Mark from Esoteric Histrionics has landed something of a scoop. Kate Clanchy’s 21-page letter to the Society of Authors on the bullies she faced while its Chair, Joanna Harris did nothing except join in the bullying. The full letter is 21 pages and can be found here.
Something seriously wrong with “Sunny Singh (she/her). It's Prof. Singh to you”. One hundred daily belligerent tweets for over three weeks attacking Kate Clanchy. That is seriously wrong. Restraining order wrong.
I am sad but unsurprised and that evidence is shocking. 'We will fuck her over' and 'to show power'? That's a professor? An adult? Isn't that something that clearly and without question brings her employer, her profession and all of academia into disrepute?
I knew a little of when this unfolded and how some students or former students came to the author's defence, but it escalated in unwieldy ways. Some individuals set out to destroy her. Is that somehow justified in this warped revenge of the critical race theorists? And they are filling 18 year old students' minds with this?
Although not directly about the damage caused by trans ideology, the hounding of Kate Clanchy bears a strong resemblance to the abuse meted out to anyone who is stepping out of line. It is also true that, unlike so many public figures, Kate agreed that some of her text did need to be changed. It's a rare things these days to admit you got it wrong here and there. Although of course, seeing the way people received her apologies, she probably wishes she'd not done so.
I wish Pullman would see that he has found himself in the same camp as those cancelled feminists, but I'm not sure he does.
The Free Speech Union is needed more than ever. I'm relieved PayPal had to backtrack (lovely to see Jack Dee jumping into the fray on that one).
‘Please consider what I have said, and then step away and practise self-care.’ Joanna Harris bullies, then advises her victim to ‘self-care’. That’s some mega-level, serious shit mind-messing bullying.
‘Please consider what I have said, and then step away and practise self-care.’ I mean, it’s so over the top sanctimonious that it is impossible to satirize. Or you’d just repeat the words verbatim, like those comedians that satirized those religious Halloween haunted houses by just exactly copying what they do.
And many in mental health know that these wafty fridge magnet instructions to 'self-care' are unhelpful as it puts the onus on the person in the difficult situation, who may be alone, unsupported and unable to, to do the 'self-care' which lets others off the hook. It veers towards blame and recrimination when you are blamed for not being 'self-caring' enough in a sea of fairly unhelpful conditions and outside of your control. A bit like 'wellbeing'. That should be a basic and taken-for-granted state and connected to wider determinants.
Haha, love the Dolores Umbridge comparison. To me, she is the most brilliantly conceived villain of all time. Pure venom hiding behind floral teacups and fluffy kittens. Kinda reminds me of 'gender' crimes hidden behind rainbow sparkle and smiling unicorns.
Every cult's story is the same: they provides an environment where the nastiest bullies and the biggest opportunists get away with the worst behaviour and this one is no different. Gender ideology is poison and the worst people thrive on it.
Harris is said to have a trans child (youngish adult) therefore is typical of the middle class (if not privileged) trans parent syndrome. Wholesale ideological capture is all they have. How else do they live with themselves?
Her descriptions of the children she taught while accepted at the time have since come under fire for being ablist and racist and all can of 'ist' stuff as dreamed up by snowflakes. I must admit, I thought some of the words she used were a bit insensitive but the grief she got for it is, as usual, out of proportion.
Same. After my question I followed the link posted by Lawrence S and I thought at worst her descriptions rankled a bit, but only in the high context way certain words do, not in a malicious way at all. A person reading them twenty years ago or in twenty years wouldn’t notice anything amiss.
Why do so many of these nasty women have the same smug look?
Something seriously wrong with “Sunny Singh (she/her). It's Prof. Singh to you”. One hundred daily belligerent tweets for over three weeks attacking Kate Clanchy. That is seriously wrong. Restraining order wrong.
I am sad but unsurprised and that evidence is shocking. 'We will fuck her over' and 'to show power'? That's a professor? An adult? Isn't that something that clearly and without question brings her employer, her profession and all of academia into disrepute?
I knew a little of when this unfolded and how some students or former students came to the author's defence, but it escalated in unwieldy ways. Some individuals set out to destroy her. Is that somehow justified in this warped revenge of the critical race theorists? And they are filling 18 year old students' minds with this?
Although not directly about the damage caused by trans ideology, the hounding of Kate Clanchy bears a strong resemblance to the abuse meted out to anyone who is stepping out of line. It is also true that, unlike so many public figures, Kate agreed that some of her text did need to be changed. It's a rare things these days to admit you got it wrong here and there. Although of course, seeing the way people received her apologies, she probably wishes she'd not done so.
I wish Pullman would see that he has found himself in the same camp as those cancelled feminists, but I'm not sure he does.
The Free Speech Union is needed more than ever. I'm relieved PayPal had to backtrack (lovely to see Jack Dee jumping into the fray on that one).
‘Please consider what I have said, and then step away and practise self-care.’ Joanna Harris bullies, then advises her victim to ‘self-care’. That’s some mega-level, serious shit mind-messing bullying.
It is. I know because that's the same shit I get at work.
‘Please consider what I have said, and then step away and practise self-care.’ I mean, it’s so over the top sanctimonious that it is impossible to satirize. Or you’d just repeat the words verbatim, like those comedians that satirized those religious Halloween haunted houses by just exactly copying what they do.
And many in mental health know that these wafty fridge magnet instructions to 'self-care' are unhelpful as it puts the onus on the person in the difficult situation, who may be alone, unsupported and unable to, to do the 'self-care' which lets others off the hook. It veers towards blame and recrimination when you are blamed for not being 'self-caring' enough in a sea of fairly unhelpful conditions and outside of your control. A bit like 'wellbeing'. That should be a basic and taken-for-granted state and connected to wider determinants.
Harris - in manner and behaviour - looks rather like Dolores Umbridge (umbrage) ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolores_Umbridge
As Pascal put it several centuries ago:
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/blaise_pascal_133606
And less "religious conviction" than self-righteousness.
Haha, love the Dolores Umbridge comparison. To me, she is the most brilliantly conceived villain of all time. Pure venom hiding behind floral teacups and fluffy kittens. Kinda reminds me of 'gender' crimes hidden behind rainbow sparkle and smiling unicorns.
Yes, Pascal was right 'conviction' only still stands.
Indeed. Reminds me of a tweet by Andrew Doyle, this passage in particular:
"The JK Rowling controversy has exposed one of the most chilling aspects of the woke ideology: the sheer certainty of its adherents."
https://twitter.com/andrewdoyle_com/status/1208423606977515520
God, I love the term ‘commissioned forensic social media report’. I’m all FOR these.
Every cult's story is the same: they provides an environment where the nastiest bullies and the biggest opportunists get away with the worst behaviour and this one is no different. Gender ideology is poison and the worst people thrive on it.
Harris is said to have a trans child (youngish adult) therefore is typical of the middle class (if not privileged) trans parent syndrome. Wholesale ideological capture is all they have. How else do they live with themselves?
I’m going to read the 21 pages, but does anyone know what Clanchy wrote that made them rage at her?
https://chalkboardreview.com/a-teacher-memoir-cancelled-reflections-on-some-kids-i-taught-and-what-they-taught-me/
Interesting. Thanks for the link.
Her descriptions of the children she taught while accepted at the time have since come under fire for being ablist and racist and all can of 'ist' stuff as dreamed up by snowflakes. I must admit, I thought some of the words she used were a bit insensitive but the grief she got for it is, as usual, out of proportion.
Same. After my question I followed the link posted by Lawrence S and I thought at worst her descriptions rankled a bit, but only in the high context way certain words do, not in a malicious way at all. A person reading them twenty years ago or in twenty years wouldn’t notice anything amiss.