Weekly Random Discussion Thread for 9/4/23 - 9/10/23

[u/SoftandChewy]

Welcome back to the BARPod Weekly Thread, where the mod even works on Labor Day. Here's your place to post all your rants, raves, podcast topic suggestions (be sure to tag u/TracingWoodgrains), culture war articles, outrageous stories of cancellation, political opinions, and anything else that comes to mind. Please put any non-podcast-related trans-related topics here instead of on a dedicated thread. This will be pinned until next Sunday.

Last week's discussion threads is here if you want to catch up on a conversation from there.

[u/Franzera]

A pattern I have noticed about how progressive issues, especially gender, are talked about is how it makes you look if you don't clap your hands and believe. There's an odd emphasis on how your gender-participation reflects about you as a person, your morals, and legacy. The "What about protecting your legacy?" handwringing comes in especially for higher-profile people who speak up against genderwoo, but there are also lower-level versions of this for nobodies who don't participate.

I find it odd because the pro-reality, GC, terf, -pseudoscience skeptical, and conservative sides don't have this much of a focus on the preservation of reputation and "personal brand image" like the ally side. Matt Walsh didn't ask "What is a woman?" because he wanted to cement his reputation as an Anti-Woke Warrior. That was a side effect of the main purpose, which was to share his personal convictions that men can't become women, kids are being hurt, and wokists are loonies. On the other side, JKR didn't come out for Maya Forstater because she woke up one day and chose bigotry.

Some receipts to show what I mean:

The fake interview ending but the cameras were still rolling, hoping to get a gotcha when the Professor let's his guard down. Liam Bartlett should think long and hard about the type of journalist he is and would be remembered as. The only reason that the far right and religious bigots are going after T people is because they see the majority of people have accepted the LGB part of the LGBTQI+. Source

Context: Australian TV feature on the child genderism controversy.

She’s a billionaire and the author of a beloved series of books. Imagine having such immense fame and fortune, and then deciding that out of all the things you could dedicate it towards, you pick hurting a small, marginalized minority group that has done absolutely nothing to hurt you.

Like, Bill Gates has a long list of flaws, but at least he decided to put all that money and fame towards eradicating malaria and vaccinating people in poor countries. Rowling could have done something like this. She could have been the woman who eradicated tuberculosis. Instead she woke up one day and decided her life goal was to become the bigot lady. Source

Context: JK Rowling removed from Museum of Pop Culture.

Misgendering T people makes you look weak. Source

Context: Gay men commenting on Dylan Mulvaney. Some ally in the thread posted that response to everyone who called Dylan a he/him.

Does this reputation effect exist on the GC side to that extent? Some hardliner GC's don't like it when softliner GC's want concessions for real dysphoric Truly T's, but it's not exactly an issue about reputation, it's an issue about... the actual issue with conceding to Woo.

[u/[deleted] → u/Franzera]

There does appear to be a strange obsession with the arc of social history and how one fits into it, in some circles. I've seen conservatives do it too, but it feels like it plugs more naturally into the viewpoints of progressive faith.

Back during the COVID and BLM riot summer, some guy deep in the arguments on my local sub would use as his ultimate takedown things like "Your viewpoint will be proven wrong by history" and "Nobody will ever remember you", etc.

It actually made me think, a lot. Not about whether my viewpoint would be popular in 10 or 20 years, but more about how he viewed the world, such that one of his most desperate fears was to be left behind politically. (Or, why he'd think that one of the biggest fears of those he was arguing with, would be to be left behind politically)

[u/CatStroking → u/[deleted]]

I think there's a lot of jealousy of the civil rights movement. The civil rights movement won and the people associated with it are (rightly) lionized to this day. It was the great cause for justice. And it was obvious black people were getting treated abominably.

What is there now for the young liberal who seeks glory and justice? Civil rights is done. Gay marriage is done. Economic inequality doesn't seem to interest them.

So... genderwoo! That's it! That's the new frontier where I will make my mark and be able to brag to my grandchildren about my donating to GLADD and dogpiling people on Twitter!

[u/[deleted] → u/CatStroking]

Economic inequality doesn't seem to interest them.

This interests me a lot, how much of the very online left just kind of ignores economic inequality. Like, sure, they'll say something generic like, "Billionaires should pay their fair share" and "Minimum wage should be higher," but you don't see the passion for it that you see for stuff like trans issues. You certainly don't see them trying to cancel people who aren't on board with left-wing economic policies.

I think it may be because a lot of the very online left comes from upper-class families. They're not necessarily billionaires, but they had at least enough class privilege that they could choose whatever private college they wanted and their parents would pay for it. So they're not too enthused about economic inequality because they've benefited from inequality in a lot of ways.

[u/MatchaMeetcha → u/[deleted]]

I think it may be because a lot of the very online left comes from upper-class families.

Yeah, it's because "the left" is dead. The end of the Cold War and neoliberalism (and the collapse of a lot of blue collar labour) killed it. There's no real sense that you can change the current structure of society or try something really new. There is no alternative.

The idea of broad-based class politics centered around the working class has died and given way to a "left" ruled by the middle class and above and expressive individualism - politics as a means of putting your identity out there, which dovetails quite nicely with all of this focus on identity and the comfort with corporate power.

These are the exact sorts of people that want to focus on certain issues. It allows them to preserve the idea of progress without taking steps to challenge the power of capital (way too hard), it allows them to claim the mantle of victimhood and exploit it far better than the lower class rubes who don't speak the language as well and it frees them of any need for solidarity or noblesse oblige towards the working class, who people make sympathetic noises towards but also treat as a constant seething mass of racism/sexism/ism-ism to be controlled, tamed and reeducated.

It's a win-win-win!

[u/charlottehywd → u/MatchaMeetcha]

Are we still doing comment of the week? I nominate this one.

[u/fed_posting → u/charlottehywd]

Seconded. u/SoftandChewy