Glinner in Mail on Sunday today

[Lamahaha]

Fabulous article:

Speaking out against transgender extremists has made me the most hated man on the internet, writes Father Ted creator GRAHAM LINEHAN

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7982837/How-hated-man-internet-writes-Graham-Linehan.html

I'm not going to cast someone out of the tent if they don't, or it's going to be a bloody empty tent.

If said tent is for feminists and feminists ask men to leave them to it as it's a female space and sai man refuses, and brings in even more men and casts you and the other women out, is that better than an "empty tent"?

The Hayton article had some pretty unique material for something the public would read, information that's been suppressed. And it led to some more general discussion of AGP. Again though, a lot of the discussion toward the end was from people complaining about the author being discussed here

I dont remember very much discussion about autogynaephilia & the clear implications for women's sex based rights & Safeguarding on the thread Goose. I shall re-read tomorrow though.

thread here:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3812773-Impressive-new-article-by-Debbie-Hayton

If said tent is for feminists and feminists ask men to leave them to it as it's a female space and sai man refuses, and brings in even more men and casts you and the other women out, is that better than an "empty tent"?

The TRA issue is one which has an effect on everyone, it's not only a feminist issue. Everyone needs to know about it.

What's the message though?

At this point in time, facts about what is currently happening to toilets, in prisons and to the word woman.
Highlighting this is one thing all of the groups are doing.
Nobody is getting in anyone else's tent, everyone is just singing the same campfire song.

This is how we lose - grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory.

Jeee Zus. A man gets a GC article in not one, but two mainstream Sunday newspapers - what's more, in 2 newspapers with very different reader profiles. Generates sunlight, questions, discussion, debate.
You please yourselves but I'm going to enjoy the moment.

Some people 'on our side' ARE 'transphobic'. We need to recognise this and the harm it can do, not descend into some bloody stupid civil war.

GL is speaking out. He didn't have to, it's cost him a lot but you want to flagellate him because he doesn't meet some test of ideological purity?

Knock yourselves out. But I would be grateful if you could do it's less publicly so you don't detract from the actual helpful stuff that others are doing - at considerable risk to their own professional reputations, income and mental health.

I saw some people ripping up and stamping on trans flags at the MMM event. Is this what you want for your optics? Is this what we do now? Shall we burn some books next?

Spartacus maybe it'd be more helpful if you addressed your posts specifically to people who'd described GL as the second coming?

For me, I engage with some of the other writers via Twitter, so I don't necessarily then come and discuss a piece here as well unless I have something specific to say/ask. I'm not joining in a discussion with GL or his followers on twitter so will usually pop over here to see a bit of analysis instead. 99% of the time it descends into the same argument.

Janice Turner has been writing feminist articles for the Times for years.
Joani Walsh has been writing for the Mail on exactly this topic for ages.
Julie Bindel has been writing on feminism in the Guardian, Mail, Spectator and more for a bloody long time.
And Linehan is being treated as the second coming for getting published in a couple of newspapers.

Yes. Indeed. And when those journalists do have good articles, we have threads about those articles and we celebrate them and the journalists who wrote them!
As we do with other journalists who get it, like Sarah Ditum, Sanchez Manning and James Kirkup..

Glinner isn’t a journalist though, he’s just the interviewee, and getting two interview pieces on the same topic on same weekend in different papers is relatively rare unless you are very high profile as a person or saying something on a topical hot property issue. So it’s something worth celebrating because he has used his platform for good, covering off good points and having these published twice in one day.

If people want to discuss and analyse topics of interest to feminists, but without actual feminist analysis, that might be better done on other boards to avoid this confusion.
Not seeing much in the way of analysis, more name calling and footstamping. Is the feminist position that we should unite in telling Glinner to shut up and never tweet or write about trans again?
What's the feminist punishment for dickpandering? These are the times I ask myself if I'm really a feminist after all. Specially as it feels not unlike the attitudes that made me leave the Labour Party.

Both this thread and the articles epitomises the problem with Linehan, which is that his position or approach, for whatever reason, puts backs up. There are other people in the public eye, men and women, who I can reliably recommend to those who don’t understand it. They’ll go away, read what Sharon Davies, James Kirkup etc... are saying on these issues and gain some understanding. Whereas when I’ve recommended following Glinner people come back to me saying he’s very confrontational or all the Twitter spats are awkward or that they find his position quite inconsistent or that he’s centering makes or that (on one occasion) he DMed her unapproached and she felt awkward, or (on more than one occasion) she wrote something he misconstrued and called her a troll.
He is so reactionary, and those articles explain why - he thought he was pointing out the obvious and that everyone would flock around him recognising it. (The fact that women (including journalists with profiles and great communication skills) had been doing so for some time and not had any flocking was presumably lost on him...)

Presumably there are some people his approach works with, and hopefully these are a bigger group than those he’s putting off. But personally I see more of the same in those articles, and when I read them my immediate thought was that I couldn’t tell if they’d be more hindrance or help.

And this is a feminism board, for feminism
In my head I just heard "this is a local shop, for local people. We'll have no trouble here".
Sorry. Carry on. I'm going to bed more confused than ever about sides and Twitter and tents.

Night Dave

The TRA issue is one which has an effect on everyone, it's not only a feminist issue. Everyone needs to know about it.

That's not what I asked thou is It? FEMINISM is not, has never been and will never be about a single issue like Tras.

Another fun fact seeing as you seem to be still learning. FEMINISM never centers men, feminists don't want, nor need, men speaking over them about issues we've been shouting from the rooftops for years.

The very fact that you're (general you're)saying "but people listen to Graham" is the fucking patriarchy in full swing.

The voices of men are amplified and listened to more than those of women. Men tend to be oblivious to this or deny it.

I see the same dynamic play out within feminism as between white middle class women and other women. And the women who benefit from that dynamic, are also oblivious or deny it.

I get the angst but I think the answer (to those bothered) is to go and boost the female voices while ignoring the male voices.
If other women want to listen to or discuss the male voices .. isn’t that their lookout?

I usually save this type of comment for closed feminist spaces.

But FWIW (and while I believe Graham’s heart is in the right place) I occasionally do wince at things he says... which may alienate potential allies, while giving ammunition to the other side.

The very fact that you're (general you're)saying "but people listen to Graham" is the fucking patriarchy in full swing.

It is, but unfortunately at present that state of the world is such, that everyone needs to speak out.

You don't have to follow what glimmer is up to, no one does.

Other people have other ideas about what is okay, and that's why free speech is brilliant.

I'm happy with anyone who speaks out, I'm allied with no one, I trust no-one.

I have to be honest I don't get all the discussion around tents and what not, it seem ridiculous to want to restrict people discussing topics in my eyes.

I understand that some people want a more exclusive tent. And it must be irritating for founding members that the FWR tent has become less exclusive.

But don’t private / closed feminist groups give you exclusive spaces?

R0wantrees

I've been reading and re reading the judgement you linked about the trans prisoner.

Dr Barrett stated in his second report:

it will become clear that she is so widely accepted as female in that unit that location in the main prison will follow. I think that such acceptance will pretty generally apply in the main prison, also, although there will probably always be a small number of prisoners who will choose to make an issue of the matter because they are the sort of women who enjoy conflict. If this patient is able to cope with protracted close proximity women of that sort I would judge her able to cope with the less prolonged, more avoidable, travails of the civilian world."

I'm shocked by this.
It's so obvious women are just a prop to validate this person's identity. Women who don't agree enjoy conflict, as if that's the only reason why a woman wouldn't want this person imprisoned with them.

There is so much to discuss in this judgement.

while she was detained in the male prison estate, the Gender Identity Clinic treating her will not approve her gender reassignment surgery until she has spent a period living "in role" as a woman within a female prison

Why couldn't they do it while he was in the male estate?
He was "living as a woman" in the male estate anyway.Why must he have to live with women, to be living "in role" as a woman?
The disregard for women is astonishing.

if glinner is such a supporter of women fighting the trans cult, where was his support for Kate scottow on Thursday

I read a Tweet of his yesterday (and I rarely go on Twitter) in which he said she has asked him not to support her publicly as this could harm her case. I'll try and find that Tweet later today.

Seriously, this is actually a public board and there are no rules that say that it is a male free zone. And since no one person gets to be the controller of what everyone else can do, they also don't get to tell the other people, mostly women, who post here what they can do.

Frankly this has always been a major failing of feminism, that supposedly it is all about listening to women's voices - right up until they say something that someone doesn't like. Then it still claims the right to speak for them and represent their interests, while it quietly (or not so quietly) tells them to shut up.

I occasionally do wince at things he says... which may alienate potential allies, while giving ammunition to the other side.

Sure, but he's certainly not unique in that.