Jon Ronson and Adam Buxton

[WarriorN]

I'm astounded at this "bonus episode" of "and things fell apart."

Absolutely everything Glinner has said has been proven.

This is a twitter link, I imagine it's on bbc sounds

x.com/glinner/status/1769152705333699000?s=46&t=A2fpFNgDRyXF2d6ye97wEA

From memory I think as PP has said more eloquently than I could, he genuinely thought people didn't know, and that when they did know they'd be as outraged as him and work to change the obvious harms occuring. And he literally couldn't believe it when people he knew and liked and respected, intelligent left leaning right thinking people, were willing to turn a blind eye and even attack those trying to show the harms which were happening.

He couldn't believe it. And for his trouble got call a boorish obsessive and told to #bekind.

Women are used to being talked over, ignored, belittled. Graham wasn't and couldn't believe what was happening.

Has it crossed your mind that he might be protecting his own children?

What an ethically moribund self satisfied schaden-freude smirking sibilant disingenuous mendacious creepy cowardly fucking prick you are, Jon Ronson.

Dunno who the other twit is.

😂 made me laugh

Sorry the grammar's shite, he doesn't deserve a well crafted insult. Fuck off, Jon.

I couldn't despise Ronson and Buxton more.

I always got the creeps from Jon Ronson, he's a bit too smug and self satisfied in his own brilliance...maybe it's the wispy voice or something.

It's very telling that he basically made his career from talking about public shaming and cancel culture, made a name for himself as someone who called it out - yet he refuses to address this one particular issue in the same way.

Everything else can be held up for scrutiny....except this. Why Jon? Is it because it disproportionately affects women and girls, so you don't really give a shit? Or you know the mob will come after you too.

Yes, I found it an interesting read objectively, and the trans part is only part of it. It's a good read about his life, writing etc.

He doesn't mention his break up in great detail which is his right but does say that his wife found the legal hounding and ostracising, which started very early on, very difficult (reasonably) - a quote: "Helen was perfectly within her rights to ask me to cease operations. But I couldn’t do so for another reason, which is – and this is something that everyone who’s in this fight knows – the Gender Stasi never forgive."

I think he's right. He wouldn't ever have got normality back.

I do think the onus really was on people not to send spurious legal threats, threats to his current and potential employers, death threats etc. Victim blaming otherwise surely?

Beautifully put! Hope Robson reads this post

Sorry *Ronson

Do we get deletions for mis-jonronsoning?

Yes.

“I did it for my wife and daughter, even though we broke up,” he tells me. “I did it for them and I’d do it again. I don’t think I’d have been doing my job as a father if I hadn’t been fighting against this stuff. I don’t want my daughter to go into college and have a male-bodied person whose story she doesn’t know in the toilet with her. She cannot object to it, so I had to take that fight on for her.”

This is a fascinating post. Thanks for sharing this information.

I think many feel like this

There are some awful posters that have been put up on here pretty much demanding young women ignore men in their spaces and shaming them into compliance

It’s pretty messed up

I am just not sure that you take on a fight for someone else if they never asked you to in the first place and your wife (their mother) specifically asked you not to.
As the daughter of divorced parents (therefore I am more than aware I'm projecting) I'd just rather have had my dad.

I do appreciate the explanation about it being too late/him never being forgiven by his critics though. It just feels a bit Macbethian is all, as in I've come so far, might as well keep going. Not that I'm comparing him with that character - just the mindset of cannot go back on what I've said/done now.
He has stuck to his convictions. That makes him more honourable than it does pig-headed.

He had the right to his opinion. I do believe that. But clapping back during that time period, doubling down with online feuds - if you make a hole and keep digging, you'll either fall in so far you can't get back out or the remaining sand will fall in on top of you and bury you.

“She was scared. She was justifiably scared. They started to target her. They started to target her family. It just got too much for her.
“When you’re under constant stress because of legal things, because of money, because of the police coming to the door, then all those tiny little problems that you have in a relationship are amplified.”

It is still tricky for me to understand that going all-in, at the expense of his wife (and with the encouragement of others he didn't know in real life) was worth it.
I hope it was, I really do, as it would keep me up at night.

I used to like Jon Ronson before he turned on Glinner. I still want to love Adam B but I know he’s a coward, that’s his character and he’s very invested in “be kind” and usually staying out of trouble but as a previous poster said, both of them see no issue with ignoring the rights of women and girls on this point. It makes me really sad that the lefty men that you think are nice are not actually nice.

Mostly I’m peeved that now I have to self select out of content I would enjoy, because it’s made by these cowardly, weasely men who have made me so angry.

Maybe I’ll toddle off and read Hags again on my holiday.

I do think the onus really was on people not to send spurious legal threats, threats to his current and potential employers, death threats etc. Victim blaming otherwise surely?

Potentially. I just think by his own words being "consumed by it" was unhealthy and that responding/engaging so much with his critics on Twitter fed the trolls and fanned the flames. Sometimes not engaging is key to not giving someone the attention or platform they desire.
I hope he does feel vindicated by Tavistock closing/puberty blockers not being dished out anymore. I think I'll read his book over Easter to better understand his choices rather than judging on his interviews only.

Glinner has been famous and listened to since his early/mid twenties. He probably genuinely thought that he couldnt be ignored, and didnt see the financial costs until it was too late.

I bet he never thought it would be going on this long, and with hindsight it might have been wiser to use his comedy against TRA, like some stand up have. But thats easier said than done.

I agree. I despise him.

I think this is a good point. I know that devoting my time to arguing with randoms on twitter is a pointless exercise so don't spend hours doing it, but Glinner probably genuinely thought he was in a position of influence and once his fellow showbiz mates heard what was going on they would join him in the fight and they'd make a real difference. By the time he realised that wasn't going to happen it was too late.

I see Graham Linehan's behaviour as having been detrimental to starting a real challenge to the male trans rights activism. The issue needs nuance and care to start a challenge.

Women get this all the time. "You were right, sure, but you said it wrong."

Or

"Okay, you were absolutely right about every single very important issue, but you weren't KIND. If only you were kind, things would have turned out differently."

No, Graham was right and the callow twonks were wrong. That's all.

That wee clip of Ronson with his faux concern troll glee, trying to keep the smug out of his voice reminded me of something and I just remember what it was - Damian Barr's 'tittering sickly' tweet.

People who lack the courage of their convictions enjoy the suffering of those who have taken risks and lost things for standing up for what they think is right. Men like Ronson are not willing to risk their own neck for their beliefs, so they like to see others fail for theirs. They need to mock and jeer because it makes them feel better about their own weakness.

It's a particularly grotty form of spectator sport.

Did you listen to the whole episode? I don't think that is what he meant. He meant that the debate is so polarised that he didn't think the conversation would add anything helpful. He controls who he interviews so he can decide to interview/not interview whoever he likes.

I thought the end of the episode, about "Twitter shaming" having moved from being a left wing activity to a right wing activity was really interesting. Chimes with what I've seen online too.

He’s the easily forgotten one from the Adam and Joe Show: