Social media and mobs

Heyho2

This one is doing the rounds on twitter now…

https://www.chimamanda.com/

I agree with the idea that much of social media is performative and not giving people room to grow. She doesn’t hold back, so many will dismiss this as hateful or whatever, which is a shame. As I really think we need some tough conversations about the points she raises.

MrsT

Heyho2

This bit really resonated with me.

“People who ask you to ‘educate’ yourself while not having actually read any books themselves, while not being able to intelligently defend their own ideological positions, because by ‘educate,’ they actually mean ‘parrot what I say, flatten all nuance, wish away complexity.’”

I feel like this at university a lot. I’m very careful. I hold a lot of unpopular views.

Gum-boots

MrsT

Yes this is so true. “Educate yourself” is the new put down.

Heyho2

I want to talk and understand, but it can’t be done in a lot of places. Conversation is slammed shut. It seems so unhealthy. Not sure how I’d go at uni now…

Woohoo

I’m now over 50 but I can remember self-righteous blinkered individuals who were exactly like those she describes now, back in the 80s. The difference being that there was no social media that allowed this level of false character destruction to go almost unchallenged.

I really loathe cancel culture.

Heyho2

Woohoo

Yeah, I’m pretty sure i was very self righteous in my youth. But it was limited to the people around me, who also dampened my righteousness.

CassandraNORI

🥳🎉👏 - yey @PuddingPlease!

CassandraNORI

^^ that was meant for @PuddingPlease for passing her unit.

😬

CassandraNORI

Yes - sometimes I look back and cringe at my self-righteousness in youth - but it’s an important time of learning / growing. Problem is now there’s a much stronger echo chamber if you don’t choose to engage in other sides of debates and critically think about what’s being said. I am still guilty of it myself sometimes but am very much more open minded about trying to actually understand where someone who disagrees with me is coming from. Social media has amplified everything.

RichardParker

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask people to defend their faith in a particular ideology. If they can’t defend it, they either don’t understand it, or it’s not a reasonable position to hold. As a religious person, I’m constantly required to respond to questions about God’s existence, and the justifiability of how I practice my faith - I don’t understand why anyone else should get a free pass to having to do that, particularly if they’re trying to pass laws and enforce social boundaries on the basis of their ideology. If there’s a genuine case to be heard, then let’s hear it - don’t hide behind “educate yourself”, and “You just don’t understand”, or the kicker, “you’re so offensive, now be silent.”

Helen Garner noticed this trend in her book “The First Stone” about allegations of the inappropriate conduct of a University College principal on campus. The Left students association reps at the time just wouldn’t engage with her - she just wanted them to state their case, and they just ghosted her.It’s not good enough.

PuddingPlease

RichardParker

It’s been a long time since I read The First Stone but my memory was that she lined up an interview with the accuser who cancelled when she discovered that Garner had already sent a personal letter of support to the man involved. I wouldn’t have talked to her either because I would have assumed that she would make me look bad in print afterwards. Prior to social media there wasn’t a lot that people without a platform could do to respond to that.

I’m a bit surprised that people ask you to defend your faith in that way though. I can understand to some extent being curious about how someone might reconcile the less conscionable parts of the churches recent history with modern faith but asking you to explain why you believe in the existence of God is a bit rude. Do you ever just want to tell folk to get stuffed?

RichardParker

PuddingPlease

I didn’t know that about the personal letter- from memory it was also the members of the student union who wouldn’t speak to her either but it’s been a while since I’ve read it too.

Yeah people can be really rude if you admit you’re religious - one of the managers at a law firm I worked at years ago said, “gee, I thought you’d be smarter than that.” Stuff like that doesn’t worry me now, because I’m a grown-ass woman, but it did used to upset me when I was younger- I was a convert, so paid a fairly high price in terms of my family relationships to choose my religion- I tend to look at the trans debate through that lens, which may or may not be fair - so while I think any trans person deserves respect and safety, I don’t they’re entitled to be agreed with, even where the disagreement relates to a fundamental part of their identity. Because if I have to put up with it, so do they- it’s the price we pay for living in a free and fair society.

LadySybilVimes

Yes, that’s right on The First Stone. Garner had already robustly supported the master of Ormond college before asking for interviews for her book. Her agenda was very clear. She also took the feminist Jenna Mead and split her into six characters in her book to make it look like there was some nasty feminist cabal opposing her and keeping her from getting to the truth. Mead’s book Bodyjamming is partly about her misrepresentation in The First Stone.

wannabefree

I was watching an interview with Tim Minchin recently and he was saying that many people think, but not many think about what their thinking, which I think is a nice way of putting it.

Theres educating yourself, but then theirs educating yourself on what you’re educating yourself on.

Heyho2

wannabefree

It’s all a bit self obsessed… they mostly seem to be thinking about themselves (get off my lawn 🤣)

Heyho2

https://www.jessdewahls.com/

Did find this artist as a result of a mob. Her work is gorgeous.

NightHawk

Heyho2

I really want the Heretic patch 😍

CassandraNORI

Heyho2

Suzanne Moore did a great piece on Jess in her sub stack:

https://suzannemoore.substack.com/p/the-inquisition-jess-de-whals

Heyho2

Me too. I also want the tree one, and some of the flowers…

CassandraNORI

From Moore’s article:

“am , of course talking about the completely ludicrous decision by the shop of the Royal Academy to no longer stock the work of Jess De Wahls because she “cannot accept people’s unsubstantiated assertions that they are in fact the opposite sex to when they were born.” She thinks that being female is not simply a feeling.

Burn the witch!

Having grown up in East Germany, she knows something about censorship. Like many feminists she has no problem with gender non-conforming people. Indeed her father is such a person. Still ,the McCarthyite atmosphere continues and as her blog, not her actual work is deemed “transphobic” she must be punished. Again ,I say to those who argue that cancel culture does not exist, we continue to see women losing livelihoods over their perfectly valid views.

Maya Forstater won her case last week but clearly the Royal Academy does not understand the Equality Act. Nor do they mind hanging paintings on the wall by a man who bought girls from their mothers and gave them syphilis - Paul Gauguin – or selling his prints in their gift shop. Diverse? Inclusive? Equal? Eric Gill who sexually abused his daughters was an associate of the Royal Academy. Indeed the place is full of art made by those with views that certainly do not embody the mantra of values that every institution now intones ”