Open letter by UK writers in solidarity (not with us obviously)

[CrossPurposes]

Prepare for some disappointing names.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/18p-rvgNitRKYs9C2PoIBC86Fb2ZQnBd8PzEfgGfnsKo/edit?usp=drivesdk

We've got writers JKR and Glinner on our side. That's enough for me!

What a long list of names.
I recognised about 3 of them.

Still on that train, Warrior? 🤣

I read this article with some disbelief - not least in the state of our education system if this is what it's spitting out at the other end - together with the utter lack of nuance and dearth of criticality it now espouses.

It's painfully obvious that the woman emitting the usual bleat of 'but intersectionality' has no idea what it means. I'm guessing she couldn't name the person who coined that term at gunpoint, nor give any precis as to the actual context or discipline surrounding that argument. They use elaborate neologisms in an attempt to sound intelligent but the racial backdrop of that term, and its contribution to the fields of critical race and disability theory, is lost on them.

Intersectionality is an account of systemic oppression and modes of oppression originally linked with the female sex and race. It is not a methodology, which makes it unfathomable that it should be touted as a potential solution to these problems.

These people should properly inform themselves of the position they are blindly following. They might find that reality is quite different to the one they imagined. Then again, considering the fantasy model of supposed 'reality' adopted by so many apparently intelligent people (who I don't believe for one moment have really swallowed the crock of BS they are so fond of spouting), it's not particularly surprising.

These people also really need to read the Queer Theory they cite as the Bible of their ideological belief system. They are going to find that the likes of Foucault are not actually arguing what the unnuanced, 280-character tweets of the past decade claim they are arguing. It's also too late to heed his warning that when power operates on the basis of oppression alone, you cannot and will not keep people under control forever. Sooner or later they will revolt.

Read more books, kids.

Loads of minor unimportant fringe people desperate to be seen as ‘kind’ - google some of the names, it’s all quite funny!

The list is a veritable who's who.

And by that I mean each name had me thinking "Who?" 🙃

I always get confused about the term gender non conforming people - as stated in this. Surely gender non conforming is a man who likes to dress in what are typically female clothes but still calls himself a man. A man who calls himself a woman and does the same is conforming to gender. Struggle to get this straight in my head.

I recognised a handful of names, but tbh not as many as one might have expected.

What are their criteria for 'writer', I wonder?

Bunch of idiots.

I recognised two.

I'm enjoying Warrior's new emphatic double-posting.

is it 2019 again?

their pompous fuck wittery letters didnt work before and they won’t work now

Still they can all congratulate each other on how lovely and kind they are to men

Jamie Carragher!?

Actually a list of sports people would be a lot more interesting

I was interested to spot one name on there of someone I know personally, and have had conversations with in the past couple of years which made me think she was fairly gender-critical, but the sector she writes in is full-on TRA territory, as are her adult DC. I wonder if her views have actually changed, or if she felt pressured to sign it?

Fact check fail in the first sentence - got the date of the judgment wrong.

Yes I saw that and can only conclude that here is an artsy fartsy Jamie Carragher out there as it ain’t him I’m pretty certain of that!

I am with you, though not so much confused as cross.

When my grandmother was a child, if a little boy expressed interest in something girly, he would probably be taken out behind the woodshed to have it beaten out of him. Young girls could get away with being Tomboys sometimes, but were, in general, expected to outgrow that. That is, if you stepped out of the box allocated to your sex, you were summarily put back in.

When I was a child (70s/80s), there was a huge push to get rid of the boxes. Women could be firemen and builders, men could grow their hair long and wear makeup. It was all about “gender nonconformity” - but critically, everyone stayed the same sex. That was important, because wearing a dress as a man was the thing that was sticking it to the old, stuffy, gender norms.

Transgenderism is so regressive in this regard. It is back to putting people in boxes - but this time, instead of behaviour and dress code boxes based on your sex, they are “sex” boxes based on your behaviour and dress code. If you are a girl and you don’t want to wear makeup or show off your boobs, then you must actually be a man. If you’re a man and you like pink and flower arranging, then you’re actually a woman. Why?!? We worked so hard to get rid of those effing boxes - why do you want to get back into them?

Cross.

Is this a list of names plucked from a phone book?

My favourites are the grifters that give a wee explanation for their unknown grift.

Alice Oseman, who got popular off promoting yaoi nonsense to teen girls, can't even spell her own name correctly.

Never heard of most of them. Maybe it's their way of getting their names in print. Pathetic really.

Those I have heard of I will avoid from now on.

Although I recognise only a few of the names, it's good to have a list of a writers to avoid.
Just as Russell T Davies has become extremely tiresome and one note, so I expect they will be.

If they got together a list of GC people it would be a long one, trouble is all the time people are being intimidated by TRA no one much is going to sign that list

They are relying on The Good Law Project for a legal opinion 😂

Spotted a couple of names I know - Russell T Davies, Sara Pascoe, Billy Bragg - no surprises there.

BTW I find the word ‘bioessentialism’ really annoying - it’s meant to sound divisive and right wing but believing in biological facts is logical.

The main thing writers should be defending is free speech. I no longer listen to literary critics or literary scholars. The vast majority have surrendered to Left-wing activists and woke bullies. I generally ignore the Booker Prize for the same reason. Books are now published, praised, taught in universities, etc, not because they are any good but because they tick certain boxes. And classics are being downgraded because the Left don't like the author, not because the work is bad.

Harold Bloom was warning about this 40 years ago. When attempts were made to edit Roald Dahl's books, for example, every major writer should been rioting in the streets. Forget the content. It's the principle. And then the Left have the f-ing nerve to whinge about the rise of fascism. They're the fascists. They're the ones shutting down free speech, locking people up for 'offensive' tweets, demanding the libraries be 'de-colonised', etc.

I don't see what the issue is on the letter. Its basically saying let's not let this cause extremism. That's not a polarising opinion surely. It looks to me like you could both support the ruling and sign the letter.

That was hard to read. But only coz I was mostly thinking "who?"

And we know the arts and literary world is largely captured.

Absolutely tons of #bekind women. 🙄

Its somewhat ironic that one of their main points is that no trans voices were heard, when so much of what they have put forward has had women's voices completely excluded.