Dave Chappelle vs the Woke

[Bromptonaut]

And I think that's the problem. Where do you draw the line between supporting Trans rights and marginalising women even more? One of Chappelle's points in a previous special, apparently, is that.



In this recent special he points out that within 6 months of Bruce Jenner transitioning to Caitlyn Jenner, she had won "Woman of the Year" from Glamour Magazine, which he feels is marginalising women rather than celebrating Trans.

In what way does supporting the rights of the transwoman I mentioned up thread marginalise anyone else?

I don't know enough about Glamour magazine to comment on its "Woman of the Year" but even on the worst case construction its a one off piece of egregious journalism. In a contest for an ordinary job I think the trans woman will come a distant third between two 'cis gender' candidates.

I agree there are problems in sport and in protecting women only spaces from those with ill intent but that shouldn't stop those living in their new role from using the spaces appropriate to their identity.

 

[AuroraSaab]

In what way does supporting the rights of the transwoman I mentioned up thread marginalise anyone else?

I don't know enough about Glamour magazine to comment on its "Woman of the Year" but even on the worst case construction its a one off piece of egregious journalism. In a contest for an ordinary job I think the trans woman will come a distant third between two 'cis gender' candidates.

I agree there are problems in sport and in protecting women only spaces from those with ill intent but that shouldn't stop those living in their new role from using the spaces appropriate to their identity.

It depends which rights you are supporting. Transgender people have the same rights as everyone else in the UK. What some trans people want is to do away with single sex spaces on the basis of self id, which for many women raises issues of privacy and safety.

The issue is male bodied people in women's single sex spaces. How do we know which ones have ill intent? We don't, so we exclude them all from women's hospital wards, changing rooms, and domestic violence refuges, on the basis of privacy and safety, regardless of how they identify.

The Caitlyn Jenner story isn't a one off. Google 'Trans women woman of the year' or similar and you will get a list.

Laurel Hubbard has just been awarded New Zealand Sportswoman of the Year by the University of Otago.

If men on here are genuinely concerned about the welfare of trans people, they can be more accepting of their gender non conforming brethren. They can campaign for third spaces that both sexes can use. Or they can welcome trans women in the men's changing rooms, toilets, and into men's sports. They can date trans women.

They can do that instead of asking women to move over, give up their spaces, and ignore their boundaries, which are there for a good reason.

 

[mudsticks]

And I think that's the problem. Where do you draw the line between supporting Trans rights and marginalising women even more? One of Chappelle's points in a previous special, apparently, is that



In this recent special he points out that within 6 months of Bruce Jenner transitioning to Caitlyn Jenner, she had won "Woman of the Year" from Glamour Magazine, which he feels is marginalising women rather than celebrating Trans.

Unfortunately every person who tries to open up a discussion about Womens rights and Trans rights seems to immediately be categorised as a "hater" or a "TERF" (see JK Rowling for more details). It now seems to be a hate crime not to call a Trans woman a woman and confer every single right that a woman has upon that person. That seems to be the point that we have reached in society.

Chappelle is disgruntled about this and feels that maybe more important issues exist such as Da Baby killing a man and it not affecting his career in any way, whilst if you don't say the right thing about Trans issues your career can be ended.

It's an interesting position, but as with all comedy - if you don't like a comedian, don't go and see them.

Yeah I don't want to get into the whole debate around extreme case scenarios , and whataboutery.

On the whole I think that's been hijacked by people deliberately trying to cause trouble, and stirring up 'moral panic' rather than seeking peaceful resolution or compromise.

I'm a radical feminist, for sure.
But not trans exclusionary

On the whole I don't think there's any need for there to be so much angst and conflict around this issue.

In the vast majority of cases it's just about people living in a way that's more aligned with their own feelings of identity, sorting their disphoria.

To reemphasise though, I think a lot of the problems that marginalised women are experiencing around this issue, could be sorted by addressing the problems experienced by womankind as a whole.

For instance, not accepting, ignoring or tolerating that certain level of aggression abuse or violence done by men, against women.

If women weren't on guard against that, from men in general, a large amount of the time, then they wouldn't for instance be so worried about sharing unisex spaces.

There wouldn't be such a need for refuges.

The sport issue is another one.
Which we've done to death on other threats.

But sorting out the whole issue of being 'sporting' in sport, rather than it just being about who gets to overwhelm who, by sheer size,in order to win 'glory' or a big cash prize , or in some cases a scholarship..

But tbh sport of the organised variety isn't my bag really..

 

[Beebo]

It’s impossible to be fair and inclusive to all without compromise.
The transgender debate is largely won on the large scale human rights issues. The lobby is now engaged in small scale issues around the edges which the public in general don’t much care about, like elite sports, whether only women have wombs and access to ladies WCs.
I regard myself as a metropolitan liberal but just can’t bring myself to care too much about these minor issues.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Fair enough. At least you're honest that you don't give a toss about women's rights.

Women and girls are 50% of the population though, and many people do care - what are minor issues to you matter to many of us. Much of this has been put through without consultation and when the public actually get to know about it they do seem to care.

Presumably you had a mother, though I'm assuming not a female partner or daughters. If your elderly mother had been in a care home, do you think she should have been able to specify a female carer for her intimate care, bathing etc.? Or should she have no option other than to accept a male bodied carer because their gender is 'female'?

 

[Bromptonaut]

Presumably you had a mother, though I'm assuming not a female partner or daughters. If your elderly mother had been in a care home, do you think she should have been able to specify a female carer for her intimate care, bathing etc.? Or should she have no option other than to accept a male bodied carer because their gender is 'female'?

This is a problem to which we need to work out a solution. Given the current state of the market for carers I'm not sure that a care home has the capacity to match the gender of carers with their clients.

If the carer is a person who has successfully transitioned then Beebo's Mother may not even be aware what her carer has in their pants.

 

[Pale Rider]

Seems some Netflix staff are unhappy about the channel broadcasting the show.

A big brute of a business, so I doubt a few protesters will have much impact.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58976204

 

[icowden]

Fair enough. At least you're honest that you don't give a toss about women's rights.
Women and girls are 50% of the population though, and many people do care - what are minor issues to you matter to many of us. Much of this has been put through without consultation and when the public actually get to know about it they do seem to care.

On the one hand I can understand @Beebo's position. If you had asked me 25 years ago, I'd probably have been ambivalent at best. However, I am now married and have two daughters, so I take an interest in things that might affect them and their friends. There are little things that come up all the time, that aren't a consideration for men.

When daughters were around 4-6 I got them a Disney Cars Scalextric set (it was for them, obviously and in *no way* for me to play with ahem). They liked it. They wanted to make it bigger. They were disappointed however that the full size track and cars were all "boring". Then you realise that Scalextric are only marketing to men. They are cutting out half of their possible userbase. 4 years on, my youngest has a passion for Space and Astronomy but then became concerned that her friends would think she was "weird" because "girls don't like that stuff". She got over that thankfully, and we still share that interest (older sister doesn't) to the point of visiting Kennedy Space Centre when we went to Florida, where she was made up at being able to meet, listen to and ask questions of a female astronaut (Anna Lee Fisher).

As a man, you do what you like, when you like and rarely question whether your gender comes into something. For women the issue comes up a *lot*.

Even as adults - if my wife goes for an evening run, she considers where she will run, is it well lit, are there people about, is she safe etc. These are concerns that men don't even think about. We just go somewhere.

 

[mudsticks]

On the one hand I can understand @Beebo's position. If you had asked me 25 years ago, I'd probably have been ambivalent at best. However, I am now married and have two daughters, so I take an interest in things that might affect them and their friends. There are little things that come up all the time, that aren't a consideration for men.

When daughters were around 4-6 I got them a Disney Cars Scalextric set (it was for them, obviously and in *no way* for me to play with ahem). They liked it. They wanted to make it bigger. They were disappointed however that the full size track and cars were all "boring". Then you realise that Scalextric are only marketing to men. They are cutting out half of their possible userbase. 4 years on, my youngest has a passion for Space and Astronomy but then became concerned that her friends would think she was "weird" because "girls don't like that stuff". She got over that thankfully, and we still share that interest (older sister doesn't) to the point of visiting Kennedy Space Centre when we went to Florida, where she was made up at being able to meet, listen to and ask questions of a female astronaut (Anna Lee Fisher).

As a man, you do what you like, when you like and rarely question whether your gender comes into something. For women the issue comes up a *lot*.

Even as adults - if my wife goes for an evening run, she considers where she will run, is it well lit, are there people about, is she safe etc. These are concerns that men don't even think about. We just go somewhere.

Staying with the 'comedy' angle there may be some mileage in educating our new 'transwomen' sisters.

"Look, this is just all part of the training, if you want to be 'one of us' you'd better get used to being regarded by a large segment of the population, as inferior, less of a priority when it comes to having your needs catered for, and having your rights and freedoms upheld upheld.

Expect to feel nervous , or slightly threatened in certain spaces, expect to have to take extra precautions, be careful about what you say, what you wear, where you go, who you speak to" .

Not cos your trans .

But because you're a woman now..

Welcome to our world 🙄

 

[Fab Foodie]

Who arbitrates when 2 rights collide?
When does principle override pragmatism (or vice-versa)?

It seems to me in this debate more than any other that there are some circles that simply can't be squared in every scenario...or it seems a lot of scenarios.
That said. I'm kinda with @Beebo I'm a laissaiz fair libertarian, but I can't see everybody's rights being able to be accommodated all of the time, and god only knows how you can legislate and design for clarity. There is going to have to be compromises which means some parties will always be aggrieved or feel disadvantaged. I don't get into the nitty gritty of this debate partly because i have little skin in the game and often because I usually end-up seeing both sides of both sides.

@AuroraSaab riposte about 'not giving a toss about womens rights' is neither true, nor helpful.

 

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

£6 a month!!!

But then I'd have to forgoe two takeout soy cappuccinos!!

I've still got a lot to learn about the whole trans issue, but I'm making some progress.

I can totally see how the whole anti woke brigade are using it as a stick to beat anyone they fancy.

And that there are some already marginalised women now feeling even more marginalised, as a result of the trans issue.

I'd say to them, beware false allies though..

Are they still £6 a month, tought they moved closer to £10 nowadays.
Anyway i really don't care if someone is trans, Flint(a) etc. But that whole allies thing is wrong, it's not Command and Conquer or Red Alert, they pose the false imagine that it is us against them, while i can understand it's feels like that if you're in the closet reality is most people really don't care. That is also evidenced by the lack of protest to all the extreme positions taken in this ''debate'' but still it's wrong. If someone says something you don't like you always have the option not to listen not to visit his/her shows etc.
Going in all twist and turns to claim you're a victim of a evil campaign against you is not the way, maybe they should visit Auswitch and educate themselves on how that really works, because yes Nazi Germany against jews and all other minority's like my family is really the difference between taking offence on everything and trying to root out whole religions/ethnicities and so on.

 

[AuroraSaab]

The CEO of Netflix has already somewhat backtracked on his defence of Chappelle apparently. However, they are paying him $60 million for 5 specials - which he keeps whether they make them or not - so that's a lot of money to lose if they cave under pressure and cancel his contract.

In other gender nonsense news, Handmaid's Tale author Margaret Atwood is getting some online abuse this week for Tweeting a link to an article talking about the erasure of the word 'Mother', despite posting stuff supportive of trans people in the past. Not JK Rowling levels of abuse of course, but still instructive of how little you have to do to incur the wrath of the more aggressive members of the trans lobby.

 

[AuroraSaab]

My comment about not giving a toss about women's rights was aimed only at Beebo.

The lobby is now engaged in small scale issues around the edges which the public in general don’t much care about, like elite sports, whether only women have wombs and access to ladies WCs.
I regard myself as a metropolitan liberal but just can’t bring myself to care too much about these minor issues.

These are not minor matters to women and girls. They are important in themselves and symptomatic of wider issues. The fact that people think they are minor issues is just indicative of how little some people care about women's welfare.

If I posted that I couldn't bring myself to care too much about minor issues around racism, I would be rightly taken to task.

 

[icowden]

The CEO of Netflix has already somewhat backtracked on his defence of Chappelle apparently. However, they are paying him $60 million for 5 specials - which he keeps whether they make them or not - so that's a lot of money to lose if they cave under pressure and cancel his contract.

And of course, as with any movie or programme that is censored, banned or "cancelled", all that the outrage has done is *increased* the number of viewers. I wouldn't have watched it had I not seen the news article that piqued my curiosity. The publicity for this now is huge. As Eric Idle has often said - the best thing about Life of Brian being banned was that it made it incredibly commercially successful. *Everyone* wanted to see it.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Certainly from my point of view, the furore over people like J K Rowling, Dave Chappelle, Professor Kathleen Stock, and Lauren Hubbard, bring these issues to the attention of the wider public in a way that womens groups have never been able to manage.

It's a shame that it takes the extreme examples like Lauren Hubbard or the Jessica Yanniv debacle to bring these issues to wider attention.