The website is suspect, of course. So, the dude being talked about had a miserable time, though he won in court... but it's not clear that is why he killed himself. HUGE jump. Downvote.
Oof, after you said that, I did a little exploring and immediately found a plethora of anti-trans apologetics, most notably with The Witch Trials of JK Rowling, a podcast that defends JKR's naked transphobia as mere concerns, which Natalie Wynn has a great video about here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmT0i0xG6zg&t=1240. And then, just by scrolling through the home page, I found the articles: "How Therapists Became Social Justice Warriors", "When Ideology Corrupts Medicine-and How One Reporter Exposed it", and "My Research on Gender Dysphoria Was Censored. But I Won’t Be." Just... yikes.
Sooo, yeah, I have to agree that the website is suspect and may very well be jumping to conclusions because they have an agenda to push.
It's really a very good exploration of the issues with plenty of context. Phelps gives both Rowling and her detractors the space to put their point of view across.
If you haven't already, it's well worth listening to, much more so than Wynn's one-sided commentary on anything.
Nah, it's not, you only think that, jkr_fan, because you evidently agree with her given how you created your account to post apologetics for her. That podcast couldn't be more skewed towards Rowling if it tried. And yes, I have already listened to it and it was an utter waste of seven hours because, no, it's not some great exploration... it's a podcast that ultimately frames JKR as a victim of a witch hunt, the clue is in the name, which is so eminently false. I have to agree with what Wynn said about it. I urge you to actually watch her video, the link in my last comment is timestamped.
Opinion, not fact, and not relevant to OP or the discourse in the thread.
Claiming NW's commentary as "one-sided" while you're suckling at the teat of JR's Kool-aid shows your own bias and hypocrisy. Try sticking to the topic at hand, or facts at least.
As a society we need to be able to move past “nice life/career/reputation you got there, would be a real shame if someone were to accuse you of racism for holding a different opinion”.
As far as I've seen, The Free Press' major crime is not necessarily what they cover but that they are egregiously tactless and their bias doesn't convey "good faith". With that being said, this article actually isn't that bad (if bad at all).
The "diversity" training described here sounds bizarre. I've yet to find any rational defense for it aside for the fact that the the people most vocally against it are supposed to be the cause of it on paper. Oddly, I'm steadily coming across instances where this training seems to target people who likely didn't hold problematic beliefs toward other races prior to this sort of DEI training. The whole practice reeks of sabotage from a more powerful establishment and lacks the polish possessed by Black Civil Rights activists of the past.
They are at least guilty in increasing and stoking racial tensions. Not only because the reproduce non-replicable and bad social science theories whose quality lies soly in the controversial part of their tenets.
There is no rationality here, it bunks on vanity.
The women here doesn't hold qualifications because she is black. She doesn't have the facilities to teach anything in my opinion.
It isn't just unlikely he was a racist. He thought disadvantaged kids. The people accusing him are scammers. The vanity of accusing a poor black women, real racism, is a cover here.
17 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 46.2 ms ] threadOof, after you said that, I did a little exploring and immediately found a plethora of anti-trans apologetics, most notably with The Witch Trials of JK Rowling, a podcast that defends JKR's naked transphobia as mere concerns, which Natalie Wynn has a great video about here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmT0i0xG6zg&t=1240. And then, just by scrolling through the home page, I found the articles: "How Therapists Became Social Justice Warriors", "When Ideology Corrupts Medicine-and How One Reporter Exposed it", and "My Research on Gender Dysphoria Was Censored. But I Won’t Be." Just... yikes.
Sooo, yeah, I have to agree that the website is suspect and may very well be jumping to conclusions because they have an agenda to push.
It's really a very good exploration of the issues with plenty of context. Phelps gives both Rowling and her detractors the space to put their point of view across.
If you haven't already, it's well worth listening to, much more so than Wynn's one-sided commentary on anything.
Claiming NW's commentary as "one-sided" while you're suckling at the teat of JR's Kool-aid shows your own bias and hypocrisy. Try sticking to the topic at hand, or facts at least.
If you zoom out a little, you should be able to see what this really is.
Article doesn’t belong here.
Don't lie about it.
The "diversity" training described here sounds bizarre. I've yet to find any rational defense for it aside for the fact that the the people most vocally against it are supposed to be the cause of it on paper. Oddly, I'm steadily coming across instances where this training seems to target people who likely didn't hold problematic beliefs toward other races prior to this sort of DEI training. The whole practice reeks of sabotage from a more powerful establishment and lacks the polish possessed by Black Civil Rights activists of the past.
There is no rationality here, it bunks on vanity.
The women here doesn't hold qualifications because she is black. She doesn't have the facilities to teach anything in my opinion.
It isn't just unlikely he was a racist. He thought disadvantaged kids. The people accusing him are scammers. The vanity of accusing a poor black women, real racism, is a cover here.