The Rowling vs. Trans People Hijack

[The Minsky Moment]

I've said before but I still think 99% of complaints in the US about "cancel culture" could be solved by employment rights.

Don't be silly.  Americans don't solve problems with worker rights.  That's Communism.  We solve problems the way God and Jesus intended, with guns.

[Admiral Yi]

Given some in this thread are keen to paint anyone who defends trans rights with the same brush as the unreasonable raging loons they're a thing worth mentioning as a separate group in their own right.

Can you give me an example of this?  I generally thought people were just disagreeing with the assessment of Rowling as a transphobe.

[Josquius]

Given some in this thread are keen to paint anyone who defends trans rights with the same brush as the unreasonable raging loons they're a thing worth mentioning as a separate group in their own right.

Can you give me an example of this?  I generally thought people were just disagreeing with the assessment of Rowling as a transphobe.

Ivan on page 1

I don't follow your logic.  How is that tweet transphobic?

Individually she's accusing stonewall's CEO of saying something they didn't; something which very neatly slots nicely into the mythology terfs have built. Its like if she shouted about being an attack helicopter.
Plus out of all the employment tribunals in the country its one that terfs have made a cause celebre she decides to donate to. Suspect.
More pertinently its just a random part of the overall pattern of behaviour. If it was the only thing she ever said on the topic it wouldn't have been such a huge deal on its own.

[Admiral Yi]

Ivan on page 1

Gotcha

[crazy canuck]

Given some in this thread are keen to paint anyone who defends trans rights with the same brush as the unreasonable raging loons they're a thing worth mentioning as a separate group in their own right.

Can you give me an example of this?  I generally thought people were just disagreeing with the assessment of Rowling as a transphobe.

Ivan on page 1

I don't follow your logic.  How is that tweet transphobic?

Individually she's accusing stonewall's CEO of saying something they didn't; something which very neatly slots nicely into the mythology terfs have built. Its like if she shouted about being an attack helicopter.
Plus out of all the employment tribunals in the country its one that terfs have made a cause celebre she decides to donate to. Suspect.
More pertinently its just a random part of the overall pattern of behaviour. If it was the only thing she ever said on the topic it wouldn't have been such a huge deal on its own.

She is not donating to a tribunal.  And it appears what the CEO did or did not say is a matter for the tribunal to decide. 

I am not at all sure what raising funds for a fired employee to take on their former employer over allegations of discrimination has to do with transphobia.  It would often be viewed as laudable but for the narrative that is being constructed.

The narrative might have some basis in fact, but so far I have not yet seen support for it.

[Josquius]

She is not donating to a tribunal.  And it appears what the CEO did or did not say is a matter for the tribunal to decide. 

I am not at all sure what raising funds for a fired employee to take on their former employer over allegations of discrimination has to do with transphobia.  It would often be viewed as laudable but for the narrative that is being constructed.

The narrative might have some basis in fact, but so far I have not yet seen support for it.

OK, she's not donating to a tribunal. She's donating to someone who has won a tribunal against their employer and decided that isn't enough and they want to sue the country's leading LGBT rights organisation because they're supposedly part of it
(they weren't https://www.stonewall.org.uk/about-us/news/stonewall-statement-outcome-allison-bailey-case)
What she is referring to the CEO saying is a few tweets down.

You're getting way too focussed on this one random tweet.

[crazy canuck]

She is not donating to a tribunal.  And it appears what the CEO did or did not say is a matter for the tribunal to decide. 

I am not at all sure what raising funds for a fired employee to take on their former employer over allegations of discrimination has to do with transphobia.  It would often be viewed as laudable but for the narrative that is being constructed.

The narrative might have some basis in fact, but so far I have not yet seen support for it.

OK, she's not donating to a tribunal. She's donating to someone who has won a tribunal against their employer and decided that isn't enough and they want to sue the country's leading LGBT rights organisation because they're supposedly part of it
(they weren't https://www.stonewall.org.uk/about-us/news/stonewall-statement-outcome-allison-bailey-case)
What she is referring to the CEO saying is a few tweets down.

You're getting way too focussed on this one random tweet.

I am focusing on it because that is the one you presented.  If you know of something she has said which earns the term terf you are using, please show us what it is.

[Gups]

No, the tweet you linked to was before the Tribunal hearing had taken place (the  Tribunal action was in relation to both her Chambers and Stonewell).

And the CEO did indeed liken the expression of gender critical views to anti-semitism

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57281448

Ms Kelley said while Stonewall believed in freedom of speech, it was "not without limit".

"With all beliefs including controversial beliefs there is a right to express those beliefs publicly and where they're harmful or damaging - whether it's anti-Semitic beliefs, gender critical beliefs, beliefs about disability - we have legal systems that are put in place for people who are harmed by that."

Challenged as to whether it might be considered offensive to compare anti-Semitic beliefs to gender-critical views, she insisted it was appropriate.

"We're talking about protected groups. We're talking about people that are protected on the basis of their sexuality, people that are protected on the basis of gender identity, people who are protected on the basis of race and that's why I think the analogy is apt."

[The Minsky Moment]

FWIW the Kelley statement does not appear to discussed by the Tribunal, presumably because it was irrelevant to their task.  It appears the claim against Stonewall was dismissed because of lack of evidence of inducement by Stonewall.  I.e the Chambers may have been motivated to act by its desire to maintain Stonewall's "Diversity Champion" imprimatur, but there wasn't anything specific that Stonewall said or did to cause that result.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah I think the Stonewall claim always seemed a bit speculative to me whenever I read about that case (haven't read the decision).

[Josquius]

No, the tweet you linked to was before the Tribunal hearing had taken place (the  Tribunal action was in relation to both her Chambers and Stonewell).

And the CEO did indeed liken the expression of gender critical views to anti-semitism

I don't see the issue here.

And again. Shows the bad faith of these groups that they're both "gender critical" yet really keen on pushing strict distinctions between gender and sex.

I am focusing on it because that is the one you presented.  If you know of something she has said which earns the term terf you are using, please show us what it is.

That's neither possible (it's not any one tweet which did it) nor of interest to me.

[Sheilbh]

I don't see the issue here.

And again. Shows the bad faith of these groups that they're both "gender critical" yet really keen on pushing strict distinctions between gender and sex.

Isn't that the core of the "gender critical" view?

[Josquius]

I don't see the issue here.

And again. Shows the bad faith of these groups that they're both "gender critical" yet really keen on pushing strict distinctions between gender and sex.

Isn't that the core of the "gender critical" view?

They claim to not be bigots and that its fine for people to be trans, except of course every single law should be based entirely on sex.... Then at the same time as being really anal when it comes to distinguishing sex and gender they  claim gender doesn't exist.

To me it betrays they're not just about women's safety or whatever rational concerns they claim to have. They want trans people erased. They just pretend to be clever about it.

[crazy canuck]

No, the tweet you linked to was before the Tribunal hearing had taken place (the  Tribunal action was in relation to both her Chambers and Stonewell).

And the CEO did indeed liken the expression of gender critical views to anti-semitism

I don't see the issue here.

And again. Shows the bad faith of these groups that they're both "gender critical" yet really keen on pushing strict distinctions between gender and sex.

I am focusing on it because that is the one you presented.  If you know of something she has said which earns the term terf you are using, please show us what it is.

That's neither possible (it's not any one tweet which did it) nor of interest to me.

So basically, you have spent pages on a diatribe, but you can't actually show us any factual basis for your diatribe. Wonderful just wonderful.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Ivan on page 1

Gotcha

hardly. I'm identifying that there are raging loons "defending" trans rights for their own nefarious reasons.