India Willoughby, dressed up in a little-girl round-collared blouse with puffy sleeves, says how persecuted he is.
…and it’s just become so toxic, it’s horrible, I feel like this government have put a target on my back, I belong to nought point two percent of the population, which is like literally nothing at all – I feel hunted now, every story that appears in the British media is about trans people being a threat to women n chil which is ridiculous
Stop right there. That’s a distortion, along with the absurd exaggeration. The main issue is men who identify as trans being a threat to women’s rights, and about men who pretend to be trans to gain access being a physical threat to women. It’s not about trans people in general being a general threat to women; that’s absurd. As for children, the perceived threat is mostly persuading children to believe this stupid reckless harmful ideology. None of those are in the least “ridiculous.”
And – erm – they’re treating me as if I’m a criminal or a disease. When you have that rettrick, I just want to say that Ben, if you have that rettrick, a thousand stories a month on trans people, exclusively hostile, you’re going to get a reaction because it’s all very well having a civilized debate, in a philosophical sense about you know women and trans people in a studio, but that feeds down onto the street where you have thuggish ignorant people who don’t pick up on the subtleties.
Mmm. Powerful argument. Women mustn’t say that men like Willoughby are undermining women’s rights, because that will feed down onto the street where thuggish ignorant people will hear it and go berserk.
Ok then. Never mind.
Comments
17 responses to “Willoughby feels hunted”
He’s not, as my German friend would say, the sharpest axe in the kitchen.
If, when we say “The main issue is men who identify as trans being a threat to women’s rights, and about men who pretend to be trans to gain access being a physical threat to women” any man who claims to be a woman says that he hears “trans people are a threat to women”, then he’s: extremely stupid and doesn’t have the brain power to comprehend the subtleties; or lying about what he hears; OR TELLING THE TRUTH about what he thinks, and is too obliviously narcissistic to realise that WE DON’T THINK LIKE THAT.
Perhaps he really does know that, actually, the vast majority of middle-aged men claiming to believe that they are really women are a threat to women. Perhaps he knows that the ideology is a massive threat to vulnerable children and young people.
Perhaps he’s seeing his position become untenable, and is recruiting flying monkeys to protect him from the rising tide of public opinion which is massively against the cult.
Having seen narcissists work on a smaller scale using the same tactics, it’s not beyond reason to suppose that he’s putting up a straw man and asking people to agree that such a blanket accusation is ridiculous, so that everyone he speaks to is less likely to listen to what we’re actually saying. Without flying monkeys, he’s powerless.
Another thing – what’s with the hyperbole?
That claim is ridiculous.
It’s such a ludicrous claim, it’s a wonder anyone lets him carry on speaking. A tiny fraction of stories in the British Media have anything whatsoever about ‘trans people’, and I bet a lot of those are just as gushing as they’ve always been. But he feels hunted because it’s all about him, isn’t it? No-one else really exists except as a prop in the play in his head, in which he has the starring role, and how dare anyone fail to follow the script. He needs to be in control, and for many years he thought he was. Just look at interviews he’s given in the past, in which he was perfectly horrible to any women unlucky enough to be appearing with him, whether guest or host. He’s going to get worse. A lot worse. A narcissist who feels himself losing control is dangerous to everyone around him.
I really doubt there are a thousand stories a month in UK media on trans issues, let alone anti-trans, since Willoughby is speaking about rhetoric. Maybe if you include individuals social media posts, but then if you do that you have to include all the pro-trans and anti-gc social media posts. Either way, he’s being a dishonest shit.
I have no doubt that with the anger and polarisation in the debate as it becomes more public there will be some threats against prominent trans people, just as there have been (for years now) against prominant GC women. Willoughby and his cohort were more than happy to whip up a frenzy against GC feminists and see them hounded from their jobs, social lives, and professions. Happy to see them threatened and abused (I have never seen a prominent trans person tell their supporters to lay off abuse and threats). Now, at the first hint that the battle has been joined on a wider front they’re falling back on the “I’m just a poor defenceless pwincess, who will save me” routine. That said, anyone who engages in threats of violence should face consequences – regardless of the side they’re on.
One last thing: the information bar at the bottom gives the number of ‘hate crimes’ for the ‘year to March 2022’. That implies that it’s for the first quarter of 2022, when in fact it covers the year ending in March 2022; in other words, the twelve months from April 2021 to March 2022 inclusive.
There are figures here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/hate-crime-england-and-wales-2021-to-2022/hate-crime-england-and-wales-2021-to-2022
Putting aside the Stonewalling of last category (the protected characteristic in law is ‘gender reassignment’), the figures for ‘hate crimes’ – which are actual crimes (such as assault) which have been deemed to have been aggravated by a motive based on hatred of the target’s perceived membership of one of the protected groups; hating someone because of who they are isn’t a crime in and of itself – the figures given are as follows:
(Emphasis mine)
• race or ethnicity…………………..109,843 (70.48%)
• religion or beliefs…………………….8,730 (5.60%)
• sexual orientation…………………..26,152 (16.78%)
• disability…………………………….14,242 (9.14%)
• transgender identity…………………4,355 (2.79%)
Those add up to more than 100% of the total, presumably because some crimes ticked more than one box.
What is telling is the bit I’ve italicised. The police seem to be recording a lot more relatively minor incidents as ‘crime’ than they used to, and are quicker to label them ‘hate crime’ (and don’t get me started on ‘non-crime hate incidents’). Meanwhile, serious crime is not being dealt with. More from the link which explains:
The annual crime rate in Great Britain is roughly 80 crimes per thousand people (population about 60.8 million). Acording to those figures above, hate crime incidents are about 2.56 per thousand people. Not nice, especially for the victims, but a very small proportion.
Those hate crimes perpetrated against people with a ‘gender identity’?
0.07 incidents per thousand people.
Three percent of crime is hate crime, and three percent of those are perpetrated against people who claim that it was motivated by a hatred of ‘gender identity’. Half of those are ‘public order offences’; i.e. someone saying something that someone didn’t like. Mr. Willoughby is taking a minuscule fraction of a small fraction of crime, and making it out to be a huge problem – for him. I’m having a hard time imagining a more narcissistic view point; or a more dangerous approach to reporting crime than interviewing him for something which is exremely unlikely ever to affect him.
LOUDLY CLAPPING HERE. Bravo, Tigger! You have outdone yourself, if that were even possible.
Not to mention this bit again…
We have seen how quick people have been to accuse GC women of hate crimes, even when they personally have done nothing but read that woman’s tweet. We’ve seen how eager som police officers have been to pursue those women for wrong think. I’m not at all against recording and pursuing hate crime charges where a person has been physically assaulted or their personal safety threatened because of gender reassignment, but…
Of course, crime motivated by hostility or prejudice towards someone based on their sex is not categorized as a hate crime, so we have no idea where that would rank compared to all the other hate crimes. We can guess though.
And on Willoughby’s claim that “all” the news stories about trans are negative – well something has to balance out the propaganda presented by all the trans story lines in fiction. I just saw an episode of Vera recently where absolutely everyone on screen pretended that the undoubtedly vulnerable and utterly harmless seeming skinny lad with too much makeup was a woman. The only people who questioned it were the anonymous off-screen women in the women’s shelter who complained that he “was a threat” – once again, the li that women pick out a specific transwoman to accuse, rather than requesting that the principle of single-sex spaces be upheld.
To be fair, they seemed to get the the trans character spot on. He turned up to the funeral of the murder victim in a harlot-red dress and proceeded to impose himself on the grieving wife and daughter.
@Catwhisperer #8
That’s a glaring point: sex is not a protected characteristic, so crimes against women motivated by misogyny are not recorded. That’s an infuriating omission.
I have just a couple other thoughts:
Counting “disorder” offences as hate crimes means that the gender identity hate crime statistics can easily be over-inflated, e.g., by hunting down women who do things like put up stickers, or post photos of suffragist ribbons online.
I’m not at all sure I believe that the letter Willoughby complains about is actually a death threat. Given that, in gender ideology “rettrick,” “misgendering” is “literal” murder, and women simply saying that “men cannot become women,” or that “sex is real,” is equated to genocide, I take his claims of “death threats” with a huge pinch of salt.
@tigger, #2
I think it’s DARVO bluster. I think he knows very well that the insistence on demanding entry into every single-sex space for women and girls is driven by prurient interests. It isn’t driven by internal, private feelings of femininity. They could do that perfectly well without ever once violating a single-sex boundary. However, it’s the violation of women’s boundaries that comprises all the fun. That’s the actual point. It’s effectively an admission of guilt that trans identifying men are dangerous to women and girls. I think he knows it very well.
I very much doubt that there’s many women in Britain who don’t get catcalled, or spoken over, or ignored by someone whose attention they need to attract (the police, for example), or insulted, or required to give a ‘dead name’ (if we use their terminology) on a form, or flashed, ogled, or filmed when in a changing room or toilet, or sent unwelcome images of penises, or rape and death threats online, at least once a year; which would amount to some tens of millions of public order offences were women allowed to complain.
But men are allowed to complain about uppity women refusing to mis-sex them; we have to ignore the myriad ways in which misogyny rears its ugly head all around us. It’s the hideous wallpaper of our existence.
And just because he annoys me so much, I’m going to point out that the reason he has chosen such a blouse is a vain attempt to disguise his manly shoulders. On a woman, the puffs at the top of each sleeve would be sticking out beyond her shoulder; his shoulders fill them and he probably hopes that we won’t notice.
It’s strange, isn’t it. On the one hand, JK Rowling receives enough death threats to paper her house with them, as she puts it. One the other hand, all the media coverage is negative and Willoughby is inundated with enough death threats to paper… well, an A4 sized patch of wall in his downstairs toilet. One might conclude that very few people who think “trans rights” are in conflict with women’s rights are the sort to send death threats, while a very high number of those in favour of “trans right” send a LOT of them.
I wonder if Willoughby has even considered for a moment the part he’s played in creating what he fears (if he actually is in fear). I suppose that’s victim blaming, but it’s not as if he couldn’t have made different choices. Considering some of the bullying and spin doctoring we’ve witnessed from him, I doubt he’s entirely blameless.
If he had been handed a letter that actually said “DIE TRANS SCUM!” or something like it, he’d have posted an image of it. If he’d been given an example of the sort of thing he’s decrying, there’s no way he wouldn’t use this piece of evidence as Exhibit #1. So I’m of the camp that this only becomes “death threat” material after having been run through the same Secret Trans Decoder Ring that turns any statement by JKR into a call for immediate trans genocide.
Now that would keep the police busy>
Not only do you have to ignore this and plow through it just to function and get through life and stuff, (patriarchal) society at large tells you it doesn’t exist (literally- sex is not on the list of hate crime aggravators), or isn’t noteworthy. It’s just part of the landscape, the air we breathe and comes into being, or happens without anyone actually doing anything, because “boys will be boys.”
Yeah, he would have posted it, but maybe not if it also contained something that hit too close to home. It wouldn’t be difficult to fabricate such a thing to go along with the claim either, so at least he hasn’t resorted to that (yet).
[…] a comment by tigger_the_wing on Willoughby feels […]
“I feel like this government have put a target on my back” – India Willoughby
Is it the case, perhaps, that among the ‘social justice warriors’ and related tribes everyone is either an oppressor or one of the oppressed? So to stay on the ‘right side’ it is necessary to keep emphasising and even exaggerating one’s personal victimhood?