Posie on Talk Radio this evening

[NancyDrawed]

KJK was on Talk radio yesterday (starts at 53.40 on this clip) and the host (Kevin O'Sullivan)was really pushing her on pronouns for Laurel Hubbard, which KJ was not budging on. (I was already cross with the him for repeatedly saying Transwomen and cis women leading in to the segment!)

KJK has put on Facebook that she is back on this evening - it would appear that Kevin O'Sullivan has found someone from the trans side to have a live debate with KJK (don't know who, though, or if they are an ally or a TRA or a regular TW). Also, there is not a time given on the Standing for Women page, and annoyingly, I will be out this evening, so won't be able to to listen live.

I'd not seen it mentioned here yet, but thought it might make for an interesting listen.

@EmbarrassingAdmissions

he is forced into the cognitive dissonance position of the Evangelical Christian Physicist, who knows exactly what the science is, but is compelled to support young earth creationism by his religion.

Social psychologists like Cialdini would identify this as the downside of consistency. Once you accept an absurdity, you end up in a position where you cope with the cognitive dissonance of not defending it or doubling down.

If not here, then I'm sure that someone, somewhere, has commented that this is why people must always have a golden bridge available to help them exit from their desperate position. Without a golden bridge, they'll end up in a fight to the death because they have no other option that makes sense to them.

Yes, i completely agree. As much as it's tempting to vent ire at any and all people promoting this shite, our focus, unlike the Genderist loonies, is rational argument and reason, not fiery pronouncements of eternal judgement for evil trangressions against the orthodoxy.

So what's OJ's golden bridge?

Brilliant discussion btw.

Good grief, just listened to that interview. The DJ ain't the brightest sandwich in the picnic is he?

And how many times did he say Cis women, at least 12! Wonder if he has daughters?

It depends if LOJ has got to sunk cost phase yet. I do think for those who plough too deeply there is no coming back. That daft Jette Knox person is one that I think has just pitched herself way too far in to ever climb out. Susie Green is another. LOJ has done about-faces politically before, but mainly for personal benefit. He's sailing pretty close to defending the indefensible with this and his MO on NSPCC rubberman was the same. He is leaning hard into the LGBTQ+ identity angle. Maybe the increasing amount of gay men speaking out might persuade him to rethink.

@SpindleWhorl

So what's OJ's golden bridge?

Brilliant discussion btw.

I'd be interested in the variety of perspectives of this.

I regularly mention preference falsification in highly polarised discussions - especially for the important message in the second-to-last paragraph in bold.

Preference falsification, according to the economist Timur Kuran, is the act of misrepresenting one’s wants under perceived social pressures. It happens frequently in everyday life, such as when we tell the host of a dinner party that we are enjoying the food when we actually find it bland. In Private Truths, Public Lies , Kuran argues convincingly that the phenomenon not only is ubiquitous but has huge social and political consequences. Drawing on diverse intellectual traditions, including those rooted in economics, psychology, sociology, and political science, Kuran provides a unified theory of how preference falsification shapes collective decisions, orients structural change, sustains social stability, distorts human knowledge, and conceals political possibilities.

A common effect of preference falsification is the preservation of widely disliked structures. Another is the conferment of an aura of stability on structures vulnerable to sudden collapse. When the support of a policy, tradition, or regime is largely contrived, a minor event may activate a bandwagon that generates massive yet unanticipated change.

In distorting public opinion, preference falsification also corrupts public discourse and, hence, human knowledge. So structures held in place by preference falsification may, if the condition lasts long enough, achieve increasingly genuine acceptance. The book demonstrates how human knowledge and social structures co-evolve in complex and imperfectly predictable ways, without any guarantee of social efficiency.

Putting aside OJ's position on this matter, he has a reputation as someone who cares about social justice. He has a reputation for contributing to a greater awareness of the impact of class and poverty on health, wellbeing and participation in society.

I have occasionally wondered if he'd find himself out of sympathy with the marginalised women in the Deptford People Project if he spent time with them and listened to them.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3203804-The-Deptford-People-Project-and-the-impact-of-self-ID-and-transactivism-on-working-class-women

Is his golden bridge the decision that no matter what, the introduction of – compelled speech
– positive rights that increases the vulnerability of a protected characteristic that is 50% of the population
adds velocity to a momentum that historically leads people towards authoritarianism in stressful times?

Would OJ even want a golden bridge though? My guess is that he was raised on tales of Stonewall riots, spent his childhood cursing his bad luck at being born too late to join in, and dreaming of getting a chance to step up and yes, fight to the death.

@Floisme

Would OJ even want a golden bridge though? My guess is that he was raised on tales of Stonewall riots, spent his childhood cursing his bad luck at being born too late to join in, and dreaming of getting a chance to step up and yes, fight to the death.

Well yes, and I think for me, this is the big shrug. People whom this has actually affected - trans people, women who are trying to be kind by volunteering to give away rights or because they have family involved - they need the opening to step away from the insanity.

LOJ you would hope had the common sense to stop being a fuckwit, but it doesn't affect him negatively either way atm, so there is no incentive for any of us for him to do an about-face. Excepting that he might be less irritating, but that's a very long shot.

@Floisme

Would OJ even want a golden bridge though? My guess is that he was raised on tales of Stonewall riots, spent his childhood cursing his bad luck at being born too late to join in, and dreaming of getting a chance to step up and yes, fight to the death.

Because, fundamentally, Owen Jones and FWR share common values.

Circumscribing free speech is seen as a pragmatic shortcut to reducing bias against minoritised and excluded groups.

The creation of non-crime hate incidents and the official recording of them casts shadow that will may well blight the lives and opportunities of people and I'd expect some of the poorest and most vulnerable people to be particularly open to abuse in this way. - The threat of such reports might become a coercive tool on a scale that we've never seen. And all without due process.

Free speech is being misrepresented as stark binaries. There is an ongoing exercise to tarnish free speech as the exercise of a protected privilege to say wretched things to people (taken as a proxy for abuse and plausibly prejudicial behaviours) with no consequences and without the expectation of any challenge.

The protection of free speech and the right to due process are core freedoms. Most people who advocate for it are aware that countries that lack these have a deplorable human rights record and minorities endure the full consequences of their multiple vulnerabilities or oppressions to the point of atrocities in plain sight.

At some point, Owen Jones will have an incident that hits home to him. And it may well be the realisation that it is a tyrannical government that circumscribes freedom of thought, speech, and association - and that he has found himself in a position that he is in danger of supporting something which is completely inimical to his other beliefs and principles. He can not want the UK to sleepwalk into its own Cheka or Stasi who will have acquired the additional power to create a new reality in which you must live and with the power of compelled speech. And that this power extends to courts of law in which judges can compel you to lie under oath.

There is no speaking truth to power with the protection of free speech.

There is more to be laid out about the positive value of free speech. And the power of people to have conversations/dialogues with good faith without a fear of a verbal choice that will result in reputational harm or even a life altering report to the authorities .

Ultimately, he will need a golden bridge because nobody can support where this is heading. We are in for some very troubled and conflicted social times in which people look for authoritarian figures. I'd hope that he has enough sense of history and humility to know that there are no enlightened despots and that the groundwork for authoritarianism is something we must all resist.

Yeah as far as I can tell he has no skin whatsoever in the game, which is why I find it a bit strange that his responses are so visceral. That lawyer guy - can't remember his name - he's another.

Sorry cross post

There is no speaking truth to power with the protection of free speech.

without the protection…

At some point, Owen Jones will have an incident that hits home to him.
See, I don't think he ever will. But it will be interesting to watch!

@Floisme

At some point, Owen Jones will have an incident that hits home to him. See, I don't think he ever will. But it will be interesting to watch!

The fact that Douglas Murray is reconsidering his previous stance gives me some optimism that the more Owen Jones sees gay men have a shift in position then there will come a point where he does have pause for thought about just what it is he is endorsing. The more so if, at some point, Jones realises that he is targeting women, including working class and WoC.

Does male privilege really exist? I did not used to think so. But in recent years, I’ve come to realise that not only might it exist, but that, at least in one respect, I may also benefit from it. That is, I have the privilege of being able to write about certain contentious issues without being singled out and demonised for doing so.

In no area has this become more apparent than in our perpetual “gender wars”.
…
Like me, Jones happens to be a gay man. But unlike me he seems to think that transgender activism is simply the latest, logical progression in the gay rights movement.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4315813-Douglas-Murray-asks-Does-Owen-Jones-have-a-woman-problem

To be perfectly honest, and bearing in mind I've been relatively nice to him on this thread, I don't think the creation of a new Stasi will bother him that much because his whole trajectory here is to set himself up as one of the enforcers of the new, glorious regime.
Don't get me wrong, I'll always be pleased to see a man with the humility to admit error. But I think Jones is far more likely to seek power at this stage than speak truth to it.

But I think Douglas Murray is reconsidering because he appears to be a fairly rational guy who's thought about it, and who isn't so entrenched that he can't change his mind. With OJ it feels like it's coming from a different place - it's a visceral response, which is why I can't see it ever changing.

Don't forget LOJ is a Guardianista who is completely and utterly surrounded by people who endorse the ideology, who call us lot all "t*rfs", who demonize and belittle women actually affected by the ideology, because they themselves never will be.

He's in a fully sealed bubble. And being a gay man will never ever understand the downsides of the ideology. He might break out of it but I doubt it because he's so stubborn.

Don't forget LOJ is a Guardianista who is completely and utterly surrounded by people who endorse the ideology, who call us lot all "trfs", who demonize and belittle women actually affected by the ideology, because they themselves never will be.*

I assure you that I haven't forgotten.

I can't think of times when a good outcome has been reached by sustained polarisation on issues rather than discussion in the public square.

At some point, Owen Jones will have an incident that hits home to him. And it may well be the realisation that it is a tyrannical government that circumscribes freedom of thought, speech, and association - and that he has found himself in a position that he is in danger of supporting something which is completely inimical to his other beliefs and principles.

Even if he did, his ordeal would be "different" to the bigoted views of gender critical feminists being silenced.

He already had an "incident" didn't he? When he was asked if he'd perform cunnilingus on a transman to which he replied "you're homophobic".

One rule for him... Another for everyone else.

After that, there's basically no hope.

@GNCQ

He already had an "incident" didn't he? When he was asked if he'd perform cunnilingus on a transman to which he replied "you're homophobic".

One rule for him... Another for everyone else.

After that, there's basically no hope.

Genuine question…. Why would asking that question be considered homophobic?

Why would asking that question be considered homophobic?

Because #NoThankYou hadn't been coined then?

However, guessing at the context…

OJ is gay. OJ promotes the ideology that TWAW #NoDebate - and possibly that genital preferences are transphobic in the context of sexual attraction.

Somebody asked OJ the question because if TWAW #NoDebate etc. then TMAM (or, trans men are men) #NoDebate etc. - Again, if trans women are self-identified as male lesbians then trans men can identify as female gay men. So, iirc, OJ was asked if he would consider a sexual relationship with a trans man. And he gave the response that he did.

That's my best explanation.

@EmbarrassingAdmissions

Why would asking that question be considered homophobic?

Because #NoThankYou hadn't been coined then?

However, guessing at the context…

OJ is gay. OJ promotes the ideology that TWAW #NoDebate - and possibly that genital preferences are transphobic in the context of sexual attraction.

Somebody asked OJ the question because if TWAW #NoDebate etc. then TMAM (or, trans men are men) #NoDebate etc. - Again, if trans women are self-identified as male lesbians then trans men can identify as female gay men. So, iirc, OJ was asked if he would consider a sexual relationship with a trans man. And he gave the response that he did.

That's my best explanation.

It's homophobic because it is homophobic to ask a lesbian or gay man to consider having sex with the opposite sex. That never changed.

However, the questioner was simply holding up Perseus' mirror to Jones's Medusa, reflecting his own nasty homophobia back to him. These are the ideas that Jones and other TRAs push on other gay men and lesbians. If he doesn't like his reflection, that's on him.

So, LOJ is being a complete and utter hypocrite, for all the world to see, not even trying to hide, it by kicking off at the interviewer because they asked him, a gay man, about having sex with someone that (everyone else knows) is a woman?

Wow…

I still think people like Owen Jones need a golden bridge.

All of that said, I am always mindful of the photograph of OJ with Jess Bradley:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3320513-Jess-Bradley-first-transgender-student-officer-suspended-after-flashing-photos?msgid=79807832

@EdgeOfACoin

KJK mentioned 12-year-olds in the US having double mastectomies.

I am aware that such surgery has been performed on 13-year-olds over there (not legal in the UK, I believe). Does anyone know the source for the 12-year-olds? The trouble is, people will dismiss Kellie's statement out of hand because it sounds so preposterous, even if it is true.

It would be handy to know a few more of the details.

4th Wave Now via Twitter

"According to the mother who posted this information, Dr. Fischer performed “top surgery” on her child at the age of 12 years old."
June 22 2019

twitter.com/4th_WaveNow/status/1142552285962231809