this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2024
428 points (93.5% liked)

United Kingdom

4108 readers
226 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

J.K. Rowling is embroiled in a fresh row with another Harry Potter actor over transgender rights.

Following exchanges of fire with Daniel Radcliffe and others, Rowling has blasted David Tennant after the Goblet of Fire star voiced strident views on those who speak out against trans rights.

During an appearance at the British LGBT Awards over the weekend, he called on British equalities minister Kemi Badenoch to “shut up” after she advocated for banning trans women from entering women’s toilets and sports teams.

In an interview at the same event, Tennant called transgender critics “a tiny bunch of little whinging f*ckers who are on the wrong side of history, and they’ll all go away soon.”

Earlier in the week, Rowling branded people like Tennant the “gender Taliban.” In posts on X (once Twitter) on Friday, she expanded her comments to address Tennant’s “wrong side of history” quote.

Rowling wrote: “This man is talking about rape survivors who want female-only care, the nurses currently suing their health trust for making them change in front of a man, girls and women losing sporting opportunities to males and female prisoners incarcerated with convicted sex offenders.”

She added: “For a man who’s supposedly a model of compassion and tolerance, he sure does want a lot of people to cease to exist.”

Previously.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DessertStorms@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

I don’t think the aggression was warranted or helpful, and only served to stagnate the discussion.

Lmfao, whatever makes you feel better and not have to confront realities that make you uncomfortable.. 🙄

(E: realities that you actively contribute to by tone policing, and framing and dismissing people whose rights, and lives, are being abused and put at risk as "aggressive", which is a classic and well documented silencing tactic, whether you knew you were doing it or not. You also literally contributed nothing to the conversation. So basically your entire reply is one big projection, almost impressive)

[–] Umbrias@beehaw.org 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Re: edit - you should actually read the article on what tone policing is in their conception and what is harmful about it, not all being called out for dickish replyguy behavior is tone policing. Frustration and aggression can be warranted, and is fine to express, but when all you're doing is arguing with no cogent point (see: yelling into the void) and misinterpreting what someone is saying to the point of absurdity, aggression is being actively harmful to the discussion. That's just being an ass for catharsis.

And again, the point was to point out that the person you're responding to did not say what you claimed they did, and that the addition about labour was helpful. You can be as frustrated and aggressive as you want about that, but this whole discussion could've been in agreement, you both appear to agree with each other on the meat of the politics.

[–] Truck_kun@beehaw.org 2 points 4 months ago

but this whole discussion could’ve been in agreement

From my point of view it was, but if someone just wants to fight about something and be right, even if you're agreeing, best just to move on with life and not waste time on it.

Either way, predictions are not guaranteed, but looking optimistically forward to the election tomorrow.

Cheers and enjoy your night/day.

[–] Umbrias@beehaw.org 2 points 4 months ago

Huh?

I mean... you are literally instead of discussing the politics of the UK, actively choosing to be antagonistic.

And antagonistic in a way that I have literally no idea what you're even trying to say, beyond wildly thrashing into the void.