Fuck Oxfam

[DismantledKing]

Anyone seen the tweet by Maya tonight about this little animation by Oxfam? Here’s the link:

https://twitter.com/mforstater/status/1665817901327085568?s=46&t=U7-xooKExwmFQ8mivn72lw

as I said, fuck Oxfam.

So what now? Is rich JK Rowling going to sue a charity that helps poor people in 3rd world countries over a cartoon that vaguely resembles her likeness? That'll do wonders for her PR /s

Even if hypothetically Oxfam said it really was her, would she have any case? Look at all the political cartoons in newspapers that take the piss out of politicians and celebs for example.

MRA think they’re the only real people.

Yup!

Fixed it for you

So what now? Is rich JK Rowling going to sue a charity that rapes poor girls in 3rd world countries over a cartoon that vaguely resembles her likeness? That'll do wonders for her PR /s

Haven't read the full thread, but have emailed to complain. Awful.

No, we're not seeing a reflection of ourselves. We're seeing a likeness between this hideous caricature and a certain photo of JKR.

frankly at this point if JKR put them out of business she would be making women and girls safer. stopping them from sending other rapists to disaster zones seems like a good thing

I understand most (not all) posters on this board have gender critical views similar to those of Ms Rowling?

Yes, most people on the feminism board are feminists.

I'm also seeing the racism in that particular part of the animation.

To defend it in anyway is astonishing

What we believe biological sex is immutable & in some cases matters? The same thing everyone believed until 5 minutes ago?

according to their last annual report 46% of the people they worked with were women and girls. I wonder how they knew this 🤔

tje plain fact is Oxfam knows exactly what women are, what girls are, they just spout the bollocks that’s it’s oooooh sooooo hard to tell because they’re well lying cunts basically

Make your mind up, is it a caricature of JKR or not?
Or do facts not matter

Merlin, you're taking the easy way out, working with the JKR caricature accusations and political cartoon analogies. One is an easy straw man (it may or may not be her, though I know what I think personally), while the other is a false equivalence (newspaper satire is very different to charity promotion.

If you're going to take our arguments down and dismiss our concern more convincingly, you need to reconcile Oxfam's explicit vilification of a group advocating for their unique rights (whether or not you agree with their arguments, "gender criticals"/"TERFS" would say that trans women's "exclusion" is necessary in some contexts to this eg. rape crisis centres / health data collection) with Oxfam's mission statement:

"We have a vision of a just and sustainable world. A world where people and the planet are at the center of our economy. Where women and girls live free from violence and discrimination. Where the climate crisis is contained. And where governance systems are inclusive and allow for those in power to be held to account. Our ambition is lasting impact. We make a difference by being part of a global movement for social justice."

Note, I recognise it's a heck of a vision, kind of like the Miss World's "...And world peace (beatific smile)" cliché. Sadly, unattainable, I'd say, not least because of clashes like the one we're debating. BUT there's acknowledging these clashes (or sensitively sidestepping them) in your promotion...

...Or there's explicitly abusing some of the people you claim to be advocating for.

It's not hard to avoid the latter, you'd have thought. I initially half-hoped they'd put out a statement saying that a pissed intern had locked themselves into head office and taken over the editing. But no...

Most of the advert is in a generic Facebook/Alegria art style which is hideously ugly at the best of times and I do not understand why it is so popular. But what's even more baffling is that normally the characters are unnatural shades of purple etc in order (I quote) "to feel universal" except when they actually want to show diversity. So someone made a conscious decision to do the two men in shades of yellow or brown - it makes it feel much more racist than if any other art style had been used. Plus the weird distorted faces compared from the super bland figures shown previously.

I know that maybe sounds like a reach but google image search allegria art and you'll see what I mean. Ageists, Misogynistic and racist as fuck

Telegraph, which has a link to Weetman's copy of the original animation:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/06/06/oxfam-accused-depicting-jk-rowling-terf-badge-cartoon/

JKR:

"While Ms Rowling has not commented directly on the row, she has “liked” a series of tweets criticising the post, one of which read: “Astonishingly, this is still up. Oxfam, speak to your lawyers.”

She also liked a post which read “women are 51 per cent of the world, Oxfam, you can’t bully us into silence with cartoons”, and a further tweet reading: “Not even a mention of actual gay people and a misogynistic slur against women – here depicted in the most ugly way as ‘hateful’.”"

Comments from politicians:

"Rishi Sunak supported the removal of the video on Tuesday afternoon. Asked about the row, the Prime Minister’s official spokesman told reporters: “I understand they’ve deleted the video after the concerns were raised. Obviously, that seems like the right approach.
“More generally, you’ll know what the Prime Minister said on this issue, and as I said, I think the starting point should be treating people equally on all sides of the debatee_ with fairness and compassion.”"
"Miriam Cates, the Conservative MP for Penistone and Stocksbridge, told The Telegraph: “It’s deeply concerning that Oxfam is using its resources – money donated by the public for the alleviation of poverty in the developing world – to demonise individuals who campaign for the safety and rights of women.
“Trans rights activism has revealed itself to be an intolerant, aggressive and misogynistic movement that does not have popular support and so it is unclear why a charity would want to align itself with such a divisive campaignn_.”
Rosie Duffield, a Labour backbencher who has been shouted down by her own colleaguess_ while giving gender critical opinions in Parliament, described the video as “vile”."

Stock and Forstater:

"Stock – whose Oxford Union talk last month was interrupted by a transgender protesterr_ – wrote on Twitter: “This has shocked me… a still from an Oxfam video, made in support of Pride month.”
Maya Forstater, a tax expert who won a landmark appeal against an employment tribunal after claiming people cannot change biological sex, said after the video was deleted: “The thing is no one in the chain of command who signed this off or who saw it internally raised concerns.
“Either they didn’t see the misogyny, they approved of it, [or] they were too scared of being labelled a ‘terf’ to say anything. This is the culture bad EDI [equality, diversity and inclusion] has built.”"

What strikes me about all of this is how the culture at Oxfam will make it so easy for Haiti to happen again.

Dehumanise your victims (women and girls), dismiss their needs and vulnerabilities, prioritise the feelings of men and silence or dismiss the voices of the people who are most likely to whistle-blow or call out abusive behaviour (again women).

Ooh thank you @namitynamechange . I've always hated that style of graphic/illustration but I never knew the name for it. Now I know what it's called it's easier to explain what I don't want when I'm commissioning things!
Completely agree about the ridiculous 'everyone is purple except for the brown skinned person' thing too.
I particularly object to the blank face style.

Many years ago Robert Conquest wrote that any organisation that is not explicitly right-wing sooner or later becomes left-wing. It would appear that the modern corollary is 'Any organisation that is not explicitly gender critical sooner or later becomes gender obsessed.'

Maya's point especially. It's one of those, where you can't help thinking...

Your average teen would know this was hugely inappropriate. Your 9-year-old would be pulled up gently on it by mum or dad. Most teachers would cringe away from it on second glance mid-rushed-late-night resource-creation, and an average middle manager would be, "What the heck? OK, let's revise this, Michelle..." But a national charity? With layers of management, a marketing department, and a mandate to be culturally sensitive?

It beggars belief.

Hence the pissed intern theory.

The alternative's just too awful: utter teenaged stupidity / sack-worthy incompetence...

...Or Orwellian, blinkered Emmanuel-Goldstein-hate-week-ing.

All are downright scary in their own sweet ways.

The culture hasn't changed. They've dug their heels in

It would suggest that the organisation is rotten through and through. They've learned nothing from Haiti and past scandals - just tried to paper over and pretend all is well.

But a national charity? With layers of management, a marketing department, and a mandate to be culturally sensitive?

It beggars belief.

It's symptomatic of a company/organisation that is deeply, thoroughly institutionally misogynist.

I dont think JKR has ever sued anyone 🤔

remarkably restrained under the circumstances

I doubt I’d be able to have such self restraint

Yup, Arabella. Like, really.

I like one of their shops and the volunteers there but this is the final nail in the coffin...won't support this charity any more.