Offering to discuss the issue in public

Jul 26th, 2020 | By Ophelia Benson
Category: Notes and Comment Blog

Jolyon Maugham QC says he would love to discuss it with a gender critical feminist, so a GC feminist says I’d love to discuss it with you Jolyon, so…

He says it.

That's certainly true. I have spoken out against no platforming of careful voices. And I could give you (for their privacy only, privately) a list of high profile GC feminists I have offered to discuss the issue with in public, without success. For me, one of the only good…

— Jo Maugham QC (@JolyonMaugham) July 23, 2020

Privately. For their privacy only. So we don’t know who they are or what they said or why his offer was “without success.” We don’t even know whether we should believe him or not. We do know he has carefully hidden the evidence and offered an explanation for the hiding of the evidence, one that seems a bit implausible on its face. If they’re high profile why would they be so bashful?

I’ll debate you Jolyon. Just say when and where.

— Kathleen Stock (@Docstockk) July 24, 2020

Am quite serious. We have conversed privately in reasonably friendly fashion before @JolyonMaugham. You’ve never offered to discuss publicly with me, at least. I’d be delighted. Let’s do it. What format – zoom debate? @LetterWiki exchange?

— Kathleen Stock (@Docstockk) July 24, 2020

Jolyon? Anything?

Jolyon, Jolyon, Jolyon, Joly-oh-oh-on
I'm begging of you please don’t blank these tweets
Jolyon, Jolyon, Jolyon, Joly-oh-oh-on
Please don't ignore me cos I’ve large gametes https://t.co/4pBkcDCjEK

— Kathleen Stock (@Docstockk) July 24, 2020

Ah there he is at last.

Kathleen, the word I used was "discuss." I didn't use "debate" – your word – because this isn't a binary with winners and losers. It's a dynamic with losers and losers. The winners are the patriarchy and the Religious Right who align against things we both support. /1

— Jo Maugham QC (@JolyonMaugham) July 24, 2020

And the GC feminists I have reached to – women you will know, high profile and brilliant – are women who share with me that belief and with whom I have established some trust. And that trust is necessary if we are to discuss, i.e. to resist the temptation to play to our galleries

— Jo Maugham QC (@JolyonMaugham) July 24, 2020

So he will only discuss it with a select list of GC feminists, ones Kathleen Stock will know but he can’t name because [something something], on the basis of their shared belief in light as opposed to heat. So apparently he thinks Stock doesn’t belong to that category? But that’s absurd – she’s famous for being reasonable and fair and not shouty.

Maugham left it there, as far as I can tell (Twitter loves to hide the replies you’re looking for and show you the ones you aren’t). LetterWike stepped up.

Kathleen has agreed to the conversation, and we've agreed to also make a $500 donation to @nia_endingVAWG if the conversation proceeds.

— Letter (@LetterWiki) July 26, 2020

Jolyon? Anything?

2 Responses to “Offering to discuss the issue in public”

#1
Papito
July 26, 2020 at 10:13 am

I can’t wait to introduce you to my girlfriend. She lives in Canada.

But seriously, “I know a lot of high profile and brilliant GC feminists, but they don’t want me to say their names in public…”

Did Jolyon ever stop to ask himself why? The answer is simple: because they’ll be libeled and threatened by the trans cult. They don’t have bodyguards and lawyers like Jo Rowling.

Own your violence Jolyon. TERF is a slur.
#2
Nullius in Verba
July 26, 2020 at 1:52 pm

Ah, the retreat from potential disconfirmation and public airing of dissent.

[Archer voice] Classic woke. [/Archer voice]