Arguing with a lawyer is exhausting for this reason
I find it sport tbh. Lots of fun.
They aren't used to people who aren't lawyers arguing on their level.
You'll notice how he speaks differently to certain women with status (or a legal background). They are the only ones he respects in anyway.
A couple of observations:
Jo Maugham @jolyonmaugham
A friend asks why I speak on the rare conflicts between trans and natal women's rights: twitter is not a space for nuance, she says, and you persuade no-one.
But when we abandon a space to absolutists we allow stances to harden, and progress and resolution become tougher still.
Andrew Howard @ amhoward01
This is not a subject I touch very often on twitter but I really struggle to see thoughtful voices like @HJJoyceEcon as “absolutists”.
You can absolutely support the rights of women who just happened to be born as males and also recognise that contact sports create challenges
Jo Maugham @jolyonmaugham
You'll have to show me where I described Helen as an absolutist. And I entirely agree with your second sentence.
Blanket statement. Challenge from man. Backs away from original statement as its about woman who is respected.
Noting here she's head of economist finance (his field no less) and is particularly sharp on Hannah Arendt and opposition to totalitarianist behaviour - Maugham is desperate to be seen as willing to debate and encourage debate for his own liberal ID - whilst he deliberately shuts it down at the same time.
On Hadley Freeman:
Jo Maugham @jolyonmaugham
No, I blocked her because she said I was, in effect, a bigot and was then persistently rude.
What Hadley said
Hadley Freeman @ hadleyfreeman
Is it respectful to describe women who are concerned - with good reason! - for female athletes’ safety as “absolutists”? Is acknowledging the obvious fact that male bodies are bigger, stronger and faster than female ones an “absolutist” position?
Talked about what female sportswomen were saying
And then in response to Helen Joyce saying
My theories on this. (1) didn’t read past headline, didn’t think. (2) deep unquestioned assumption that women are supporting actresses in male lives, nothing more. (3) unlikely - but misfiring joke? Thoughts?
Hadley said
I think (b) is a really underestimated factor, here and in general
And
Jo. I’ve always got on with you and for your own sake I beg of you to delete this tweet. Because I didn’t call you a bigot or misogynist, but talking to women as if they’re grumpy toddlers who’ve let you down but also themselves down comes across as a little bit, well.
The only vaguely controversial thing she did was call transwomen in women's sport 'lazy arsed freeloaders'
Interestingly enough Helen Joyce pretty much agree with Hadley on everything else.
And Debbie Hayton got special treatment and niceness.
Then Maugham said this, which is pretty revealling:
Jo Maugham @jolyonmaugham
I think that's the lesson you are supposed to learn. The slurs, the wilful ignoring of the very real body of work I have done to seek to protect women from violence, the deliberate misrepresentation of my language, the complaints to my family members and professional...
... colleagues, the terrible bad faith shown in argument; this does not persuade, it simply clears the ground of dissent.
And then what? Have they won an argument or persuaded anyone? Or just caused people to leave the space well alone?
Helen Joyce @ HJJoyceEcon
Judging from the many men who have now started to speak out and say that males in women's rugby is crazy - and the enormous number of people who responded to you with well-reasoned, politely expressed rebuttals of your position - yes, we have persuaded a lot of people actually
Maugham hated having any question over his professional ability or social status. That was beyond the pale.
Yet as a man who said women must prove that transwomen in sport is dangerous (after letting them in first) rather than its for the trans community to prove its safe for them to participate and doesn't seem to value all the professional sportswomen saying there's a problem - AND all the former professional men from rugby who said it was a problem. Nor does he acknowledge all the academic women who do research relating to conflicts between women and trans women and the professional abuse and attempts to have them no platformed or out of a job...
It tells you all you need to know about society and who he thinks are important and has status and who he looks down on.
It's utterly fascinating to look through and observe.
Helen has backed Hadley to the hilt and has continued to push the button on Maugham. Even more so after he blocked her.
It looks like Helen Joyce still hasn't been blocked. I guess he needs to read her columns and stuff from the economist but Hadley is dispensable to him.
I'll repeat that in case you miss the point.
Hadley is dispensable to Maugham whereas as Joyce isn't because she holds value and status which Maugham needs and respects.
It's fascinating and I hope someone here is in a position to point this out to either Hadley or Joyce.