Stephen Fry - What a repulsive, condescending misogynistic turd

[Absentmindedsmile]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14820209/Harry-Potter-narrator-Stephen-Fry-turns-JK-Rowling-TERFs.html

Yuk.

Only someone disingenuous and deceitful would call a discussion a 'pile on'. If you come onto a feminist board and start saying a load of unfeminist, racist and misogynist things, you will be called out. It's a discussion board for a reason. If you can't defend your statements and accusations and attacks on feminists, don't start. Neither she nor you are a victim here.

Well misogynist bigots are very regressive...

Considering these days any comment or social media post made by JK Rowling is heavily reported in media as headline news, and is shockingly twisted out of context and twisted out of truthfulness, I suspect that Fry believes the media and thinks it is fine to vilify her.

We have had an excellent example of that effect here on this thread. Of someone who admitted they stopped reading JK Rowlings tweets but confidently accused her of attacking individuals. The specific example, I can only assume to have been chosen because of the news coverage turns out to be wrong.

JK Rowling didn’t attack Banda at all despite the media reporting as if she did. She attacked the BBC.

And some people believed the media rather than checking for themselves. Now repeat that with at least a weekly frequency, and you get people feeling completely justified in their own attacks.

Fry however knows her personally, and has built a profile of supposedly being a man of integrity. He has shown none here though.

But the thing is with discussion boards…. You post your opinions and people respond. Or do you just want us to ignore that particular poster? Surely that would be worse? If you post racist and misogynistic opinions why should you not be expected to be challenged on them?

Just to be clear,

https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1861449157564592425?s=46

This tweet is specifically one criticising the BBC for choosing a male footballer as their Female Footballer of the year. She is ‘attacking’ the BBC not Banda.

She clearly says “Presumably the BBC decided this was more time efficient than going door to door to spit directly in women's faces.”

While many media outlets reported it correctly. Media such as the Guardian did not. Nor did LGBT+ specific media. Those outlets twisted the single tweet to be directly attacking Banda. Not just once but repeatedly everytime another person ‘defended’ Banda. Such as Rapinoe.

Of course, I don’t consider that media has twisted that single tweet to be any excuse for making and doubling down on false accusations and actually spreading lies. That is not a justification at all.

I think we are supposed to ignore the misinformation and the accusations and accept the rebuke. It seems to be a constant theme from those who accuse people of ‘piling on’. These days I read it as:

‘pile on = I just want to post my opinion freely and without having to defend it even when it is based on falsehoods.’

I also suspect that those making accusations of pile ons don’t consider that posts spreading misinformation might contribute to someone else being wrongfully piled on. I think that some people wish to be able to post statements that are clearly based on falsehoods and repeating misinformation without having their opinion scrutinised.

I think some visitors from Reddit are so used to their hugboxes they see the slightest pushback as a pile on or a personal attack. I’ve learned on mumsnet, bring the evidence or prepare to be called out.

You are no doubt onto something there. I also think though that it must be a mind fuck to think that your moral position is shown to be based on falsity and you are so heavily invested that you can’t accept facts.

I remember discovering just how poor and untrustworthy media had become when I started understanding what was happening with the reporting of gender. It was very concerning and it takes a lot of extra work to establish what is accurate and what is false and what has been spun to no longer represent an accurate characterisation of an event.

I also think that if you enter discussions with an already entrenched and negative prejudiced view of the people posting, that is not going to change. And even if you are shown where you are wrong, you are simply going to ignore that. Because a group of people you have already put into a category of haters must be wrong.

These discussions always descend into ‘Waaaah, horrible, nasty women are picking on us again!’

People are so conditioned into our capitulation on all things. It freaks them the fuck out when we say ‘no’.

💯

All of your post. But especially ‘it must be a mind fuck to think that your moral position is shown to be based on falsity and you are so heavily invested that you can’t accept facts.’ We see that over and over. Poor sods.

My eyes were opened by the media (guardian) response to the Cologne attacks. Then the trans issue. Stepped out of my cosy smug left wing bubble. Once you see it you can’t unsee it.

You’re not really interesting enough to report though are you?

When did it become acceptable to come to specific platforms and post prejudiced views about the posters on the platform and expect that those you have just vilified and maligned just should accept your (general you) vilifying and demonising?

I know it is common to do, but when did this warped perception that people should not respond negatively to your interaction become the expectation. There have been quite a few threads recently where the regular posting group is denigrated and when this is received negatively, the poster falls back to ‘I am just posting my opinion! Why are you all so unwelcoming of alternative opinions?’

All the while ignoring that people are not responding to the alternative opinion. They are responding to the denigration and negative characterisation.

It is fuckwittery. I can only assume it is designed to reinforce that specific poster’s prejudice and to give some kind of positive emotional hit to be proven right.

Delivering an alternative opinion, particularly one based on misinformation, wrapped in denigration of the people also participating in the thread is not a neutral or positive engagement. It is fucking dishonest to say it is just someone stating their opinion.

If your own opinion is based on misinformation and falsity, how the fuck do you generally think you have the moral integrity to accuse others of being prejudiced? That takes some twisted thinking right there.

And once you see it, you see it repeated on too many topics. The BBC is horrendous for integrity of reporting.

People keep sticking media like the daily mail into the click bait category. However, I have found that if you read it and then read the BBC version of events, the DM can be helpful source to find the original source to fact check. The beeb had become far too ideological on topics to be trusted.

Again though, we have to do these extra steps to fact check.

Who's "visiting from Reddit?"
Is this yet another conspiracy theory that any dissenting voices must be some shadowy character from another place? 🙄

No. There have been threads on Reddit about MN threads of late which MNetters have gone back to Reddit and seen. I can't be arsed with it but there definitely has been a verifiable thing with visitors coming here to scold and then reporting back. MNetters have also then quoted back on the crazy stuff that's been said over there. So in fairness it's not really out of context or too unreasonable as a suggestion as it's been happening a lot of late.

For once this isn't a conspiracy theory.

And of course Maugham uses Fry’s discussion as further fodder.

https://x.com/jolyonmaugham/status/1935684654821954031?s=46

”I disagree profoundly with her on this subject. She says things that are inflammatory, contemptuous and mocking. They add to a terribly distressing time for trans people": Stephen Fry.

He echoes what so many who once admired her now believe: that Rowling is toxic - and unwell.”

So because there once apparently was some Reddit threads about MN, posters on this thread must be Reddit visitors?
Kind of does still sound like a bit of a conspiracy

It's occam's razor.

It doesn’t happen once. And it is not a new thing.

Maybe you should do some research for yourself

u ok hun? Do you need a cool drink? Cup of tea?

Classic projection there from the fox killer,

I don't know what set Stephen Fry off specifically, but he's so behind the curve with all this

The press relentlessly take the piss out of JM. His credibility is nowhere.

And now he's linking himself to Fry.

There's a sort of fascinating inevitability to all these men finally linking arms.

Even if it isn't a new thing then, it's still tin foil hat territory to tar everyone "dissenting" "must be a dodgy Reddit visitor" 🙄

That tired old trope, that a woman who isn’t behaving as a man thinks she should must be ‘unwell’.

Straight out of the gaslighter’s handbook.