J. K. Rowling is cancelled because she is a T.E.R.F [ADMIN WARNING IN POST #1]

Gatling

Rothko wrote: »

How does someone even do that?

You can find videos on YouTube

Sir Oxman

political analyst wrote: »

That's a bit melodramatic.

For example, crimes committed against women and against children will always cause a public outcry, regardless of whether the perpetrator is a cleric or a layperson, a priest or an imam. or an average white person or a person of an Asian background in Britain.

Freedom of speech still exists in the US - it's enshrined in the US Constitution. Therefore, no side has won a 'culture war' there!

I believe what she's saying is the places of thought and education over the past 30 or so years have been captured by what we see publically now as 'wokeism' and from there a lot of those who graduated over those 30 years have entered positions of influence and power including the recolonising of places of thought and education. It is quite easy to see beyond the slogans and ideals (once people look at words v actions v consequences) which have advanced the ideology and very clear that it relies on using liberal (not US political jargon nonsense liberal/progressive) ideals, so it has appeal on the surface to the generally liberal public (inc liberal conservatism) while employing very illiberal tactics and enforcement.
In that respect, coupled with very attractive slogans and trojan horse ideals, 'wokeism' is sure in the ascendancy and dominant in the influential circles of the US but IMO never with the majority of the public. That's where the war is won.

Canada is lost (there's always hope though as the writer says), UK has major disentanglement from it's infrastructure to do, Ireland is along the path (sometimes used as an international exemplar on one particular subject...), Australia and NZ akin to Canada's trajectory, but time to pull back.

Northern European countries are similar - definitely a pattern!

Anyhow, I'm looking forward to the responses back and forth on the letterwiki site.
If you have any alternative viewpoint links to share, I'd be appreciative.

political analyst wrote: »

Sarah Jeong wrote this article, disagreeing with those who oppose 'successor ideology', or 'wokeism'.

https://www.theverge.com/21320338/letter-harpers-writers-free-speech-canceled-social-media-illiberalism

Thanks for the link.

metaoblivia

Was reading a twitter thread yesterday from a woman who has had many miscarriages and was sharing the different types and her experiences within the American healthcare industry, and of course one of the first responses after this very informative and emotional thread was a TRA chiding her for using words like "woman" and "mother" instead of more inclusive language like, "people who give birth." :rolleyes:

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

metaoblivia wrote: »

Was reading a twitter thread yesterday from a woman who has had many miscarriages and was sharing the different types and her experiences within the American healthcare industry, and of course one of the first responses after this very informative and emotional thread was a TRA chiding her for using words like "woman" and "mother" instead of more inclusive language like, "people who give birth." :rolleyes:

Yup. This is why saying 'women, transgender men and non-binary females' apparently isn't acceptable in literature about female-specific health conditions, even though it's fully inclusive. It's aaallll about sparing the feelings of people who are not affected by these health problems. Who cares if women die because of it? We must protect the feelz at all times. That's much more important.

Sir Oxman

metaoblivia wrote: »

Was reading a twitter thread yesterday from a woman who has had many miscarriages and was sharing the different types and her experiences within the American healthcare industry, and of course one of the first responses after this very informative and emotional thread was a TRA chiding her for using words like "woman" and "mother" instead of more inclusive language like, "people who give birth." :rolleyes:

The latest example of complete ignorance of the actual effects of a situation is the luvvies and politicians and TRA's (mostly not actual trans ie, real trans with genuine dysphoria) twittering their disgust at the Limerick Leader for using 'he' instead of 'she' in a tweet about the Limerick Women's Prison debacle. The LL deleted the tweet but kept their headline on their site.

Not a single word from da feminists-on-the-right-side-of-history or the pols or the luvvies about the threat to the women already incarcerated.
Performative gob****es.

Sir Oxman

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Yup. This is why saying 'women, transgender men and non-binary females' apparently isn't acceptable in literature about female-specific health conditions, even though it's fully inclusive. It's aaallll about sparing the feelings of people who are not affected by these health problems. Who cares if women die because of it? We must protect the feelz at all times. That's much more important.

Yes, totally agree.
I have no doubt this is because listing the actual people, inc *shock horror* women, it affects will 'exclude' trans women.
Can't be having that now...
Just like the incoherent babble of 'terf' - no feminism excludes females.
Trans men are included but it's just inconvenient for TRA's and their leader, Butler!

Sittingpretty

Sir Oxman wrote: »

The latest example of complete ignorance of the actual effects of a situation is the luvvies and politicians and TRA's (mostly not actual trans ie, real trans with genuine dysphoria) twittering their disgust at the Limerick Leader for using 'he' instead of 'she' in a tweet about the Limerick Women's Prison debacle. The LL deleted the tweet but kept their headline on their site.

Not a single word from da feminists-on-the-right-side-of-history or the pols or the luvvies about the threat to the women already incarcerated.
Performative gob****es.

Including a female councillor in Limerick. Elisa O’Donovan.

Errashareesh

Hilariously telling when self described feminists and feminist groups block people on Twitter - not for abuse (which deserves a blocking) but for stating facts. It is of course quite simply because they don't have an argument.

Few beardy brocialists have entered the fray too - again, nothing whatsoever other than snide comments, but it gives them a sense of belonging to the cult. These "respect and equality and compassion for all" folk sure engage in doublethink.

I don't think they hate women but their feminism claim certainly falls flat on its arse.

Errashareesh

Sir Oxman wrote: »

The latest example of complete ignorance of the actual effects of a situation is the luvvies and politicians and TRA's (mostly not actual trans ie, real trans with genuine dysphoria) twittering their disgust at the Limerick Leader for using 'he' instead of 'she' in a tweet about the Limerick Women's Prison debacle. The LL deleted the tweet but kept their headline on their site.

Not a single word from da feminists-on-the-right-side-of-history or the pols or the luvvies about the threat to the women already incarcerated.
Performative gob****es.

Virtue signalling is a real thing. I know the term gets used by eejits - and gets misused a lot. It's also like those terms like sjw and snowflake (when used incorrectly) and they grate on me too. But that doesn't change how accurate a term it is, and the prevalence of what it addresses. Slavishly being seen to follow what looks good rather than thinking for oneself.

Justin Credible Darts

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

My brain cannot even comprehend wanting to simulate childbirth. It's disgusting.

I think its mental illness.

y0ssar1an22

maybe this has already been answered; if no i apologize.

my right leg always pissed me off, more than that; i feel its not part of me.


can i elect to get my leg removed? any surgeons (doctors) here that would do that?

what would your diagnosis be, if i wanted a limb removed?

Hrududu

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

maybe this has already been answered; if no i apologize.

my right leg always pissed me off, more than that; i feel its not part of me.


can i elect to get my leg removed? any surgeons (doctors) here that would do that?

what would your diagnosis be, if i wanted a limb removed?

Sounds like body integrity dysphoria. I remember hearing about it years ago and couldn’t believe it was actually a thing, but apparently it is

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_integrity_dysphoria

Errashareesh

So much of this (not all of it - I will continue to refer to trans people as transwomen and transmen; she's not being fair to the many trans people who aren't appalling fascistic bullies; but the rest of it - perfecto).

https://twitter.com/Ellen_Mingott/status/1311735622357446656?s=09

ProfessorPlum

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

My brain cannot even comprehend wanting to simulate childbirth. It's disgusting.

Went down the twitter rabbit hole myself and come across a transwoman who wanted to get a uterus transplant so that they could have an abortion. I mean wtf! How messed up is that thought process?

Gervais08

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

Went down the twitter rabbit hole myself and come across a transwoman who wanted to get a uterus transplant so that they could have an abortion. I mean wtf! How messed up is that thought process?

There are no words as to how awful that is.

jam_mac_jam

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

Went down the twitter rabbit hole myself and come across a transwoman who wanted to get a uterus transplant so that they could have an abortion. I mean wtf! How messed up is that thought process?

Are all the awful things that we have to go through going to be used as roleplaying? And any objection then we are at fault?

Sir Oxman

Jenni Murray who retired from BBC radio's long running and very well known show Woman's Hour, let's people know why she decided to do so.

"I was not leaving, contrary to popular rumour, as a result of ageism on the part of the BBC. I made the decision a year ago when it became clear to me that it was time to move on and be free of the leash which, in recent years, had caused me to be what I can only describe as ‘cancelled’.

First came the furore concerning an article I had written in which I acknowledged that I was entering the most controversial and, at times, vicious, vulgar and threatening debate of our day.
I made clear that I was not transphobic or anti-trans. Indeed, I emphasised my belief that everyone — whether transgender or those of us who hold to the sex assigned to us at birth — should be treated with respect and protected from the bullying and violence that so many like me have suffered.

I merely asked the trans activists to acknowledge the difference between sex and gender, a trans woman and a woman, respect our right to safe single-sex spaces and abandon the nonsensical idea that we should be known as ‘cis women’.
We are women. No need for further definition. I begged trans activists to understand feminism and the struggle we had experienced in fighting for our right to be viewed as equals to men.
I reminded them that feminism had fought against sexual stereotyping, and that it was ridiculous to assume a girl who liked cars and trousers really wanted to be a boy, or a boy who loved dolls was ‘born in the wrong body’ and needed to be a girl.

Of course, I was branded a TERF — a Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist — on social media and threatened with all kinds of violence. But what shocked me most was the BBC’s response.

I was roundly ticked off publicly and informed that I would not be allowed to chair any discussions on the trans question or the proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act. I had lots of emails and tweets asking me why I had not been involved in this debate, as it was so important to Woman’s Hour listeners. You have the answer."

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

^^^^^

There are NEVER any debates on the topic. Lofty reasons are given - “I’m NOT debating somebody’s existence’ - but the real reason is because they know their position is built on sand.

This brief classic of the genre shows how easy it is to reveal the absurdities:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8nViKYmEhU

I’m not the biggest fan of Posie Parker but she comes up with great ideas for exposing the hyperbole of TRAs. Get the popcorn out.

Gervais08

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

^^^^^

There are NEVER any debates on the topic. Lofty reasons are given - “I’m NOT debating somebody’s existence’ - but the real reason is because they know their position is built on sand.

This brief classic of the genre shows how easy it is to reveal the absurdities:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8nViKYmEhU

I’m not the biggest fan of Posie Parker but she comes up with great ideas for exposing the hyperbole of TRAs. Get the popcorn out.

I have on at least one occasion reported him to the GMC for his remarks towards women on Twitter - and like reporting hatred from TRAs and science deniers in here, response came there none.

People say not to worry and that it’s all nonsense - of course it’s nonsense but we are smack bang in the worst parts of 1984 now - wrongthink and you can lose your job.

Errashareesh

I'm only learning a lot of this utter rot now.

"Transwomen are women, like black women are women" - yes, that one gets used.

This type of white "liberal" is beyond grotesque - "I'll use black women extremely dishonestly to make an atrociously poor point, without consulting them, because no black women are bothered by this sh1t, I've decided as a white person... but muh black lives matter."

suicide_circus

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

^^^^^

There are NEVER any debates on the topic. Lofty reasons are given - “I’m NOT debating somebody’s existence’ - but the real reason is because they know their position is built on sand.

This brief classic of the genre shows how easy it is to reveal the absurdities:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8nViKYmEhU

I’m not the biggest fan of Posie Parker but she comes up with great ideas for exposing the hyperbole of TRAs. Get the popcorn out.

What a monumental knob that man is. I think Posie Parker is the inevitable response to the absolutist, abrasive and aggressive tack taken by the "no debate" TRAs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JN6PUvMUWoc

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

suicide_circus wrote: »

What a monumental knob that man is. I think Posie Parker is the inevitable response to the absolutist, abrasive and aggressive tack taken by the "no debate" TRAs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JN6PUvMUWoc

Oh yeah, that Triggernometry episode is very good. I didn’t really get Kisin’s point about feeling a bit of schadenfreude about the whole thing though. To me, the pushback is entirely consistent with feminist struggles of the past. Women sought to create and protect female-only spaces in the past and continue to do so now. So I’m not sure what point he was making really. Unless he means that inclusiveness is biting us on the arse now?

suicide_circus

I thought it was more the "gender and sex are entirely unrelated" thing. If that's true then anyone can be any gender at the drop of a hat.

Errashareesh

I know by looking at him what a piece of sh1t he is. They always have that crazed look don't they?

Justin Credible Darts

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

^^^^^

There are NEVER any debates on the topic. Lofty reasons are given - “I’m NOT debating somebody’s existence’ - but the real reason is because they know their position is built on sand.

This brief classic of the genre shows how easy it is to reveal the absurdities:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8nViKYmEhU

I’m not the biggest fan of Posie Parker but she comes up with great ideas for exposing the hyperbole of TRAs. Get the popcorn out.

she really did show him up there.

Rothko

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

^^^^^

There are NEVER any debates on the topic. Lofty reasons are given - “I’m NOT debating somebody’s existence’ - but the real reason is because they know their position is built on sand.

This brief classic of the genre shows how easy it is to reveal the absurdities:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8nViKYmEhU

I’m not the biggest fan of Posie Parker but she comes up with great ideas for exposing the hyperbole of TRAs. Get the popcorn out.

That guy is a total moron.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

suicide_circus wrote: »

I thought it was more the "gender and sex are entirely unrelated" thing. If that's true then anyone can be any gender at the drop of a hat.

Well, lots of women don’t confirm to gender stereotypes and they’re still women. Lot’s of men don’t conform to gender stereotypes and they are still men. So, if sex and gender ARE related, where do these people fit in?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

she really did show him up there.

It’s easy when you’re armed with facts. She didn’t even need to break a sweat to make him look foolish.

Gruffalux

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

^^^^^

There are NEVER any debates on the topic. Lofty reasons are given - “I’m NOT debating somebody’s existence’ - but the real reason is because they know their position is built on sand.

This brief classic of the genre shows how easy it is to reveal the absurdities:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8nViKYmEhU

I’m not the biggest fan of Posie Parker but she comes up with great ideas for exposing the hyperbole of TRAs. Get the popcorn out.

Haha she does great there.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Gruffalux wrote: »

Haha she does great there.

The only place she lets herself down a bit is correcting him on how she is to be addressed. It comes across a bit petty and she really didn’t need it.