Ignoring the persisting dynamics
The Open Letter by itself wasn’t enough, Alana Lentin also had to put out a “press release” about it, as if it were important. It’s more of the same shite but put into the third person to make it sound newsy and official and impersonal, the way Bill Donohue does with his absurd press releases.
(London, February 22) – Peter Tatchell’s actions in bullying and inciting a media furor against a student who criticized him in a private e-mail reflect a disturbing intolerance toward dissenting views, said 116 human rights activists and scholars in an open letter published today. The media coverage of the concocted controversy also feeds a national moral panic over inflated claims of “no-platforming” – a panic that actually contributes to silencing marginal voices.
See how that works? It sounds like journalism, but it isn’t, it’s just more bullshit from Alana Lentin, along with some of her friends who said things for her to quote.
‘Each generation has a moral panic about the one that follows it,’ said Sarah Brown, UK campaigner for LGBT equality and one of the 116 signatories. ‘Older activists and journalists are bullying a young person in the press, without a right of reply, over opinions expressed in private, all in the name of “free speech”. It seems some folks are short of both moral fibre and a sense of irony — but I’m pretty sure it’s not the young people.’
Not in private though, according to Peter Tatchell – he says she was showing them to other people.
‘If you think you are an ally, take criticism,’ said Roz Kaveney, writer, critic, and poet, and longtime advocate for transgender rights. ‘Allies who don’t take criticism get in the way at best. And allies who can’t take criticism display an arrogant sense of superiority.’
No matter how empty, stupid and malevolent the “criticism” is? Nope, not going to do that.
‘This incident points to a growing tendency to minimise the effects of discrimination on marginalised groups,’ added Alana Lentin, Associate Professor of Cultural and Social Analysis at Western Sydney University in Australia. ‘Among liberals, for example, “postracial” celebrations of the end of racism are increasingly common, ignoring the persisting dynamics of white supremacy.’
You know what another growing tendency is? The one to minimise the effects of discrimination on women, ignoring the persisting dynamics of patriarchal dominance. I wonder why Alana Lentin didn’t mention that one.
I don’t really wonder. That was sarcasm. I think she didn’t because she’s part of it because it’s central to current trans politics: ignore the marginalization of women so that trans women can freely demonize and shun women and feminists.
Signatories is another good word there, implying some official imprimatur, as though this petition is the instrument of a governmental or diplomatic body.
Ugh so much smearing. So much mud thrown. It’s Tatchell’s name that has the mud sticking, not Lentin’s.
“Allies who don’t take criticism get in the way at best. And allies who can’t take criticism display an arrogant sense of superiority.”
Ah yes, this is exactly why being an ally is bloody stupid. Screw your merit badges and honorary titles, I’ll do what’s right on my own terms, thank you very much…
This really reads as if in order to have to be an ally you have to subjugate yourself to being a foot soldier in the other parties battles. This is quite wrong-headed. By definition an ally is someone who has their own battle to fight, but with an overlapping area of interest. They are prepared to help you in your fight in exchange for support in theirs. The relationship and level of support do not have to be equal, but the point is it cuts both ways. Feminists could just as easily accuse trans activists of being shitty allies. In the current environment many many groups could claim that about others.
What happened to standing in solidarity on commonalities but not shitting on each other the rest of the time? Why this assumption that everyone else WILL see/say/do exactly as you wish them to no matter how perturbed they are by your own behaviour?
From the Open Letter:
I know I’m an Old, but you’ve got to be daft to think that expressing religious opinions about homosexual acts is just “simple” and innocuous.
If I could, I’d introduce the author of said writings to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. He’s rather on record “simply expressing religious opinions about homosexual acts”. From a position of power. Said power being the reason a person might feel a “peculiar urgency” about religiously motivated bigotry being legitimized in any way whatsoever.
Islamaphobia (i.e. irrational hatred of Muslims) is a thing. I don’t quite think this qualifies.
(Yeah yeah, wrong country/continent, and all that, but you can find a Scalia anywhere, thanks.)
“Old” comment was meant to refer to the fact that while I’m quite young, I’m hitting the “are you fucking kidding me” threshold of age.
PatrickG – GET OFF MY LAWN!
I hate the term “moral panic”. It’s a derailing tactic. They can’t or don’t want to debate the topic of no-platforming because that would show that this is not really about Tatchell personally but part of a growing trend. So they dismiss it as a moral panic instead.
The persisting dynamic, last I checked, was, across pretty much everywhere, and vast stretches of history, any inhumanity–however bloodthirsty, however horrific it might be–and however miserable, lonely, and painful it made the lives of those forced to live with it (or die under it)–any such inhumanity enough people with enough social clout within their communities claimed was the opinion of their god or gods was excused, defended, perpetuated, even celebrated.
Check in anytime for updates, I guess. But this century is looking pretty much the same as usual, so far.
This is one meme I am good and sick of. Just because an older person says something, it does not mean they are a crank who can’t accept anything new. Sometimes it is a valid critique, and the person or group being critiqued is younger. This does not make it a “Get off my lawn” sort of comment.
By the way, what exactly is wrong with not wanting people tracking through your grass and tulips? This has never seemed like a legitimate critique to me, anyway, unless you are a person who believes private property is wrong (and I am willing to consider that view, but right now private property is the norm).
Please stop assuming a person who is older is just a crank when they express a reasoned critique. Please, please, please, please, please! This is just a debate stopper.
While I suppose it’s possible I’m missing something, I pretty much assumed this particular ‘get off my lawn’ was meant in a spirit of self-mocking camaraderie, fogey to fogey, so it did not much bother me, for what this is worth.
(Incidentally, my lawn is hardly worth defending, of late. Walk on it, whatever, I guess. Just pick up your litter. And mind my tea roses. Tho’ roses can kinda defend themselves, I find careless tromping through them still tends to go poorly for everyone, and I am quite fond of them.)
(That said, agreed more generally re assumptions of age and crankery. If anything, I think I’ve become more open to change with age. But then, my adolescence was in the 80s, when red suspenders were big with the relatively young. Sure, most of those guys would probably have considered me a complete hippy at the time, but it’s hard to compare; the Overton window was in a different place.)
@ Rob/AJ:
Pretty much how I felt, as well.. If Rob meant it seriously I’d be shocked and horrified. Possibly yelling at clouds!
Still, iknklast, I agree the trope can be deployed as a dismissal of “behind the times cranks”. But I’m well over 30, so you can’t trust anything I say. ;)
AJ, Patrick G – I also assumed the same, given the context. But there do appear to be many times that this is used as a dismissive technique, and I thought it was time to speak.
And my lawn is the same – not particularly grand. But I am tired of other people’s trash blowing on it! People see that trash there, they might believe I frequent McDonalds. Yuck.
Kaveney and co are being disingenuous.
Fran Cowling did not merely ‘criticise’ Tatchell, she made serious allegations of the kind that can ruin – and in some cases have ruined – people’s careers. If false, they are potentially defamatory. Tatchell was well within his rights to ask Cowling for evidence of his having (supposedly) used racist language in front of her and having ‘harassed’ an NUS officer. If the allegations are true, then Cowling ought to be able to substantiate them.
The fact that she was unwilling to produce the evidence might lead many to reasonably infer that she was simply libelling Tatchell.
On top of this, there is the excuse that the ‘criticisms’/defamations were made in a ‘private’ email. Note in the first case that this was a response to a university by Cowling in her capacity as an NUS officer and in relation to an invitation to a public event, and claiming to speak on behalf of LGBT students. That is to say, it would be more accurate to call this a work email than a ‘private’ one.
But even had been entirely private, there is no protection for defaming someone ‘privately’. If I whisper to X that Y has (let us say), a conviction for GBH, and if there is no truth in that obviously serious claim, then I would be slandering Y. I might find myself in court. The excuse that I had ‘only’ whispered the false claim to another person rather than accused the person to their face would not cut any ice with a court.
The fact is, Cowling made some serious allegations about Tatchell which she was not willing (or, presumably, able) to substantiate. She’s not a victim in this, and she’s lucky she’s not currently being sued.
Finally, Cowling’s Snowflake Brigade are claiming she has been ‘silenced’ and has been given no ‘right to reply’. That is nonsense too. She chose to remove herself from Twitter. I am sure any newspaper would print her side of the story. If she’s telling the truth, then she has nothing to fear. I suspect she is simply embarrassed that her sly defamation has been found out and challenged – a challenge she knows she can’t meet. Again, her discomfort does not make her a victim.
If my suspicions are wrong, then of course Cowling can prove this any time she likes by providing the necessary evidence.
I was, of course, expressing self mocking camaraderie to PatrickG. While he’s far too young to fulfil that particular archetype I am not. Then again, if you could see the state of my front lawn you’d laugh your ass, or indeed arse, off. Yes, it’s a tired old joke. That’s probably why it suited my mood and the moment. I won’t use it again and I might just be a liiiiittle nervous about attempting humour here again. Maybe that’s a good thing .
Aw, no, don’t be nervous about attempting humour here again. Especially since it all worked out, which demonstrates that WE CAN DO THIS.
And I really really don’t want this to be a humour-free zone.
Then again you probably didn’t mean it all that literally, so…
Well, I’m going to be risque and say I now picture Rob as this.
:D
Huh! Wha! Someone hacked my iPhone. Damned FBI.
I dunno, guys. It still seems to me if this doesn’t end up in a proper shunning, we must be doing it wrong…
We should probably start with me. Enabling crypto-self-hating-ageist or something, presumably… The fact that I should probably be working anyway in no way motivates this proposal… Down with me! I’m never speaking to that guy again!
This post made me feel shame and guilt at reading blog comment updates when I, too, am supposed to be working. I think we can all agree that you are History’s Greatest Monster.
Stop this slacker shaming! My identity is someone who pisses around at work. Check your workaholic/goody two shoes/boss suck up privilege.
You see? You see how evil I am? Beyond the fact that, evidenced by my cavalier attitude in no less than one blog comment, I, no doubt, would endorse a Logan’s Run-type handling of octogenarians, I show no respect whatsoever for the differently-industrious!
Those pesky kids and that lawn:
http://rhymeswithorange.com/comics/january-24-2016/
Rob remembers the days when ya got 40 rods to the hogshead, and he liked it that way,
Holms you shit, I’m still laughing at that and can’t explain why to my co-workers (I blame AJ Milne for that most assuredly). Regardless, I shall clamber up upon my high horse, wrapping the tattered shroud of my dignity about me like a cloak, and declaim that as a lover of fine scotch a hogshead is approximately 250 litres; and as 40 rods is 201 metres the resulting fuel economy of 125,000 litres/100km would make going to the local purveyor of said scotch profoundly uneconomic. Which I most certainly would not like.
I’m now going to flounce off and sit in a corner chuckling to myself.
^^^ This is why y’all rock.
Ok, you said you were old. I didn’t expect Victorian old. Geriatric and undead, people!
Ophelia #17; Amen to that!
On a more serious note, I remember Tatchell’s role in the OutRage campaign in the early-mid ’90s. Now that’s what I call bullying!
For those unaware of OutRage, they were a group whose main mission was to ‘out’ public figured they suspected of being gay but who were publicly homophobic. Tatchell’s role was to pass stories to and deal with the media.
It was an unpleasant business all-round for certain with not a few careers damaged and with some false ‘outings’ to boot.
Yes, they were homophobes being ‘outed’, but was it right to do so publicly and against their wishes? Irrespective of what one thinks of homophobes – and personally I think the world would be a better place without them – and despite what one may think of hypocrites who publicly state one thing and privately enjoy the opposite, there are no laws stating that one must practice what one preaches, and I feel that the OutRage campaign was a campaign of bullying.
I’m not sure how relevant this is to the current furore, I just can’t see all these people defending Tatchell without wanting to provide some kind of balance. Fine, he may not be transphobic but he sure as shit ain’t the innocent some quarters of the media are making him out to be.
Now, I’m old, tired, and grumpy, so get off my 300 acres of private estate.
So old and tired I misspelled my own bloody moniker.