The “Woke Left” being called out on their hypocrisy

[MangoSeason]

Brendan O’Neill on the money again. A most unexpected ally, who has been all over this issue for years.

www.spiked-online.com/2021/10/04/oh-so-now-the-woke-left-cares-about-misogyny/?fbclid=IwAR2IvMp7S-r4yyAjfGtV6RUmNEfhYcxzO6odUBNV2m9Eo3njNT36Bw03RTI

@dyslek

I think Brendan O'Neil is brilliant and has been great on this issue. I dont agree with everything he says but thats normal and no reason to rubbish him. So Spiked was Marxism today or whatever, I was in the Labour Party till a few days ago but that does not mean everyone of my opinions should be ignored?

You seem a little confused. And very aggressive.

[quote dyslek]@ColourMagicok, so this board is about women fighting for their rights, if you want to stalk Brendan O'Neil, you do you, but dont be suprised if people here call you out on your derailing.[/quote]
Fuck the (thread) police

"Stalk Brendan O'Neill" ???

Brendan is more than capable of standing up for himself - especially against sick/disabled women and kids who are having to fight for their rights ,while Brendan and his Living Marxism/Spiked ableist mates gaslight and denigrate them in his high profile publication.

Just as well to know the history of those you think are 'fighting for the rights' of women and kids. Living Marxism's (LM) history is pretty murky.

I don't agree with him on everything. On this issue he is blistering and right. Isn't that being a grown up?

"Isn't that being a grown up?"

Not when O'Neill's denialism of disabling disease in his magazine articles contribute to the medical neglect and medical abuse of sick kids.

.

If

‘If you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas’

There are many questions around some diseases, from the medical proffession as well as social comentators.
Hounding people who ask questions is what TRAs do and we have seen the MO many many times, no one here will fall for it.

You really are waisting your time. Unless you have some sailent points on the gender debate?

@dyslek

You really are waisting your time. Unless you have some sailent points on the gender debate?

OP posts an article by a very controversial figure, some posters point this out. Debate ensues. I really don’t see how I make make it simpler for you.

We can read and think for ourselves. I used to shout at the TV when Brendan was on about Brexit. I agree with all his points in this article. Which part do posters disagree with, address the arguments not the man.

O'Neil has a high public platform. He uses it to publish damaging ableist articles by himself and his long term RCP/LM/Spiked colleagues which incite contempt and social and medical abuse of people with diseases (WHO/NIH/CDC classified disabling diseases) which affect majority women and kids.

So, Who is hounding who?

O'Neill supports GC women and women's rights only as far as they align with his ideology. Some women and kids he and his colleagues repeatedly throw under the bus.

I don't need a lecture on TRAs thank you very much, let alone being suspected of being one! Sheesh.

.
How sick disabled kids are thrown under the bus, medically abused due to the gaslighting that Brendan O'Neill supports and encourages.

.

.

If there is one thing I have learnt from the gender debate, it is not to take people who make ad hominem attacks seriously.

Hypochondria is very real and debilitating, no joke. My mum had it, it was very difficult for family to deal with and was totally real to her. She was wonderful in many ways and I believe her hypochondria was how she dealt with past trauma. But it was definatly an obsession, like in the real medical sense.

Thats my last word. Also article was brilliant, like many of his.

It is absurd to believe that you must agree 100% with their every expressed opinion on every possible subject, otherwise you cannot accept someone as an ally on one specific issue.
During the Scottish independence referendum I campaigned for Better Together. Alongside me were young Communists, Labour supporters, and very high Tory toffs with landed estates in Perthshire. I couldn’t possibly have agreed with all their varied political stances, but I was delighted that we all pulled together to save the Union.
This is no different. I will accept any and every ally who is prepared to defend women’s single sex rights against the current tide of misogyny and abuse.

How myopic would your outlook be if you felt the need to become a fully paid up member of a person's life perspective to agree on a particular matter? How ridiculous.

Still on page 1 of the thread but Brendan O’Neill has clearly rattled the monitors’ cage. Ooof!

@TimeToDateAgain

It's not very often I've ever used the word rebarbative x2 in 10 minutes (another thread) but it's yet again wholly merited when describing both O'Neill and Fox.

I resent the thought that I must overlap with them in some areas (time of day, existence of gravity) but it's realistic that it must happen.

I have to recognise that O'Neill is a gifted polemicist. I'm still almost completely opposed to him but it would absurd for me to deny his skill and breadth of knowledge although I deplore the way he uses it and the causes that he services.

Why are you writing like you swallowed a thesaurus and live in the the 1800s?

Why are you writing like you swallowed a thesaurus and live in the the 1800s?

I’m sure she can simplify it for you if you want

I'm confused. I thought the argument was GC women align themselves with the far right. But this article should be dismissed because it is from... the left?

I’m sure she can simplify it for you if you want

tbh, Rufus , as a matter of interest I put it through one of the online readability checkers and it came out as suitable to a 'reading age' of a 15-17 year-old. And, as I'm not familiar with the lived history of people in 1800s…

I've seen tone policing before but TJWIT's faux knowledge of history applied to writing styles is new to me.

I thought the argument was GC women align themselves with the far right. But this article should be dismissed because it is from... the left?

It's absolutely clear that GC women must not have opinions or pockets. If GC have opinions and they overlap with a political perspective of any sort that that is helpful as it's an extra form of smears, criticism or even attack. It's never to be considered seriously or critiqued on its own merits.

I think that's how it goes.

@FourTeaFallOut

How myopic would your outlook be if you felt the need to become a fully paid up member of a person's life perspective to agree on a particular matter? How ridiculous.

I agree. It's bizarre.

Frankly I can't help feel it's the latest stick to beat GC Fems with.

Don't refute the arguments, refute the source.

Ideally, go further and dispute its credibility and thus that of anyone agreeing with it - even when the topics at hand are unrelated.

Flip that on its head wrt to many of the very unsavoury characters who are ardent TRA's or indeed the Guardian and it's rank misogyny as highlighted in this article and suddenly the source is far less important than the message - funny that....

I used to subscribe to Spiked, but I found that there wasn't quite enough variation in the writing styles. So I switched to Unherd.

I don't know about Spikes alleged ableism. I guess it must be this article?

How woke culture hurts disable people

but for sure, when O'Neil is on form, he hits the target unerringly;

You cannot casually shift, in mere weeks, from sending your hacks to call into question an allegation of indecent exposure to demanding on your front page that society take the problem of indecent exposure more seriously. You can’t essentially excuse an act of misogyny one month and then bang the drum about the scourge of misogyny the next. And this doesn’t just go for the Guardian – numerous activists and commentators on the woke wing of the culture war are now posing as the defenders of women from misogyny, despite having spent the past few years berating women for talking about misogyny.

I know self-identification is all the rage, but it is a bit much to ‘identify as’ a crusader against misogyny when you have contributed, whether wittingly or unwittingly, to a new culture of misogyny. One in which women are monstered, censored and sometimes even sacked merely for talking about problematic male behaviour. One in which you can be branded scum and a bigot for arguing that women should have their own spaces in which no biological male is allowed to enter. One in which women are called hags and bitches and subjected to sexual threats by armies of faceless Twitter crazies simply for suggesting that some dubious men will exploit trans loopholes in order to get close to women.

What an absolutely brilliant article.