Category: Bullshit

Pernicious nonsense and other irritants

  • Another phoney war

    Much of the media – and much of the government, including a Prime Minister who didn’t appear to give a shit about the exams catastrophe or anything else that’s actually important – is huffing and puffing about the Wokerati Thought Police Black Lives Matter Political Correctness Cancel Culture Gone Mad “ban” on singing Land of Hope And Glory at the Last Night of the Proms.

    There’s no ban. We can’t have entire venues full of people singing because there’s a bloody pandemic.

    Joel Golby:

    We’re somehow now on day three of #Promgate, and the Daily Mail, Express and Telegraph – as well as about half of the government – are raging about what the Sunday Times in its headline gently refers to as the “BBC’s ‘Black Lives Matter Proms’”.

    …I hate to be the one saying “you know we’re in a pandemic, right?”, but you know we’re in a pandemic, right? If I didn’t know better, I’d think the political right was deftly exploiting our national inability to ignore culture-war bait in order to obfuscate bigger stories, like, I don’t know, the fact that things are going badly for the government, literally all of the time. How many more times do we have to watch this happen? What do four more years of this government have in store for us? Five hundred children somehow catch the plague due to government negligence and the Express front page is “EU demands hungry Brits RENAME Cornish pasties”? After the 2022 banking crash, Boris Johnson stands behind a podium and vows that, despite the rumours, “the woke left will never make poppies illegal”?

  • “God. Damn. YouTube.”

    If you don’t want to make yourself thoroughly miserable about the state of the world, don’t read the Reddit group r/QAnonCasualties. It’s a forum for people who’ve lost or are losing friends and family to conspiracy theories.

    Mum, stepdad and brother have been well down the rabbit hole since about 2013-2014.

    Started with flat earth, now I’ve heard almost all conspiracies you could imagine. Doctors are bad and all drugs are bad, vaccines cause all health problems, billionaires eating babies, flouride, 5g. It all started because YouTube. God. Damn. YouTube.

    Another:

    Since we’ve been in lockdown [my two best friends have] become consumed by Plandemic misinformation, anti-mask and COVID denial stuff, and my friend admitted to me the other day that she supports Trump because “he’s the only one doing anything about the child trafficking.” She’s gotten a medical exemption from wearing a mask because she thinks the virus is a lie.

    I haven’t mentioned this, but I won’t trust her around my newborn since she’s not being safe with the virus, and I also have a condition that puts me in the highly risk category.

    In many cases the slide into conspiracy theories began with trauma.

    [My boyfriend’s mother] really started to subscribe to conspiracy theories over 20 years ago, when her other son (BF’s little brother) was diagnosed with severe autism. That son died last year, just before his 25th birthday, after suffering from seizures his whole life. She blames vaccines for all of it.

    Unsurprisingly, she is very suspicious of COVID-19 and masks, has already stated she will never take a COVID vaccine, doesn’t understand BLM or the protests, etc… and yesterday at dinner, she asked us if we knew about “pizzagate”. I braced myself. She claimed that some of BF’s cousins opened her eyes to this theory and she’s starting to believe it.

    This one’s from the UK, a woman writing about her boyfriend:

    His Grandad has just passed away and I think he was in a vulnerable place making him more susceptible to all this. He was researching more and more, joining more and more groups on Reddit/Facebook, watching countless videos and basically just spending hours and hours getting deeper ‘down the rabbit hole’

    …I feel like I’ve lost my boyfriend. He’s normally so level headed and sound minded and normally so smart and switched on but now he’s been brainwashed by these people

    It’s a terrible litany of destroyed friendships, families and relationships, made all the sadder by the knowledge that the people who’ve been sucked in by this bullshit believe that they’re the rational ones.

    This is absolutely breaking my head, because at this point any sort of rational discussion hits an immense brick wall. How can you argue with someone who always says that all your souces are “fake news”, and all her sources are correct?

    It’s also very clear that these conspiracies are spreading far beyond their usual audience.

  • False framing

    Gemma Stone, writing on Medium:

    Recently, an anti-trans activist was spoken to by police over a suspected hate crime. Suzy Ireson has been quite prolific in posting anti-trans propaganda around public places, with a direct intention of drumming up hate for trans people and making trans people feel intimidated. She even gleefully admits to doing this on social media profiles, all egged on by other known hateful anti-trans campaigners.

    This is how the media should have reported on this story, it should have just been a very simple “bad person doing bad thing” kind of affair. Except that’s not what we got when The Mirror got their hands on it.

    The Mirror piece was written by a vocal supporter of anti-trans activists who has written multiple anti-trans pieces for the right-wing press.

    The Mirror ran with the title “Mum in hate crime probe after pro-JK Rowling stickers amid trans rights row” which is very clearly slanted in making her seem like a sympathetic character in this narrative.

    It’s happening again today. A woman in the US, Sasha White, has been fired by her literary agent employer for posting a mountain of abusive tweets about and to trans women, including tweets advocating violence against them. Inevitably it’s being framed as a brave feminist silenced by the sinister trans lobby rather than a tiresome bigot getting the sack for bringing her employer into disrepute. It’s important to note that her employer is very and vocally LGBT+ friendly and represents a number of LGBT+ authors.

    Suzanne Moore has tweeted her support, Toby Young has already been in touch with her. It’s surely just a matter of hours before The Spectator offers her a column and JK Rowling calls her a hero.

    Stone:

    Transphobes and bullies are framed as innocent little victims who didn’t do anything wrong, while trans people are framed as monstrous, authoritarian and dangerous. 

  • “These days, right, if you sexually harass someone…”

    Sometimes columnists accidentally reveal more about themselves than they perhaps intended. Iain MacWhirter in The Herald:

    Doing any of those things without consent is sexual harassment, and the Herald’s self-appointed Defender of Women should know that.

    Emma Rich of Engender Scotland:

    Sexual harassment is sex discrimination & a human rights violation. For decades, unwanted hair stroking, touching, and kissing have been understood to be sexual harassment.

    As one commenter put it:

    Who the fuck is going round stroking people’s hair and thinking that’s normal?

    Rich posted some statistics from a recent TUC survey:

    • Nearly 1/4 of women have experienced unwanted touching (such as a hand on the knee or lower back)
    • More than one in ten women reported experienced unwanted sexual touching or attempts to kiss them.

    Author and Scotsman columnist Laura Waddell:

    What does it say about the security of women’s rights when leading Scottish political columnists like Macwhirter feel completely comfortable and unashamed repeatedly diminishing the idea of consent? Women-hating garbage.

  • Your neighbours are going mad

    One of my friends has been watching with horror as a former school friend has plummeted down the rabbit hole of online radicalisation. The former friend is a university educated middle class woman; think stereotypical Waitrose shopper.

    Six months ago, the friend started posting on Facebook about her doubts over the official COVID death tolls.

    Three months later:

    She has gone from questioning official death tolls to hollering about 5G to spreading QAnon conspiracies on Facebook: “I’ve done my research!”

    And now we’re at the six months mark:

    This weekend she was out at the QAnon protests with her husband and kids. Maskless, no social distancing. Wearing a T-shirt that said “NO TO: pedophiles, Bill Gates, Covid Lies, Plandemic, MSM”…. out on the street giving speeches about Pizzagate and how it’s linked to the ‘fake virus’ through a megaphone.

    As my friend pointed out, note the American spelling of “paedophile”. QAnon is a US conspiracy movement that’s being imported wholesale, American spellings and all.

    If you’re not familiar with QAnon, it’s a far-right conspiracy theory endorsed by clueless celebrities, Donald Trump and other Republican politicians and, increasingly, the people next door. It’s grown significantly during lockdown and social networks have been too slow to crack down on it.

    The BBC puts it very well.

    At its heart, QAnon is a wide-ranging, unfounded conspiracy theory that says that President Trump is waging a secret war against elite Satan-worshipping paedophiles in government, business and the media.

    Let’s just read that again.

    President Trump is waging a secret war against elite Satan-worshipping paedophiles in government, business and the media.

    It’s a kind of meta-conspiracy theory that happily pulls in other conspiracy theories – 5G phone masts spreading coronavirus, Bill Gates supposedly putting microchips in Coronavirus vaccines, Hilary Clinton carrying out child sacrifices – and makes them its own. Remember the recent claims that the online furniture shop Wayfair was trafficking stolen children? QAnon.

    The FBI considers “conspiracy-driven domestic extremists” a growing threat:

    The FBI assesses these conspiracy theories very likely will emerge, spread, and evolve in the modern information marketplace, occasionally driving both groups and individual extremists to carry out criminal or violent acts.

    The Guardian featured a piece about US women who are falling for and amplifying these conspiracy theories.

    This is not solely a fringe group of uninformed people blindly forwarding cat videos. These are college-educated women who (correctly or incorrectly) believe they have done their research. They look out for their families, the health of their children, and they share information on their Pinterest, Facebook and Twitter accounts. Adherent literature abounds, providing a rabbit hole of media links to seemingly real evidence from experts.

    There are obvious parallels with UK anti-trans activism, which I’ve seen described as “QAnon for British women”: it too rejects science and facts because “I’ve done my research.”

    “From Rockefeller to Gates, it’s all related,” Alice told me. “This has been in the works for a long time, and it’s all part of a new world order of control and surveillance.” She attends Zoom meetings with doctors who explain the “misuse of ventilators in NYC hospitals” and how “wearing a mask will kill you”. She felt privy to a labyrinth of interconnected world-altering plots. My questioning the credibility of these sources was taken as a sure sign that I had been brainwashed by the mainstream media.

    My friend:

    The speed of these conversions is frightening.

    We are living in terrifying times.

  • Facebook fuels hate

    This, by Julia Carrie Wong, was written in 2017.

    Facebook groups – like any social capital – can just as easily be used for ill as good. And social capital is not an unalloyed good. A 2013 study by New York University political scientist Shanker Satyanath, Bowling for Fascism, found that dense networks of social organizations and clubs in Germany helped promote the spread of nazism. And even a cursory search of Facebook unearths networks of extremists using groups to recruit and organize.

    And this is from the same paper this week.

    Last Wednesday Facebook announced it was banning conspiracy theories about Jewish people “controlling the world”. However, it has been unwilling to categorise Holocaust denial as a form of hate speech, a stance that ISD describe as a “conceptual blind spot”.

    The ISD also discovered at least 36 Facebook groups with a combined 366,068 followers which are specifically dedicated to Holocaust denial or which host such content. Researchers found that when they followed public Facebook pages containing Holocaust denial content, Facebook recommended further similar content.

    …A Facebook company spokesperson said: “We take down any post that celebrates, defends, or attempts to justify the Holocaust. The same goes for any content that mocks Holocaust victims, accuses victims of lying, spews hate, or advocates for violence against Jewish people in any way.

    You’ll note that the words “Holocaust denial” aren’t in that statement. Facebook continues:

    While we do not take down content simply for being untruthful, many posts that deny the Holocaust often violate our policies against hate speech and are removed.

    And many posts that deny the Holocaust do not violate Facebook’s policies and are not removed. I’ve seen this myself: I’ve given up reporting Facebook hate speech, including posts containing Holocaust denial videos, because every time I did Facebook came back and said that the content did not violate their community guidelines.

    When historians write about our era, they will conclude that Mark Zuckerberg was one of the bad guys.

  • Many things we know are wrong

    If you’ve read this blog for a while you’ll know I’m fascinated by Internet Facts, things that everybody believes but that aren’t true – such as the story claiming singer Mariah Carey, when asked about famine, said “I’d like to be that thin, but without all the flies and death and stuff”.

    Another good example of that is Queen Victoria and lesbians. According to legend, she refused to sign a bill criminalising same-sex relationships until references to women were removed; according to the monarch, “women do not do that sort of thing.”

    It isn’t true. The law in question was the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885, and it never referred to women: it didn’t initially mention gay people at all until an amendment by a liberal MP criminalised “gross indecency” between two men.

    Another, similar legend about the Victorians claimed that they were so prudish that they covered up table and piano legs for fear of accidental arousal. That one isn’t true either: it was a very dubious claim by writer Frederick Marryat in the mid-1800s.

    I like Knowledgenuts.com’s explanation:

    Marryat visited a girls’ seminary where he discovered the piano’s legs were shrouded in little ruffled pantaloons. The headmistress told him she’d covered the legs to “preserve in their utmost purity the ideas of the young ladies under her charge.”

    Either the headmistress was something of a kook or Marryat got punked. There’s no evidence in the historic record that this supposed custom was widespread. In fact, the pretty pantaloons were most likely dust covers, concealing damage, or mere decoration.

    The British press at the time picked up Marryat’s story and ran with it, since American society and its straight-laced, puritanical, overly fastidious, ludicrous manners were considered gauche and far inferior to their cousins across the Pond.

    The British press printing bullshit because it enabled them to perpetuate prejudices? Pass the smelling salts! I feel all giddy!

    One of the reasons these things endure is because they feel true: they chime with what we know, or think we know, about the era or people concerned. So the fake quote from Mariah fits the image of a callous, air-headed diva; lesbians and sexy piano legs chime with our image of sexually repressed Victorians.

    But of course, what we think we know is wrong. Mariah Carey is much smarter and apparently much nicer than we think she is; many Victorians were off their face on hard drugs and going at it like knives.

    The comedian Stephen Colbert coined the term “truthiness” to describe something that may feel true, but that isn’t. As Wikipedia puts it:

    Truthiness is the belief or assertion that a particular statement is true based on the intuition or perceptions of some individual or individuals, without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts. Truthiness can range from ignorant assertions of falsehoods to deliberate duplicity or propaganda intended to sway opinions.

    There’s a good example of that doing the rounds on social media right now. “I never knew of any trans kids when I was young, just old trans people” the post says. “So where are all these trans kids coming from now?”

    Same place the old trans people came from. But now, people are less likely to wait their whole bloody life before coming out.

    When I was a teenager, to the best of my knowledge there were no gay, lesbian, non-binary or trans people in my town. But of course there were. They kept their identities very secret because they didn’t want their heads kicked in.

    This was the era of the Sunday Times claiming AIDS was a gay plague, of Piers Morgan outing pop stars as “poofs”, of the Murdoch press demanding lesbians be banned from girls’ changing rooms because they were dangerous predators.

    Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.

    I’ve mentioned before the response of one anti-trans activist to the idea that trans people have existed since long before she was born. “But I’m 42!” she said.

    We were always here. You just didn’t see us, because for many of us being seen meant being targeted. So we stayed hidden.

    I was talking to someone a few days ago about their aunt, who’d  tried her whole life not to be trans. She did the hyper-masculine stuff that many trans people did: the military career, the body building, the hard drinking and risk-taking. But you can’t outrun yourself, and when she finally came out very late in her life she was transformed: happy at long last.

    Cancer claimed her two years later.

    There are many sad stories like that one. She was trans her whole life and spent almost all of that life fighting it, too scared to let anyone know until so late in her life that she didn’t get to spend much time being herself.

    She was a trans kid. So was I. So was every late-transitioning adult. You didn’t know about us because we didn’t know it was okay to be us, because it wasn’t safe to be us.

    We were always here. You’re only seeing us now because more of us feel that it’s safe, or at least safer, to be out. Information we were denied when we were younger is freely available. Support exists that didn’t before. There are communities that will welcome us when family or friends reject us. We can see that there are many others like us.

    If people really cared about the wellbeing of kids, they’d be pushing for better trans and non-binary healthcare, for counselling services that don’t have years-long waiting lists, for people to be given the help they need to discover who they are – whether cis, trans or non-binary: the only outcome that should matter is whether the child is happy and supported, irrespective of how they identify. But these people don’t campaign for that. They campaign to remove the little healthcare that’s available. To remove hard-won rights. To make everyday life so difficult that trans and non-binary people stay in the closet. Better a miserable, repressed, self-hating kid than a trans or non-binary one.

    As the banner (pictured) puts it: “we don’t want your cis kids to be trans. We want your trans kids to survive.”

    It’s sad that even that low bar is too much for some. I don’t just want your kids and my kids to survive. I want them to thrive, however they may identify.

    Photo of a placard: We don't want your cis kids to be trans. We want your trans kids to survive.

  • Happiness is not a cold scalpel

    Last night I read a post by a trans woman that made me sad. It was intended to be supportive – it was written as a kind of open letter to trans women who compare their appearance to other women and find themselves lacking – which is why I didn’t give it a kicking in the place where it was posted. But I think it’s worth talking about here.

    The poster wanted to tell trans women that happiness and self-acceptance are possible. All you need to do is “pass as cis” – that is, look like a particular kind of cisgender woman. And to do that, all you need to do is lose a ton of weight, take a ton of hormones, have facial feminisation surgery and undergo three rounds of vocal feminisation surgery.

    That might have been the route to happiness for the poster, but it might not be for anybody else.

    Take facial feminisation surgery, aka FFS. The poster had a well paid job and was able to pull together around £15K for their FFS (which suggests they didn’t have many treatments; you can easily spend many times more than that). Some people will never be able to afford that.

    And of the people that can afford it, some of them will not get spectacular results because the surgeons can only work with what they’ve got. If you look like me, a chin reshape or a brow reduction is not going to make you look like Audrey Hepburn.

    It’s the same with hormones. For some people HRT’s effects are minimal; their effectiveness depends on a whole host of factors, particularly genetics and age. Age is a big one, so telling late-transitioning trans people that HRT will definitely have magical effects is untrue. And even minimal effects may be many years in the future: not only do hormones work slowly but the wait to even start treatment can be very long. In some parts of the UK you can expect a wait of around five years between being referred to a gender clinic and getting a hormone prescription.

    Last but not least, there’s weight. The poster asserted that losing weight has a massive feminising effect, but again that depends on the face and body you have. Some people find that losing weight makes them look more masculine, not less.

    Of course if that’s the case they could always have facial feminisation surgery… and we’re back to the start again. There’s always one more thing you need to do before happiness is yours.

    Let’s pretend I have the desire and the resources for facial feminisation surgery (spoiler: I don’t). What if after a brow reduction, or chin recontouring, or a hair transplant, or a nose job, or a tracheal shave, or a lip lift, or cheek augmentation, I still don’t look or feel pretty?

    What if I’m still clocked because of the things surgery and hormones can’t change: the width of my shoulders, the breadth of my ribcage, the length of my torso, my centre of gravity?

    What if something goes wrong with the surgery – many FFS providers specifically advertise their ability to fix other surgeons’ mistakes – and I can’t afford to get it corrected?

    What then?

    I’m not suggesting that FFS, HRT and other things can’t have positive effects on how you feel about how you look. Of course they can. Some people have these things, look amazing and feel fantastic. I don’t endure two hours of painful facial electrolysis every week for a laugh: I do it because having a stubble-free face is important to me.

    But the idea that there is a particular standard of beauty (thin, pretty, usually white) and that if you just starve and carve yourself enough to meet it then happiness will surely be yours is a pernicious myth that has caused a great deal of harm to very many women.

    Cosmetic surgeries will not necessarily make you any happier or deliver the results you want, and nobody should be telling anyone that they will.

  • False flags

    Here’s a great example of how anti-trans activism works.

    On social media, some anti-trans activists are posting about stickers that prove how evil trans people are. The stickers, which were first spotted in Torquay, have the phrase “genital preferences are transphobic” over a rainbow flag.

    The stickers were made and posted by an anti-trans activist trying to discredit trans people.

    The phrase on them is an anti-trans trope: in much the same way homophobes want you to think that gay men want to have sex with your children, transphobes want you to think that trans women want to force you to have sex with them even, or especially, if you aren’t into trans people. It’s a vicious libel, and I’ve written more about where it comes from here.

    Some of the better known anti-trans groups have condemned the stunt, so for example the LGB Alliance has said “if it is true that agents provocateurs are posting these stickers in an attempt to exacerbate our divisions, we certainly condemn it.”

    But really, the arsehole making the stickers is just doing a crude version of what the anti-trans groups and activists do every day. They make false allegations about what trans people think, who trans people are or what healthcare trans people get, and they then call on everybody to condemn trans people (and often, to demand the removal of their rights) based on those false allegations.

    How many articles have you read about the supposed prescription of cross-sex hormones to children, which doesn’t happen? About children being given gender reassignment surgery, which doesn’t happen? About trans women being predators, which the religious right made up? That’s much more deserving of your condemnation than a couple of stickers at the seaside.

  • Here come the thought police

    A new report says that right-wing academics are being silenced by the thought police. Inevitably they’re talking about that silencing on the front pages of right-wing newspapers.

    Here’s Newsweek.

    There is an experiment of sorts taking place in American colleges. Or, more accurately, hundreds of experiments at different campuses, directed at changing the consciousness of this entire generation of university students. The goal is to eliminate prejudice, not just of the petty sort that shows up on sophomore dorm walls, but the grand prejudice that has ruled American universities since their founding: that the intellectual tradition of Western Europe occupies the central place in the history of civilization. In this context it would not be enough for a student to refrain from insulting homosexuals or other minorities. He or she would be expected to “affirm” their presence on campus and to study their literature and culture alongside that of Plato, Shakespeare and Locke. This agenda is broadly shared by most organizations of minority students, feminists and gays. It is also the program of a generation of campus radicals who grew up in the ’60s and are now achieving positions of academic influence. If they no longer talk of taking to the streets, it is because they now are gaining access to the conventional weapons of campus politics: social pressure, academic perks (including tenure) and — when they have the administration on their side — outright coercion.

    Surprise! The Newsweek article is 30 years old. It’s from December 1990.

    As media researcher Becca Lewis notes on Twitter, “it’s really incredible how identical the talking points are, thirty years later.”