Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

"JK Rowling is a gold-plated hero': Author Anthony Horowitz blasts cancel culture"

303 replies

ScreamingMeMe · 07/02/2022 16:29

Good to see another successful author speaking out

'JK Rowling is a gold-plated hero': Author Anthony Horowitz blasts cancel culture and says writers are 'under siege' and should 'lead the agenda, not be cowed by it'

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10483263/amp/Anthony-Horowitz-blasts-cancel-culture-says-writers-siege.html

OP posts:
RufustheFloralmissingreindeer · 08/02/2022 20:50

Take it up with MNHQ about the 'pretty low bar'. We do quite regularly. Because it is very regularly us that are getting deleted. you do realise that simply posting a biscuit on this board is delete worthy whereas it is used regularly else where

And yawn and bless and Roz

The biscuit one must be very embarrassing for MNHQ…I’d deffo be embarrassed about it

GuidingforDummies · 08/02/2022 20:53

Not sure how Ploppy can simultaneously claim to not spend time hanging out on this board, but spend sufficient time hanging out on this board to make a comprehensive assessment of deletion patterns. He is Shroedinger's Ploppy.

ScreamingMeMe · 08/02/2022 20:55

As for posts that go against the grain not being deleted - sure hasn’t been what I’ve observed. Usually any ongoing argument/discussion will garner enough reports from the prominent side (ie in line with the views of people who mostly frequent these boards) to be deleted

No, this doesn't happen. This is demonstrably untrue.

We have a number of posters on this board that disagree with us (GorblimeyGG, barleybadminton and MargaritaPie to name a few) and the vast majority of their posts are still here.

You seem to have come to this board with preconceived notions. I suggest you read some more threads, as you're really wrong.

OP posts:
GuidingforDummies · 08/02/2022 21:00

Thank you Helleofabore. Just looked back and tried to work out what Popper is getting at. They said:

In that situation - what was wrong with having that space for men/boys and why did it have to be taken away? And if it was right that it be taken from them - then why is it not also right that trans women be let into similar women’s spaces? That’s just one such situation for example.

So in short, it wasn't taken away as a space for men and boys. The men running Scouts threw it away through either being abusers or ignoring abuse, and then failing to volunteer when the going got tough.

There is no right or wrong about it becoming mixed sex. It had to happen for Scouts to survive as an organisation. Don't blame women for saving an institution.

There is no equivalent situation in Girl Guides. There never has been wholesale child abuse in Girlguiding, to my knowledge there has never been any significant drop in demand, and generally no problem in getting volunteers. It's like comparing apples and car tyres. The reason why Guides is going through its current crisis is that it has been institutionally captured by Stonewall. That's all.

RufustheFloralmissingreindeer · 08/02/2022 21:02

but spend sufficient time hanging out on this board to make a comprehensive assessment of deletion patterns. He is Shroedinger's Ploppy

Id agree but its been an utter balls up of an assessment…pretty much got it arse about face

ItsLateHumpty · 08/02/2022 21:05

And I can observe that if *posts that go against the grain are deleted^ then mine eyes do deceive me as I can still read all of the plopping ploppers comments.

I would posit they are against the grain not just in this ikkle corner of MN, but in the wider world context of being inaccurate to the point of mendacious.

RufustheFloralmissingreindeer · 08/02/2022 21:07

Is mendacious a posh way of saying arse about face?

RufustheFloralmissingreindeer · 08/02/2022 21:08

I do know what mendacious means…I’m not a complete wally

Helleofabore · 08/02/2022 21:11

@RufustheFloralmissingreindeer

Take it up with MNHQ about the 'pretty low bar'. We do quite regularly. Because it is very regularly us that are getting deleted. you do realise that simply posting a biscuit on this board is delete worthy whereas it is used regularly else where

And yawn and bless and Roz

The biscuit one must be very embarrassing for MNHQ…I’d deffo be embarrassed about it

I know... I would post a bikky, but I would get deleted and earn a strike. And as we all know..... three strikes and you are banned.

So a strong Hmm is what YOU get.

Helleofabore · 08/02/2022 21:15

@GuidingforDummies

Thank you Helleofabore. Just looked back and tried to work out what Popper is getting at. They said:

In that situation - what was wrong with having that space for men/boys and why did it have to be taken away? And if it was right that it be taken from them - then why is it not also right that trans women be let into similar women’s spaces? That’s just one such situation for example.

So in short, it wasn't taken away as a space for men and boys. The men running Scouts threw it away through either being abusers or ignoring abuse, and then failing to volunteer when the going got tough.

There is no right or wrong about it becoming mixed sex. It had to happen for Scouts to survive as an organisation. Don't blame women for saving an institution.

There is no equivalent situation in Girl Guides. There never has been wholesale child abuse in Girlguiding, to my knowledge there has never been any significant drop in demand, and generally no problem in getting volunteers. It's like comparing apples and car tyres. The reason why Guides is going through its current crisis is that it has been institutionally captured by Stonewall. That's all.

Yes. I suspect we will not get an acknowledgement of the error.
GuidingforDummies · 08/02/2022 21:17

@RufustheFloralmissingreindeer

but spend sufficient time hanging out on this board to make a comprehensive assessment of deletion patterns. He is Shroedinger's Ploppy

Id agree but its been an utter balls up of an assessment…pretty much got it arse about face

You're right. Maybe that should have been "a comprehensively crap assessment".
RufustheFloralmissingreindeer · 08/02/2022 21:18

😀

ThatsWhenTheCannibalismStarted · 08/02/2022 21:19

Back to the subject of the thread, I've heard of Horowitz but never realised he was so prolific nor had such a varied body of work. I will check out some of the recommendations.

ItsLateHumpty · 08/02/2022 21:35

@RufustheFloralmissingreindeer

I do know what mendacious means…I’m not a complete wally
There is only one wally on this thread, and it’s not you RufustheFloralmissingreindeer Brew and I’ll risk a Biscuit to go with it Grin

To be fair if this was a game of where’s wally, it was beginners level.

I’m pleased I read this thread tho, because of the recommendations for Alex Rider I’m going to start watching the series so that’s a win.

PurgatoryOfPotholes · 08/02/2022 21:51

@ThatsWhenTheCannibalismStarted

Back to the subject of the thread, I've heard of Horowitz but never realised he was so prolific nor had such a varied body of work. I will check out some of the recommendations.
I found a thread on twitter recommending his books! @Manderleyagain, it might be of interest to you too.

twitter.com/Dora_Callisto/status/1491122359918821376?t=tMkQyq96KY7r1phNXTdilQ&s=19

Helleofabore · 08/02/2022 21:56

That Dora Callisto is a great account to follow on twitter. I read her tweets all the time.

Ploppingperp06 · 09/02/2022 03:27

@Helleofabore

Yes after much self congratulatory agreement between like minded posters that posts are not deleted simply because of disagreement and women have saved the scouts (it’s clearly insignificant and dying and has been for a long time) we can get back to Horowitz.

You have obviously failed to understand my original point, it was never relevant whether Rowling deserves support or disagreement, only if she deserves cancelling because of that disagreement - posters here (and myself) didn’t believe that she does and I questioned whether the same moral logic would be applied to Horowitz, no matter the topic he took up - say were he to make some statement (or show) against or satirising feminism in a negative way - would he still be deserving of his freedom to do so by posters here?

Based on observance it seems the people defending Rowling against “cancelling” for ideological reasons (the feminists not the daily mail crowd) were also once (and still?) very quick to want the same censorship of others whose views didn’t align with theirs. That is that they got this ball rowling and the current cancel culture being unsuccessfully applied against Rowling is just a further growth from that. But now that the same is happening to people they agree with and being done by a younger generation with more “correct” opinions than them they don’t like it so much - despite having previously occupied this exact same role.

Now perhaps they have learned something from all this but it doesn’t seem so - to an outsider those defending Rowling against cancelling were/are? pro cancelling those who offend them and genuinely believe that their particular generation of feminism had the correct views on issues as opposed to both those before them and those after, while fervently denying that they are caught in an echo chamber.
It’s actually somewhat interesting and entertaining to watch the blind ego centric thinking in action.

I appreciate the insight provided here.

PurgatoryOfPotholes · 09/02/2022 03:43

@Helleofabore

That Dora Callisto is a great account to follow on twitter. I read her tweets all the time.
So, the first one linked in that thread is called the Falcon's Malteser.

I can't remember if I read it as a child (I could have done, looking at the publication date) but I definitely want to read it now for the gorgeous pun in the title!

www.goodreads.com/book/show/224516.The_Falcon_s_Malteser

TheCurrywurstPrion · 09/02/2022 05:34

Based on observance it seems the people defending Rowling against “cancelling” for ideological reasons (the feminists not the daily mail crowd) were also once (and still?) very quick to want the same censorship of others whose views didn’t align with theirs.

Not sure what you’ve observed, but it certainly wasn’t the feminist board on Mumsnet. Are you sure this isn’t projection or misogyny? One of them is likely skewing your view.

Ploppingperp06 · 09/02/2022 06:05

@TheCurrywurstPrion

Perhaps, all of our views are no doubt skewed whether slightly or largely by such things, even your own view of your own group and these boards - so keeping that in mind perhaps an outsider to your group is also more capable of picking up your own flaws than you are and you more likely of being incapable of seeing them. This being true of both you, me and everyone on this board.

After all what is the chance that those on this board have a perfect perception unskewed by their own bias and emotion (or simply different values) of both themselves and the world? If they did they would be the first group in world history to have such. Don’t you think that’s a little unlikely? Even for the feminists here on Mumsnet?

ScreamingMeMe · 09/02/2022 06:22

Oh well if these are your observations, Plopping, you'll be able to back up what you're saying with evidence. Link us up!

OP posts:
Ploppingperp06 · 09/02/2022 06:49

@ScreamingMeMe

My evidence of what? That those on this board don’t have (like all people and groups) a crystal clear picture of themselves and their flaws and are inclined to overlook them?

Or of this being an echo chamber?

The first is impossible to prove since specific flaws will just be denied even if the overall premise is accepted. Which in itself is a kind of proof.
And the second (echo chamber) can be witnessed on this very thread and really shouldn’t need description, it would be quite obvious to any not in said chamber. For instance this very page of posters congratulating each other on “proving” me wrong about posts being deleted - even though all they expressed was their own biased opinions that they weren’t deleted and if they were deleted it was only happening to them. Obviously I can’t link to things which have been deleted for people to judge them.

That people here can honestly doubt this is an echo chamber (despite it being full of the same group of people with very similar beliefs and their deluded assumption that everyone who disagrees with them is a trans activist in hiding or denial) is actually quite funny. They really can’t see the wood for the trees.

ScreamingMeMe · 09/02/2022 07:06

Your evidence of this

Based on observance it seems the people defending Rowling against “cancelling” for ideological reasons (the feminists not the daily mail crowd) were also once (and still?) very quick to want the same censorship of others whose views didn’t align with theirs.

OP posts:
ScreamingMeMe · 09/02/2022 07:24

And of this

Posts that go against the grainbeing deleted due to mass reporting

These are two claims you have made, leading to experienced posters telling you are wrong (you know, based on their actual experience of reading and posting on this board for many months or years), which you are now claiming is evidence of an "echo chamber" Hmm

OP posts:
TheCurrywurstPrion · 09/02/2022 07:27

@ScreamingMeMe

Your evidence of this

Based on observance it seems the people defending Rowling against “cancelling” for ideological reasons (the feminists not the daily mail crowd) were also once (and still?) very quick to want the same censorship of others whose views didn’t align with theirs.

Exactly this. Evidence please.

Odd that despite the fact that I highlighted a specific claim, Plopper chose to ignore what I said and attempted distraction.

As someone else said, Schrödinger's Ploppy: simultaneously someone who doesn’t follow this board, yet somehow knows everything about what is said here.

For what it’s worth, I’ve never seen any of the regular women here calling for any author to be cancelled, and I am here a lot. There are sometimes frustrations expressed and statements that women will avoid certain products or businesses, but I’ve not seen any evidence suggesting anyone should be cancelled, their books banned or removed from shops or libraries, they should be “educated” or lose their job, or that their publisher should remove them which is a very different thing. I suspect my knowledge of what is actually said here is much clearer than someone who appears to have arrived with extreme inbuilt prejudice about feminists, who is now applying it randomly to a different group of women.

And please don’t @ me Ploppy. I commented directly to you. I don’t need an e-mail to tell me you’re likely to reply.