I don't agree with the ad-hominem comments on Sam Smith, India Willoughby et al.

[TERFCat]

Basically as the title says.

I think gender ideology can be robustly criticized without the need for comments on any individual's appearance or dress sense.

If you go to Twitter, a lot of the GC accounts I follow are currently laughing at Sam Smith for his latest magazine cover. I don't like SS, but I do think that they is free to dress how they want. SS shouldn't be body shamed either as they has a perfectly normal body.

Same goes for India. Don't like them, but I don't think their clothes etc should be mocked.

@CryptoFascistMadameCholet " I like to imagine it would make a farty sound, like a whoopee cushion. "

@CriticalCondition " If a bit starts to deflate do you think you can top it up by blowing into a tube? Like an aeroplane life-jacket in a safety demo. It just needs a toggle and a whistle and he's all good for a emergency landing on water. "

loooooolzzz!

I’m sure calling them ad hominem attacks is a form of misgendering and I’m surprised this thread hasn’t been deleted.

We would both be laughing together (rather then me laughing at her), first about friends crazy outfit and then about how boring my outfit is.

Precisely. Great post.

I would feel sorry for Sam Smith if SS weren’t so determined to kick away the supports helping women achieve recognition in the music industry.

SS never appears truly confident in any of these avant-garde costumes. The clothes are always wearing the person. I think much of this may stem from SS’s unhappiness in their own body, their documented comments about their weight, which is at least a part of what has led to this NB nonsense.

Harry Styles has been mentioned a lot on this thread and I think he is a good example of non-conforming style (mostly) working well. I don’t like everything HS wears but there’s very little doubt that whatever it is, he is wearing it, not the other way round. He gives the impression of being quite happy in his own skin, something SS unfortunately doesn’t. HS also doesn’t claim that his body style or weight distribution or the clothes he wears make him a woman or some kind of not-man, so he is a refreshingly GNC man.

But I do think some of the claims by trans women mean that their appearance is a subject that has to be addressed.

For example, some TW claim they've been using female facilities for years and that there is no possible way that they make women feel awkward because no one spots that they are a biological male. And this is seized upon by many more TW now who claim that if only women weren't kicking up a fuss, they'd be quietly be able to use women's facilities and there would be no issue.

And so it becomes necessary to point out that their appearance means we can tell they're men. And that actually, they're nowhere near passing for a woman - as they may have convinced themselves they are. And that in itself is a problem for women because we can SEE our spaces are being encroached on, and that can be very intimidating.

This debate over appearance has become relevant because they're forcing us to address it when actually most of us would very happily stick to the science of biology.

YY, this, exactly.

Does anyone remember Bjork going to an award show dressed in a sort of swan dress in the 90s? Obviously everyone took the piss. But because she was Bjork, and completely comfortable in her own self, she carried on being fabulous and bonkers. She genuinely didn't give a fuck that other people thought she looked ridiculous.

That's the issue with Smith I think; he clearly does care what people think and is highly sensitive about his appearance. You need to get over that before you go out wearing deliberately ridiculous outfits.

It's relevant to comment on Willouby's apperance, because Willoughby sets so much store by the male idea of what a woman should look like.

I loved the Swan dress!

🤣🤣

£28 from a well known online retailer!

Sam Smith is the walking definition of "play stupid games; win stupid prizes".

I agree OP. Sam Smith is a performer and joining the pantheon of pop performers who have shocked over the years. Many examples of this from Madonna to Miley Cyrus.

IW, yeah I don't like all the comments re I's clothing. I actually like a lot of what I've seen.

But it's difficult as pointing out someone's obvious ridiculousness is part of the argument in many cases. Trying to use judgement on those kinds of comments.

OP get the threat title changed to "Ad theminem" please

I kind of agree OP, I find it uncomfortable how many of the comments about SS are about him being fat. If anything it feeds into the nonsense rather than tackling it, as it just serves to confirm that a man can't dress in a non masculine way without being mocked, therefore they DO need another label for being so very unusual.

But as a side note, surely if we are using they pronouns, we are saying "they are", not "they is"?? We're not obliged to pretend it's a singular pronoun, are we?

Grombles

I think Sam Smith has a lovely singing voice, lots of his songs are catchy. I hated Unholy but, the video notwithstanding, I'm Not Here to Make Friends is a good pop song.

Sam Smith is obese, his body type is only "normal" in that we are going through an obesity crisis and over a quarter of the English population is obese. It's not normal, as in a normal human body type. Not that he should be mocked for that but all the comments I've seen about his weight, come from his supporters. There is a current trend for claiming the only problem his detractors have with his video is because of his weight. Which I don't think is true and is also a case of the people being hurtful about his body being the people defending him. But there is absolutely form for that kind of unthinkingly awful defense, that is more hurtful to the subject than those critcising them.

Well after looking up what ad hominem means ...

When you make a statement with your clothes , when you use clothes to say something about you then I do think comments on the clothes are more attacks on a position - the statement you are making - not personal - you are saying look at me and then objecting when others say omg that's aweful

just saying "shes ugly " would be personal , or laughing at ginger hair .

And it can be bullying to exclude someone from your group if they don't have the right brand of trainers

Clothes are an interesting case because many people do use them to indicate what group they belong , to express their personality , to make people go "what on earth are they thinking .." there are social rules on clothing - it's not appropriate to show knickers in the office

So wearing certain clothing could be considered taunting people

It also is part of the "what is appropriate to wear at school " thinking

Sorry. - rambling

Judging by those photos, if you're not commenting on Sam's clothes, Sam will be sorely disappointed.

Likewise Sam's body image. You may personally feel uncomfortable, but Sam is overtly offering it up for discussion.

As for IW. I don't recall a lot of outfit discussion either. India's clothes are unremarkable.

Sam Smith is letting us all know what he thinks of women.

TRA ideology aside, he's a dreary, boring, middle-of-the-road musician who has clearly decided an outrageous visual image will compensate for being less musically edgy than The Lighthouse Family. If your music doesn't live up to the video or the outfits you can't get away with this stuff.

The thing about TW’s appearance becomes relevant because the claim to womanhood is based on some mixture of an internal feeling and an attempt to look like a woman.

That’s why there’s a gulf between ‘I’m a woman and I never wear skirts’ and TW’s claims to femininity based on clothes, hair, make up and surgery. They are biologically male so the only way to claim womanhood is superficial or solipsistic. A biological female is a woman whatever she wears.

But we are talking about celebrities here: people who have built their careers in large part around aesthetics. Comments on any aspect of their carefully cultivated to generate attention aesthetic are not comparable to personal comments for most individuals. Most people are not looking to make money from how they look.

The arguments about ‘be kind’ are being co-opted by brands. Sam Smith in his hot air balloon gimp suit is a product to be sold, separate from sam smith the individual. But that individual has chosen to make what Sam Smith looks like an increasingly important part of the product. Sam Smith doesn’t get to just take the positives from it and have everyone silence criticism of how Sam Smith looks because it’s ‘unkind’.

borntobequiet · Today 06:47

I’m sure calling them ad hominem attacks is a form of misgendering and I’m surprised this thread hasn’t been deleted.

Yes, ad feminam!

Was about to say the same thing as @borntobequiet and @GromblesofGrimbledon

Latin has no grammatically neuter word for 'person'. So it has to be 'ad hominem' or 'ad feminam'.

Transphobic bloody languages, eh?

In Willyboy's case, it could be "ad gitiam."

Only if IW is reading. Fairly sure Sam is way to busy and important to check wether there is misgendering going on on mumsnet. India...or someone India adjacent, gets every post they find saying he, him in regards to India deleted faster than the page can refresh!

The last IW thread was a sea of deleted posts!