The nerve of Jon Ronson

[RoyalCorgi]

Jon Ronson has an interview in the Sunday Times (sorry, no share token) about why the culture wars will soon burn out:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jon-ronson-interview-the-culture-wars-will-burn-out-soon-8gsj9wrj0

This is a man who failed to stand up for women who were being bullied on social media and being banned from Twitter for standing up for women's rights. He fell out with Graham Linehan over Linehan's support for women's sex-based rights. Far from being a dispassionate observer of the culture wars, he has actively chosen a side - the wrong side.

I get the impression the Jon Robson is famous enough that he employs researchers to tell him what to think gather material for his books, which could be why he hasn't been able to engage his brain on this - if he's been shielded from the facts by fluffy propaganda.

I wrote a big long post and lost it and now I am cross.

They did get back to it, in the last 25 minutes or so - she's a smart interviewer so allowed him to loosen up by talking about the stuff he was comfortable with before going "ok, now we're going to talk about this".

Ronson's program was about respectful debate, finding a way through heated differences. He ended it by disgracefully saying that Camp Trans was a part of that wider process. It was not. It was an attempt by men to intrude on a woman's space. To fail to mention the fact that one of its members went on to (allegedly, but probably, as you point out) murder one of the Michfest women amounts to journalistic fraud.

It doesn't really bother me what he decided to include and discuss in that one podcast episode.

What annoys me is the way he talks about this issue more generally. He didn't want to talk about that episode, because the issue scares him. He won't delve into it. He keeps saying he doesn't know enough about it to comment and that it's 'toxic on both sides'. It's cowardice.

If you have an interest in cancel culture, then this issue is front and centre. He doesn't necessarily need to give his own view - that's not really his thing. What he would do if he was rigorous and fearless is to examine it in detail and from all angles as he claims to do on all the issues he covers. He hasn't done that and is quite openly admitting that he doesn't want to go there.

I find the whole 'this debate is toxic and both sides argue in bad faith' take is completely unhelpful. How is anyone supposed to unpick the mess if no one has the balls to examine it properly?

He knows this matter to a huge number of people. He is friends with some 'TERFs' so he must be aware that it is not borne of bigotry. Why would anyone with that level of intellectual curiosity NOT want to understand that properly?

Agree, lifeissweet. I don't think he's going to be able to avoid it forever.