In light of the whole arts world supporting Macklemore over his censorship, who in the music industry supported Róisín Murphy?

Not necessarily, but it's arguable accurate unlike your lazy assertion and misrepresentation. You'd already successfully misled another poster, see the post immediately below yours, the one with 'disingenuous' in it.

Yea. Macklemore has both performed in Saudi Arabia and helped with Saudi’s attempts at sportswashing by performing at a LIV Golf event. His commitment to human rights is as selective as anyone else’s.

I can see you’re not willing to engage with any of the complexity of the conversation (e.g. what it means for Ed S to work with artists he knows full well are political when it benefits him and his tour, but then stepping back and claiming he isn’t political after all once it gets hard etc).

Thats up to you of course, but it’s a shame - there’s interesting conversations going on out there if you were willing to think any more deeply about what’s actually happened than just saying ‘but I don’t think Ed Sheeran concerts should be political’ over and over again.

ES's records have been pulled from the radio stations in Ireland, radio is part of the 'creative industry', yes. I love to know the complex reason for that is, has it been discovered that his world tour has been a front for drug smuggling and human trafficking and he knew about it, has a mass grave of babies been found in his back garden, did we just discover if you play his songs backwards they're chants for devil worship, because he's been a Satan worshipper all along?

What complex reason does the preformative arts have for its treatment of ES, if not the obvious one, which is, they're a bunch of ugly, performing seals, who are bullying and harassing someone who they don't approve of, because he didn't take the 'right' stand on something he has no interest in. Something everyone else in the 'arts' has decided is something that is the only, most, important thing ever in the whole wide world, in all of history forever and ever.

He made a bad choice when he picked the dickhead to share his tour with, maybe it wasn't his choice, maybe it was the people who are making money out of ES, the one's who's career depends entirely on the talent of others, that made the choice.

Who knows! who cares! the treatment that ED has been subjected to is wrong, it's not complex, it's not nuanced, just plan wrong.

Sorry, I’m not really sure who the ‘omnicausers’ are? Genuine question!

Just come back from Synagogue- in thr sermon the Rabbi talked about how now you have to be aligned to one side or the other and even referenced Ed in a roundabout way. His point was, those on ‘one side’ should look at the other and widen their worldview.

The Omnicause is pro-Palestine, anti-Israel, TWAW, net zero, borders are bad, that kind of thing. People who can't see it are usually fully committed members of it.

People in the arts, media etc are getting bullied if they deviate from this set ideology, which is really bad and really boring.

This is…. Unhinged.

Humans often hold contradictory views, but it's rarely as obviously stated as 'Queers for Palestine'.

Is it? What has Ed Sheeran done that’s so bad?

The Omnicause is where all the world's problems, real but mostly imagined, has been rolled into one big cause.
The Omnicausians are people who are convinced they can solve all the worlds problems, real but mostly imagined, because they are of The One True Calling, and they have The One True Flag and The One True Chant to prove it.

I’m not saying supporting Ed Sheeran is unhinged (although I do think he’s been hypocritical and his difficulty now is partly of his own making - I.e. he has been choosing to work with politically vocal artists on his tour and to gain a kind of of credibility through that, and then he stepped back once the financial stakes got too high).

I’m saying this sudden tirade about an Omni-cause is a mad conspiracy theory.

But, you asked what Omnicause meant. So someone explained it to you.

Not really clear how 'answering your question' is counting as a 'sudden tirade'.

And do you think it also works the other way round? I.e. Are you aligning gender critical feminism with anti immigration and ‘climate change’ isn’t real viewpoints??

because I didn’t think you’d persuade me to stand up for gender critical views, but there are many regular gender critical posters on here who would be horrified by that, and spend a great deal of time explaining why they don’t believe their views are aligned with the far right etc 😮

I just wasn’t expecting the answer to be so mad. I was suprised by it.

do YOU think the ‘omnicause’ thing is reasonable? 😮

'gender critical' views describe the views held by the vast majority of people. That humans are one of two sexes, and that it's not possible to change sex.

This covers people from all political stripes and all walks of life.

What is with all the emojis?

I think the reaction aimed at Ed is more unhinged by a long chalk. The guy is benign and barely did anything, look at the backlash.

Oh I’ve heard how racists use the term ‘two tier policing’.

I promise you that the police are not more lenient towards black, Asian or ethnically diverse people than white people; they are not more lenient towards progressive causes than eg racist ones. It’s a racist myth.

Honestly I’m shocked to see this. I think those of us who challenge gender critical feminists have long suspected that sort of belief is often connected to other bigoted ways of thinking (eg racism) but I don’t think I’ve seen anyone just say it so loudly on these thread before 😮

Do you really? You’re really more upset by that than aligning yourself with racists bringing up two ‘tier policing’ etc?