Terms And Conditions Apply (3)
Further to this, touched on in the comments,
Here’s Helen Joyce on transgender overreach, exploited politeness, and belated pushback:
There is no way that you can say to a man who identifies as a woman, insists he is a woman, that, fine, he can do what he likes, but he can’t actually come into women-only spaces – and that you reserve the right to say that the reason is because he’s a man – that doesn’t offend him…
What has happened is that a lot of women have seen their willingness to be polite absolutely taken advantage of… What it’s come down to is that people who don’t identify as their sex have taken other people’s politeness as license to override other people’s desires, needs, rights, and boundaries…
It reminds me of a sign, when I was a child, that shopkeepers used to have behind the till, that said, “Do not ask for credit because a refusal often offends.” Don’t ask to come in, don’t ask me to call you a woman, if by that you mean that you’re entitled to come into women’s spaces, or to count as one. And then I won’t have to refuse, and you won’t have to complain.
Full interview below:
An earlier, longer interview with Ms Joyce has been mentioned previously and can be found here.
Consider this an open thread. Share ye links and bicker.
Helen Joyce is bloody good.
Yes, I think so.
Copied from the tail end of the previous thread…
In entertainment news.
Not entirely unrelated.
Re the rumblings on Doctor Who, above, the second half of this seems apposite.
That is indeed a large part of the reason that I didn’t bother with the Nu Who.
Perhaps it was inevitable that such a remake couldn’t satisfy the nostalgia of fans, and that it had to be jazzed up in some way.
But the over obvious sexing up and the emoting is redolent of the insincerity of nothing more than Blairist politics. The show didn’t have anything near the cultural impact of the original ‘Who’, whose titular character got his grandfatherly sternness and kindness and reserve from a generation that had endured two world wars. It also tapped into the golden age and New Wave SF era and presented some truly original and compelling plot lines, whereas the Nu show was merely a series of callbacks to old themes.
As I said some years ago, the Doctor’s apparent age, relative to the companions – the intergenerational aspect – seems a rather important element of the series. Having a young(ish) actor playing the part never quite convinced me. Adding sexual or romantic tension, or the potential for it, seems both out of place and beside the point. As I read somewhere, “No teenager should fancy the Doctor.”
As is so often the case, in pretty much any context, the more woke the thing becomes, the more ham-fisted and amateurish the writing is. And it hasn’t always started at the highest levels.
And again, in recent iterations, the Doctor has been made politically parochial and conformist, and so instead of looking askance at contemporary assumptions, as being very local and of their time, he (or she) very often parrots them enthusiastically. Using younger actors to portray the character dovetails with the shrinking of the Doctor’s worldview to conform with current political fashion.
As Steve 2 quipped in an earlier thread,
They’ve taken the alien out of the alien.
Ahora en México es la ley para los políticos …
There’s, er, quite a lot to unpack there.
There’s, er, quite a lot to unpack there.
Also…
Guaranteed participation, the photos prove it.
Unexpectedly…
What would we do without “progressives”?
Helen Joyce:
That.
Btw, the second interview is really good.
Well, it’s not clear to me what scope there is for compromise. Say, in terms of whether dysmorphic men should be allowed to compete against, and beat, women in women’s sports. Which sort of makes the idea of women’s sports seem rather meaningless. Or in terms of whether dysmorphic men and autogynephile perverts should have socially affirmed access to women’s toilets, changing rooms, and other intimate spaces.
I don’t see what sort of concessions one could plausibly make.
‘We just opened a box of bananas and out popped this magical creature.’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13420375/Giant-huntsman-spider-London-primary-school.html
Meaty goodness.
Canned foods look better all the time, don’t they?
[ Directs significant glance at David’s bar snacks. ]
How about a nice can of Spam? Only twelve dollars.
[ Opens coat to reveal array of canned spam, corned beef, sardines, and herring. ]
How about these? Only three dollars and just as good.
[ Opens coat to reveal cans of “potted meat food product”. ]
[ Screams, fainting. ]
Mandatory pop culture reference.
Are there any of those back eggs dicentra mentioned?
Blatantly on a sign on a public business premises! Those dark days of open debtorphobia.
Start with a principle that’s so obvious that no normal person would ever have to say it out loud: “this is an amenity for women, and not an amenity for providing men access to women”, or “our country is the unique home of our own people, and foreigners will be dealt with as foreigners”. And then propaganda works over the years by turning secondary embarrassment at having to say it out loud to somebody who doesn’t get it turns into primary embarrassment and then it becomes something that can’t be said at all.
Bollocks.
Women are seeing the result of five decades of women unapologetically barging in to men’s spaces.
Men’s clubs? Oh no, can’t have that.
Men’s games? Sexual discrimination!
Men’s professions? Lower the standards, let in those incapable of doing the job, then prepare to be sued when the incompetence becomes too much to ignore.
Boy Scouts? Nope. Get some girls in there. Change your name while you’re at it.
Turnabout may not be fair play, but it shouldn’t be unexpected.
[ Peers over spectacles. ]
Enjoy life?
‘Magical’ doesn’t seem quite the word.
Not implausible.
Fair point.
TBF, they generally look, say, or do something stupid either way.
Which women? Oh, progressive women, leftwing women … you know, right, that Left-based ‘feminism’ is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Left?
There’s always been a [much maligned by the Left] substantial group of equity feminists (e.g. Christina Hoff Sommers) who only want to the freedom to pursue according to our own talents and skills. We’ve been called everything from Handmaids to Stepford wives to traitors to our sex.
Progressive women served their purpose for the Left’s identity politics and been shoved down the privilege rankings. And the rest of us are trying to say “we told you so”.
Still thinking about those back eggs.
“Ooh, my back eggs are killing me.”
[ Rubs back eggs. ]
Well, yes.
It would seem more accurate to say they are stupid. Heaven knows they’re ignorant and largely ineducable.
It’s unwatchable now. It’s like they’re making it bad deliberately.
Spoliation does seem the purpose of ‘enwokening’.
I’ve only seen short clips and interviews, both of which seemed designed to repel my interest. Though I was never a big fan, even as a child. As I’ve said before, the idea of the series, its premise, is more engaging than what has generally materialised on screen.
I did think that John Hurt could’ve made a good Doctor, instead of just being a peripheral gimmick – ditto Peter Capaldi, but the writing during Capaldi’s run was often piss-poor and, from what I can see, generally derided. And the weakness of the writing tends to make the politically-correct assumptions, which have grown denser, louder, and more self-satisfied, all the more grating.
Something the Left has been doing to designated victim groups since forever.
I’d also note that the self-satisfied wokeness often coincides with some perverse moral choices. In one Cybermen story, our hero, played by Capaldi, decides to needlessly abandon and doom his companions, the people he’s supposed to care for, while lecturing everyone – including those he’s consigning to mutilation and oblivion – about the imperative to be compassionate.
The companions are sacrificed in order to briefly delay the extinction of some random people that the Doctor has only just encountered and will presumably never see again, and who are apparently destined to become Cybermen fodder regardless of what he does, or who he sacrifices. And this is very much presented as something that we, the audience, are expected to applaud.
One companion, Bill, is eventually saved by a third party, but this is after the fact and unknown to our supposed hero, who has chosen to doom the people he’s meant to care for and protect. It’s like an attempt at a moral fable written by someone with sociopathic leanings, and who doesn’t comprehend why anyone might find this behaviour – which is presented as heroic – a little dissonant.
What that says about the scrupulously progressive writers, I leave to the reader. The episode in question, the title of which escapes me, was one of the last I watched in full, albeit with a kind of morbid curiosity.
Women weren’t exactly polite when they were attacking men, male spaces, men’s rights or something as basic as a fair trial, were they? And yes, I know, not conservative, normal women, but you aren’t exactly the ones setting the narrative are you?
What has happened is that college educated, liberal women have seen their hypocrisy and double standards being taken advantage of. After decades of arguing women are exactly the same as men (only when it suits them, if course, so not when it comes to domestic violence or military conscription), and using slimy emotional blackmail to get their way, someone else has used exactly those same nonsense beliefs and tactics against them.
This whole trans thing is ridiculous. But the problem is simply that western society has gotten used to a lot of ridiculous things, such as pretending that women are as strong as men, a man and woman getting drunk and having sex is rape, but only in one way, or diversity is a strength.
And women like Helen are part of the problem, because they are still intent on attacking “men”, not their college educated sisters who are responsible for this mess and are the biggest supporter group for trans “women”.
True, but the problem, Darleen, is that women like you – old school, take responsibility for my own life and actions instead of claiming victimhood – are not much in favour and have little say. Pity, because would work out better for everyone if that were the case.
As it happens, its the progressive, leftwing women who are running things.
And part of the problem is, men can’t take them on (for some obvious reasons).
And other normal women didn’t as well, because of the “sisterhood”.
This trans thing is a prime example. How many women, Helen Joyce, JK Rowling, etc, have actually called out those progressive, left wing women who are actually responsible and are the sword arm of the trans lobby? None.
And here we are, unfortunately.
The same can be said of many issues, most obviously immigration, DEI nonsense, Ukraine, and crime. The politeness, good will, empathy, etc. of the sane majority have been weaponized against them by the psychopaths in charge, for their own purposes.
Purposes which often seem to boil down to “Because I can” and “F you, dirt people, that’s why”.
Meanwhile, in the thrilling world of politics:
And if that wasn’t quite thrilling enough: “Neumaier is not the first gay European politician to come under recent fire for publishing graphic videos involving faeces.”
What the hell is it with Germans and feces?
[ Cancels plans to sample German food on next European vacation. ]
Joke heard years ago:
Q: Why do German toilets have a shelf?
A: That’s an altar.
It seems to me that if radical trans progressives can choose to ignore sex (which they grudgingly appear to accept as existing) in favour of “gender” then the rest of us should be free to ignore “gender.” Changing gender does not change sex. Hormones do not change sex. Surgery does not change sex. It should be self-evident that sex-based rules are as legitimate as “gender”-based rules.
Doing your job.
The reward.
Chait and Burkett’s original exchange put me in mind of a Reddit thread, wherein a pilot-trainee (private, mind you, not commercial) was insisting that his family and friends title him “Captain” in ordinary conversation. He was UNIVERSALLY mocked.
I mused to myself how the same, notoriously “liberal” Reddit participants, would have responded had the same bloke simply insisted on being called “Ma’am”.
The shooter’s name is Ali Hamsa Yusuf.
So often true: Lunatic known to police, or criminal known to police, or Muslim name.
And we recently had news/video of a Spanish Communist eating his own shit. The Left is shit. It’s a cry for help.
Long thread about a government woman with creepy tattoos.
The dog did the right thing.
Liberals want to allow lunatics like this to run free.
Liberals let lunatics like this to run free.
FTFY
Liberals want to allow lunatics like this to run free.
Liberal have allowed lunatics like this to run free for the past 20 years.
There, fixed it for you.
Back in the day, it would have been Barney Miller and Bellevue. Today, it’s: “you can’t infringe on his rights.”
Barney Miller and Bellevue
In Toronto, it was 999 Queen Street. They even changed the address to 1001 to– “remove the stigma”. Yeah, the stigma of violent mentally ill people who physically assaulted or killed people in their own families. Good lord, if we can’t see the failure in the mental health system of the past 40 years, we’re beyond doomed.
But David Tennant tho.
I said what, now?
Timestamp 07:06 GMT, translated to GMT -0600 is 01:06.
Yeah, that tracks.
Was it the one where the ship was so long that time moved at a different speed at one end as compared to the other? I think I saw part of that. The concept was fascinating and tragic.
This dude is gay and he’s calling out Cluster B women for inflicting trans. Does that count?
I feel sorry for him. He effed up and trusted the wrong people. Sounds like there was at least one Cluster B harpy gunning for him, and she maneuvered things around until the noose tightened around his neck.
He had most of a book on the laptop they seized. I don’t know if the laptop belonged to the college, but he also effed up by having only one copy of something that important, and if it was on a work computer, having something personal on it.
Watch the video and see how incredibly betrayed he feels by people who were nice to his face. He must be on the spectrum: he is so devoid of guile that he can’t imagine it in other people.
I trust he will be scooped up by one of the groups that are trying to build a parallel academic institutions. And he’ll keep his manuscripts in his personal cloud.
Dicentra – this is why I’ve missed you around here.
he’s calling out Cluster B women for inflicting trans
There’s a retrograde horse-cart inversion here.
The Cluster B disorders are themselves symptoms of complex PTSD, which results from sustained severe physical or sexual abuse during childhood or adolescence. Because psychiatric diagnoses have to be black and white, either/or, this obscures the fact that someone can suffer a milder form of CPTSD from sustained emotional/verbal abuse in childhood as well.
It was once thought that BPD was genetic, because the children of borderlines also tend to develop BPD. It’s now better understood that borderline adults tend to abuse their children in ways that produce a similar complex[1].
The prevalence of childhood sexual abuse in adults suffering sexual dysmorphia so severely they seek surgery to ameliorate the symptoms is well over 90% for both sexes (with the caveat that the recent social contagion effect in teenage girls is screwing those numbers around). Again, these are black and white, either/or kinds of stats, but less severe abuse will produce less severe dysmorphia.
Sexual dysmorphia is a kind of self-destructive coping mechanism developed by the psyche to distract from more severe and more permanent forms of self-destructive behaviour.
What’s happening here is Cluster B parents abuse their children in ways that produce a similar syndrome in the children, who then turn to sexual dysmorphia as the self-annihilation method du jour. It’s not that “Cluster B women inflict trans”; Cluster B women inflict Cluster B disorders on their children – some of which manifest as sexual dysmorphia or deviant sexuality, some as alcohol/drug abuse, eating disorders, cutting, compulsive tattooing/piercing, etc.
[1] This confounded by the fact that how susceptible someone is to developing a Cluster B disorder is determined by the sensitivity of their amygdala, and there’s likely a heritable genetic component to that. But broadly, BPD isn’t genetic the way neurological schizophrenia is
As I understand it, Mr Smith’s YouTube channel was under sustained bot assault almost immediately after posting a video in which he parsed another rhetorical attack on JK Rowling, revealing it to be, shall we say, not entirely honest. I’m still not clear why he was fired, but I would guess that his willingness to reveal such dishonesties, however calmly and politely, may have been a factor.
That a preference for honesty and logical coherence can now be considered a liability in academia, a reason one might be conspired against, even fired, is… quite something.
Yes. I remember liking the original-design Cybermen with the surgical bandages. And I did appreciate one of the incidental details – the supposed ‘treatment’ for pain being merely a volume control, a muffling device. But the bombastic moralising was weirdly jarring, given the actual storyline and the Doctor’s perverse moral choices.
I wasn’t sure if it was some amphibious mutation.
Madam, do try to keep those heaving bosoms under some kind of control.
[ Fetches tarpaulin. ]
A resonant phrase.
I’ve seen a fairly wide range of estimates, but it does seem strikingly common. And a big, red flashing light. When poking through transgender Reddit and other forums, it’s hard to miss just how often coyly unspecified “trauma” is invoked, along with abbreviations and euphemisms for sexual assault – i.e., childhood or adolescent sexual assault. And yet, despite this, I haven’t seen much enthusiasm for making what would seem to be an obvious connection.
the idea of the series, its premise, is more engaging than what has generally materialised on screen
As a child in Canada, every nerd was a huge fan of the show – mostly, I think, because it was British and British things were considered to be superior to American things, for reasons I didn’t quite understand at the time. The awkward way TVOntario scheduled the episodes made it impossible for me to follow it in any effective way and so I only saw a handful of Fourth Doctor episodes.
As an adult I’ve gone back and watched a number of Third, Fourth and Fifth Doctor series, and odd smatterings of the others.
It’s just not…good. It’s incredibly twee, and every episode that tries to be profound in some way ends up feeling like SF for people who have never read any SF ever. I don’t expect an SF TV show to dive into boring realistic detail, but you don’t need a degree in computer science to deduce that androids capable of reliably passing the Turing Test should be able to play rock-paper-scissors effectively.
(I’m given to understand that much of the Fourth Doctor was the result of Douglas Adams’ script doctoring, so I may be guilty of Taking Professional Wrestling Seriously. But Who was always presented to me as Thoughtful Science Fiction, so.)
I can think of maybe two or three stories that are… okay, provided you make allowances for the budgets, the underwhelming effects, and so on. (The historical stories tend to look slightly better, due, presumably, to using existing sets and fittings from other, more expensive projects.) And Tom Baker does have a certain charm. But even as a child, I was more engaged by the premise, and the theme music, than by the actual show itself.
Might need a gloss. “This dude” says:
He means that a lot of the unpersoning and social savaging of those who refuse to admit AGPs into their spaces comes from a whole lot of women, many of them Cluster B, which gives them that savage edge.
He (Joshua Slocum) also observes that:
Some of the kids who are transed by their Cluster B mothers have dysphoria because of the abuse from mom. But others have no such dysphoria: they’re just enmeshed in their psycho mothers, who use any excuse to “see signs” that their kid is trans. “Tranhousen” syndrome is the coinage.
Watch the interviews closely: you can see that the kid is regurgitating the mother’s language in the hopes of pleasing her, but on the other hand you can see that the kid is NOT happy with transitioning. It’s in their eyes.
In many cases, the mother hates males just on principle and so she turns her disgusting boy into a cute little girl. I’ve even heard them admit “[she] doesn’t actually have dysphoria,” but then the transitioning isn’t explained.
Given Tennant’s self-righteous scolding of late, I find it fairly easy to exert just such control.
[ Puts tarpaulin back in storage. ]
There’s a good lad.
[ Slurps coffee, looks at pile of Ephemera candidates. ]
[ Finishes compiling Ephemera, realises, belatedly, breakfast hasn’t happened. ]
Denial isn’t just a river in Egypt.
Strange indeed. Most of the Smart and Right Thinking People that I know seem to be wedded to the “born that way” theory. In spite of their enormous brains and fierce independent-mindedness they keep following intellectual/political fads.
Well, yes. But it is strange, as an outsider, to browse several trans forums in which the subject of childhood molestation crops up, as if coincidental and unrelated, but with boggling frequency. And yet seemingly none of the participants in the forums are connecting that alarming rate of very serious abuse with their own psychological issues – and by extension, the reason the forums exist.
Of course it’s possible some do make that connection – I don’t monitor these things round the clock. Contrary to rumours, I have better things to do of an evening. But still, the disconnect seems very, very common and, to an outsider, a little surreal.
I agree. It never appealed to me at all and I found the fan cult mystifying and off-putting. I did not even hear of Doctor Who until I was about 25 years old, and then only through encounters with similar-age science fiction fans. There’s nothing like an encounter with inappropriately passionate enthusiasm for mediocrity to get one’s attention. “This supposed adult is wildly obsessed with something of no real merit. Why? What is it about these items of pop culture which generate cult followings? Are there commonalities? And what does this reveal about those things and about the fans?”
For some, it may simply be that “noticing” and “pattern recognition” get punished. Noticing various patterns in crime statistics gets punished. Likewise patterns in IQ distribution and scholastic success or failure. Likewise religious-based violence. And so on.
(Are “noticing” and “pattern recognition” sufficiently arch references to Known Things?)
I just remembered that as a small child I did ask for a long scarf, so the series must have been engaging at some point, at least briefly. I mean, monsters, adventure, and time machines that are bigger on the inside. There is an appeal, at least as an idea. But I don’t recall really liking any particular episodes. None stick in the mind. Whereas, at the same age, I do remember being excited by some old episodes of Star Trek. The Doomsday Machine comes to mind.
Still rate that one, actually.
Key phrase: “small child”.
That was one of the better episodes. Still enjoyable. Unlike various others which range from boring to silly to painfully bad.
Related: Every now and then I pick up a book that made a big impression on me as a small child. Usually it does not bear re-reading; the thinness or childishness is clear and there is not much to appeal to adult sensibilities. But sometimes a book stands that test of time. I think Tolkien said something about such books but cannot recall exactly what he said. Or was it CS Lewis? Or even Chesterton?
I can only stand in awe of your heroic dedication.
I managed a quick brunch. Stand down red alert.
♪♫We are the very model of a modern moonbat family
We manifest confusion about both sexes and androgeny♪♫
I believe this is what used to be called child abuse.
Transhausen by proxy.
Oh, nonsense, why I remember as if it were yesterday going out to the playground at recess in grade school and trading baseball cards and pronouns.
Who can forget their childhood admiration of “switch hitters”?
Not to mention athletes who could “play all positions”?
I managed a quick brunch. Stand down red alert.
David’s weary and put-upon ‘Significant Other’ clears away remains of smoked salmon and scrambled eggs and returns to washing up.
Interesting theory.
Having now had a chance to watch a handful of Warren Smith’s videos, and they are worth watching, he does seem to confine his focus to logical errors, identifying why one thing does or doesn’t follow from another. There’s one video that touches on “diversity” initiatives – DEI, or Didn’t Earn It – and the obvious implications for standards. Another pokes at the economic illogic of Hollywood writers and the likely fate of their industry.
But it’s not overtly ideological or partisan, or party-political – the motive seems genuinely to be one of spotting common errors in thinking and teasing them apart, sometimes with charts and illustrations. It’s very… structural. As you say, there’s no discernible guile. No obvious agenda, beyond encouraging students, and viewers, to avoid some common bad habits.
The problem, I would guess, and perhaps a factor in his firing, is that his peers and employers are likely to share a worldview – and social status – very much based on a series of such errors. All those unearned conclusions, those glittering pieties, so loudly announced.
Hehe. How unintentionally appropriate.
For newcomers, the Problematic Competence category tag has many related items.
Heh.
That, as they say.
Re the prevalence of abuse victims in the transgender population, I can’t speak for anyone else but I’ve never experienced abuse, physical or emotional, aside from some bullying pricks at school. I might be an outlier. That’s stats for you.
Re Dr Who [Cares], I’m just going to have to not watch it even more than I already was. A black, queer lead, you say? YAWN.
Re the show becoming – like All The Other Things – a pod-people-like vehicle for the promulgation of hard-left politics: that’s just where we’re at now. All the adults with life experience, non-leftist perspectives, and talent have apparently retired and/or died. Male, Pale, and Deceased.
Re back eggs, my snarky and esoteric comment on the original thread appears to have been willowed, to borrow an expression from our cousins at the Ace of Spades blog.
Leave Ric Flair out of this.
What. I have a soft spot for 80s WWF rasslin.
Doctor in the House > Doctor Who.
But that’s just me. For some reason I found the former far more relevant to my life, my universe, and everything. For some reason people, the few who “knew” stuff, tried to convince me otherwise.
In regard to this “identity as” BS. Think back a decade or so, imagine how bloody absurd, dismissive you would have been had someone seriously suggested that a member of the SCOTUS would not be able to say what a woman is. Today, we accept, whether we admit it or not, that a man can identify as being a woman. Here’s an absurd thought you may dismiss at your leisure…today…imagine ten years from now, someone telling a man, against his own objections, that he actually is a woman. They are doing this to homosexuals…or even people they say are homosexuals…today…in Iran. Complete with necessary surgery. Ah, but this is kwazy, kwazy talk.
I might be an outlier. That’s stats for you.
Both sides of the culture war really want a simple universal answer to something that is messy and complicated. It is always The Thing/It is never The Thing. And there are no universals in nature. Of course not every single gay man was sexually abused as a child – but when the CDC says 50% of them were, and 90% of gay women, there’s something there that bears further investigation.
it’s hard to miss just how often coyly unspecified “trauma” is invoked, along with abbreviations and euphemisms for sexual assault
The problem with the cult of victimhood is that it makes this kind of self-reporting very unreliable – LARPing for online status is a thing, after all. But even if only half of them are making it up, Great Caesar’s Ghost why is no one doing anything about what is clearly a raging pandemic of child sexual abuse??
A too-common failing. I mostly gripe about the idiocy behind Marxism, the desire for a turn-the-crank-and-out-comes-the-answer mechanism which rescues people from the need to think deeply. But libertarianism is not exactly free of that disease either–hence the open borders cranks, and the “it is immoral to wage war until the enemy’s missiles are actually in the air” idiocy.