Freedom is the freedom to say two plus two equals four

[BovaryX]

Reading some threads, including the recent one about M&S, is reminiscent of the quote from 1984. There seems to be a concerted effort to silence any dissenting voices who refuse to submit to the demand that previously sex segregated spaces are open to anyone who self identifies as a woman. What’s most peculiar about this is companies whose customer base is predominantly female capitulate to these demands without considering how many existing customers they might alienate. What motivates that? It’s interesting that much of the battle is over language and an Orwellian attempt to redefine the meaning of commonly understood words. Does anyone know why this is happening? It’s so bizarre.

What motivates that?

Cowardice.

Does anyone know why this is happening?

Totalitarianism is back in fashion. Why that may be is open to debate but I suspect the rise of social media has played a non minor role.

Arnold, I think you are right on both counts. The totalitarian thing is quite extraordinary to behold. It is accompanied by a fanatical conviction of moral righteousness and the dismissal of any other viewpoint in terms which quickly degenerate into Godwin territory. It really is very bizarre and the desire to stifle any alternative viewpoint is quite chilling. The obsession with semantics is straight from Newspeak. Much of is beyond parody.

AIBU thread on this issue

To think that calling transwomen Male terms is against guidelines?
http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/amiibeingunreasonable/3731886-To-think-that-calling-transwomen-Male-terms-is-against-guidelines

I think it's a lot to do with the desperate desire to be seen as woke, cool and non-bigoted, by both individuals and companies. Social media fuels that as that is where it's easiest to virtue-signal, both by making and supporting "woke" policies, and by slapping down and heaping outrage on anyone who dares to dissent.

With the trans issue IMO the problem is that trans (the T) has been allied with LGB since long before trans became a huge bandwagon. For decades no one was that bothered as it very rarely affected any given individual. But the fact is that trans identity is a totally different things from LGB - LGB are about your sexual preference, which does not demand anything of anyone else's space and does not involve redefining anything.

Trans is not that, it's about wanting to be something you are not and cannot be. In order to Not Be A Bigot, the totally reasonable concept of respecting gay and bi people and them having fair treatment and equal rights, has somehow become allied with the idea of respecting and accommodating the false statement that a man is a woman (and vice versa, or that you're not either if you say so) and caving to any demand related to that.

Anyone questioning that can be slapped down as "phobic" "bigot" etc because "LGBT", they're all lumped in together so having worries about trans issues is as bad as beating up a gay man in a back alley. And trans activists totally do use that, they say that anyone gender-critical is no different form an old-school bigot who hates gays and will be left behind in history like they were.

This is why it makes total sense to me that some LGB people should want to form their own group.

"If you demoralize people with little lies, you can make them HAVE TO agree to huge lies"

Douglas Murray talking about his book The Madness of Crowds

Ghoulie, I think you have made some very interesting points. I watched an interview with Douglas Murray who has similar insights and talked about the reactionary, stereotypical view of gender which seems to dominate this debate. It all seems like such a regressive step from the progress made during the last twenty years. Douglas Murray is quite scathing about intersectionality and accurately points out that T rights are inevitably in conflict with women’s rights and LG rights. Bizarre times.

The obsession with semantics is straight from Newspeak.

I think this predates social media, which has just ramped it up. Even back into the 60's people began with this idea that they needed to change language that wasn't itself pejorative, because it had been used during a time when attitudes were not good. So for example there was a period where the "right" word for African Americans flipped between black, negro, coloured, and than of course African American.

There was a sense that somehow just moving to untainted language would help fight racism and that this kind of wrangling over language was really accomplishing something - which perhaps might have seemed plausible then but looking back I'm not sure how anyone could really think that now. And yet just recently I had a conversation with some people insisting that the use of any of those older terms was a sign of at least latent racism, notwithstanding that some older people continue to use some of them to self-describe - because of course we told tell those people what to say, but the rest of us should do better if we know better. It doesn't seem to occurs to ask who decided there was a problem, why we privilege those views, and it doesn't seem to occur that there might be a difference between archaic or old-fashioned language use and racist language, or that the former is different than a racial slur.

Oops, that should read "of course we don't tell those people what to say"

Yes I think a vast misunderstanding about what gender is, is also at the heart of it all. Not surprising when the word "gender" is now constantly used to mean sex, on forms, clothes shop websites, everywhere. If people think gender is sex, no wonder it's so hard for so many people to see how importantly and hugely different they are, and that adopting a load of stereotyped "feminine" look and accoutrements does not change your sex and in fact just reinforces sexism via the exploitations of the concept of "gender" which we should just be binning.

Because unless you are well-versed in the feminist concept of GC and have thought about that deliberately, you are unlikely to have consciously considered it. I meet plenty of women who are left-wing, would call themselves a feminist and are opposed to sexism in principle, who are shocked and confused if I mention any dissent about the trans issue. One told me at length how she had met this terrible woman who did not support TWAW. When I admitted I felt that way too, and explained briefly my reasons (eg I don't want an adult male penis in my swimming changing room) she just looked totally baffled.

@GhoulieBat’s post got me thinking if the ramping up of the T as part of LGB could be the cause of recent homophobic sentiments?
I read a study (not in English, from my home country) that acceptance of LGBT has dropped by over 10% since the 90s.

she just looked totally baffled
Ghoulie, I think this is because of a failure to engage in any critical thinking. Instead, as you outline, people adopt a set of cliched political views which worn like a uniform and reinforced because anyone who dares challenge them or voice any dissent is immediately demonized. Diversity of opinion is regarded as heretical. It’s a dire state of affairs and unfortunately it seems to dominate higher education, politics and increasingly corporations.

Goosefoot,
You make an interesting analogy with the US. As you cite, the semantic struggles to deal with its racial history are ongoing. However, I think what is happening with the T issue is something qualitatively different. It is an attempt to redefine the meaning of ‘women’ in such a way that it does not exclude people with male genitalia. Hence the 1984 reference. It is an attempt to force people to say two plus two equals five.

Goosefoot, I agree about language being used that way. I found it fascinating that suddenly "people of colour" came back in and was what we were all supposed to use, without much warning. Benedict Cumberbatch came a cropper because he accidentally said "coloured" instead of "of colour" and got roasted alive, but it could just as easily have been the other way round - it changes. There was a time when you couldn't say black, then it had to be ethnic minority, or BAME, now POC/WOC, etc etc.

If you unpack ethnic minority, that in itself is an odd choice because white people are not the majority in the world, so it actually kind of asserts white control in the sphere you are in. People of colour also feels really odd and artificial to me as we all have a colour and it's hard to say where you you start to count as "of colour".

But mostly people don't care what language is really doing to how we think, they care more about getting it right and not being a bigot and making sure they call out anyone who gets it wrong, even though last week it was a different rule.

The moral panic about whether you are say he or she or they is similar - the reality of how meaning works and WHAT it means is a side issue, signalling that you are woke is the priority.

This reminds me of that Star Trek episode where Picard was being tortured into saying there were 5 lights when there were only 4. Inspired by Orwell I assume.

On the racial stuff... Whenever racial issues and vocabularies are discussed online, it's always the US view of race that takes centre stage. Which overshadows the very real but different issues that the UK and other countries have.

If you unpack ethnic minority, that in itself is an odd choice

I prefer the phrase ethnic minority as it applies equally to any group in any country who are from a minority culture, whether black in a predominantly white country, white in a predominantly Asian country, a minority black group in a predominantly black country or anything else.

Ethnicity is not just about skin colour, no matter how many ill informed wokesters insist it is.

You’re right sorry, I don’t claim ethnicity is just about race, it just often is among other things. And yes it does mean a minority within a nation, town or whatever, that’s how it’s used.

(Or skin colour.)

I don’t claim ethnicity is just about race

I didn't intend to imply you did and apologise if you read it that way.

It worries me that some people continually try to apply an American framework of race issues to other parts of the world. It may be useful in other New World contexts but isn't a great fit for the Old World in my view, at best accounting only for a limited portion of issues.

What motivates that? It’s interesting that much of the battle is over language and an Orwellian attempt to redefine the meaning of commonly understood words. Does anyone know why this is happening?

Power to control.

I agree with the social media influence, virtue signalling and people tripping over one another to see who's the most woke.

Part if it might be worry of being labelled a bigot for not going along with the rhetoric.

The people who shop at M&S/buy Flora/etc are by and large a very different demographic to the people working the social media channels and applying for the wokey-cokey "inclusion" jobs.

To the latter, the former don't really appear visible in their worldview, so they don't see any need to cater for.

Yes to the social media aspect. It's like a pandemic, social contagion.

I often wonder about younger people and their sense of self, comfort in their own skin. Yes I was bullied at school, was pawed at by men, leered at, raped as a young woman but I NEVER had to triple check my thinking. I was always me and didn't have to be forever wndoering about anonymous likes, being in favour, getting validation from anyone other than those peole I was in physical social contact with. Given my issues with the ILs, PoisonousSIL etc, that was bad enough.

Imagine having a whole world at your finger tips and having to mind and manage how it perceives you, even when it doesn't know you. You apparently MUST engage, be out thre, have an online presence, and then youhave to acualy mind what strangers say. And many people find it perfectly acceptable to say a lot. No filter, not a care for the real person on the other side of that avatar! Just vomit up your bile and move on!

Fake news, biology as bigotry and all sorts of utterly shire, unimaginable e-realities to live with. Makes me very glad to be in my 50s and happy to say Fuck That! I wouldn't be in my teens now, even if it meant an extra 100 years of happy, healthy living!