Kathleen Stock - "These people are just a bit thick"

[Another2Cats]

So, Kathleen Stock has just made her views on people like Joylon Maugham et al known.

She started off with a tweet that said:

"Never mind the serious reputations, the accents, the swagger, the BBC connections, the Guardian column, the KC status, the rave book reviews, or whatever it is - like no other issue, trans ideology shows up people who are really quite stupid."

Which, not unsurprisingly, got a lot of replies. Some in support and some defending these people.

In reply to those defending these people she then had this to say. It's a different take on how to approach the argument. Don't know if I entirely agree:
.

I never do a long post but first time for everything. Lots of lively comment on my "they are just quite thick" explanation of Establishment transactivism capture (proposed hashtags #itsthestupidstupid #makeidiocymortifyingagain).

Also, some alternative explanations being proposed. I suppose my conclusion is: it doesn't matter if they really ARE thick, or just pretending/left-brained/lost in a cult/cosseted from the consequences/ smart in a way that makes them susceptible to motivated reasoning.

Having spent best part of six years (FML) arguing patiently with these people, a) I am not convinced of the more charitable explanations for notable characters, and b) either way, I don't care any more. If it walks like a moron, talks like a moron, it is – for all relevant purposes– a moron, and we should say so.

So for instance (just a small selection from timeline today):

• if you think transwomen (men) are to women what step-parents are to their children YOU ARE A MORON (think it through to the end: when was the metaphorical marriage? wtf is "womaning" as a verb? Wearing kneesocks?)

• If you think you can't know your own sex because you haven't seen your chromosomes YOU ARE A MORON (if that is the burden of proof, how do you personally know you have a brain?)

• If you think that the Supreme Court should have "consulted trans people" about their "lived experience" while interpreting existing law YOU ARE A MORON, this is not what courts do; and for good reason - how would it be workably scaled up?

• If you base your glowing view of trans ideology on what your daughter at private school and all her mates tell you (it doesn't affect us, Dad, why can't they just be kind?), then YOU ARE A MORON. What kind of general epistemology is that, exactly? You seem to be confusing having 360 degree insight into the intersection of law and social reality with them being able to use the remote better than you can.

I see so many people on here trying to shame the likes of Maugham, Campbell, Stewart, Harman (insert your most annoying establishment shill for transactivism here) on the grounds of their ethical failures and inability to empathise with vulnerable or respect basic fairness norms. It is hopeless. These people are utterly convinced of their moral rectitude, they automatically take disagreement as a sign of the limited mindset of their opposition.

We should forget all that, and hit them where it hurts: in the ego. THESE PEOPLE ARE JUST A BIT THICK. They are promoted way above their station, have blustered through on their accents, educations, and connections, and now the tide is going out, we can truly see who is naked. Let's learn from this, and never trust their so-called expertise on any other matter again.

https://x.com/Docstockk/status/1917165815339589823

Absolutely this.

For me, there are two camps of believers. One is what toomany calls the dangerous group who know full well what they’re doing eg SW, Mermaids etc. The other group is the rushing to be kind without stopping to reflect on what TWAW really entails eg most academics.

I’m not inclined to call either group morons. Not the least because my own caring DC might fall into the latter. But actually the first group has been extraordinarily strategic and clever infiltrating the highest level of organisations, firms and public bodies over many years.

Whilst neither group actually believes that people can change sex. The latter group do fall for convoluted beliefs that somehow a feeling about one’s gender trumps biological reality. That argument falls at so many hurdles, but it’s one that has been perpetuated and repeated ad nauseaum by the first group until it’s become accepted as the truth. It’s very hard to argue rationally against an irrational belief. People get defensive and more obstinate the more you try.

I think moron covers it. Offensive? Yes. They have been offensive.