Category: Notes and Comment Blog

How ya like him now?

President Donald Trump has spent months trying to move the country’s focus away from the coronavirus. He’s purposely downplayed the threat it poses to Americans, pushed unscientific treatments and ensured the country that a vaccine would be arriving any day. In pre-recorded remarks at the annual Al Smith Dinner on Thursday night, Trump promised that “the end of the pandemic is in sight, and next year will be one of the greatest years in the history of our country.”

Hahahahaha cool, minutes later – oops Hope Hicks has the COVID, minutes after that, oops Trump has to quarantine, minutes after that, oops Trump has the COVID.

Just this morning, when I woke up, I was thinking sadly it might be days before he tested positive. I wasn’t daring to hope it had already happened, let alone hope for symptoms.

He’ll be fuming that he can’t get out there to shout at crowds of screaming racists. With no masks.

And according to the pool reporter traveling with Trump to and from the debate, “all family members who entered without a mask, members of his administration and other guests were not wearing masks.” A doctor affiliated with the Cleveland Clinic approached the group offering masks if they did not have them. No one in the group put on a mask. In addition, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said on ABC News Friday morning that “no one was wearing masks in the room when we were prepping the President during that period of time, the group was about 5 or 6 people in total.”

I wonder how hard they’re all kicking themselves this morning.

What we do know is that Trump’s attempt to make these final weeks of the election about something other than the coronavirus failed the second he got his positive test back. Cable news will cover his illness — and the people he came into contact with and whether they are also sick — wall to wall for weeks. While Covid-19 was the lead story for most news outlets on most days for the last few months, it is likely to become the ONLY story for the foreseeable future.

Will there be a sympathy vote?

You already know, but just to get things started…

You reap what you sow.

President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump tested positive for coronavirus, the President announced early Friday morning, an extraordinary development coming months into a global pandemic and in the final stretch of his reelection campaign.

Good.

He’s been laughing and jeering and sneering, he’s been putting other people in danger in their thousands, he’s kneecapped the national response to the pandemic so thoroughly that we have the worst death toll in the world, so it’s only fair that he should get it himself.

The White House doctor says

The President and First Lady are both well at this time, and they plan to remain at home within the White House during their convalescence.

The fact that they’re “well at this time” means nothing. The disease can start out mild and then become not mild and then kill you.

Rest assured I expect the President to continue carrying out his duties without disruption while recovering, and I will keep you updated on any future developments.

Blah blah blah. Virus gonna do what virus does.

Originally a comment by Bruce Gorton on Grab that pen and sign.

Saw on a comment about Stephen King coming out in support of Rowling:

Eva Webb: Adorable Antifascist Pumpkin Queen

because agreeing to disagree means agreeing to not exist, and agreeing to let the other person write papers that effect policy that affects the lives and rights of the people she’s attacking. there is no agree to disagree when you’re lobbying to have someone’s legal rights taken away or restricted

You don’t have the right to force other people to see you the same way you see yourself, otherwise we’d all want most of the world to see us as ultra-rich billionaires, and the tax authorities to see us as ultra-poor non-profits. That people see you differently to how you see yourself isn’t some sort of phobia on their part, nor is it an unbearable trauma, it’s life.

If you require the affirmation of others to exist, you don’t actually exist. Reality is real whether we agree with it or not, if your existence is contingent on the words of JK Rowling, then you don’t actually exist, any more than Hagrid actually exists.

Rowling is a rich author in the UK. She is not directing UK policy, never mind global policy. Freedom of speech is a right, not all of the “rights” asserted by trans lobbyists actually qualify as such.

For example, there is no right to compete in sporting events under your preferred category. Otherwise the featherweight champion of the world in boxing, would be a mediocre heavyweight. A heavy person identifying as a light person would not be considered as having their existence or rights denied by boxing boards for this rule.

Now I’ve disagreed with some feminists on the issue of abuse shelters before. I think that there is a need for abused persons to have services geared towards them regardless of sex, that abused men do have a need for services directed towards them.

However, it doesn’t help abused men to close shelters that cater solely to women. The needs of the abused should take precedence over anybody’s feelings over the matter, and women who do not wish to face men after being abused, have the right to such safe places free of men even if you disagree with their personal feelings. “I’m a man and I would never…” doesn’t mean that she is in a state to face you, and her state of mind is the important thing in that situation.

People recovering from trauma should not be expected to be at their most emotionally stable, you don’t expect someone to run when their leg is broken, why do you expect the equivalent to people escaping abusive situations? There is a time and a place for discussing such issues, an abuse shelter is not one of them.

And what goes for men, goes for trans too. The answer to abuse suffered by trans individuals isn’t to shut down Women’s Place, it is to create shelters and services that cater to the needs of trans abuse sufferers. If you demand that shelters perform in a way that suits your politics rather than the needs of their residents, then you’re putting your politics ahead of the needs of abuse sufferers. Your rights do not trump the rights of those in need of such services.

It isn’t a denial of trans rights to state as such, anymore than it would be a denial of men’s rights to state as such.

Finally, if Rowling’s position on trans issues was simply ignored, then it would be largely unknown to the general public. Her advocacy only has the meaning it does now, because of the over-the-top reactions of ideologues who are chasing clicks and the latest sensation. It is as important as it is, mainly because of the rush to the virtue signal that has highlighted how lacking in virtue the signalers really are.

In the UK you have the Conservative Party in charge. In the US you have the Republican Party.

There are a lot of issues which should be taking precedence in both countries, and your press is arguing over the views of a children’s book author. There is this plague of highlighting the trivial to distract from the substantive, which only serves to undermine any real progress on any real issues.

Originally a comment by Screechy Monkey on That’s showbiz.

Maroon @2: “And then four years later, Lester Holt sandbagged Dukakis by asking him if he would support the death penalty if someone raped his wife.”

It was Bernard Shaw, by the way.

It was perhaps in poor taste, but it was the easiest question in the world to answer politically. Dukakis could have said something like this:

“[optional: Bernard, that’s a disgusting and offensive question.] Would I support the death penalty for my wife’s killer? I’d want to do it myself with my own bare hands, slowly and painfully. I would be blinded by my rage and grief, and not interested in hearing any reasons why his life should be spared. And that’s exactly why we don’t let victims’ families sit as judge, jury, and executioner. We have a system of justice where impartial judges and jurors decide on guilt and punishment, and that’s as it should be. So would I want bloody vengeance for my wife? Yes, absolutely. But what I want most of all is to live in a country where justice is done. [optional puffery about how wonderful American justice is, even though it isn’t really true, but this is 1988]”

Rightly or wrongly, many Americans want to believe that their President has emotions, is a fighter, etc. (It’s why some people like Trump.)

Dukakis’s problem wasn’t that he was asked an unfair question, or that opposition to the death penalty was inherently unspinnable. It was that he gave a bland, unemotional answer to a question that should have provoked a reaction. Dukakis had already built up an image as a somewhat robotic technocrat — if he had showed some anger and feeling in his response, nobody was going to paint him as unhinged, it would have rounded him out as a human being. Hell, he could have just ripped Shaw a new orifice and that would have been a much better answer.

Dukakis was a politician. He had no excuse for botching that. One of the frustrating things about Democrats is that so many of them just plain suck at politics, and then complain that voters and the media focus on the wrong things. Well, yeah, of course they do. Voters are mostly idiots. I learned that in 8th grade student council elections, and have found no reason to change that opinion since. It’s one of the many reasons I’m not in politics. But if you’re going to get in the game, for fuck’s sakes, play to win, don’t complain about the rules of the game.

Trump’s “press secretary” tried to con journalists into thinking Amy Barrett was a Rhodes scholar.

If you watch it you see that she says “my bad” in a brushoff sort of way when she’s exposed as having lied to the reporters. We don’t refer to people who went to, say, Wharton as “Wharton scholars.” We say they graduated from Wharton or attended Wharton or got a BA at Wharton. (In Trump’s case we note that they did it by paying a less stupid kid to take the SATs for him.) The “press secretary” and former Fox News sleaze got caught telling a flattering lie about the religious fanatic Trump nominated for RBG’s seat.

Danger? What danger? I don’t see any danger, do you? Oh you mean danger to the female prisoners – oh well who cares about them.

She’s not just some random shouter, she’s a Councillor. And a woman.

Texas governor goes for more voter suppression.

Gov. Greg Abbott issued an order Thursday requiring counties to close multiple locations where voters can drop off completed mail-in ballots.

As an election security measure, counties will be limited to one dropoff site where poll watchers — designated by political parties and candidates — must be allowed to observe ballot deliveries by voters, Abbott said.

“Election security” my ass – it’s voter suppression.

Travis County has four dropoff locations, including three downtown, while Harris County has opened 12 locations as election officials strove to meet unprecedented demand for mail-in voting during the pandemic — particularly amid questions about the efficiency of the U.S. Postal Service.

“As we work to preserve Texans’ ability to vote during the COVID-19 pandemic, we must take extra care to strengthen ballot security protocols throughout the state. These enhanced security protocols will ensure greater transparency and will help stop attempts at illegal voting,” Abbott said in a statement.

They will make it harder for people to vote, is what they’ll do. That’s voter suppression. Scumbag.

How that nightmare looked from farther away:

Over the years, the presidential debates have become as much about entertainment as elucidation. As journalists we hype them like Vegas world heavyweight boxing bouts beforehand and score them like TV critics afterwards.

Indeed, and it’s maddening. There’s so much palaver about the stupid debates, as if they mattered, when in fact there are much better ways to evaluate the candidates and what they plan to do.

Ever since Ronald Reagan mastered the genre, the debates have tended to reward star power over expertise.

Well there you go. If it works for a Reagan and doesn’t work for a Mondale then it’s not a good instrument.

Presidential debates increasingly have come down to who can deliver Reagan-style one-liners, the jokes or putdowns that are rerun endlessly on the news in the days afterwards. What is supposed to be a job interview has become more like an audition for the role of leading man.

And…that’s not what presidents are for. They’re not our roommates or colleagues, we don’t have to live with them, we don’t even have to like them.

He’s still finding ways to get worse.

About Trump and the Proud Boys…

The president was asked repeatedly by the moderator, Chris Wallace, to condemn violence by white supremacists and rightwing groups, such as armed militias, as well as criticizing leftwing protesters.

Instead, Trump addressed the Proud Boys, a far-right group whose members have been sentenced to prison for attacking leftwing protesters in political street fights, and said: “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by! But I’ll tell you what, somebody’s got to do something about antifa and the left.”

The Proud Boys, whose uniform is a black polo shirt, immediately celebrated the president’s comment in posts on social media platform Telegram. One Proud Boys group added the phrase “Stand Back, Stand By” to their logo. Another post was a message to Trump: “Standing down and standing by sir.”

Ready to “do something” about antifa and the left sir.

In 2019, a New York judge who sentenced two Proud Boys members to prison for assaulting leftwing protesters after an event in New York City said that cracking down on political violence was essential.

“I know enough about history to know what happened in Europe in the 30s when political street brawls were allowed to go ahead,” the judge said at the Proud Boys’ sentencing, the New York Post reported.

And what happened in the 40s as a result.

Biden’s running mate, Kamala Harris, also condemned the president’s refusal to disavow white supremacists. “The president of the United States, in the year of our Lord 2020, refuses to condemn white supremacists,” she said.

Maybe they’ll make him their god when he loses the election.

Good one.

Not so good.

Damn. There I was thinking no one would be rushing forward to say “Barbie Kardashian” is no threat to anyone and that it’s transphobic and evil to say he is. DINGDING wrong again.

They also posted the statement on Facebook.

We are profoundly disappointed with the recent piece shared by the Limerick Leader. The Limerick Feminist Network have been active in Limerick and working on the ground with the feminist community for several years and we are disappointed that we were not contacted for comment. Never the less, here are our views on the matter.

Trans women are not a threat to cis women. With the rise of the far-right and the huge increase in calls to domestic and sexual violence support services since the beginning of lockdown it is clear that some of the biggest threats to women right now are cis men and white supremacy.

The notion that cis men are pretending to identify as female, changing their names and obtaining certificates of gender recognition just to get access to abuse and victimise women is not only ludicrous but completely inaccurate and a narrative that makes trans women incredibly unsafe.

Trans women are women, trans men are men. We stand with all of our trans and LGBTQIA+ siblings and will continue to promote and practice feminism that is inclusive and intersectional.

It is never okay to dead name a trans person. There is no place for transphobia in Irish feminism.

We hope that the Limerick Leader takes the time to learn from this and urge them to contact and include the diverse voices of local community organisations in future.

So, you know, if you’re out and about in Limerick and you run into “Barbie Kardashian” on the street you shouldn’t turn and walk swiftly away, you should approach him and offer your warm kind compassionate intersectional inclooosivity.

The people of Twitter are disputing and/or reproaching John Cleese for signing the letter, but they’re not shouting or threatening or hurling sexual insults and fantasies about violence. Funny, that.

Sarcasm. Oh no not sarcasm!

So there.

Of course the nonsense follows swiftly.

MY hormones, mine mine mine, me me me. It’s personal.

Once more, with feeling: it’s not about existing. It’s about truth-claims. Truth-claims about the self are not the same thing as existence. If you say you’re forty feet tall and I say you’re not, you don’t abruptly pop out of existence. That’s not how it works.

What SurvivalSavvy said:

Oh John. Please say this isn’t so. Are you really abandoning inclusion and diversity for narrow minded anti-trans bigotry? So very disappointed.

Compelling stuff, for sure.

How is it any of a woman’s business that men want to take the word “women” away from women? The question answers itself.

What Trump refused to say is significant.

Fox News’s Chris Wallace — who had spent most of the debate with the demeanor of someone unexpectedly pulled from the audience to ride a bronco at a rodeo — pushed Trump on his recent reluctance to say that he would ensure a smooth transition should he lose.

“Will you urge your supporters to stay calm during this extended period, not to engage in any civil unrest?” Wallace asked. “And will you pledge tonight that you will not declare victory until the election has been independently certified?”

Oh hell no. Of course he won’t.

“I’m urging my supporters to go into the polls and watch very carefully, because that’s what has to happen,” Trump said. “I am urging them to do it. As you know, today, there was a big problem in Philadelphia. They went in to watch. They were called poll watchers, a very safe, very nice thing. They were thrown out. They weren’t allowed to watch. You know why? Because bad things happen in Philadelphia, bad things.”

In fact they were asked to leave because of the pandemic restrictions.

There is a utility to having poll watchers in place, people trained to track voter turnout or, for those with particular expertise, to assist those who might need help casting a ballot. What Trump is obviously encouraging is to poll watching what armed militias are to police: self-appointed experts whose priority is less keeping order than confronting perceived enemies. It wasn’t the first time that Trump had similarly called on his supporters to serve in that capacity, but it was probably the call that had the largest audience.

And let’s not forget that this is in a country with a long and murderous history of such “poll watching” to keep the descendants of slaves from voting. Black people were lynched for voting not that many decades ago. Chaney, Goodman, and Schwerner were murdered in 1964, when Donald Trump was 18.

That was in a different Philadelphia.

The reviews are harsh.

Then Dana Bash says that was polite, she’s just gonna say it like it is: that was a shitshow.

Why are tv news personalities moderating these debates anyway? None of this is a good idea.

I hate presidential debates. I think it’s a bad thing that they’re taken so seriously and given so much attention. Debating isn’t a key part of what a president does – presidents aren’t legislators, they’re executives.

Add to that a debate where Trump is one of the debaters…and just no.

I did watch a few minutes, just to see, and was disgusted, and stopped.

Our shame can be seen from space.

Only one man looked remotely presidential on the debate stage in Cleveland, Ohio, and it was not the incumbent. He interrupted, ranted, raged, spewed lies and interrupted some more. Oh, and he passed on an opportunity to condemn white supremacists, instead telling them to “stand back and stand by”.

And the Fox News umpire did a shit job of keeping him under control.

Trump looked more like a challenger than an incumbent, butting in and hurling petty insults such as: “Don’t ever use the word ‘smart’ with me … There’s nothing smart about you, Joe.” The hapless Wallace struggled to gain control as viewers heard only a cacophony of voices. “I am the moderator of this debate, let me ask my question,” he almost pleaded.

…

Worst of all, when Wallace asked Trump if he was willing to condemn white supremacists and militia groups, the president couldn’t do it, saying: “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by! But I’ll tell you what, somebody’s got to do something about antifa and the left.”

And that somebody might as well be white supremacists amirite?

Well anyway they’ve written a letter too so ha. They’ve written their own Big Important letter that repeats The Dogma so there. Take that, Bad People.

Days after a host of prominent literary names signed a letter defending JK Rowling “against hate”, more than 200 writers, publishers and journalists including Jeanette Winterson, Malorie Blackman and Joanne Harris have put their names to another stating their support for transgender and non-binary people.

In order to imply that The Enemy is undermining transgender and non-binary people.

The letter, which is described as “a message of love and solidarity for the trans and non-binary community”, was pulled together by acclaimed writers Kiran Millwood Hargrave and Daisy Johnson. With signatories also including Juno Dawson, Elizabeth Day, Max Porter, Nikesh Shukla, Sara Collins, Irenosen Okojie, Mary Jean Chan, Naoise Dolan, Olivia Sudjic, Sharlene Teo and Patrick Ness, it states that “non-binary lives are valid, trans women are women, trans men are men, trans rights are human rights”.

There it is again – the empty meaningless jargon, robotically repeated. It’s like the Doxology or the Pledge of Allegiance or the Dale Carnegie ego-booster.

The statement was put together in the wake of an open letter signed by 58 writers including Ian McEwan, Lionel Shriver, Susan Hill and Philip Hensher, which highlighted the abuse directed at Rowling, and the “insidious, authoritarian and misogynistic trend in social media”.

So let’s have another insidious, authoritarian and misogynistic letter. Can’t have too many, can we.

The Bookseller reports on Mslexia’s shunning of Amanda Craig:

Amanda Craig has been dropped as a competition judge by women’s writing magazine Mslexia over her signing of a letter to the Times in defence of J K Rowling.

…Craig has said she is “very disappointed” by the decision taken after her involvement protesting “relentless bullying and death threats to a fellow author”. She also called on professional bodies, including the Society of Authors and English PEN, to defend authors from such bullying.

…

Craig had been appointed a judge for the Mslexia Fiction & Memoir Competition 2020 alongside novelist Kiran Millwood Hargrave and literary agent Joanna Moult. Hargrave said on Twitter that she “wasn’t comfortable to sit on a panel of judges alongside Amanda because of the letter”. She said she had offered to step down herself in order to let Craig remain on the panel.

Craig said: “I was going to judge this prize as a favour to a magazine I’ve supported virtually since it began. I’m very sad, because I love finding new talent,” said Craig. “But I am just very disappointed in them [Mslexia] because it seems quite clear to me what I am protesting against, like the other signatories, is the relentless bullying and death threats to a fellow author. It’s clear that is what that letter was about. It wasn’t about views on trans matters, which I know there is a broad spectrum of opinion about; it was to show someone I very much admire as a writer support. So it’s disappointing and ironic that a magazine, founded to support and champion women writers, should have fallen in this ridiculous way. I’m afraid it’s pretty damaging for them.”

All the more so when the point of contention is whether or not men can literally transmogrify into women. If anything short of agreeing – noisily, enthusiastically, publicly – that men can become women is grounds for punishment and ostracism, then we’re in a realm of thought-policing in the most grimly literal sense possible.

Hargrave–who was to be Craig’s co-judge on the panel and has since been attacked on social media over her stance on the issue–said from her point of view she was glad Mslexia had “taken a stand in support of a persecuted minority”. 

Men? Men are not a persecuted minority.

One of the organisers behind a letter published in the Guardian on Wednesday (30th September) in solidarity with the non-binary and trans community, she said: “Following Amanda’s signing of the Times letter, I spoke with Mslexia and offered to step down as my views are antithetical with the signees. I’ve seen a lot of talk about how it was a letter opposing bullying, but where was the support for the trans community Rowling put in harm’s way with her views?”

Rowling didn’t put “the trans community” in harm’s way with her views. That’s the usual manipulative lying crap and it is a pack of lies.

“I do not support hate speech, towards anyone. I never condone or participate in it. And when you look at the people who signed –Graham Linehan, Lionel Shriver–it’s clear there is alignment with transphobia. That is unacceptable to me, and to Mslexia, who are after all a magazine for women who write. You can’t exclude trans women from that definition and truly represent all women.”

Yes you can. That’s exactly what you can do. What you can’t do is the other thing: include men in the definition of women and truly represent all women. Support and help and love and hang out with gender-nonconforming men all you like, by all means, but don’t try to bully us into agreeing that their gender nonconformity means they are literally women. That’s just stupid.

“If they had asked me to step down, I would have without fanfare or public statement. I’m disappointed the same courtesy wasn’t afforded me, and that I have been subject to character attacks by people with a track record of spreading hatred. The debate has become a binary of ‘supporting’ Amanda, or ‘supporting’ me and Mslexia.”

Whose fault is that? Nothing required Hargrave to ostracize Craig; the decision to do so was all hers, and was malevolent and destructive. Yes it created a “binary” but she’s the one who created it. We think she did a bad destructive anti-woman thing and we get to say so, even if it does create a “binary.”

“Really, it’s about trans people’s right to exist and have their existence enshrined in law.”

Like hell it is. Nobody disputes trans people’s right to exist. It’s not about existence, it’s about definition. Catastrophizing talk of a right to exist is just more bullying.

“I did not set out to ‘cancel’ Amanda, and the very people who say I have now seek to ‘cancel’ me. Those who claim to hate bullying share my name and invite others to ridicule me and the work I do – the hypocrisy is astonishing. Judging a prize is an honour, not a right, and I am glad Mslexia have taken a stand in support of a persecuted minority.”

There’s that “persecuted minority” again. Men are not a persecuted minority.

So much stale empty jargon thrown down like poker chips. Look behind the damn jargon to see if it even means anything. Use your brain instead of your box of slogans.

Mslexia has issued a statement – a bad, stupid, smarmy, chickenshit statement.

All that plus difficult to read – but hey, tiny white print on a lavender background is so Feminine, amirite?

Mslexia exists to support all writers who identify as women, regardless of their prior background or current circumstances, including issues relating to their age, race, class, income, disability, sexual preference, location, health status, fertility, caring responsibilities and gender assignment. We stand against all forms of abuse and harassment.

Mslexia aims to foster a welcoming and inclusive environment that encourages women to express themselves across a wide range of literary genres in the knowledge that they, and their writing, will always be treated with respect.

Therefore, we absolutely respect any woman’s right to freedom of speech, within the law. However, if a Mslexia judge expresses views that threaten to undermine Mslexia’s climate of welcome and inclusivity, we will always ask her to step down from that role.

So “Mslexia exists to support all writers who identify as women” – as opposed to supporting all writers who are women. I’m ancient enough to remember a time when it was enough to just be a woman, and it wasn’t enough to just “identify as” a woman [while not actually being one]. I think we shouldn’t have swapped the one for the other. I think we should go on thinking of women as women, and leave it at that. Men who wish they were women are a separate issue, and frankly not our problem. That’s not to say we can’t be supportive or sympathetic, it’s just to say that it is literally not our problem and that women still have a lot of inequities and injustices to deal with; we don’t need to take on men’s issues along with ours, let alone instead of ours.

Notice that in that list of 11 items in under “including” that sex is not included. Mslexia exists to support all writers who identify as women, including men but not including all women. Uh…thanks? Mslexia exists to support all writers who identify as women but it will drop a woman like a stone if she supports a woman who supports a woman who fails to agree that men are literally women if they say they are.

(I still, after all these years, find it hard to believe – this new “feminism” that includes some men and excludes women who don’t agree that those men are literally women.)

Mslexia aims to foster a welcoming and inclusive environment that encourages women to express themselves across a wide range of literary genres in the knowledge that they, and their writing, will always be treated with respect.

No it doesn’t. Obviously not.

Therefore, we absolutely respect any woman’s right to freedom of speech, within the law. However, if a Mslexia judge expresses views that threaten to undermine Mslexia’s climate of welcome and inclusivity, we will always ask her to step down from that role.

That is, they don’t aim to foster a welcoming and inclusive environment that encourages women to express themselves across a wide range of literary genres in the knowledge that they, and their writing, will always be treated with respect. Despite the fact that they just typed words saying they do, they don’t, because immediately after typing words that say they do, they typed more words that say they don’t. You can’t have both, chums. You can’t say you support women and then say you dump women who fail to agree that men can be women.