"We must not fetishise debate"

[RoyalCorgi]

A line from an article by Nadia Whittome, MP. She was so pleased with it that she also tweeted it.

t.co/cr8b8QfOn0?amp=1

When did our MPs become this stupid?

Labour then.

My favourite replies to her. We all know why TRAs don't want a debate.

And up pops Natacha Kennedy to tag in Terfblocker

Does she even realise what she sounds like?

No other civil rights campaign has ever the slogan 'no debate'. I remember growing up at a time when gay people were ridiculed and abused, even people.suspected of being gay, the chance to actually debate the issues, get the abusers to state exactly why they thought they were superior would have been welcomed in open arms. The chance to explain that personal sexuality was not threat to anyone else would have been infinitely preferable to dear ears and mindless taunts. I am sure countless other groups would thought the same. Changing the world can never be down be saying magic wand and making oppression go away, it cannot be achieved by changing one mind at a time and the only way to do that is through free and open debate.

zanahoria: you are absolutely right about this. Did Martin Luther King ever say "No debate"? Did Gloria Steinem say "No debate"? Did Nelson Mandela say "No debate"? They were all of them willing to argue their case passionately and publicly.

The reason why TRAs say "no debate" is because they know they would lose any debate, since their argument is a series of unevidenced assertions based on a false premise.

Changing the world can never be down be saying magic wand and making oppression go away, it cannot be achieved by changing one mind at a time and the only way to do that is through free and open debate.

Apart from anything else #nodebate works both ways, and if Nadia Whittome removed herself from twitter she might notice that we currently have a Conservative government and the only way for her to express her views on this issue as part of the democratic process is through debate.

@SquishySquirmy

I have no problem with daft statements like "women are less intelligent than men" being "up for debate". Because there are plenty of arguments and evidence that show women are as intelligent as men. When people argue for "no debate" it us usually because they are not able to defend their own position, so must resort to silencing the opposite position.

Completely agree with you on this.

I am extremely frustrated with a politician telling us there shouldn't be a debate on proposed legislation, she clearly doesn't understand what democracy is and as such she shouldn't be representing anyone in Parliament. As for her repeating the quote of a UK drag race contestant - belief/ reality - belief = born in the wrong body, reality = biology. I don't think she does a lot of heavy thinking sadly. She really is in the wrong job.

If Keir Starmer wants people to see Labour as a party advocating for a totalitarian state he should keep MPs like her in his party.

Iain Fletcher's point about dogwhistles and bad faith is a good one. Once again, it's about avoiding having to justify your views. So if someone makes an entirely sensible remark such as "it's impossible to change sex" or "biology is real", and normal people think "What's wrong with that?" a TRA will pop up to tell you it's a "transphobic dog whistle".

The term "dog whistle" is a useful term for describing a particular kind of anti-Semitism which uses coded references (such as "Rothschild") to disguise what they're saying to the unaware. But it's completely ludicrous when applied to the trans debate.

@Thelnebriati

"We must not fetishise debate"

Can anyone explain what she means by fetishise?

She means being irrationally committed to debate or that our desire to debate is somehow overblown.

Well, I think that is what she means but with everything else she has said I'm not sure she does a whole lot of thinking on her own.

The idea of irrational commitment to debate in a democracy (by which she was elected) - sheer folly and madness, we should all just do as we are told.

@zanahoria

Don't you just love getting history lessons about things you remember from someone who was not there?

She should check her history books again, look at other people who believed in #nodebate.

This^^ We need to learn from history, not repeat it.

I didn't realise she was only 24, that's simultaneously impressive and disturbing. You'd think someone would have to be quite exceptionally bright or talented to get elected an MP at age 24. I'm not sure what her abilities are - but it's rather ominous that they don't include understanding why free speech and open debate are an important part of making laws in a democracy.

Every single person arguing with her in parliament will now start with

"While I understand that the honourable member for Nottingham East does not like to 'fetishise debate', I must point out that..."

So what she's saying is: gender ideology trumps women's rights - no debate.

What a misogynistic disgrace she is.

@Thelnebriati

"We must not fetishise debate"

Can anyone explain what she means by fetishise?

And why she's insinuating fetishes are wrong? Isn't that kink-shaming?

Think-shaming might be an apt term.

She means being irrationally committed to debate or that our desire to debate is somehow overblown.

The idea that the violent censorship of women is neutral, and women's democratic right to debate laws that affect them, isn't, is astonishing.

Particularly in light of the bloody government telling people to do so.

She's oppression shaming. She is telling women that they must not react to their own oppression, because that's hatred.

Ugh.

It seems to me as though she has swallowed a whole load of bullshit, and regurgitated it with her own weird spin, making it sound more insane than it did in the first place.

Think-shaming might be an apt term.

Excellent. It's notable that she might have used 'idolize' which would have made her brain dead point too, but she chose the word fetishize. I'd say that was fairly revealing in itself in terms of the stable of ideas her ridiculous rhetoric comes from.

The state of that tweet

Pleased to see the Baroness has picked up on this mess.

@Kantastic

I didn't realise she was only 24, that's simultaneously impressive and disturbing. You'd think someone would have to be quite exceptionally bright or talented to get elected an MP at age 24. I'm not sure what her abilities are - but it's rather ominous that they don't include understanding why free speech and open debate are an important part of making laws in a democracy.

Nottingham East has been Labour since 1992. Chris Leslie, the previous Labour MP (since 2010) was deselected by the local constituency for not being sufficiently loyal to Corbyn.

Nadia Whittome is the loyal replacement. I have no idea how loyal she is to Starmer, but I imagine he isn't happy about the 'fetishise debate' gift she has given to the Tories.

Imagine thinking you know all there is to know on a subject. I constantly question my GC beliefs when I see that someone I respect holds an opposing view, I read what they say and look at my position again. On Twitter I follow loads of people who espouse the TWAW, but then they say something offensive about ‘TERFs’ or quote the disproved statistics, or conflate sex and gender and I just unfollow.

Think-shaming might be an apt term.

I suppose we can look on it as the death-throes of 'no debate'. Slightly polished - now it's not that we mustn't debate, it's just that if we do so we're guilty of fetishising debate.

It's an interesting term to choose, really.

'to be excessively or irrationally devoted to (an object, activity, etc)'

www.thefreedictionary.com/fetishise

To be excessively devoted to debate? What is the appropriate degree to be devoted to debate? Or is she suggesting it's irrational to be devoted to debate?

I really really hope someone holds her to account - even - gasp! - debates this with her, in the HoC.

Being an MP is a brutal experience, I am in awe of young women who rise to the challenge. I’m not convinced that she’s fully cognisant of what the end result of what she’s saying might be though.

I think Whittome is one of a few Corbyn-wing types who managed to get candidacies in 2019 and were duly elected. See also Claudia Webbe and Sam Tarry. Jeremy may have gone but he managed to rejuvenate his wing of the party (which was necessary as he, Abbott and McDonnell are getting up there).

Does spell trouble for Starmer's efforts to show he now leads a grown-up party though.

Please can someone explain this reply to me as it seems to make no sense.