He’ll rename himself Anne Frank next

India Willoughby having the fucking gall to frame himself as a Jew and gender skeptics as Nazi exterminators.

https://twitter.com/Phoebe2403/status/1681267449402982402

This is not Vichy. There are no “collaborators” because there is no Vichy and there are no Nazis. There is no “Nazi poster-girl” and no one, NO ONE AT ALL, is “coming for” Willoughby. He’s not going to be hauled off to Auschwitz to be worked to death or immediately gassed. He’s not going to be one of the six million.

This is where narcissism and obsession with one’s precious IdenTiTee takes a person.

Comments

14 responses to “He’ll rename himself Anne Frank next”

  1. Piglet Avatar

    Nobody’s coming for Willoughby, and I think that’s what’s so galling to him. We just want to get as far away from him as possible so we can happily ignore the constant screeching for attention and the casual racism.

  2. clamboy Avatar

    PZ Myers recently shared a 2-hour-long(!) YouTube speech that was all about KJK being, at a minimum, Nazi-adjacent. In his post sharing the link, Myers also called JK Rowling “a raging fascist”.

  3. VanitysFiend Avatar

    At this point I almost feel pity for PZ, he’s become everything he used to rage against. He’s dug a hole so deep for himself I don’t see him ever being able to walk it back, and I’m not sure he even deserves an out…

  4. Piglet Avatar

    Clamboy: shades of George Orwell, but not in the way people usually say it. He had a whole essay about people completely devaluing the word “Fascism” by using it to mean “I don’t like it”.

  5. Holms Avatar

    I watched ten minutes of that video and found it already riddled with gaps in research, and packed with the lazy thinking and dishonesty usual to this crowd. Two hours of that shit would be dire viewing.

  6. Ophelia Benson Avatar

    This comment by one “moonslicer” is interesting for how bizarrely off the mark it is about the whole subject.

    Bear in mind that we’re not talking about mathematical concepts here but transgender rights. The very fact that somebody thinks they have a right to argue with you about your rights, the fact that they think you have to convince them that you’re entitled to rights like everybody else, means that they’re starting out with a prejudice: the idea that transgender people are beneath the cisgender majority and that we have to justify our claim to the rights that everybody else has. …

    …Guys like this, who want to have a calm, philosophical discussion about your rights, they will never be convinced by any sort of argument. People who start out opposing transgender rights will never come round to supporting them, not by virtue of any arguments we can present to them. If that were possible, we’d have converted the world by now.

    Opposition to transgender rights is not based on any philosophy or ideology. It’s based on people’s antipathy to us. They simply don’t like us. And there’s nothing we can say to them to get them to dislike us any less.

    But nobody, nobody, nobody argues that trans people should not have rights. That’s not what the disagreement is about at all. Trans people should have human rights; of course they should.

    The issue is that they don’t get to invent new, peculiar, impossible “rights” like the “right” to be “validated” as the sex they’re not and then force everyone to agree they should have those “rights.”

  7. Ophelia Benson Avatar

    clamboy I’m not seeing the part where PZ called Rowling a raging fascist. CTRL F doesn’t find it. Is this the wrong post?

    https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2023/04/19/can-we-debate-about-how-remote-the-desert-island-debate-bros-should-be-abandoned-on-should-be/

  8. Holms Avatar

    Yes, lately there have been a few awful PinkNoise-worthy denunciations of people he doesn’t like. The one mentioned above is here.

  9. Sastra Avatar

    Atheist blogs have long noted the existence of what we’d call “persecution porn” coming from Christian conservatives. Liberal Secularists were feverishly plotting ways to destroy Christianity and choosing the easiest and only viable method: the use of force against Christians. Laws banning Bibles and camps “reeducating” the faithful were always on the verge of being implemented or had become fact in a fictional drama about the near future. Being asked to renounce Jesus by someone holding a gun to your head was a viable possibility: prepare yourself. How will you answer?

    General consensus was that there were several factors motivating this lascivious dwelling on people “coming for you.” First, there was fundraising, for obvious reasons. Second, was the thrill of seeing oneself as a crucial player in an important drama. And third was confirmation that your faith was true. Nobody would bother bringing such big guns to Christianity if one — they thought it insignificant and pointless and two — they weren’t on the side of Evil.

    I’m not sure about the role of fundraising, but sense of significance and establishing truth — oh yes. Willoughby is intent on both. That may also apply to those with the stubborn inability to see the opposition as they are, as opposed to how they need to be if we assume they know they’re wrong.

  10. […] a comment by Sastra on He’ll rename himself Anne Frank […]

  11. Peter N Avatar

    Ophelia @ #7,

    Strangely, I read “moonslicer”‘s comment and couldn’t find a single example of the rights the transgendered are being denied. But in light of his general point, I suppose I’d be dismissed as an irredeemable case if I dared to ask for one.

  12. NightCrow Avatar

    ‘Vichy Gay Lesbian’? ‘Anti-trans collaborator’? Willoughby, you and your kind are invaders and encroachers on our rights. We are the resistance.