The latest fallouts in GC world

[Pluvia]

My terfing energy has been focussed elsewhere in recent months and I haven't been here or on TwiX or social media much. Now I've taken responsibility for tweeting/ comms on behalf of a small but potentially significant LGB group and I discover that there seems to be something going on — another schism — in GC world. Jane Clare Jones's name seems to be coming up a lot. Something seems to have gone on but I can't work out what.

If it was my own account I'd just ignore, but the followers of this account are bringing it up and seem to expect an opinion to be expressed or a side to be taken. Also I'm seeing a lot about 'ultras' and 'lites', which is new to me. Can anyone enlighten me? I need to tread carefully.

Jane's position, such as it is, seems to be that if it's too hard to change something (GRA, MVAWG) we shouldn't bother, that it's a waste of time aiming high. We should be grateful for crumbs or something.

And the extracts shared by LaScap give off a sense of 'reframe your trauma'.

And the extracts shared by LaScap give off a sense of 'reframe your trauma'.

Yes but extracts are what they are. I can remember threads that started with a clip from a KJK video and that sometimes looked pretty damaging unless you watched the whole thing and got a sense of the context. I no longer take any notice of threads like that and I've yet to be persuaded that I should take any notice of this one unless I can read the whole source..

Link to her blog index:
janeclarejones.com/blog-index/

Scap provided the source material

There's having a go back, and then there's suggesting she's a sexual predator though. (For the avoidance of doubt, LaScap wasn't the one that introduced the idea into the conversation, but definitely fed it). That's the reason it's really gone off, not that LaScap was scathing about her thesis.

I agree it's not helpful. Of course, often that's not the goal! Which might account for different people's different attitudes to what they're reading.

analysing the whys and the wherefores with historical context and references is sometimes just an end in itself.

I don't particularly need to read an academic essay about anything to do with this issue, because I know what I want to happen and it's got fuck all to do with scholarly pontification about it.

And I've said it before, I do see a distinction between people who come at this from a historical or academic, viewpoint, and others who come at it from a safeguarding viewpoint. Especially those who would never regard it as a civil rights issue, because they see it as a men's sexual rights/fetish issue.

Hence the alliances suddenly falling off a cliff due to the Janice Turner/Debbie Hayton article.

it's an odd one, because mostly, we all want the same goal. But there are quite a few different reasons why we think we should have it.

She did but, as I've said, I can only access the opening paragraphs from the links on her X thread.

Thanks @DrSpartacular for the link to JCJ's blog. LaScap appeared to be referencing academic papers so I'm not sure if these will be on here but I'll take a look. (I guess I might be some time!)

Not everything is in the index but I'm pretty sure those papers are reproduced on the blog.

I can't find a link to her thesis though. If it was a UK thesis it would be available easily.

Thanks @DrSpartacular
Ok I'm going in. (All things considered, I think I'd rather watch one of KJK's videos but needs must.)

And don't worry about a thesis link - much as I'm trying to be fair, there's no way I'm going to read the whole of that! Thanks again for your trouble.

Good luck, Floisme. I'd be grateful for your insight.

I think the issue for me is, I've watched JCJ take down whoever she wants and when someone does the same to her, all hell breaks loose. Year after year after year.

Did she ever once say 'thank God KJK didnt get killed' last year? It seems every time the attention is on someone else, along comes another 756 tweet thread having a pop at someone who must remain nameless.

So if someone has a go back, it's pretty much 'if you can't take the heat' for me I am afraid. Maybe rethink those mile long tweet threads that make no sense other than 'she's a big meany poo poo head'.

Fully agree.

KJK personally attacks and makes insulting comments about anyone who disagrees with her. But this is okay with her supporters.

Why would KJK get killed? She had security and has never received any injury. I was more scared for the elderly and disabled women left behind with some mobs after security had hussled KJK away.

@AlisonDonut

👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

@AlisonDonut
🙌

Oh, top virtue points to you!

Nothing. They live their lives as they wish, with TW away from women's spaces, and children are back to being free from being medically butchered.

Ive been aware of her for a while, but still not sure what she wants. Women only spaces but men allowed a women-lite status and ignore the safeguarding implications? I genuinely dont know.

If that's close to how she sees it, how could that be implement? We are always going to come up with the reality of TRA - the constant boundary crossing, and the need for safeguarding. Having a bit of both isnt going to work.

If an approved person promoted repeal would she support it?

Why would KJK get killed? She had security and has never received any injury.

She could quite easily have been killed at Auckland and other events. She had two security guards, not a fucking army. Come on.

Did you actually see the huge mob @CandyMaker? It was genuinely terrifying to watch. Easy to handwave it away with hindsight though.

Lers not forget she had to be guarded in the police station and officers were not allowed to know where she was.

When the bad women go on GB news they are right wing nut jobs.

When a GB news star comes to the aid of an approved person, it's fine to ally with GB news people suddenly.

I watched footage which showed disabled and elderly woman left behind after KJK had left. I do not know in the video who was paid security, but there were far more than two people in orange coats.
I am sure it was scary for KJK. And she should have had better security. But it is an exaggeration to say she was nearly killed when there was no attempt on her life. She was pushed and shoved and people shouted at her.

You missed the elderly woman whose skull got cracked at that protest?

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/fear-and-loathing-in-new-zealand/

'That day I was told emphatically by each police officer and security that had I fallen I would have been killed. Women were injured that day, women who you may never hear about. You will never know their names. They didn’t get to hop on a plane and leave; they have to stay and live in a country that has told them their lives are not worth protecting.'

Ha! I don't know if I can offer insight but I think this is one of the papers that LaScap references. Unlike the link on the X thread, I managed to open and read it:
https://onedrive.live.com/?redeem=aHR0cHM6Ly8xZHJ2Lm1zL2IvcyFBZ09yQmZmR1dYWHJnbGc4bmNtX0Fic21HME5D&cid=EB7559C6F705AB03&id=EB7559C6F705AB03%21344&parId=root&o=OneUp]]

When I say 'read it' what I mean is, I've been through it once so far and it's classic JCJ and frankly, might as well have been written in Norwegian for all the sense I've made of it.

So I'm no closer to knowing whether or not I agree with LaScap's interpretation. But I do still have a gut feeling that hers (LaScap's) is a selective reading and I remain uneasy about it although I doubt I'll have the time or the energy to unpick it myself.

There's other writing listed here, including what looks like a link to a Phd thesis.
https://janeclarejones.com/writing/rape-culture/