What has Stewart Lee done?

[concernedfriend500]

I see lots of people on Twitter are slagging off Stewart Lee because he listed a lot of non-woke folk like Graham Linehan in his "pedal bin" of people he doesn't like. What is his public stance on the Trans Rights campaign though? I've not heard/read anything but I've probably missed it.

I just looked it up. There are some bloody good candidates for the bin on that list.

That list, towards the bottom

www.stewartlee.co.uk/2022/01/from-the-metro-lib-elite-desk-of-stewart-lee-january-2022/

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

Not only Hibo Wardere. Jana Cornell, another campaigner and survivor, gave up on using twitter all together because of the trans activists. I saw the stuff she was getting publicly tagged in. There were abusive teens and adults showing off to their mates by tagging her in the most disgusting stuff like videos of men being murdered, and piling in to tell her that FGM victims didn't count as women.

What an absolute gift 'gender ideology' is.

You can be a complete c-word and misogynist; and merrily say these things out loud.
And not only is there no opprobrium for being a complete c-word and misogynist, but you get a little pat on the back for being so inclusive and woke.

Apologies for the bold text...it was an accident.

@RoyalCorgi I agree this is all just giving him what he wants.

On the flip side, Graham struggles with the cowardice of two faced individuals, which I understand. He wants to hold them to account. But yes, unfortunately, I think he’s played into Lee’s hands here. And Lee doesn’t take a single thing Graham says seriously, because he can’t be bothered to look any deeper than is comfortable for him.

Great to see Arthur Mathews standing by him, though.

I'm glad Arthur Mathews has stood by him too.

I can see why this has been so hard for glinner. He's staked everything on standing up for women and girls, he's lost his livelihood and he's receiving no end of abuse from people he could reasonably have hoped would be allies. I think for those of us who feel very strongly that this is a moral issue (which is probably most of us), it's very very tough to see people who should know better defending a fundamentally immoral position and being lauded for it.

So I can see why he gets upsets and angry. But I don't think it does him, or the cause, much good. It puts me in mind of those women who spend years being abused by men, and then when they finally lose it, everyone says "Look at that silly irrational woman and how hysterical she's being." It doesn't matter if you have right on your side, all people see is the anger.

Better, in glinner's case, to ignore it all and continue making his case as best he can rather than focus on what others are saying.

I've found over the years that the gender ideology stuff is quite a good intelligence test. If you can say the words "a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman" without realising that's a circular definition then it says a lot about your critical thinking skills. Most of my friends are still in the TWAW camp but I can see the twinge of doubt among the more thoughtful ones. Even my "queer academic" (his words) friend has quietly said to me that he thinks non-binary doesn't make any sense.

So Stewart - if you're reading this - maybe you're not quite as smart as you think you are.

@RoyalCorgi Totally agree. He’s being treated as an irrational woman. I think most of us know how that feels to some extent. The knee jerk reaction is part of his character and he finds it hard to hold his tongue.

His substack is a fantastic resource for evidence of all this batshittery and speaks for itself. Especially with the input from JL and ripx4nutmeg etc.

I do hope he’s vindicated, but yeah, he’s feeding the troll with this one.

In answer to the title of the thread I think what Stewart Lee has done is channel his inner 10 year old and written a journal entry 'All about ME'. The difference is he has published it in the mistaken notion that anyone cares about his 'likes and dislikes' - even 10 year old kids know diary entries are supposed to be private because they are a bit cringe-worthy. Apparently Stewart likes to put it all out there, bet he dots his 'i's with hearts or a little smiley face too.

This was on Glinner’s latest substack rundown:

A subscriber writes: "There's no one else to touch him" he humbly puts on the trailer emailed hours ago for his tour. Who wrote that? Someone at The Mail on Sunday. But isn't the Mail on his bin list?

The Times also hyped him hugely, which is maybe why they escaped the bin, despite full-on Terfitude”

(It’s referencing Stewart Lee. Sorry, failed to post that clearly. Just caught the covids and I am NOT on form today.)

Big SL fan here. I remember the earlier thread about him so this doesn’t come as a surprise.

My thoughts then as now was that this is a very interesting stance to take for someone who has publicly scorned the modern tendency to not be able to engage with subtle arguments. Because one ‘side’ here is under-powered when it comes to logical argumentation. I like SL precisely because he rips apart illogical, weak thinking. If anyone could concisely spell out the argument for the TRA pov and take down the GC one it would be him. But if all he’s got is ‘if you’re worried about who’s in your space, you’re thick - like a Brexiteer!’, then that’s disappointing on both the logic and comedy fronts.

Come on Stew, I want to hear just why TWAW and why anyone who disagrees is a thick bigot from you.

He’d be absolutely fucked if he showed any nuance on this debate though. Last time I went to one of his gigs it was 90% beardy he/him in Twitter bio looking guys. Exactly the type who’d feel personally wounded and boycott him forevermore if he said anything deemed wrongspeak.

@kwiksavenofrillsusername

He’d be absolutely fucked if he showed any nuance on this debate though. Last time I went to one of his gigs it was 90% beardy he/him in Twitter bio looking guys. Exactly the type who’d feel personally wounded and boycott him forevermore if he said anything deemed wrongspeak.

He hasn't shown any nuance though has he, he appears to have nailed his colours to the mast on the side of TWAW.

Just had an email from a venue that I’m on the mailing list…

‘We're back with a bang as Stewart Lee reprises Snowflake/Tornado and we've had a few return tickets so it's worth checking…’

I’m sure it’s a Covid thing…

I went to see Lee last night as have always loved his comedy. I had heard about the list and suppose I was anticipating what he had to say. There wasn’t much, but there were some uncomfortable moments for me. There was the usual adoration and annoying element of sycophancy in the room, but it was weird to experience moments of complete alienation as a feminist who’s followed him for years.

I don’t know whether now I see him as having completely gone the way of Billy Bragg etc, but there were a couple of long joke riffs on whether he was a misogynist. Apparently, Tony Parsons once claimed he was one cos he used the word c So there was a long ironic narrative/diatribe about the word c which went on for ages; he said he’d asked one woman whether it was ok to use the word and she’d said yes, but then he’d locked her in a hot car. The woman locked in car image kept coming back. The whole point of the story was to show how ludicrous the idea of him hating women was. But it morphed into a kind of unconscious weird antagonism for me – which you can only feel if you’re a woman. I could also sense a slight defensiveness around the idea of some feminists recently criticising him. But I think he’s happy to throw them at the wall to keep on side with everyone else. He says Dave Chappell is ‘kicking down’ by criticising transgender people. But I felt Lee was kicking gender critical feminists down in his show too. But of course, very subtly.

He has obviously decided to leave his usual forensic deconstructing approach at the door when it comes to the transgender/feminist debate. He must be able to see that it is highly problematic for women in terms of language, autonomy, self definition, safe spaces etc (he was talking about language/semiotics itself at some moments interestingly.) But he either hasn’t really looked at all the intricate layers of the debate or can’t be arsed to. And in those moments, I found myself feeling really pissed off as the crowd went hysterical round me. He’s still really funny, but it’s weird to feel oddly betrayed and unrepresented by someone you thought was kind of on your side.

I think there is a social blind spot around women - it's very difficult for some men and some women to engage with women as real people or to understand that they don't do it.

He says Dave Chappell is ‘kicking down’ by criticising transgender people.

An interesting reflection of the way that trans ideologues have persuaded people that they are the most vulnerable, marginalised group in society. Chapelle may be black, in a country with a profoundly shocking history of slavery and denial of basic civil rights to black people, but apparently he still comes above people like Caitlyn Jenner in the hierarchy.

@royalcorgi

Yes, weird. I think he needs to read Kathleen Stock's Material Girls.
My husband also felt uncomfortable during some sections. It's the repetition of certain ideas or images that make them somehow bleed into your mind in a way perhaps Lee didn't consciously intend, but nonetheless, the associations on repeat, have this accumulative effect. There was a link between women and out of date bruised bananas (attributed to Tony Parsons) that went on too long.

Apparently, Tony Parsons once claimed he was one cos he used the word cSo there was a long ironic narrative/diatribe about the word cwhich went on for ages;

That sounds grim. Also Tony Parsons hasn't been in the public eye for ages- does Lee hold long term grudges? (I'm sure he does)

www.google.com/amp/s/www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/the-c-word-has-had-its-day/amp

It's from 2019. I'm with Tony Parsons on this.

@TheAntiGardener

Big SL fan here. I remember the earlier thread about him so this doesn’t come as a surprise.

My thoughts then as now was that this is a very interesting stance to take for someone who has publicly scorned the modern tendency to not be able to engage with subtle arguments. Because one ‘side’ here is under-powered when it comes to logical argumentation. I like SL precisely because he rips apart illogical, weak thinking. If anyone could concisely spell out the argument for the TRA pov and take down the GC one it would be him. But if all he’s got is ‘if you’re worried about who’s in your space, you’re thick - like a Brexiteer!’, then that’s disappointing on both the logic and comedy fronts.

Come on Stew, I want to hear just why TWAW and why anyone who disagrees is a thick bigot from you.

Dont hold your breath. Intelegence was/is Stews stick, its just as much of an act as the guy who does ads for McDonalds in a clown costume. We should never take someone's public persona as evidence of their actual character. Stew's actual character seems petty, thick and lazy. Also fame obsessed. Ahh, what a clown.

I could also sense a slight defensiveness around the idea of some feminists recently criticising him.

Yes, there is nothing worse for one of his ilk than being described as a woman hater. Because they are so 'pure' and always 'on the right side' so the idea is ludicrous. The problem is, because they are actually quite misogynistic, it comes up fairly often, and therefore they have to get more and more defensive.

See also Billy 'but I campaigned about violence against women and abortion' Bragg and Owen Jones.

@KimikosNightmare

www.google.com/amp/s/www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/the-c-word-has-had-its-day/amp

It's from 2019. I'm with Tony Parsons on this.

From his writing, I've always felt that Tony Parsons respects women. I've never thought that of Stewart Lee.

He says Dave Chappell is ‘kicking down’ by criticising transgender people. But I felt Lee was kicking gender critical feminists down in his show too. But of course, very subtly.

The whole kick down thing has been overused and tends to be used as an excuse to berate others without having to justify why. Few groups are at the bottom of every hierarchy and very few of us are immune to doing daft things that deserve a ribbing occasionally.

If anything, isn't it presumptuous of white, middle-aged, middle class, wealthy Lees to decide what that hierarchy is?

He's a comedian, not a politician, and ultimately it doesn't matter what he says and thinks. He's there to entertain a crowd and he's giving them what they expect. But given the music he likes, I thought his work would be less mainstream.