Julie Bindel on twitter

I didn't read JCJ's thread as an "epic rant" either, more of an explanation of her own feelings, and she is not at the centre of this for a lot of people who are upset about it. I've always found her quite considered and her posts interesting. I'm not interested in slagging off people simply because they're academics and people think that's cliquey per se. There is from the outside obviously a load of 'background' going on that was to do with ongoing issues connected with the Posie/Julia stuff as well as some other infighting and shit-stirring drama between particular individuals and factions.

But for a lot of people in the last couple of days, what's just blown up has bugger all to do with that particular spat and more to do with the particular behaviour of two or three individuals. being seen directly slagging off anon accounts post Jameela Jamil incident and in one case being extremely rude directly to someone anon in a "you're just a nobody" kind of way, a bunch of Twitter mates doing a kind of "oh well done YOU telling the plebs what's what" afterwards and then revived, not by JCJ at all, but a particularly snotty post by Sarah Ditum getting in on the act and being even worse.

None of it a good look. Divide and conquer and all that. But I do think some of what is some frankly appalling classism in there has been brewing for a while and it's not wrong that it's been called out.

I like JCJ too, but I wanted her to stop, especially when she started posting screenshots which, as far as I was concerned, didn't reveal what she seemed to think they were revealing.

Stock is a newbie, she is recently in the fight.

Thanks so much.

janeclarejones.com/2020/05/03/notes-on-what-feels-like-a-trashing-spiral/

I copied the link before she deleted her Twitter account, hopefully it works

@Bflatmajorsharp
janeclarejones.com/2020/05/03/notes-on-what-feels-like-a-trashing-spiral/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
I think!

I just caught the tweet where JCJ said that she was going to screen shot the thread to put on her website then delete.

But I can't find it on her website - what's it called does anyone know?

I feel very sad about these Twitter wars. They're an inevitable side effect of using the medium as intensely as Kathleen, Julie and Jane do and this has been a long, hard slog for them.

Lockdown also escalating emotions for lots of people.

I love JCJ, so smart, erudite and funny, although it worries me when she exposes vulnerabilities in a public domain (like Julie does, and Stock has recently).

Tempting and easy to do when you're had a run of friendly interactions, but a risky tactic for women already so in the eye of online abuse.

I'm glad that she's taking a break though. It's too much for anyone to be out there like that all the time.

Odd that Stock was all good supporting Harry, who seems pretty right wing, and solid evidence of him being a Tommeh fan being glossed over whilst Posie is demonised

I didn't read that as an epic rant either. I would have liked to wade into the debate but I only just managed to finish reading what she said when she deleted.

From what I gather, a group of women philosophers and their mates had an idea about how this whole thing should play out and got the rage when Posie et al. stepped outside their narrative.

I'm very fond of JCJ and grateful for her extremely clear way of explaining complex issues. But I disagree with making everything a left vs right issue.

I do not see how an idea can change political allegiance depending on who espouses it?

There is a discussion to be had about whether we should be absolutist when saying TWANW or make exceptions for people we like.

I don't think Jane (or the others, for that matter) are saying that the left owns feminism. My reading is that it's important to them to plant their flag in the ground as being on the left, even though they recognise that many on the left have shat on women.

Everyone has to do what they personally are comfortable with.

If Jane and others were trying to stop someone like Posie from doing her campaigning, that would be problematic IMO. But they're not (in fact, Jane says she admires Posie's campaigning skills): they're just saying they personally want to be clear that their personal politics don't align.

I really struggle to understand why that is so problematic.

What's a PhD by proxy?!?

I mean another, specific, and if true aa more seriosus issue , not the current row. She went down in my estimations for that.

I've seen Bindel and Kathleen Stock having a pop at Posie Parker on Twitter but never seen JCJ do that.

It strikes me that the connection between them is more about loyalty to the left than academia. They're entitled to feel that way but the left does not own feminism.

JCJ did however dig up an issue between some women on twitter that had died down. Not cool at all.

IMO the thread needs to be read as a whole. Not just one tweet in isolation.

I see Jane has deactivated her account now but she's put the whole thread on her website.

As I said upthread, I found it helpful as a way of understanding some of the current rifts emerging on social media.

I have found some of the tweets about anonymous Twitter accounts snarky and unpleasant, Sarah Ditum in particular was very rude. But I don't think it's fair to have a go at a load of people by accusing them of being a clique when you don't know what their opinions are on a lot of this stuff - JCJ didn't weigh in on anon accounts at all, for example

For Goodness sake, it really is two steps forward and a giant leap backwards in women's rights, isn't it? In the week that Liz Truss said something positive, the CPS dropped their guidance and other ridiculous aspects of trans ideology got exposed, are feminists really going to hold an internecine war? Are we really going to separate into named and anon, left and right, rich and poor? It is possible to disagree with someone on every possible detail of life and put that aside to work together to achieve our aim: GRA reform is wrong, children need therapy before ever medical intervention becomes the only route and single sex spaces are an essential, not a luxury.
How we keep so many different personalities together is a real issue: perhaps leaving egos at the door and accepting that there are multiple routes to the same ends, some polite and intellectual, others a little more in your face. Get the intellectuals on TV more arguing the finer points of law and let the anon accounts get on with what we do: political pressure, sticker campaigns, pushing on committees in the real world and keeping saying No. Many paths, one united outcome. And less internal struggle.

We're clever

The rest of you are not.
If this were a man he'd be hung out to dry

don't think Julie Bindel has a PhD?

No but she, stock, Jones et all are the inner clique who spend their time in Twitter insulting anon accounts and posie Parker.

She has a PhD per proxy thanks to stock.

You are also worthless as you are not brave enough to use your name, surname, address and academic record in your bio.

I've just read all those. I screenshotted so I could make sense of it at my own pace.

I didn't see it as an epic rant either. Just stating her POV and experiences.

Not exactly any the wiser tbh.

Lisa M mentioned elitism etc and how it can rise; it strikes me everyone is accusing everyone else of elitism

I really don't see how you can call Jane's tweet thread a rant, even if you disagree with what she said. I've always found her tweets and longer writings very interesting and often hilarious, and I enjoyed the Institute of Feminist Thought seminars I did with her last year. JCJ doesn't have an academic career thanks in large part to not toeing the pomo line, and is not in my view anyone's idea of a privileged academic

That wasn't my reading of JCJ's thread either. I'm still not clear what this is really about, except that it clearly goes way beyond Jameela Jamil or anonymous accounts.

I'm sure each and every one of us behaves like a dick sometimes and so, if you spend enough time on Twitter, there's a good chance you'll be a dick there too at some point. And if you then publicly call someone out, no matter how egregious their behaviour, someone 's bound to pop up with that screenshot of you being a dick.

It pains me to say this but it does feel like the only grown ups in town right now are Liz Truss, Baroness Nicholson and the 14 year-old who took on the CPS.

It was a one sided and twisted explanation of how she is bullying women because they are not as smart nor privileged as her and academics and who cannot have an opinion as they don't worship the left.

Jcj, bindel and stock have been insulting, blaming and defaming women for months.

I don't think Julie Bindel has a PhD?