twitter also creates an incredible echo chamber, and gives a bigot a feedback loop that justifies it in their own head. and once you go too far down that rabbit hole, there's no escape. Rowling is slowly going down the Glinner path, you can see she's far less veiled than she was a year or so ago.
Transgender rights discussion
- Thread starter crappycraperson
- Start date
Not a fair summary and you know it.
Yeah, definitely. It’s like some mad psychological experiment.
As far as I know, the echo chamber effect has never been proven and recent studies suggest effects to the opposite. Social Media has led to an environment wherein people are confronted with extreme and differing views much more frequently. Which explains how absurd conspiracy theories find so many followers these days. They simply reach more people than they used to.
Groupthink might very well exist online. But the bigger the platform, the less likely it is to occur.
I’m not familiar with the research at all.
But always imagined that someone with lots of followers like Rowling or Linehan who gets immersed in a controversial subject would end up reading a fairly carefully curated selection of replies to their tweets, due to blocking and muting all the accounts most involved in the debate who are critical of their opinions. And, conversely, being constantly exposed to the most active accounts who always agree with their opinions.
Feck knows how you study that phenomenon
In cases of figures like Rowling it’s obviously somewhat difficult to normal people. No matter what they say, they will always find people agreeing (or disagreeing) with them. So I assume that, depending on the character, possible narcissistic tendencies and so on, some people will simply seek out the positive responses and feel vindicated in their opinions. No matter how horrible, wrong or absurd they might be. I think that’s what happened to her and happens to many extremely famous people during their life. Especially from the many people who might financially benefit off of them. That will obviously change a person in some way or another.
But us normale people don’t experience this often quoted echochamber. We go through the opposite. I’m frequently confronted with hardcore racist views on the internet, no person in my circle would ever dare to voice publicly or even privately.
A little bit unfair, but my comment is mostly based on the fact that you made very sure to end your post with "Both sides." It (the post) gives the impression that you consider yourself in the englightenend middle, while on both sides of you are the bad faith actors. That might be a lot to read into your post, but it's a common challenge with online discourse.
Definitely disagree with the above fairly strongly re echo chambers not existing in online communities...the algorithms are going to adjust to user preferences in most cases. It even happens on here all the time with players being scapegoated. You do get outliers, like the whole world being pushed Andrew Tate for a few weeks to push engagement with him, even though he's fairly clearly a gowl. On the whole though, the daily consumption of the everyman is tailored to their interests - on Reddit, I see /r/soccer and /r/reddevils, I never come across /r/Liverpool. Anecdotally, it's fairly handy to see from the language people use over time too...you used to have lads in rural Ireland calling people "snowflakes" and the like because their YouTube was all Alex Jones and the "change my mind" prick. It's just naturally gonna happen over time - moreso with some platforms than others.
It’s still, as far as I’m concerned, not proven to exist and recent studies do suggest otherwise. We are exposed to much more opinions than we’ve been before the ascend of social media. As I’ve said, in small communities forms of groupthink are possible. As they are outside of the internet. But generally speaking, we are exposed to much more information and opinions than ever before.
That people become part of subcultures with its own language and such is a completely normal phenomenon and in no way new. What‘s new about it is the global reach of certain subcultures. That is rather new and down to social media.
The general issue I personally see is not the ascend of social media with so called echo chambers. It’s an erosion of journalistic standards, the lesser reach of good and factual journalism due to the widespread and generally not fought ascend of pseudo journalistic platforms and everything that goes with it. We are not in a crisis caused by echo chambers, but by a bleed out of quality journalism across the globe. Which is a consequence of social media, search engines and simply capitalist practices in general.
To get back on topic: I’ve stumbled over this quote by Rowling:
„it is dangerous to assert that any category of people deserves a blanket presumption of innocence.“
It is directly related to trans people. That is basically as fascist as it gets. I think there is absolutely no wriggle room there. A damning proof of her horrible views and character.
https://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/...-deserves-a-blanket-presumption-of-innocence/
„it is dangerous to assert that any category of people deserves a blanket presumption of innocence.“
It is directly related to trans people. That is basically as fascist as it gets. I think there is absolutely no wriggle room there. A damning proof of her horrible views and character.
https://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/...-deserves-a-blanket-presumption-of-innocence/
Eh? It’s not a very helpful thing to say but it’s true. Can apply to any group. “Person x couldn’t possibly have done this bad thing because they’re a policeman/doctor/whatever”. That’s a bad assumption to make.
She’s taking a swing at a straw man. A non-existent argument that no trans woman would ever harm a woman. It’s a crappy debating tactic but not remotely fascist.
I agree with your point in general, but I suspect this one is because you've subscribed to those subreddits but not /r/liverpoolfc.
Presumption isn't assurance though, is it?
Those who commit crimes are also presumed innocent until proven guilty.
And considering the shade that she puts on the trans community as a whole...
It's Rowling's MO: Always paint herself as the victim. And when she really wants to try and shut someone down, she'll invoke the rape and death threats.
no one is saying that trans people can't do bad things just because they're trans, just that it's massively discrimatory to presume all trans people are potential predators just because some cis men 'may' pretend to be trans to access women's spaces. and very much emphasis on 'may' because no cis man needs to pretend to be trans to abuse women or to walk into a women's bathroom. in fact, it's frankly ridiculous to think they need to do that.
Yeah, it’s a stupid argument. Like I said, she’s tilting at a straw man. She’s not being a fascist though.
He didn't really say she was being a fascist, just that the following statement is right out of the fascist play-book:
„it is dangerous to assert that any category of people deserves a blanket presumption of innocence.“
Everyone gets a presumption of innocence, that's more or less how the justice system works.
He said “that is basically as fascist as it gets“
We both know what exactly what she meant when she said what she said. It clearly wasn’t a suggestion that trans people should lose the presumption of innocence everyone gets in accordance with the law
I don't know what she meant. It probably wasn't a sincere suggestion that trans people should lose the presumption of innocent in the justice system, but it certainly seems like basically an anti-trans dog-whistle to me.
It is an unfortunate choice for a pen name, given there was a Robert Galbraith Heath who was a psychiatrist and pushed gay conversion therapy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Galbraith_Heath#Gay_conversion_therapy
So many levels to the irony. Love it.
You do though. Or you could certainly have a good guess. In this never ending stupid argument, people on her side are obsessed with safe spaces for women. They think all biological males are potential sexual predators and need to be kept out of spaces where biological females are likely to be vulnerable. Changing rooms, prisons, rape crisis centres etc The point she’s making here is that if a biological male comes out as trans you can’t presume they’re no longer a potential threat to women, just because they identify as a woman.
It’s definitely unhelpful but it’s also definitely true. And saying it doesn’t make her a fascist. The bigger issue is whether biological males really are as big a threat as she implies they are (probably not) and whether identifying as a woman makes them less of a threat (probably) Either way the point stands that you can’t “presume innocence” (i.e. deem someone to no longer pose a threat) based upon a particular cohort they might belong to.
It’s kind of the converse of profiling, which most left leaning folk get rightfully annoyed about. Deciding anyone is more likely innocent or guilty (a threat or not) based around their identity is a slippery slope.
Last edited:
Good watch. She's certifiably awful.
Kemi Badenoch is second favourite to be the next tory leader / potential PM. her only contribution so far to the nations political discourse is that trans people are evil. (and that theres no such thing as racism)
honestly, all this culture war bullshit, is exactly that. most of the people in the public eye who wade in, dont give a shit about the issue at all, its just a convenient means to get noticed in this fecking soundbite / click world we live in.
meantime working classes being savaged by costs of living / austerity / public service gravy train milked by well connected spivs and shysters and they really are losing their minds about gender neutral bathrooms?? feck em. burn down all their libraries and their workings mens clubs (the ones that havent been converted into multi-ethnic community centres), books are wasted on the sun / mail reading red wall peasants.
honestly, all this culture war bullshit, is exactly that. most of the people in the public eye who wade in, dont give a shit about the issue at all, its just a convenient means to get noticed in this fecking soundbite / click world we live in.
meantime working classes being savaged by costs of living / austerity / public service gravy train milked by well connected spivs and shysters and they really are losing their minds about gender neutral bathrooms?? feck em. burn down all their libraries and their workings mens clubs (the ones that havent been converted into multi-ethnic community centres), books are wasted on the sun / mail reading red wall peasants.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
a good post.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
26? That's... what?
Ridiculous?
18 would be ridiculous. 26 is gobbledygook.
Really stretching the definition of dependent there.
26 is also the age when kids can no longer be covered on their parents health insurance, iirc. I’d say it has more to do with that.
I think the bet is that many would have killed themselves or settled into their born gender by then, so reducing the total by a lot.
That's why I suggested they're stretching the definition of dependent. It implies that people can't make these kinds of decisions, be trusted etc until they're 26.
But that's just a cover. If they truly believed that then the maturity argument could be applied to gun rights, too, and they'd shit all over themselves in the great state of Oklahoma to stop such a thing from happening because freedom means guns and hate only.
But this is all too serious and depressing to think that people care so much about folks just trying to be happy in their own skin. I'd rather just say "Whoa, looks like no Oklahomo, eh?" and move along.
True enough Doc.
It’s only when it suits them that “kids” can be up to 26.
It’s only when it suits them that “kids” can be up to 26.
I think I'm one of those that think it should be 18, but 26 is outrageous
26 is so arbitrary. I’d love to be a fly on the wall at the discussions when they nailed it down to that specific age. Fecking weirdos. Don’t suppose it was a significant age for Jesus, or something mental like that?
What do people think of the argument surrounding the new Hogwarts Legacy game?