How social media trans "pile ons" have pushed Glinner and JKR into an echo chamber that reinforces a sense of fear and threat article claims

[IwantToRetire]

The irony of someone who clearly lives in their own echo chamber claiming that people who dont share his views have been radicalised by echo chambers.

The writer who is Deputy Head of Social (whatever that means) does at least recognise that trans pile ons dont work. But rather than acknowledging that the pile ons just confirm that TRAs are hostile to women's sex based rights, he says the reaction "is not normal behaviour, and belies an unhealthy fixation on an issue that we typically see from radicalised individuals."

"Just as importantly, we must recognise the role we all play in perpetuating this cycle. It may feel morally ‘just’ to call out someone’s indiscretions to a wide audience, but even well-meaning posts can be radicalising when passed through the corrupting prism of social media.

"In some cases, this corruption may be too deep-rooted to tackle. It’s hard to see how the likes of Linehan can return to a more balanced – and less vicious – place on trans rights given how far he’s fallen."

https://metro.co.uk/2023/04/20/anti-trans-views-are-rewarded-on-twitter-we-can-prevent-radicalisation-18647768/

(It says you can comment but I cant see where. What I dont understand, even though posted as "opinion" someone can label someone else corrupted and worse.)

Arse.

The total lack of self-awareness in everything touching this garbage makes me want to tear my hair out.

.

The irony of anyone on this board complaining about echo chambers...

What a terrible, unbalanced, badly written article.

Through better education on what trans rights actually means for women’s rights, and more political courage from our leaders in calling out the very real danger of transphobia...

Yeah, right!

Who's complaining about echo chambers?!!!!

This issue is the writer's complete lack of awareness of him being in an echo chamber.

Get it?

Did you read the article?

That's the point of including a link to an article is so that contributors to a thread can comment based on what has been written in the article.

I love it when posh boys tell me I didn't repent fast enough for them.

criticise someone once and they might repent

Someone buy that boy a tambourine.

Repent motherfuckers.

One of the biggest differences between the TRA side and the GC side is the ability of the former to dismiss the bigger picture and the latter’s ability to point it out.

“It will never happen!” vs “But it’s a possibility isn’t it?”

”It hasn’t happened!” vs “Here are hundreds of examples of it happening.”

“It doesn’t affect me, I don’t mind!” vs “Do you not see or care about all those that might?”

“It’s only one athlete, why does it matter?” vs “What the impacts of that one athlete on others and implications for the future?”

”They/we just want to pee!” vs “Have you seen all the examples of those who clearly don’t want to do just that?”

”Why should I care about prisoners?” vs “We should do all we can to protect prisoners.”

And so on.

The echo chamber of TRAs is not just about the agreement of ideas and opinions amongst themselves, it’s also the inability to consider the value and worth in people outside of their echo chamber. They have no empathy. They don’t care about the impacts of this ideology on other people.

How can JKR be in an echo chamber? If she was, she would only care about the impact of ideology and legislation on billionaire authors. Instead she cares deeply about abused women in prison. How can Glinner be in an echo chamber? He’s not a woman, yet he cares deeply about the impacts on women, not just male comedy writers.

TRAs care about no one else other than TRAs. That’s a real echo chamber.

This forum allows both sides to make their case.

It's the trans-activist side that often is "no debate", and wants censorship of different viewpoints.

If this forum is a bit of an "echo chamber", it's because trans-activism just can't survive that well in the light of open discussion.

Their own online spaces are probably "echo chambers" because they censor the fuck out of them.

As far as I'm concerned, I'm in a good position to "complain" about their echo chambers if I want. I'm all for open discussion. You know those scoundrels and intellectual cowards on the other side can't say the same!

We can achieve this by educating people, calmly and rationally, that trans people are not a threat – and by giving trans people more space in the media to show the public that treatment for gender dysphoria is essential, not dangerous.

So a media propaganda campaign is the way to convince people.

Personally I think we ideally want higher quality studies to settle this kind of question, not a media campaign.

Each time there’s significant engagement, more people see and understand the questions that are being asked and the problems with the demands being made. To suggest that if they just keep on (calmly or otherwise) making the same arguments, while failing to ever address (or indeed even listen properly to) the very pertinent questions that are being raised, that suddenly it will start working and everyone will stop objecting is very odd.

How long will it take before it is recognized that these two things…

1. Demanding that a group of people should have the right to be treated at all times as if they were the opposite sex
2. There’s a rise in “transphobia”

…are not a bizarre and unfortunate coincidence, or even are occurring because some transactivists are violent, but rather are inextricably linked?

I think there is a much more serious issue with algorithm based social media - ones which actively learn to push particular types of content towards you, like Facebook and Twitter, to increase engagement. So far as I can see Mumsnet doesn't do this.

So excellent!!

Agreed. @NotBadConsidering, brava!

Sadly, I don’t think female tras are acting in their own self interests in any way shape or form.

It's kind of fascinating that he can see how counter productive social media pile ons can be to changing people's minds whilst missing key points:

"How did this happen? In a cruel twist of fate, those who support the protection and expansion of trans rights are, in my view, partly responsible for this.

Those who oppose trans rights now seek to portray transgender people as an existential threat

From my time working in social media, I’ve seen a clear pattern play out: criticise someone once and they might repent, but criticise someone a hundred times and you’ll only solidify views they might once have held loosely – driving them into the arms of those who validate those beliefs instead.

The multiplier effect of social media, more commonly called the ‘pile on’, creates the perception of an angry mob assailing someone from all sides.

Algorithms, programmed for engagement and attention, warp our often well-meaning intentions, turning isolated instances of valid criticism and attempts to correct into a tidal wave of digital sound and fury that can overwhelm even the most hardened internet native"

The complete gloss over of the nature of these pile ons here is astonishing. This is not a cruel twist of fate where individual well meaning valid criticisms and are multiplied up into something overwhelming.

As if all JKR and GL have to put up with is thousands of "I disagree with you because...." "I'm disappointed that..."

The algorithm multiplier effect doesn't convert your 'valid criticisms' into raging rape and death threats, or even into nonsensical circular arguments.

I think both sides represent the other as an existential threat and that is why the debate has gotten so heated and polarised. Both sides feel that rights are under threat.

But only one side is actually removing the other from language by saying that transwomen are women but removing the word women from those it belongs to and leaving us as discombobulated parts which birth/feed/menstruate.

Only one side are actually removing rights from the other by denying female prisoners the right to spaces free from male rapists and murderers.

I haven't clicked yet as can already imagine how it goes. ChatGPT could probably put forward a more nuanced argument these days.

Anyone accusing JKR of living in an echo chamber says much more about them than her. But Metro has form for this, esp the Glinner bashing. I haven't touched it in years.

Well, I guess he is right that there is a rise in ‘transphobia’, when just about every reality oriented statement regarding the fact there are two sexes in the human species, is considered transphobic. 🤡

Hehehe, just saw that another poster also was reminded of the Repent motherfucker tambourine person 😂😂

It is sad. A lot of hostility and accusations of being obsessed with genitals, not to mention the ongoing genocide that we all partake in.
The last bit, when people in all seriousness claim there is an ongoing genocide of transpeople, really does raise my hackles. They clearly have little idea of what they are on about. For that alone I have to dismiss them completely: it is the cherry on top of the shit cake of lies.

Also, I think he's wrong about JKR's view becoming more radicalised. She still has compassion for vulnerable trans identifying people and her snark for the bullshit around this was visible from the first "Wimpund?" tweet.

Also the repentance (what an appropriate phrase given blind faith demanded) of the people who are called out in a smaller way isn't genuine. As people "convinced against their will are of the same opinion still". Just because you can bully some people into reciting 2+2=5 doesn't mean they have been convinced by your superior math skills.

Also, I think he's wrong about JKR's view becoming more radicalised.

Yeah - get back to me when she's screaming in someone's face banging a tambourine...

The "radicals" on this side are really are a bit weak.

If anything, we're closer to Rimmer in that Red Dwarf episode.

Let's get tough. The time for talking is over. Call it extreme if you like, but I propose we hit it hard and hit it fast with a major - and I mean major - leaflet campaign, and while it's reeling from that, we'd follow up with a whist drive, a car boot sale, some street theatre and possibly even some benefit concerts. OK? Now, if that's not enough, I'm sorry, it's time for the T-shirts: "Mutants Out" ... "Chameleonic Life Forms, No Thanks" ... and if that's not enough, well, I don't know what will be.

The outcome of this radicalisation online has real-world consequences: bomb threats sent to Budweiser factories after the brand partnered with a trans influencer, harassment of Daniel Radcliffe’s girlfriend – and suggestions that she might secretly be trans – after he held a roundtable with trans teens, and a raft of anti-transgender legislation seeking to curtail gender-affirming care in a number of US states.
This radicalisation leads us down a dark path: one that only ends in violence unless it’s quickly mitigated.

I’m not as on top of this debate as I once was, but I haven’t heard anything about bomb threats from women’s rights activists. Anyone else? Did I miss something?

Given that Radcliffe’s girlfriend is pregnant, any suggestions she’s trans must have been tongue in cheek. And again, where did this alleged harassment occur? Criticism of Radcliffe himself was obvious, but I wasn’t aware of any attacks on his girlfriend.

And the irony in suggesting that the dark path with violence at the end is a path women are treading is out of this world. There is overwhelming evidence that transactivism is treading exactly that path though.

It's only half 8 and you've already made my day 😆

did you even read the article

or the OP

or did you read both and the point went swooshing over your head

It's hilarious that people who believe things like "humans can't change sex", "men shouldn't be allowed in women's sports" and "rapists shouldn't be in women's prisons" are accused of being radicalised, whereas people who do believe those things are apparently the sane, normal ones.

Also hilarious that I've read Cameron's argument we must be educated that trans women don't pose a threat to women five minutes after seeing a video of a trans woman threatening violence against anyone who prevents them from using a woman's toilet.

Having looked up Cameron on LinkedIn, I see he attended Bedford Modern School (fees: £15k a year), so I expect that's where he acquired an enormous self-confidence vastly out of proportion to his actual abilities.

Another thought on my last point:

“And the irony in suggesting that the dark path with violence at the end is a path women are treading is out of this world. There is overwhelming evidence that transactivism is treading exactly that path though.”

Given the absolute absence of any evidence of radicalized women becoming violent, it crosses my mind to wonder whether he’s actually referring to TRA violence here, but blaming it on women as they were “asking for it”…