Graham Linehan on Joe Rogan why he left the UK

[rriffraff]

Graham Linehan talking on Joe Rogan about the UK trans movement - most of it I have heard him talking about before but when he talked about moving to the USA, Joe asked him (with regard to so many people being jailed for facebook posts etc.)
'Do you think that people are going to bail out of the UK and leave it a mental institution?'
Graham replied:
'The last few months I was in the UK I felt so paranoid and afraid because I thought I barely exist as a person there, I exist only to get sued and for the police to visit me'.
He is being sued again currently and has to return to the UK to face trial.

It is a terrible sign of the state of the country that people like Graham can't stay here and the state helps to harrass him and others via the police and the courts.

I watched an IT crowd this evening. It was really good, its criminal that he isnt writing for TV anymore.

I always wonder if he'd played it a bit smarter and subtler and used his comedy writing to make the point rather than twitter, things may have worked out differently. He doesnt seem to have a subtle setting, though.

I don't really care about sports one way or the other.
Great - you don't give a toss about sports. I therefore, don't need to give a toss about your opinion on sports. Glad we got that sorted.

Public restrooms are not safe spaces
Fair enough - I don't mind a bit of pedantry. It is anoying when people write or say 'safe spaces' when they are actually discussing single sex spaces. I think you might mean 'unisex' where you wrote 'sexless' though? No issues with unisex loos in addition to single-sex ones if needed as long as they are designed well.

people are uncomfortable with lots of things, and they aren't pandered to about it.
Yep. We shouldn't pander to the people who are uncomfortable with their sex. They can use the unisex facilities.

*Erin1207
I don't really care about sports one way or the other. *

Pretty much sums up Erin's attitude. Erin doesn't care about the effect of misogyny on women, women's rights, safeguarding, fairness.

Anyway, back to Glinner. He has been a steadfast supporter of women's rights, safeguarding and fairness. I sincerely hope he will feel able to return home.

I do not think it is necessary to either agree with everything he says or does, or utterly damn him for staying or doing something you disagree with. That way lie purity spirals and extremism.

From that reddit link:

It's like turning up a concentration camp and asking the guards to debate you in good faith about the showers being real or not.

There's really no hope for these people, is there?

A good man, and a funny man too, and God knows, we need more funny people now. But I don't blame him for not laughing.

Tell us what you really think?

Re chess: before men larping as women invaded women’s sports, chess recognised that women needed their own category as the behaviour of men pushed them out of the game. It’s not about body strength, it’s about how male entitlement excluded women.

I’ve seen Chessaroo being an absolute arse to a MNer with MH issues on another MN board. Best quietly ignored.

I've started this podcast and Rogan’s meandering approach (3+ hrs FFS!) makes for interesting, if unfocussed, conversation.

I used to listen to Joe Rogan many (many) years ago. He would have a huge range of guests and just let them talk. I'm getting the distinct impression he's gone a bit alt-right adjacent in the last 5 years for whatever reason.

It's not come completely out of the blue - he was already flirting with the guns n ammo lads since way back when, but in those days it was like he was their pet liberal. Now he's, well, whatever he is now.

I like Joe Rogan’s approach even though I rarely have 3 hours to spare and end up fast forwarding. His guests can’t just tell a funny story, plug their new book and get out. They have to have a conversation. It can be interesting to see who comes out of it well and who doesn’t.

Anyway I wish Graham Linehan all the best.

No comment on Lineham - haven't listened, and have mixed feelings about his approach to this battle - but wow, the above is frighteningly naive.

I don't really care about sports one way or the other. If a sports division decides to have it single sex, then that's fine, but it doesn't really seem to be about fairness.

Erin, there may be outliers driven by whatever you're suggesting above (phobia? I'm honestly not sure), but of course it's about fairness in the overwhelming majority of cases. Without single-sex sport, women couldn't play safely in a significant number of sports or excel in any. Eg. there'd be no women in professional football, rugby, baseball, cricket... ad infinitum.

https://boysvswomen.com/#/

[Mixed-sex spaces] all exist already and have throughout history. So there's nothing inherently wrong with it. Feeling uncomfortable with it isn't really a valid reason to make it a human rights issue, because people are uncomfortable with lots of things, and they aren't pandered to about it.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/women/sexual-assault-unisex-changing-rooms-sunday-times-women-risk-a8519086.html

Erin, the main reason isn't discomfort, but proven risks to women's safety (and legitimate anxiety resulting from that). Men, including trans-identifying males, commit 98% of sexual assaults, and have up to 150% greater punching power. Why do you think charities campaign for women to have single-sex spaces in developing countries?

Either you already know this and are being disingenuous... or you don't, in which case, for your own sake, please (as the awful, patronising cliché goes - forgive me for using it for the first time ever, it's just that it really does seem to apply here) "educate yourself".

PS This is an especially curious approach:

Mixed-sex spaces all exist already and have throughout history. So there's nothing inherently wrong with it.

cf.

Murder exists already and has throughout history. So there's nothing inherently wrong with it.

Theft exists already and has throughout history. So there's nothing inherently wrong with it.

Etc.

@Erin1207
hey zombies, I’m popping into MN to boysplain female reality to intelligent women because mummy didn’t pay me enough attention.

That one stopped me in my tracks. Staggering.

I have a friend in Florida who I speak with weekly, and listening to her you'd think that the U.K was fast becoming totalitarian state. The way that U.K news items are presented in the U.S, by more conservative channels/ conservative podcasters etc is very dramatised and inflated. I think Graham is playing into, and feeding that, to a great extent.

His situation here had become untenable because he'd been unable to make a living and had become a figure of total censure and hate for trans activists at the very peak of the madness. It's horrible for JK Rowling too, but she does not have to worry about feeding herself,and her wealth shields her to an extent.

Graham can now make a living on the conservative talk show circuit in the U.S and will inevitable conform to the nature of the heavily polarising debate there.

He absolutely is. This vile bullying movement has sought to destroy him economically, socially and psychology.

I have the utmost admiration for him, and for all the women and men who have stood up and been abused like this by this appalling 'movement'.

If you haven't lived through what he has, you cannot even begin to understand the psychological devastation it causes.

How apt that someone with your views uses misogynistic insults.

You are nothing if not consistent.

You can't safeguard an open door. Literally anyone can go in at anytime. Why was none of this being given any attention until recent years? Aside from trans people using the restrooms they wanted for decades without anyone caring, men and women use each others restrooms anyway, like to skip queues. It's not a big deal.

He thinks it's okay to assault anyone he perceives to be male in the women's restroom.

Why was none of this being given any attention until recent years?

Because, by and large, until 'recent' times, men stayed in their own lane. Now, they're getting the message that that's no longer necessary; they can try their luck.

Sex segregated restrooms was not started as a women's rights issue. It was due to modesty concerns during the Victorian era, and their values at the time. The generalizations about harassment don't make sense, because unisex spaces of all kinds predate sex specific spaces, and there's nothing wrong with that. If we are uncomfortable with something, that doesn't justify it as a rights issue to dictate where people go or what they do. What is wrong with men and women being in the same room? They aren't security zones, so it's not the same as something like a prison.

What's even sillier is that any man could walk into the women's room, and if someone gives him a look, he can just say he's biologically female, and you wouldn't know any better.

I think people should use any restroom they want. Including TW using the men's room if they want. My issue is that the melodrama about restrooms is completely unfounded and stupid on both sides.

Trans people have been using the restrooms they wanted for decades.

This is called identity politics. I don't believe that being a man or a woman, a black person or white person, gay or trans etc, mean you get to dictate what is or isn't bigotry, or make factual statements that are ultimately just personal opinions and feelings. There are many women who will disagree with you about many things, including your opinions about anything sex based. Do their opinions not count anymore?

Also, I'm sure there are many concerns that people have that you don't just go along with, no matter how serious they profess it to be and no matter how valid their concerns can be, that won't make you go along with it or care about it. So it's the same here. If people disagree with you, or don't coddle your feelings, that doesn't make them bigots. It means they disagree and may have good reason to.