Guilty Feminist on Triggernometry

Wow! Fascinating! What an odd woman. Such scatty arguments. No intellectual rigour.

KK on asskicking form.

Terrible faut therapy bit at the end from crazy eyes - she ran out of tactics and ran to get box of feelings. Weak.

She didn't give the impression of wanting a conversation, though, she just wanted a chance to browbeat someone with her 'ideas' and have them say "yes, yes, of course, silly me!'

She was impervious to what KK was trying to explain to her, about how to approach the average Trig listener.

And when she said, 'I studied indigenous societies' it took me at moment to work out that she meant, I read a couple of books and articles. Not that she went up the rivers to the longhouses in the deep jungle....

'I know Sall Grover wrote in a while back but was told they didn't accept gender-critical feminists on the podcast'

Oh dear, not very feminist of DFW, is it? Quelle surprise. Also SHOCKED that she couldn't even be arsed to reply to Julie Bindel, who has done more for women than DFW could ever dream of. Pathetic stuff

Words! A book full of WORDS! Look at all these pages with WORDS on them!

Do you know how much EFFORT went into this? Words don't come easy to me!

I'M IN A BOOK, MOTHERFUCKER, IN A BOOK
TAKE A GOOD HARD LOOK AT THE MOTHERFUCKING BOOK

Yes, you're right

https://x.com/bindelj/status/1922312692817174531?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

I'd like this too, but am I right in thinking that Helen (or possibly Julie Bindel or other high-profile gc person) has written to her asking to appear on the podcast and not had a reply? I know Sall Grover wrote in a while back but was told they didn't accept gender-critical feminists on the podcast. Which does suggest that she is not very keen on difficult conversations, probably because she knows that people like Sall, Julie and Helen would absolutely wipe the floor with her.

Id like to see her face off against Helen Joyce. Helen wouldn't act like a pissed off wasp the way KK did. She would just destroy her inane points one by one, with patience and humour.

I would sóooo love to see her try the psycho analysis voo Doo mind trick on Helen.

She gives feminists a bad name

I don't get it rhouygh,. She's written a book on how to have difficult conversations, and then proceeds to have the most poorly executed conversation I've seen in a long while

My DS had an idea at breakfast the other day - if his mattress was a giant waffle then he could nibble on it when he gets hungry during the night

Perhaps he should write a book

fucking hell I'm still listening. Do I win a medal or anything? I at least need a sticker, like the ones you get at the dentist. One with a dinosaur on, to make the pain a little less.

Remember the description is - some ideas in a book of ideas

Not some good ideas, or thought provoking ideas, or profound ideas ...
... just a load of ideas ... in a book

I'm listening and my m ind is blown. How do such stupid people manage to get book deals?! like Who on earth thought that her ideas should be printed?

I started this the other day and got totally pissed off with her in short order. Being over-emotional (and illogical and rambling and ranty) isn't the same as showing 'passion'. Saying 'I studied indigenous cultures' isn't the same as actually studying them up close and personal. Going for the 'noble savages know more than we do and are better than us' is wildly patronising, and cherry-picking their cultures for what you want is misrepresentative and, um, a bit colonialist.

But now I have to go and listen to the rest, because it clearly became an even more wild ride towards the end.

'These are just words in a world full of words'

'This is some ideas in a book of ideas'

What?

'Theses are just words that that are tumbling out of my mouth'

Also, I managed 10 minutes and 55 seconds - is this a record?

She keeps starting to explain a point, gets half way through, then talking about it from a different angle or introducing a new anecdote, then goes back to explaining. She is all over the place.

Kudos to Francis, he sits there listening for two hours and then is devastatingly succinct in response to a fairly offensive line of questioning.

It's weird that James Marriott didn't mention Francis Foster, who landed one of the most memorable points of the conversation. FF is often good at bringing the conversation back down to earth, a foil to KK.

I think the people like me who managed more than 15 minutes are basically rubber-necking a car-crash, and/or marvelling at just how insane people can come across and just how bad their critical thinking can be. Worth watching to the end (in some ways) but on the other hand if you want to only watch the worthwhile arguments you've already watched 15 mins too much.

I tried, I really did, but I only managed about 15 minutes. DFW is tedious, patronising and rude. These are all excusable faults if she had even the semblance of a sensible argument to make. But it was all such bloody nonsense.
I can't remember the last time I listened to her podcast (although it was probably about the time when Sofie Hagen left), so I'm not sure if she talks to everyone like they are slightly wayward toddlers, or that's an attitude she brought out just to flog her book (you might have missed that bit, did you notice that she has written a book?).

The most obvious point to make to someone who calls themselves a feminist is: feminism is about advocating for women's rights, and if you don't think there is such a thing as women, and that sex exists on a spectrum, how can there be such a thing as women's rights? It's completely meaningless.

I watched yesterday. Although she was infuriating, from what I’ve seen of KK in the past I think he could have handled things more productively.

She’s utterly ridiculous, with her ‘new’ ideas & ill thought out arguments. If KK could have parked his obvious dislike of her (understandable) it would have been a far better conversation. I think he could have cleverly dissected the nonsense coming out of her mouth. One of the few things she said that I agreed with was how he was treating her at points throughout the interview.

The part at the end where she was trying to psychoanalyse them was excruciating 🤦‍♀️

Ah well, I appear to have an allergy to 'nurturing and supportive'. Maybe especially when it seems performative.

'Recent interview with Davina Mccall was even less watchable'

I listened to that podcast episode and actually didn't mind it - it's a very nurturing, supportive kind of podcast so she wasn't being challenged on anything and we were spared her tortured attempts to explain trans ideology via clowns driving buses etc. She has been through some really traumatic stuff with her JW experience and I found that interesting and very sad