Who has most disappointed you?

[Calistano]

I'd say Russell T Davies when he had his drunken rant. I get his concern that lgbt is being fractured. But his absent concern for Women and their rights was palpable. I honestly thought he had more sense.

TRSOH brigade on Twitter have been tweeting repeatedly saying that GC women are keeping quiet about RB because we’re on his side

it doesn’t seem to occur to them that the reason they’re not seeing GC women commenting on it is because they’ve blocked or muted every single woman who isn’t TWAW 🤷🏻‍♀️

Oh what nonsense. They've really run out of things to say now.

There are loads of posts about RB on Mumsnet alone. What a funny bunch they are to make stuff up!

Well, "Don't let the facts..." is their motto, after all. 😛

They need to read what the gender-critical poet and artist Joolz Denby is tweeting about Brand. She’s giving him both barrels!

Ffs.

@MargotBamborough

Where I have decided I really do not care at all is about upsetting people by not using the language they want me to use.

Yes. I've switched to using my own language rather than the mantras that have wormed their way into so many heads.

'Third person pronouns', 'XY Transexuals' and so on.

Can I add Jonathan van Ness from Queer Eye to the list, who has now resorted to this:

variety.com/2023/tv/news/jonathan-van-ness-cries-dax-shepard-podcast-transgender-issues-1235734972/

Went on Dax Shepherd's podcast, got some innocuous questions about trans kids, started crying, saying it was like talking to his dad, it was exhausting caring so much about trans kids like what he does and that the issue if fairness in women's sports is "fictitious".

I used to think he was a sweet, charming guy but he's a misogynist and a liar who spews dangerous nonsense.

Yeah he doesn't care about women, only confused men. I don't watch Queer Eye anymore. The interiors guy has similar views too.

'Yeah he doesn't care about women, only confused men. I don't watch Queer Eye anymore. The interiors guy has similar views too.'

Same here. I used to love Queer Eye but can't stomach it any more. Tan France is awful too

Yeah JVN is horrifically disappointing too, agreed. He doesn’t give a shit about women, women’s rights or the safety of children.

The irony of calling the dangers to women fictitious when so much of gender ideology is nothing but fiction.

I do try not to boycott people, everyone is entitled to their views after all. It’s organisations being batshit that I object to

but I agree, there is something about finding out that a person has views that are so stupid and harmful that just makes me…not want to engage with them

It’s like with the Poldark series. I was an avid viewer. Then came the episode where he rapes Elizabeth and the inference was that it was kind of sexy. When the following Sunday night rolled around, I found that I just didn’t want to watch it anymore

Has to be Philip Pullman. He literally wrote a book about a religious cult stopping puberty in kids and destroying them. How can he not see the parallels?! ?!

And the Sally Lockhart series!

Yes, I am devastated by both him and Margaret Atwood. I don't put celebrities on pedestals, we don't know these people, just because you like their creative output doesn't mean they have to be a decent person, or that they owe you anything. I don't want to be like the trans activists who were big fans of JK Rowling and have taken her views on women's rights catastrophically badly.

But Philip Pullmann and Margaret Atwood know. They know what a woman is, they know about dangerous ideologies, they know about the evil that can be done by people in positions of power preventing the truth from being spoken. It's all there in their writing.

They are cowards, both of them.

I have come to the conclusion, seperate to this issue, that sometimes artists, even writers, actually don't know. That is, they can tell stories in their books that are deep and nuanced, and seem unable to show the same depth when they speak.

I realized this after reading a book I enjoyed a lot addressing a hot button issue, and then hearing the author speak - he was so reductive I could not believe he had written that book.

Now, I don't think that is always the case, maybe the best authors are not like that. But some, I feel like they are prophets in a way - they can channel the gods, and it's not necessarily just their story that we are getting.

Just speculating, and I haven't even read his work.

But I'm guessing his target is religious conservatives, and he can't fathom that secular progressives could be extremist and irrational. So that's an inversion of his thinking.

Now someone like Dawkins doesn't seem to have any issue with being critical of progressive ideology on this.

Now also really disappointed with Neil DeGrasse Tyson, though to be fair he already came across as a pompous arse and misogynist.

I still find it hilarious that middle aged beardy woke bro types who used to worship Dawkins can't wrap their heads around the fact that an evolutionary biologist who made a second career out of rubbishing magical thinking doesn't believe that male people can become female people using the powerful forces of "gender".

I mean, who'dathunkit? 🤔

Turns out Richard Dawkins is actually a real atheist whereas they are credulous fucknuggets who think they're too clever to believe in God but still need to believe that humans are different to animals and their lives have some deeper meaning and have therefore fallen right into the large hole left behind by organised religion.

Or perhaps I am thinking about this too deeply and they only liked Dawkins because they follow every trend. Maybe atheism was what was trendy back then and gender woowoo is what is trendy now.

I really rather like the phrase 'credulous fucknugget'.

'Or perhaps I am thinking about this too deeply and they only liked Dawkins because they follow every trend. Maybe atheism was what was trendy back then and gender woowoo is what is trendy now.'

I think that's a very good point. Some people just jump on every passing bandwagon because they like the virtuous glow they get from it. No thinking involved at all

I most certainly think there is an element of this. Family members I know who have jumped on the bandwagon do indeed jump on every bandwagon going.

He’s been on my shit list for ages. He did a reel yesterday which was spouting absolute crap about TW in men’s sports:

1. the science says there’s no advantage
2. trans kids can’t compete in “any” sport
3. it’s character building for trans kids to compete in sport so they shouldn’t be excluded (from competing with the opposite sex)
4. there are no TW Olympic gold medallists so there’s no competition
5. Michael Phelps has big feet

Etc. A smorgasbord of the usual shit talking points. The only thing that’s changed is he now actually realises there is a debate and tries in his dimwitted way to vaguely address the contrary arguments. He was talking about female erasure last week - obviously denying it happens but a year ago he would just not have engaged at all.

PS I do admire him for dressing in a GNC way and not thinking this makes him female. That’s about it. He also uses they/them but doesn’t seem to get too exercised by people calling him he.

Oh yes and “sport is inherently dangerous anyway so who gives a shit if it becomes exponentially more dangerous for women by the inclusion of men.” He can fuck off.

Dawkins was swithering long enough mind. He chooses his targets carefully so the fact he has come out at all is a good sign.
Pullman...well sunk costs there. He hates religion and despises C S Lewis and Tolkien for using religious themes in their work. Now it turns out much of his New Atheist fan base basically think eugenics is no biggie.
Atwood..I don't know what she tells her head. She's a national treasure in Canada and in her 80s. Disappointed but I guess she wasn't as combative as some of the others. The O Briains , Pullmans and Inces who heaped abuse and scorn on the old religion. And cowered in the face of the new one.