Martina responds to OJ

[zanahoria]

Owen Jones is truly despicable. What an awful comparison… he clearly has no shame

mobile.twitter.com/Martina/status/1512169135739863052

So, just so i am clear. We are now all right wing, evangelical, anti abortion, russian money taking transphobes.

Gotcha.

Even for Talcum X this is a stretch. Has he ever met a gender critical feminist?

@nepeta I really think that the women who patriarchy selects and 'allows' access to the sacred halls of power are the ones they know will toe the patriarchal line.

Imagine Martina noticing him. Social media is a strange thing.

[quote IvyTwines]@nepeta I really think that the women who patriarchy selects and 'allows' access to the sacred halls of power are the ones they know will toe the patriarchal line.[/quote]
Many years ago I spotted lefty blokes linking to articles supporting sex work as a good career path (but only to vulva people, of course). So yes, there is something in what you are saying.

What @ATeamAmy said is really important:

"The Democrats in the states have dangled the threat to abortion rights over the heads of female voters for decades as a ploy to keep them voting Dem, even though the Clinton and Obama legislations had 16 years between them to enshrine the right to abortion in federal law. Meanwhile, the Republicans have played the long game of stuffing the Supreme Court with their picks by persuading incumbents to retire rather than carry on until death, in order to ensure Republican candidates took the seats at times when their passage through the Senate could be guaranteed. By doing this, they can stack the court in favour of Roe v Wade can being overturned, and potentially block any proposal to enshrine RvW as federal law as unconstitutional."

Our law is different. LOJ - like many of his ilk - seems too keen to import US ideas and then grab the UHU and stick them on top of our way of life and laws.

It doesn't work and it won't work. We are not the US and they are not the UK.

@brainbowbroad

It's the same as when people bring up feminists and JKR "supporting" Caroline Farrow and CitizenGO, it's most annoying.

Well, Caroline Farrow is Britain's leading anti-abortion campaigner to be fair.

The attempt to tie trans activism to the struggle against racism was less successful than they hoped, so now they’re trying to tie it to feminism. One barrier might be not quite realising how many women think trans activism is deeply, fundamentally misogynistic. Another might be that - at least in the UK - the strongest voices against trans activism have no intention whatsoever of proscribing abortion.

@RoyalCorgi

You know the way they always say things like "If you've got Boris Johnson on your side, you ought to question whether you're right"?

If you've managed to make an enemy of Martina Navratilova, then you really ought to question whether you're right.

Borris is keen on sending arms to help Ukraine defend itself - in fact Britain started sending arms to Ukraine in January weeks before the invasion.

Assume they also believe Borris was wrong on this too ?

There are definitely some right wing conservative/ religious people in the gender critical movement. They seem outnumbered by people who hear gender critical = anti-choice and say WTF?

OJ is just resorting to analogies again as he has no proper argument, saying something is just like something else is just an opinion and does not prove anything.

And why should we be bothered if Boris jumping on the bandwagon

Most people here we're against self if when it was tory policy

Just because they have switched, does not mean we should.

It used 'host body' for the pregnant woman.

Fucking hell. They don't even try to hide their contempt and disgust of us.

Sadly Germaine Greer had it spot on.

@BenCooperisaGod

So, just so i am clear. We are now all right wing, evangelical, anti abortion, russian money taking transphobes.

Gotcha.

Even for Talcum X this is a stretch. Has he ever met a gender critical feminist?

Aligning this MRA nonsense with the left wing and feminist objectors to the right along with 'pro-lifers' and homophobes really is the laziest shortcut to ideological thinking. He's showing himself up as incredibly shortsighted and as not particularly bright, unless he's being deliberately disingenuous.

It's been pretty obvious that this distinction hasn't existed for aeons, especially in Britain, where politics have always clustered around the fairly conservative (small c) centre. That's not even taking into account the horseshoe effect of the far right/left. MRA/TRA don't resemble anything approaching the left as I remember it. I can't even feel let down by the fact that betrayal by the left always stings the most, given that's the ground on which political rights of vulnerable groups have mostly been contested. The left/right divide is now completely meaningless.

NB. the 'we are the most oppressed group in the world' shit is classic DARVO. The appalling, sobering statistics of VAWG are ample evidence of as much.

Why do we have to agree with other people on every issue? I can agree with someone on one issue and disagree on another one. Surely the ability to decide on an issue by issue basis is the very basic building block of having an opinion.

I agree with LOJ on some things and on others think his take is a pile of wank. On balance, I think he's a tube but that doesn't preclude me agreeing on some issues.

And who gets to decide the range of opinions I'm allowed to have? Hint: I'll fucking die on the hill of it not being a no-name wank stain who writes shit for a living.

This purity concept is harming public discourse and removes the grey areas where consensus is found.

@nepeta

Why is OJ always butting into debates where he has no skin in the game (except perhaps needing a surrogate one day)? And why do I get that creeping feeling up my spine that I am reading someone who very much loathes women when I read his views?

Yep, exactly. Owen has his views on abortion, on women's bodies, on how women ought to feel about single sex spaces, males in women's sports, etc, and he'll damn well crush any women who disagree. I'd like to think it's just a sheer monumental failure of empathy and imagination rather than active spite.

Personally I would be mortified if Marina Navratilova had occasion to speak to me in this manner. Hopefully he'll shut up.

@Apollo441

Personally I would be mortified if Marina Navratilova had occasion to speak to me in this manner. Hopefully he'll shut up.

I don't think he's losing much sleep over what an irrelevant tennis player with less than half his followers is saying.

@ErrolTheDragon

Martina has said all that needs saying about OJ.

The thing is though, women concerned about womens rights haven't 'zoned in' on sports, we've been discussing many aspects for many years. It's commentators at large, average blokes etc who can simply see it very clearly in sports- they can see what a 'trans woman' is, see how it's unfair for them to be competing with women, see that contrary to what whining apologists pretend it's reall not complicated at all.

This is exactly it. And it’s kind of depressing that society at large cares more about fairness in sports than about vulnerable women in refuges and prisons, but it does and now it has traction. And yes this is leading to greater scrutiny on all the other issues. And yes also as another poster said, this is LOJ rattled and desperate and making the most ridiculous, how-can-he-not-see-the-irony comparisons.

I don't think he's losing much sleep over what an irrelevant tennis player with less than half his followers is saying.

One of the greatest tennis players of all time.

But yes, number of social media followers is how good people judge someone's character. Not by their accomplishments.

@Thetailfeather

Why do we have to agree with other people on every issue? I can agree with someone on one issue and disagree on another one. Surely the ability to decide on an issue by issue basis is the very basic building block of having an opinion.

I agree with LOJ on some things and on others think his take is a pile of wank. On balance, I think he's a tube but that doesn't preclude me agreeing on some issues.

And who gets to decide the range of opinions I'm allowed to have? Hint: I'll fucking die on the hill of it not being a no-name wank stain who writes shit for a living.

This purity concept is harming public discourse and removes the grey areas where consensus is found.

I am very troubled by that, too. It is tribalism which is created and supported by the ways we engage in online debates where tribal membership matters more than debating issues in a polite and constructive way, and where 'who' is allowed to speak at all is based not on what that person might say but on who that person declares themselves to be.

After having said that, I don't know anything else about OJs opinions except the way he appears to look down on women with vulvas.

I don't think he's losing much sleep over what an irrelevant tennis player with less than half his followers is saying

Lots of people follow OJ because they want to know what shite he is coming out with. To be forewarned is to be forearmed as it were.

Much like why so many people followed Trump really. For the entertainment value.

I would imagine people mostly follow Martina because of her sporting prowess and otherwise because they agree with with what she has to say.

This purity concept is harming public discourse and removes the grey areas where consensus is found.
Yes, precisely.

Between Talcum X's comments here, and Grace 'penis like an miscarried foetus' Lavery on Women's Hour yesterday, I'm just about done. The lack of empathy these two display is completely mind-blowing. They have no fucking idea.

Not for the first time, I wish MN had a vomit emoticon.

I think this is a 'no uterus; no opinion' situation.

Pffft Martina is world famous. LOJ...not so much.

Once again for the people at the back: twitter is not real life

Re. Caroline Farrow, you would almost think Catholics were not allowed.

Wasn't there a protection in the Equality Act? Do Catholics, or other 'non progressive' religions get to be 'included' too. Or do they get the women treatment?