JK Rowling TERFing her legacy into the bin

[madhair60]

what the hell is Breadtube, not googling

[JaDanketies]

what the hell is Breadtube, not googling

lefties talking about the same shit as Ben Shapiro et al on YouTube in the hopes of converting people via algorithm

named breadtube after some bread

[TrenterPercenter]

Trenter you're grossly overestimating the amount of terfs that are actually part of the old radfem man-hating ilk.

They have a few convenient figureheads like Bindel, Stock etc but mostly they are just bigot cunts that find us disgusting.

Sorry GAFS I'm to sure I'm with you here; I'm not saying all/or a sizeable amount of old radfems are or were TERFs. 

I think I'd need you to expand a bit more to know what you are getting at here and where you think this overestimating is occurring.

If we are saying that TERFism is a thing; evidence suggests so; It is a current mainstream issue, this thread, CP is making a video one highly influential person that is alleged to be one, JKR, and there is a lot of discussion and quantifiably so looking at the popularity of Glinner and Mumsnet (as Z's thread has shown), then it comes from somewhere and appears to have a clear interaction with feminism and appeals to feminists.

I'm not sure but I think you might be reading my comment incorrectly;

It seems much more likely that TERFism, and JKRs TERFism in particular comes out of a radical anti-male element of feminism

I'm not saying radical feminists; I'm saying a radical anti-male element of feminism.

[Dog Botherer]

what the hell is Breadtube, not googling

insufferable leftish nerds. obsessed with debate and hating Chapo Trap House.

[jobotic]

what the hell is Breadtube, not googling

French stick

[pigamus]

insufferable leftish nerds. obsessed with debate and hating Chapo Trap House.

Can you name names? Wikipedia mentions Natalie Wynn and Harry Brewis, not high on my list of cunts

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

TERFism in the main emerges from feminism itself; not separately; this is seems incredibly obvious (something some of us on CaB had recognised some months ago)

Jesus it's almost like I've said a number of times that a number of Big F Feminist thinkers and writers held or still hold transphobic views, or something.

If you plug this into what she is saying about JKR you have to go with this idea that JKR herself has just been brainwashed into being a TERF; there were transphobes that pulled on feminist clothing and whispered in her ear that discriminating against trans people was the way forward.

yeah did you get to the part of the video where ContraPoints talked about how bigotry has a history and cites feminist thinker Janice Raymond

or the part of the video where she talked about the two reasons JK gives in her essay for having an intensely personal interest in "the trans debate", number one that she thinks tomboys are being pressured to transition and that might have happened to her, and number two being PTSD from being sexually assaulted?

everything that CP says around the propaganda about trans-women are exactly the same as about men; that is because TERFs do not recognise trans-women as women, they see them as men; they literally say this.

What an enlightening insight, I had no idea. Thanks for telling us.

She seems to have a clear affection for her.

She doesn't "have a clear affection for her" just because she doesn't spend 90 minutes clapping J K ROWLING IS A FUCKING TERF.

what the hell is Breadtube, not googling

Breadtube is a nickname for a loosely defined group of generally leftist/progressive YouTubers, so named because of something to do with Communism. It was coined by fans of "Breadtubers", with many of the YouTubers themselves disliking the concept of being grouped together because they find it gate-keepy and too focused on white creators. The main ones are ContraPoints, Hbomberguy, PhilosophyTube, Shaun, Three Arrows, Innuendo Studios, Folding Ideas, Lindsey Ellis etc. etc.

[chveik]

insufferable leftish nerds. obsessed with debate and hating Chapo Trap House.

oh dear

[Dog Botherer]

Can you name names? Wikipedia mentions Natalie Wynn and Harry Brewis, not high on my list of cunts

Vaush is a name i've heard. can't recall any others, sorry.

[thugler]

insufferable leftish nerds. obsessed with debate and hating Chapo Trap House.

Re: Chapo, I've enjoyed listening to it for a while, but they do have dumb takes on stuff sometimes and I don't see what's wrong with people pointing this out

[græskar]

Re: breadtube - the original meaning was an informal name for this group of popular left-leaning youtubers, but, as Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse says, they don't like or use the term themselves and I believe in recent times it's become more of a pejorative. It describes a kind of leftist youtuber who arose in the wake of Contrapoints' et al. huge popularity and who tries to make the same types of videos, but they end up being interminable, derivative 'video essays' on obscure philosophy.

See 0:05-0:15 here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URBCvsuqNzY&t=8s&ab_channel=OliverNico).

[dissolute ocelot]

I've no idea if this is accurate, claims they were named after Kropotin's Conquest of Bread which is anarcho-communist.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/BreadTube

[kngen]

Re: Chapo, I've enjoyed listening to it for a while, but they do have dumb takes on stuff sometimes and I don't see what's wrong with people pointing this out

Which reminds me, Contra's nasal impression and then 'I don't know Amber, why don't you try being a feminine man?' seemed to be explicitly directed at her off of Chapo. Which is a good thing, as - if anyone deserves to be dragged - it's her and her increasingly tiresome 'Look at me, I'm having OPINIONS!' interjections. Didn't realise she was a bit TERFy though, as she's not exactly - um... - RFy?

[bgmnts]

The only 'leftist youtuber' I sometimes listen to is Thought Slime, and he pretty much says all the right things. So if that's breadtube then I'm down with the breadtube.

[Dr Rock]

The main ones are ContraPoints, Hbomberguy, PhilosophyTube, Shaun, Three Arrows, Innuendo Studios, Folding Ideas, Lindsey Ellis etc. etc.

Maggie Mae Fish deserves more exposure. I also enjoy Ivan's Shady Existence, where he spews vitriol over Jordan Peterson, Stefan Molyneux, etc.

[TrenterPercenter]

Jesus it's almost like I've said a number of times that a number of Big F Feminist thinkers and writers held or still hold transphobic views, or something.
yeah did you get to the part of the video where ContraPoints talked about how bigotry has a history and cites feminist thinker Janice Raymond

You've said? Sorry I'm talking about this video.  I watched (well listened to) the whole video so I got to all of the parts;  CP doesn't examine in much detail why people like Janice Raymond have transphobic views in the first place[nb]though she does in another video but again from a quite understandable trans perspective - I'm not saying there is anything wrong with this; I thankful for CP discussing things at all I'm just adding thoughts to it [/nb] and more importantly why other feminists would listen to the views of feminists like Janice Raymond.  Janice Raymond also seems as quite a prominent, outspoken and extreme transphobe which makes her a bit different to the majority of TERFs that whilst not sharing such extreme views; have less persecutory; and more defensive views on trans-women (this alluded to again in the video but not in any depth of why these irrationally defensive views exist). 

To my mind the big F thinkers are not as relevant as are being made out (though they are not irrelevant either); if there were just a small group of transphobic feminists disconnected from wider feminism then there wouldn't be such an issue.  I would also differentiate between radical feminists who are against male supremacy and radical feminists that are anti-male; a much more bigoted and hate-filled view of men (you can be the latter and the former; but you can't really be the former from an egalitarian view and seriously entertain the latter).  The point is that these people (or at least very few of them) are not exclusively transphobic; they are anti-male and therefore transphobic.  Hence why MRAs and TERFs are similar; however they are not spoken about in the same way; we accept that MRAs hate women; we say TERFs hate trans people when in fact they hate men; they just see trans-women as men.  If you think this is blindingly obvious then we are in agreement; what I'm pointing out is that for some reason it is not discussed in this way; an egalitarian view would be to protect trans-women and question whether the way in which men have been viewed by feminists has negative consequences; not just for men but for trans-women.  This isn't what appears to be happening.

or the part of the video where she talked about the two reasons JK gives in her essay for having an intensely personal interest in "the trans debate", number one that she thinks tomboys are being pressured to transition and that might have happened to her, and number two being PTSD from being sexually assaulted?

Again, yes I listened to the whole video, and even refer to JKRs reasons and experiences here;

it is fascinating to consider what CPs says in the vid about being vulnerable to being "trans" and putting that alongside her male pen name and creating the equally unnecessary male protagonist Harry Potter; I don't know for sure but like CP I don't think JKR was really having gender identity crisis, however I think giving herself a male pen name in some way made her equivalent to those female writers that actually had to as a means of survival; Harry is just basically her as far as I can tell; again just to obscure self-indulgence (which is actually Freudian just not the sex obsessed interpretations of what Freud said) rather than anything Oediple.

and here:

In the main we don't think it is unacceptable for a woman to feel threatened by a man, by dint of him being a man, because some other man unrelated to anyone has hurt her (this is understandable in regards to trauma but the same caveats apply they CP says in the video; and raises the question what is the role on non-traumatised people in the care and support those that are traumatised); we empathise; however it doesn't seem right if that person is a trans-woman as CP details (it obviously isn't in both cases)

This isn't just about JKR; this is about how trauma and hatred can create bigots; now we appear to have got as far as it can make feminists bigots to trans-women but we are not willing to say it can make feminists bigots towards men.  CP touches on this with the idea that bigotry is related to power; which is not really explained very well and isn't really the meaning of the word.  I get where she is coming from but it is overly simplistic; you can definitely be a bigot and be powerless, you can just do more damage if your bigotry is empowered.  Case in point; empowered feminist bigotry towards men creating empowered trans-exclusionary beliefs.

What an enlightening insight, I had no idea. Thanks for telling us.

It's not enlightening.  It is obvious.  That is why it not being overtly discussed in this way is weird.  That is the whole point of the what I was saying.  The reason being I imagine is that CP wouldn't be taken kindly to.  You're quite needlessly hostile and dismissive responses being again another example of this and also what CP also discusses in the video about people "hating" online.

She doesn't "have a clear affection for her" just because she doesn't spend 90 minutes clapping J K ROWLING IS A FUCKING TERF.

I've already pointed out I'm not really suggesting CP is a massive fan of JKR; it was a segue into talking about JKR pre-TERF crappiness.  It is weird several posters have taken the first sentence and ignored everything else; You are not bad people for reading Harry Potter when you were 9 this is not the point. I'm also not seriously annoyed with CP for liking her and understand she obviously doesn't because she is making a video about her being an arse.  JKR does have a legacy though; it is the subject of this very thread, and it was created by people that perhaps could have been paying a bit more attention to how she was being presented and held up as a progressive figure (this does not include children reading her books!).  She has been seen as a progressive figure and has only recently been #cancelled because of her transphobia.

[TrenterPercenter]

I've no idea if this is accurate, claims they were named after Kropotin's Conquest of Bread which is anarcho-communist.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/BreadTube

Ha! I always assumed it was bread as in money (which is probably part of it also - though I'm not sure how much bread is used in the US to mean money).

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

CP doesn't examine in much detail why people like Janice Raymond have transphobic views in the first place

Yeah the bit where she talked about trauma didn't examine anything. Stupid Contra for not making a three hour video dissecting all the reasons people might be transphobic, even though she's talked about it on her channel many times and this is a video about one individual.

To my mind the big F thinkers are not as relevant as are being made out

What's in your mind doesn't matter. Feminism is a movement and a philosophy and many of its prominent thinkers held or still hold transphobic views, such as, oh, Germaine Greer for instance. People who weren't "just" transphobes or "man-haters" but who made actual good points and did a lot of work in the advancement of women's rights as well. This matters because it allows transphobes to cloak their transphobia in a disguise of feminism.

an egalitarian view would be to protect trans-women and question whether the way in which men have been viewed by feminists has negative consequences; not just for men but for trans-women.

"This video about a transphobic public figure should be about men and how they're victimised by feminism. This is the second thread about transphobic women I've barged into to talk about how men are unfairly maligned by feminazis, which is the real issue here. I love to hear the sound of myself typing. Paragraphs and paragraphs and paragraphs of ignorant shit that I think is dazzling and insightful. How dare you be hostile to me and my clownish, ridiculous pronouncements."

[TrenterPercenter]

"This video about a transphobic public figure should be about men and how they're victimised by feminism. This is the second thread about transphobic women I've barged into to talk about how men are unfairly maligned by feminazis, which is the real issue here. I love to hear the sound of myself typing. Paragraphs and paragraphs and paragraphs of ignorant shit that I think is dazzling and insightful. How dare you be hostile to me and my clownish, ridiculous pronouncements."

This just says everything about you and how you view these things; I'm not saying men are being victimised; I'm saying that hatred towards men leads to bigoted views on them which are being used to victimise trans-women.

The last thread you barged into you told me I thought the partner of rape victims were more affected by it than actual victims;  for saying something completely the opposite; you talk like you are some sheriff having to barge into threads to set the record straight; I really think you should stop and try and think that you might be talking to real people here with real feelings and experiences; now you've just decided I'm the type of person that uses terms like "feminazi" (never used it in my life - I'm more more likely to be called a feminazi myself) and wants to diminish feminism in someway (I don't it is the one of the important historical and future movements we have); this is all in your head; an excuse so you can be vile to people.

Please just don't bother responding to me if you can't get your head out of this cul-de-sac; it is perfectly possible to disagree with someone without being so needlessly horrid or having to disingenuously dial them up into some monster so you can get your rage fix.  All your basically doing is trying to bully someone into not discussing things in ways you don't think they should be; you think that is something a) to be proud of or b) won't just be ignored.

[NoSleep]

what the hell is Breadtube, not googling

Mostly crust.

[Buelligan]

Maggie Mae Fish... Ivan's Shady Existence etc.

What are the odds on them?

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

This just says everything about you and how you view these things; I'm not saying men are being victimised; I'm saying that hatred towards men leads to bigoted views on them which are being used to victimise trans-women.

Except you kind of are when you talk about feminists being bigoted against men as if feminists as a group or feminism as a movement is fundamentally and irrationally biased against men, as if it's a movement that spontaneously arose because a bunch of crazy chicks decided that men were the devil for no reason. The reality is that sexism is actually real and not only is it real it's institutional. Your inability to comprehend that is why we  had our last argument about feminism.

Now, if you had spent any time at all in the Feminist end of the Internet, which I have, you would know what actual transphobic feminists say about trans women when they think they're "safe". And what comes across over and over, especially from women who are 50+ and experienced much more overt sexism growing up, and sometimes from women who are BAME/gay and experience varieties of sexism that white straight women just don't, is disbelief that a man would willingly become a woman because he's "just so sad being a man". That's not possible. No man would pick their lives with all the career barriers; ever-present threat of rape; sexism; misogynoir; and lesbophobia. Either the man has bought into the MRA belief that men are the most oppressed and being a woman is easy, or he's doing it because he's a creep and a perv. It's not as simple as "they hate men, they think trans women are men, therefore transphobia". Which is ironic because you're picking at a video for being too simplistic.

It's also a little bit disgusting that you'd put "let's talk about how feminists are bigoted against men" on an equal footing with "let's combat transphobia". Transphobia is institutional. "Bigotry against men" is not.

The last thread you barged into you told me I thought the partner of rape victims were more affected by it than actual victims

Which thread was that, the Suzanne Moore thread? Because I'm looking at my posts in that thread right now and I said no such thing.

you talk like you are some sheriff having to barge into threads

I was posting in here before you were.

I really think you should stop and try and think that you might be talking to real people here with real feelings and experiences; now you've just decided I'm the type of person that uses terms like "feminazi" (never used it in my life - I'm more more likely to be called a feminazi myself) and wants to diminish feminism in someway (I don't it is the one of the important historical and future movements we have)

Yeah you say that but you also say stupid shit like "feminists are bigoted against men so they hate trans women because they consider them men". You don't actually know very much about feminism and maybe you should consider that before you write lengthy pronouncements on it. You ever think maybe I get really annoyed with this garbage because I'm a real person too and I've seen clueless spiel like this a million times?

[Dog Botherer]

Which reminds me, Contra's nasal impression and then 'I don't know Amber, why don't you try being a feminine man?' seemed to be explicitly directed at her off of Chapo. Which is a good thing, as - if anyone deserves to be dragged - it's her and her increasingly tiresome 'Look at me, I'm having OPINIONS!' interjections. Didn't realise she was a bit TERFy though, as she's not exactly - um... - RFy?

Amber kinda sucks but i don't think she's a TERF

[TrenterPercenter]

Except you kind of are when you talk about feminists being bigoted against men as if feminists as a group or feminism as a movement is fundamentally and irrationally biased against men, as if it's a movement that spontaneously arose because a bunch of crazy chicks decided that men were the devil for no reason. The reality is that sexism is actually real and not only is it real it's institutional. Your inability to comprehend that is why we  had our last argument about feminism.

No I haven't; read the post again it is ALL about feminist transphobes; nothing you've said here is what I think or have said (psst I even noted saying I shouldn't have make it clear but I will that this is not representative of all feminism) that is why you are having to make this up....now I don't think sexism is real apparently.

Now, if you had spent any time at all in the Feminist end of the Internet, which I have, you would know what actual transphobic feminists say about trans women when they think they're "safe". And what comes across over and over, especially from women who are 50+ and experienced much more overt sexism growing up, and sometimes from women who are BAME/gay and experience varieties of sexism that white straight women just don't, is disbelief that a man would willingly become a woman because he's "just so sad being a man". That's not possible. No man would pick their lives with all the career barriers; ever-present threat of rape; sexism; misogynoir; and lesbophobia. Either the man has bought into the MRA belief that men are the most oppressed and being a woman is easy, or he's doing it because he's a creep and a perv. It's not as simple as "they hate men, they think trans women are men, therefore transphobia". Which is ironic because you're picking at a video for being too simplistic.

No it isn't ironic; and what you've just said there is exactly what is being said by me and the video; you are just doing your own version of reductionism (though thanks as it was the first bit of actual consideration and not mindless hostility you engaged in and it was interesting) and simplifying things to paint what I've said as the only thing; this wasn't said I was just examining why women would have these views; not understanding; then buying into either of the dichotomies you've just pointed out is reductionist; it's not a problem to ask why does it occur? Why would their beliefs about men be so irrational to think they are either deranged or perverted? discussing the element of hate that arises and interacts from this, because the video is discussing hatred and bigotry btw, is not the only thing going on but it is an extension of things not a reduction.

It's also a little bit disgusting that you'd put "let's talk about how feminists are bigoted against men" on an equal footing with "let's combat transphobia". Transphobia is institutional. "Bigotry against men" is not

.

Stop quoting things I have not said.  You understand what quotation marks are right? Why are you one minute talking about people being reductionist and now being utterly reductionist is saying I am just saying this.  You haven't understood the post; you are pouring your anger into it for some reason.  There is probably an interesting discussion about bigotry against men not being institutional in that does something need to be institutional for it to be bigotry; however I'm not convinced you are the person to have that conversation with.

Which thread was that, the Suzanne Moore thread? Because I'm looking at my posts in that thread right now and I said no such thing.

I just checked; you are right it wasn't you that said it however you were participant in precipitating it; in that thread as you are now your were being utterly vile for no reason; just literally go back through our exchanges there; you see a similar pattern of you being incredibly rude and nasty for no reason and me trying to be polite whilst you get your pound of flesh.

I was posting in here before you were.

I'm honestly starting to think this is the level that you are operating at.

Yeah you say that but you also say stupid shit like "feminists are bigoted against men so they hate trans women because they consider them men". You don't actually know very much about feminism and maybe you should consider that before you write lengthy pronouncements on it. You ever think maybe I get really annoyed with this garbage because I'm a real person too and I've seen clueless spiel like this a million times?

Once again; stop quoting things that were never said; and take your own advice and stop reducing things down to the level of banality that is convenient for your rage.  It's really easy; just stop paraphrasing people and superimposing them onto your invented enemy in your head; ask them if they mean this if you want but be aware that you are being consistently nasty to someone who is not willing to do the same back to you; stop thinking everyone thinks in the horrid ways you insist on throwing into the conversation; you are literally on a level arguing with yourself.

Anyway I'm not into adding into the hatred that is already out there; I have no idea what is going on in your life but I certainly don't think this is healthy and it is proving impossible to talk about anything without you resorting to some angry invention you've made up in your head.  So let's leave it there. All the best.

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

Yeah I think I'll go back to imagining soothing white noise whenever you wank out a big paragraph of shite. You keep demonstrating that you didn't even watch the video and have no idea what feminism even is. But thanks for implying something is "going on in my life", that's great.

[George Oscar Bluth II]

Fortunately I always preferred Horrible Histories, which is very hard-left.

edit: Terry Deary's Wikipedia page makes him seem like a bit of a rich arsehole who thinks libraries should be banned as he ought to earn £180,000 for his books. He should've read the stuff he wrote a bit more closely.

Yeah was a real disappointment to learn that he's an utter cunt on the issue of libraries, loved those books as a kid and it's pretty grim to think that he wants to deny the experience of reading those books to kids whose parents can't afford £5.99 a throw or have no interest in buying books or whatever.

[idunnosomename]

wow i think i've vaguely heard of that but what an entitled cunt. children should start work at 11 years old so they can all earn enough to buy my books so I can earn thirty times as much?

car libraries sound like a great idea too. when you think about it, it's ridiculous we all have our own cars when if public transport was good enough we'd only need them for specific purposes.

I don't remember particularly loving Horrible Histories, I do wonder how often this horrible politics crept into it?

[TrenterPercenter]

I had no idea of this either; from his wiki page;

Deary is an outspoken critic of schools, which he believes serve no function above keeping children off the street.[11] Deary has commented: "I've no interest in schools. They have no relevance in the 21st century. They were a Victorian idea to get kids off the street. Who decided that putting 30 kids with only their age in common in a classroom with one teacher was the best way of educating? At my school there were 52 kids in the class and all I learned was how to pass the 11-plus. Testing is the death of education. Kids should leave school at 11 and go to work. Not down the mines or up chimneys, mind, but working with computers or something relevant. Everything I learned after 11 was a waste of time. Trigonometry, Boyle's law: it's never been of any use to me. They should have been teaching me the life skills I was going to need, such as building relationships, parenting and managing money. I didn't have a clue about any of these things at 18. Schools need to change."[12] Deary has also called to "ban Horrible Histories from schools", because "classrooms take all the fun out of his stories".[13]

It's not quite children should start work at 11 to pay for books. Some of what he says makes sense, albeit pretty half-baked, there are problems with testing so he's at least taking a critical eye on how school can operate to stratify and label kids.  Why he hasn't put this together with how if you get rid of public libraries then rich people would be the only people able to buy books is pretty weird though.

[idunnosomename]

no he's not saying that, I'm just putting together his separate strands of "i should make lots more money" and "children should be employed from 11 instead of learning" to point out he's a greedy fucking idiot.

yes, school I agree is pointless for the most part, but how you go from that to "children should work" is just incredible

[bgmnts]

Gutted to learn Terry Deary is a bit of a cunt but rich people are by definition I suppose. Ah well.