of the letter himself and he reveals he didn't know who else was signing it.
 
WHO would ever say that the solution to being gay is to change gender via surgery? :D as though it's a quick fix or something!

for fucks sake - it's so insane and transparent an argument you almost HAVE to LAUGH
 
Honestly, what an actual legend Miriam Margolyes is
 
She also has some choice words about aNtIsEmItIsM iN tHe LaBoUr PaRty!!!1, it's well worth reading - just be careful with those retweets gays or Keir will come for you.
 
Last edited:
This is particularly nice to see from a prominent lesbian celebrity, because pitting lesbians and trans women against each other seems to be a cornerstone of the TERF playbook.
 
oh dear, not this. the stupid bitch is claiming trans women are biologically men. moron? yes. fascist? erm, no. plz google what the word actually means.

throwing these heavy-loaded words around just makes them lose their meaning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom