Linehan tweeting misogyny and racism now

First of all, are they? What is the evidence?
Why are you asking for evidence in a hypothetical scenario? This is just debating the premise of the question, not engaging with it substantively.

Secondly, if that's true, where is the campaign to tackle this terrible behaviour from men?
As above - that's my point! It's important to tackle violence by men against transpeople, but whenever I bring it up, you reply telling me that transpeople are the real violent ones and we go around in a circle.

Thirdly, if third spaces and needed, go for it. Most GC types have been advocating this for years (and been called bigots as a result)
But do not make male on male violence women's problem to solve. Do not attempt to shame and bully women who rightfully refuse to give up their rights to ameliorate the effects of male behaviour
Simply having a discussion about something isn't 'making it women's problem to solve'. Do you see posts on here about Trump and reply 'Well, what do you want me to do about it?'? It's possible to have a discussion about something without acting like the entire weight of the world is on your shoulders.

Yes, but my point is the refusal of many GC people to even acknowledge the issues that transpeople face.

When JKR wrote that first essay, she made mention of the fact that she would march with transpeople if they were discriminated against; in the last two years, has she done that even once? Has she made any comment about violence against transpeople? I agree she's not obligated to, but not doing so is certainly inconsistent with what she previously wrote.

I'm proud that none of that violence has any connection with GC people; I'm firmly against self-ID and support single-sex spaces, but I'm not going to pretend there isn't any nuance to the matter; for instance, if a transwoman has fully medically transitioned, she is going to be at risk in the men's toilets. Does that mean there should be a third space? How would that be implemented? Or is there a level of medical transition that should entitle a transwoman to use women's toilets?

First of all, are they? What is the evidence?
Why are you asking for evidence in a hypothetical scenario? This is just debating the premise of the question, not engaging with it substantively.

Secondly, if that's true, where is the campaign to tackle this terrible behaviour from men?
As above - that's my point! It's important to tackle violence by men against transpeople, but whenever I bring it up, you reply telling me that transpeople are the real violent ones and we go around in a circle.

Thirdly, if third spaces and needed, go for it. Most GC types have been advocating this for years (and been called bigots as a result)
But do not make male on male violence women's problem to solve. Do not attempt to shame and bully women who rightfully refuse to give up their rights to ameliorate the effects of male behaviour
Simply having a discussion about something isn't 'making it women's problem to solve'. Do you see posts on here about Trump and reply 'Well, what do you want me to do about it?'? It's possible to have a discussion about something without acting like the entire weight of the world is on your shoulders.

“This kind of thing is observable across multiple TRA demonstrations.”

indeed. There really is no comparison when you look at how extreme trans activists behave at any protest to shut down any discussion.

The claims of ‘both sides’ are never symmetrical. Having been to numerous events now where masked male people are literally screaming at us, and the vile signage, I don’t believe anyone who attempts the ‘both sides’ arguments. For a fucking start, when have feminists protested and tried to shut down any transgender event?

I have never once seen a feminist call for a trans person to die, I don’t recall ever seeing anyone call for one to be attacked.

An insightful comment from Alex Massey this weekend, in an article that summarises recent events. The article is primarily in response to Claire Methven O’Brien‘s coming court case.

https://www.thetimes.com/article/bcf537da-8153-41be-8c3b-94cc284de538?shareToken=91a445d484b9a342ec0c9f3bdce5f9b2

“A terrible amount of time and energy has been wasted attempting to note that “both sides” are to blame for this horribly “toxic” debate. Focusing on this has always been the hallmark of pusillanimous commentary and political leadership. For in reality the two sides are very different. One promulgates a revolutionary reinterpretation of material reality; the other, more prosaically, suggests that public bodies and other interested parties should follow the law. Anyone drawing a false equivalence between these positions is peddling a counterfeit version of history.”

A great reminder of the lack of symmetry of the ‘both sides’ accusations.

Yes! It would be great to find a solution, and I'd love to talk about it. Unfortunately, any time I do try to talk about it, someone follows it up with a post saying that it's not they're responsibility, and I shouldn't even be asking.

I'm not saying that anyone has to find a solution, but I think everyone can agree it'd be nice if they did

Yes! It would be great to find a solution, and I'd love to talk about it. Unfortunately, any time I do try to talk about it, someone follows it up with a post saying that it's not they're responsibility, and I shouldn't even be asking.

I'm not saying that anyone has to find a solution, but I think everyone can agree it'd be nice if they did

yes, try Reddit for eg.

But it's still a minority, and acting as if they are fully representative of an entire group is reductive and helps nobody.

But it's still a minority, and acting as if they are fully representative of an entire group is reductive and helps nobody.

Again, I want to speak gently because I'm in the same position as you, and have seen the same thing, and I do find it genuinely enraging. I think the way that GCs are treated is disgusting, and agree wholeheartedly with you that the treatment of Rowling is particularly unpleasant.

However (and this is why I really want to be clear that I'm speaking gently and just want to have a calm conversation about this), I have seen the same response from GCs towards reasonable transpeople. For instance, in the example of the medically-transitioned transwoman in the men's toilets; the responses immediately on this very thread have skirted around the central point and haven't offered an actual solution. The only two options seem to be A. The transwoman should just go in the Men's where he'll be in danger, or B. The transwoman just shouldn't exist.

@murasaki
"I don't see why you think it's women's job to facilitate these men. It's men's, or theirs to argue for other spaces, which it would seem they don't want as there's no validation in that."

I fully agree with you! But that's not something that's going to happen overnight, and I think an actual discussion on the subject should be wide-ranging enough to discuss its nuances. I certainly don't think it's a woman's responsibility to stop men from being misogynists, but we don't live in an ideal world where men will just magically decide not to be misogynists. And denying that transwomen do face some dangers is the first step to addressing those nuances.

I still watch clips of The IT crowd, when I need cheering up. 'The Work Outing" episode is highly amusing. "Black Books" is also a wonderful series.

There are millions, probably billions of humans facing all sorts of horrible, unfair, shitty situations right now. Why is it just the plight of transwomen wanting to pee that you feel women should be taking a special interest in?

This is geninely not a gotcha or a snark.

I am asking the question trying to get you to see that the problems of transwomen have been framed as women's problems when actually they are no more women's problems than anybody else's.

Transwomen's appropriation of the word woman created the impression of an actual connection between us but that is a false impression. Outside their own heads, (and even inside their heads there is no certainty that what is in those heads is even the same between two transwomen), transwomen are no more like women than any other man is.

It's literally just a manipulation of language that is being weaponised to make it look like women have some extra culpability or responsibility for transwomen vs other men, to try to guilt trip women into feeling we are obliged to find an answer to "what will TW do then?" before we are allowed to say no.

I think people who have been in an abusive relationship may recognise that dynamic - "I'm sorry this hurts you, but until you give me a better option what can I do?"

But it's still a minority, and acting as if they are fully representative of an entire group is reductive and helps nobody.

I'm saying this genuinely, and I really don't want it to be taken in bad faith, but... The majority of TRAs do speak against this, and aren't this extreme. But, since GC people aren't likely to visit TRA spaces, when are they going to see that?

Social media has atomised arguments such that the reasonable voices on either side aren't the ones that are going to be promoted. A lot of GC people on this site only get their information from here, and perhaps from Twitter.

Put it this way - and to illustrate that I'm not exempt from this problem - if I see a tweet from an extreme TRA issuing a death threat, I'm far more likely to share that than five other TRAs condemning that tweet.

I'm not claiming to have any solutions, but I think it's important to acknowledge a certain level of bias, whether deliberate or not.

Yes! It would be great to find a solution, and I'd love to talk about it. Unfortunately, any time I do try to talk about it, someone follows it up with a post saying that it's not they're responsibility, and I shouldn't even be asking.

I'm not saying that anyone has to find a solution, but I think everyone can agree it'd be nice if they did

I'm going to leave this thread because it's not doing anyone any good, but I just want to say one final thing.

This is a discussion thread, and so many people have the knee-jerk reaction to reply with 'Well, it's not my responsibility to have this discussion'.

Yeah, no shit. It's not your 'responsibility' to let old people cross the road. It's not your 'responsibility' to recycle. It's not your 'responsibility' to consider people's feelings when you talk to them.

But... If that's the case, just don't engage. If you don't want to acknowledge a problem then fine, but don't just pretend the problem doesn't exist. And, if someone wants to talk about the problem, don't act like they're trying to somehow shame you into doing the right thing.

I'm sick to the back teeth of an atomised social media landscape where every argument has to be taken to the extreme, and I think you all are too. But treating the most extreme voices of your opponents as if they are the norm is exactly what's escalating discussions like these until people who agree with each-other on 99% of a subject are frothing with rage over the 1% they don't.

I don't think it's unreasonable to point out that there are bad actors who are willing to use GC people's genuine concerns as a wedge issue to push them to more extreme views, in exactly the same way that some TRAs are radicalised to the point of posting disgusting threats online. There is absolutely a comparison to be made with Linehan's extreme social media addiction leading him to the point where he's openly cheering the extrajudicial killing of an innocent woman simply because she's on a different 'side' to him, and just sticking your fingers in your ears won't change that.

Nobody thinks they're being radicalised in the same way that no-one thinks that they're susceptible to propaganda. But the refusal to even discuss violence against transpeople just because 'it's not your responsibility' is just an abdication of basic empathy, and reduces actual lives down to a dehumanised monolith.

Argue the rest of this amongst yourselves, since apparently it's not my responsibility to make you see the bigger picture or become more caring people.