Zoe Williams again

[theilltemperedmaggotintheheartofthelaw]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/oct/27/how-the-free-speech-debate-stops-us-from-stating-the-bleeding-obvious

TL:DR I believe in free speech but only if it's WORIADS, reasoned, and polite. I decide what fits the bill, and that means not Glinner. I mentioned him because he's a bit rude sometimes.

(I would have looked ridiculous if I chose, say, Helen Joyce, even though I don't think she should be allowed to speak, either, because she's like a racist uncle who doesn't believe trans people exist. You wont find me debating with people like her through a prism of civility.)

I know Sarah Pochin has some rough edges, and I doubt she'll ever lose the ability to make me think "good grief, you could have phrased that better", but her whole Real Nationalist Housewives of Cheshire vibe is very useful in flushing out the Zoe Williamses of this world, who really don't like anyone outside their salon having an opinion.

Glinner's Irish bluntness has the same effect.

I note that Glinner is the only one who is not even told what he he has done wrong. She just states that he obsesses about trans people and plonks him in the same category as Elon Musk and Sarah Pochin. They are at least told what they have done wrong to upset Zoe.

It's all very elliptical, and unlikely to be understood by anyone not already aware of the ins and outs. The casual reader will absorb the message that Glinner is anti-trans in the same way that Pochin is racist, but that Zoe is willing to debate with either if they are willing to stick politely to rational ground (thus avoiding the whole freedom-to-give-offence argument, which she is not wrong about). But we know that Zoe considers all rational debate about gender ideology, no matter how polite, to be intrinsically hateful. And this is a problem for this topic like no other (at least mass migration, grooming gangs, and the war in the Middle East are things that actually exist).

Bitter, because I was a Guardian reader ever since it was the Manchester Guardian 😔

I'm slightly confused - was she arguing that Sarah Pochin's opinions should be illegal, or that they just shouldn't be broadcast? On the BBC? Anywhere? Does the article come to any conclusions?

Meanwhile, I don't know what to make of this:

"You know you’re debating a thing, rather than the freedom or otherwise to say the thing, because there’s a lot of love in the room. And that isn’t because you all agree; it’s because it’s not possible to meaningfully communicate – say what you mean, listen to others – without generating warmth."

Does she believe that is how Parliament works? Or any political party?

Is that how things are supposed to work at the Guardian? I suppose it would explain a few things.

It’s a typical Woe Williams article - mostly incoherent

I think she's saying that we should stop wasting time on the freedom-to-give-offence issue and, instead, concentrate on debating with each other pleasantly at which point she will win all the arguments because she is right.

It's hard to believe she's a grown-up.

My attempts to lovingly and meaningfully communicate with trans friends certainly do generate a lot of warmth, but not the sort she has in mind.

Only being slightly confused puts you way ahead of most readers

Yeah, that para is like something Fergie would come out with after a session with one of her psychics.

Woeful Williams. Why does anyone read her garbage?

Williams kicking off on sky papers review last night and about Kishwer Falkner (equality and human rights commissioner) saying Labour has let down women.

ZW Claims the right have fermented a split between younger and older feminists on trans. Also mentioned “a current sitting - trans judge” is about to challenge the high courts two sex decision but then “I will stop as it’s not public knowledge” .

Is that the supreme court thingy

Isn’t it public knowledge? He’s made it clear he was going to do so, been interviewed on various news programmes etc.

She had claimed to have inside knowledge of the formation of Your Party back in the summer. The fact that she of all people was even then describing it as "A bit chaotic" was probably the clearest sign they were doomed

I think it’s just her self aggrandising manner.

Is there still a sitting trans judge? The one I’m thinking of retired in 2024.
ZW is one of the many things trans ideology spoiled for me. I used to enjoy reading her articles on exercise, now I just eye roll at anything she says.

She means McCloud.

Well, that's just typical Zoe Williams. Even when she's right she's wrong.

Seems to think she has her finger on the pulse, when in fact she's so far off the pulse that it's cringeworthy.

And all of those tired old tropes about "right wing manipulation". She's just a fan girl who likes to be at the very centre of the 'in crowd' at school

Do you know ZW once pretended she’d never heard of the concept of a woman only gym despite having written about them 😂

https://x.com/justmisogyny/status/1512527320246013956?s=46&t=SPorwN-mokktL467rcZ57g

edited to remove duplicate post

"And let's not rehash where faith as a caveat to equality meets its hard limit."

Oh, I think we should. We really should.