Trig Boys Interview is timely

[DougAndTheSlugs]

Caolon Robertson, the "journalist" who called JKR a putrid cunt. Remember that? The Trig boys have interviewed him. They started at the beginning with his decision to interview India Willoughby about being misgendered by JKR, and calling the cops on her.

At 1:09 minutes in CR says JK misgendered India Willoughby (the horror)

At 1:12 CR said she "called him a man"

Called HIM a man.

This was a car crash interview, in my view, for Caolan Robertson. The first half was spent minimising his understanding of the 'toxic' trans issue to deflect blame from himself and the second half was mostly angling for a job (cause he was fired doncha know, but can't admit it <NDA cough>).

At about 16 minutes in KK discusses pronouns as used in CR's interview with IW, saying it is dishonesty to use 'her' for a male and KK also fights back about the use of 'them', even admits it took him a while to get it. When he lays it out plainly at 27:58 (Isla Bryson, double rapist, tight pink leggings revealing boy bits, sent to a women's prison) CR says "that's a good point" and LAUGHS.

Like, he never thought about the consequences for women. It never entered his mind. It probably didn't sink in this time either. He just laughed and then went on talking about what a good investigative journalist he is and how nobody else does it like he does anymore <please let someone see this who will give me a job>.

Have now listened to it all and agree with PPs, I’m amazed at how little thought he’s actually put into any of this. Especially when he keeps talking about the importance of balanced, neutral investigative journalism. Surely to do a properly balanced investigative report you have to actually think about the issues (any issues, not just the gender identity one) and consider the positions of both sides, and interrogate them, don’t you? Very odd!

So it must be pretty shit to find out that not only do these guys see TW as women at all, but they only jumped on their cause for an excuse to let their inner misogynist out whilst getting back slaps for being A Good Guy.

This links to the concern I have about the idea that it's kind to use preferred pronouns. People tend to overlook what is happening and the meaning that comes from it.

For those who don't see the trans individual as they wish to be perceived there are a number of possibilities: the trans person will see the interaction (I) for what it is and appreciate the kind intent (2) for what it is and feel upset, but pleased they don't also have to deal with feelings of humiliation that they are being overtly 'outed' (3) for what it is and feel powerful regarding the use of preferred pronouns but angry at the lack of perception (4) will take it at face value.

For those who don't see the tran individual as they wish to be perceived but use preferred pronouns, again, there are a range of things that might be going on for them: (1) they may simply feel good that they are doing something they believe to be helpful (2) they may feel uncomfortable but believe this is a price worth paying to help alleviate greater discomfort that they think the trans person would feel otherwise (3) they may feel that they would prefer not to but the social norms within the context demands this (4) they may feel very uncomfortable that they aren't being authentic, which undermines their value system about meaningful relationships.

The list could go on and on. Humans are complex social animals. The simple solution of 'just say this' is ludicrous. Humans are also meaning makers. We find meaning in everything. We do not blindly accept what is said in interactions.

When someone says 'I'm so fat', there are infinite ways to respond kindly, without affirming or denying the truth that the person is fat. We are not forced into a position with 'fatness' to affirm or deny. The fact that some try and position affirmation of a gender identity as the only 'kind' response is ludicrous. In addition, the range of thoughtful responses for 'fatness' is better therapeutically - they tend to affirm the human being as a worthwhile individual, regardless of fat/weight. Trans people are being damaged by the myth that failure to affirm their identity means they are hated or discounted as an individual.

I can 💯 value an individual and see their worth without perceiving them as they want to be perceived. They can exist in the world being their authentic self, and I can applaud them for that. I just may not see them the way that they do. If this isn't tolerable - therapy can help.

The list could go on and on. Humans are complex social animals. The simple solution of 'just say this' is ludicrous. Humans are also meaning makers. We find meaning in everything. We do not blindly accept what is said in interactions.

Although many people on the autistic spectrum, who are vastly over-represented in the trans community, do blindly accept what is said in interactions.

I do wish India would be more dignified.
Ladylike, even.

I agree that some think the whole topic is beneath them, and assume getting a few bullet points from reddit/tra give them enough of an understanding.

But some can't resists the attention TRA output gives them, then get wounded when their lack of knowledge gets exposed.

It isn't just youtubers desperate for attention, its politicians and business owners too.

Its taken us years to get this as a talking point, but because of hurt egos and the potential of hurt egos of mainly men, this is getting called a culture war and again giving the media and politicians and excuse to believe the topic is beneath them.

Caolan seems to be saying he is at once both a serious, investigative journalist and an innocent interviewer who knows nothing about the subject. So he's just another billy bullshitter isn't he.

He did quite literally squirm in his chair a few times which was amusing to watch.

I would feel sorry for IW but he has sold his soul for a 30 minute shot at grasping for fame. Every interview has backfired and sent IW into an even worse desperate spiral of attention farming.

I really wish IW would take a break from social media and try to be happy in his own life without constantly arguing with randoms on X. It just makes IW look a bit deranged, sitting in his car, calling it a studio and making videos comparing himself to persecuted Jewish people and oppressed black people.

IW is making a laughing stock of himself which is why I feel pity for him. BUT it's all IW's own doing and IW could stop at any time.

TBH, in my experience it does sometimes take straight men a long time to see the issue. But when they eventually get it, they REALLY get it.

Agreed. I think a lot of men don't care that much at all and only get involved because it's an opportunity to post misogynist hate about JKR, whom they hate for having the temerity to be incredibly gifted, rich and successful whilst being female.

I thought this too @Rightsraptor My view is that he articulates the experience of many Gen Zs, which is that the only exposure to information about the world and one's culture is siloed. The lack of critical thinking is a hall mark of this generation, and it comes from being raised with social media.

I was actually cheered that he took on board the points Konstantin and Francis made about pronouns and about the issues of truthfulness being important. He also tried to champion a return to proper investigative journalism.

JKR forgave him publicly for what he said. It was the right thing to do. The Trigger boys are a generation ahead and may well be role models for this generation to start to think and speak properly about things again. We are all allowed to be wrong and to self correct over time.

So I think, I will take what he says at face value and continue building bridges, allowing people to make mistakes and keeping conversations going. This is what social media destroys (as he points out). We humans have to get our conversations, our humanity, our intelligence, our nuances, and our ability to forgive back.

For me, CR kept swithering between presenting self as someone affected by crass naivety and hadn't bothered to conduct any due diligence and research vs. presenting self as a savvy political commentator.

CR's constant references to "we" were irritating, and indicative of generalising for self-exculpation.

Golden bridge, golden bridge…

I actually felt sorry for CR. He is either presenting as dim witted to escape being in the wrong or he actually is dim witted.

This is excellent. Thank you.

@Brainworm

I can 💯 value an individual and see their worth without perceiving them as they want to be perceived. They can exist in the world being their authentic self, and I can applaud them for that. I just may not see them the way that they do. If this isn't tolerable - therapy can help.

This all day! ❤

I would like to know why 'the authentic self' requires substantial body modification.

JKR forgave him publicly for what he said.

Watch and learn, Willoughby, watch and learn.

I have just watched this off the back of this thread. Never heard of this guy before but my god, he was out of his depth wasn't he? Such a lack of critical thinking, faux innocence and naivety and wallowing in his own victimhood. Awful.

I found it extremely exasperating when Caolan presented JK Rowling’s defence of women’s rights as her having been pushed to the brink by negative interactions on social media. It was patronising, almost 'poor old dear, she means well but she can’t cope'. It proves that even with her extensive and erudite documentation of the issues inherent in gender ideology, Caolan doesn’t take her or her argument seriously.

He also accused her of deliberately bullying him by tweeting at him more than once following his interview with Willoughby - he had no concept of her trying to correct the public record after the one-sided video he released discussing her.

No understanding of the prior history and context and didn't care to perform any due diligence. Hence the swithering between being a naif victim and a KOL for social media and journalism.

I'm tempted to think CR is like some other men who bounce into a live cultural issue and assume they'll pick it up in moments because silly airhead women are making a fuss about nothing and lack his insight.

Exactly! For all his wittering on about the lack of proper investigative journalism these days and complaints about shallowness in news coverage, Caolan didn’t exactly put himself out in researching Willoughby’s constant bad behaviour and Rowling’s many detailed statements on women’s rights. He just saw an opportunity for virality and got stuck in.

I got the feeling that proper journalism to him is covering wars and famines, not the reduction of women’s rights by gender ideology espousing men’s rights activists in Western countries. That hasn’t got enough prestige in his view.