Talk

Advanced search

Ben Beaumont-Thomas Responds ...

(24 Posts)
MarieIVanArkleStinks Fri 17-Jul-20 10:39:35

To the chorus of women's voices accusing him of selling them out. By patronising them, reiterating the message that they need to #BeKind, and to admonish them to be quiet and listen whilst the men are talking.

mobile.twitter.com/ben_bt/status/1283704333977223169

Tweet #5 is particularly tone deaf:

To the cis women who feel betrayed by the Guardian's coverage of trans issues: I'm genuinely saddened to have lost you as everyone working here wants to fight misogyny, sexism and patriarchal power/bullshit. (5/10)

The responses to that one are golden. I liked that Jane Clare Jones points out the distinction he's missing: biology is the basis of women's oppression and gender is the system through which they are oppressed. No woman 'identifies' with her own oppression. Ergo no woman is 'cis'.

Even more entertaining is the fact that he's seemingly missed the bullseye with his target readership. Comments from trans women on that thread suggest that even when a publication is toeing their party line more or less to the letter, when a political potato is as hot as this they'll leap for the jugular if they perceive so much as one letter out of place. You'd think that would tell them something ...

OP’s posts: |
Z0rr0 Fri 17-Jul-20 10:44:52

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3968686-The-Guardian-job-cuts

MarieIVanArkleStinks Fri 17-Jul-20 11:08:38

That thread was about his yesterday's tweet. This one's today's. His instant pushback against the women telling him why they're no longer supporting the Guardian shows he still isn't hearing.

OP’s posts: |
CharlieParley Fri 17-Jul-20 11:26:44

He has no intention to listen to women, let alone hear what we tell him. It's such a perfect demonstration of mansplaining, too...

Shedbuilder Fri 17-Jul-20 11:27:00

That was a long suicide Tweet.

He doesn't get it and he hasn't even bothered to think about it or question his assumptions.

It makes it so much easier to turn my back and walk away. Farewell, Guardian. I deserve better.

twoHopes Fri 17-Jul-20 11:37:50

What a blindingly stupid Twitter thread. I am embarrassed for him.

HandsOffMyRights Fri 17-Jul-20 11:40:30

A man who won't take no for an answer from women.

Not a good look, Ben.

HandsOffMyRights Fri 17-Jul-20 11:44:54

I find that no TRA thread is complete unless it features a meme of Sonic the Hedgehog or Donkey Kong as a counter argument.

These are your people, Ben.

MarieIVanArkleStinks Fri 17-Jul-20 12:02:26

A man who won't take no for an answer from women.

Not a good look, Ben.

Disturbing. An interesting related point is that there's now pretty much radio silence on former TRA rhetoric relating to the 'cotton ceiling'. In some of them are now insisting against evidence to the contrary that that rhetoric never existed in the first place.

It seems even the most aggressive woman-haters have recognised that a reluctance to hear women who say 'no' reflects badly on them.

Women are telling BBT loudly and clearly why his product isn't selling and he's sticking his fingers in his ears and going 'la la la'. His complete tone-deafness is staggering.

OP’s posts: |
thehumanformerlyknownasfemale Fri 17-Jul-20 12:08:27

I won't be giving the Guardian any money or clicks, but I'd gladly contribute to get Ben a better shovel for that big hole he's digging himself in to.

wellbehavedwomen Fri 17-Jul-20 12:34:21

Anya Palmer, the barrister, hands him his backside sliced, diced, and neatly packaged in cellophane. (Two comments in thread.)

CharlieParley Fri 17-Jul-20 12:45:24

Women are telling BBT loudly and clearly why his product isn't selling and he's sticking his fingers in his ears and going 'la la la'. His complete tone-deafness is staggering.

It's the arrogance and condescension that stand out for me.

His complete but unashamed ignorance. In the tweet you quote in your OP, MarieIVanArkleStinks, he claims he wants to fight misogyny, sexism etc.

But if it isn't misogyny to follow this with tweet after tweet about the issues of males, I don't know what is.

It isn't enough to namedrop misogyny and sexism. That means nothing.

To write in his sixth tweet

Men threaten women in so many ways.

And follow this with

Trans women (often non-white trans women) experience the blunt, murderous end of that threat all too often.

Centres men claiming womanhood in a tweet that he seems to believe shows his sympathy for women.

And that's regardless of the fact that men claiming womanhood in the UK have in the last decade been far more likely to have murdered than been murdered.

He brushes the hundreds of women murdered in the UK every single year under the carpet. Because his fellow men remain more important to him. Even if they claim womanhood.

The pretense fails completely with the final sentence of that tweet:

Again, these women need compassion.

He hasn't expressed any compassion with female victims of male violence up to this point (he doesn't later either), but he urges the many of us who belong to that group to show compassion to males. Because they need it.

That we might need compassion too does not register. Because you cannot show us that compassion for having experienced male violence while simultaneously denying us what we need to recover from male violence.

Tweet seven:

There needs to be debate on how to ensure safety and agency of all women; of methods and timings of transitioning, which will vary for each person. But any debate needs to come from a place of compassion where the fact of trans women's existence and womanhood is honoured. (7/10)

More of the same. No thought given to our needs, to honouring our existence and womanhood. To ensure our safety and agency.

Tweet eight is just sad. I feel embarrassed for him. He signed a letter demanding to silence a female colleague by denying her a voice in his paper and justifies it thus:

I signed the letter in the wake of Suzanne Moore's column because I thought she mis-characterised the fight for trans rights as denying women's rights. I respect debate and part of that is calling out something I don't agree with. She isn't silenced, nor would I want that. (8/10)

Suzanne Moore did no such thing of course. She explained carefully why a proposed law reform conferring a privilege to people who identify as trans (that no other group in the UK has) will negatively impact on the existing rights of women.

She did not claim the fight for trans rights denies women's rights.

She isn't silenced. No. But that's because she's refusing to be, not because you haven't tried.

Once again oblivious to the reality of women's lives, he ploughs ahead:

This debate should continue until everyone feels safe. People often approach it in bad faith. I encourage people to think openly. Talk to trans people and understand the reality of their identities; their difficulties and joys. (9/10)

Talk to us. Understand us. This isn't about feeling safe but being safe.

Many hundreds tried to explain after his first thread. To no avail. He urges compassion from us but shows none. And is too blind to see it.

wellbehavedwomen Fri 17-Jul-20 12:50:23

He doesn't have the capacity to listen to women. The only women's voices he's interested in - the only women's needs he shows concern for - are women born with penises. Like him.

Same old misogyny, just with different backing vocals.

nauticant Fri 17-Jul-20 13:07:21

I wonder how he's going to reframe the "discussion" so he can be the victim in all of this.

Z0rr0 Fri 17-Jul-20 13:23:19

MarieIVanArkleStinks

That thread was about his yesterday's tweet. This one's today's. His instant pushback against the women telling him why they're no longer supporting the Guardian shows he still isn't hearing.

No, it's the same tweet, from yesterday.

MarieIVanArkleStinks Fri 17-Jul-20 13:26:06

@CharlieParley that really does bring out the ways in which this whole discussion legitimises misogyny. People like this can now spout their loathesome attitudes towards women with impunity - attitudes which have always been held by such men but until recently put under scrutiny by feminism and ordinary decent people - under the pretext of 'being kind' to other men. When women object, we are the ones told to be kind.

This isn't about trans rights. If it were, there'd be equal concern emanating from this lobby about trans men. The silence on that point is deafening.

If the issue is that trans women are being murdered in huge numbers, the problem is men. No mention of the enormous numbers of women being murdered globally, daily, by men. That Twitter hashtag #countingdeadwomen is heartbreaking and rage-inducing in equal measure. That problem is also men. That this ilk are coming after women tells us all we need to know. Not least, mansplaining their definition at us as to their creative interpretation of what a woman actually is. (Hint: we don't have dicks).

The good news is that the other side to this argument's been so effectively silenced that I bet he wasn't expecting this backlash. Popcorn ...

OP’s posts: |
MarieIVanArkleStinks Fri 17-Jul-20 13:27:34

No, it's the same tweet, from yesterday.

Were you wanting to add something to this thread, or just wanting to police what people can and can't start conversations about? If it's the former, happy to chat. If the latter, no one's forcing you to read it.

OP’s posts: |
MarieIVanArkleStinks Fri 17-Jul-20 13:28:39

I wonder how he's going to reframe the "discussion" so he can be the victim in all of this

Probably take lessons from Lloyd Russell-Moyle.

OP’s posts: |
Vermeil Fri 17-Jul-20 13:31:11

I don’t get all the ‘The Guardian is so, like, totally transphobic!!!’ replies.
They’ve never actually read the Graun, have they, just seen tweets of that one, recent, Suzanne Moore article.

Goosefoot Fri 17-Jul-20 13:37:18

There are a few factual issues that I keep seeing again and again in these Tweet threads. Mainly this business that trans brains are like the brains of the other sex, or that a transitioned man is biologically closer to a woman than a man. And then the business of transwomen being at risk of violence.

We need some heavy scientific/statistical organisations to come out with material to show these are false. There will always be crazies, like people who continue to defend the Wakefield vaccine guy, but most people will take things like that seriously if it comes from an authoritative and unbiased source.

GivesNoFox Fri 17-Jul-20 13:43:14

@Vermeil

It's down to the cultish mentality of gender ideology, if you don't toe the line 100% you are essentially a blasphemer to the cult. The guardian has occasionally let in some gender critical articles, Suzanne Moore's being one of them, despite 98% of the rest of their reportings shit on women and biological sex issues.

This isnt enough for the cult, ANY dissent has you labled as 'transphobic'.

CharlieParley Fri 17-Jul-20 13:51:28

Vermeil

I don’t get all the ‘The Guardian is so, like, totally transphobic!!!’ replies.
They’ve never actually read the Graun, have they, just seen tweets of that one, recent, Suzanne Moore article.

There have been three gender critical pieces in the Guardian in total throughout this debate vs countless pro-self-ID ones. But a single deviation from the TWAW line is enough to earn eternal condemnation. Three is beyond the pale.

Z0rr0 Fri 17-Jul-20 15:12:02

I just thought you'd want to be part of the main discussion on the other thread.
Not policing.

MarieIVanArkleStinks Fri 17-Jul-20 15:44:02

I just thought you'd want to be part of the main discussion on the other thread. Not policing.

Then my apologies.

OP’s posts: |

Join the discussion

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet

Already have a Mumsnet account? Log in