Penny for Your Thoughts - No! Not You
That great feminist thinker and cultural luminary Laurie Penny is feeling attacked again. So, she's fighting back with brilliantly cogent ripostes, making even the most ardent gender identity extremist think "meh. Course I'll endorse this, but it's not TWAW SMDCOIT*, is it? I'll probably use it to fill spaces where deflection and waffle is required. Like a sort of rhetorical thickening agent".
*Trans Women Are Women, Suck My Dick & Choke On It Terf
(I'm currently enamoured with Penny and her benevolent advice)
No - she swears - she never belittled the traumatic consequences of a girl being exposed to a naked man and his dick. Oh no, Penny is too feminist for that! Penny's written books and everything, she's a stalwart of liberal feminism that never would excuse sexual harassment or violence, or attempt to blame the victim.
It's just about asking why does someone's exposed male body, in an enclosed space, while you are also likely to be naked or semi clothed, bother you so much? Are you really such a Karen?
Penny can empathise with victims, precisely because of her feminist principles and in-depth analysis. She cares, goddammit, not only for the victim, but also the accused.
This is what they call intersectional feminism, where white, heterosexual men are simultaneously the dark oppressor, deserving wall-to-wall scrutiny and critique (sit down, check your privilege etc) and even intense economic hardship or childhood abuse makes zero difference to the towering advantage imbued by that holy trinity of characteristics.
That is, until the white, heterosexual male says he feels like a woman, where abra-cadabra, Darren Merager, they are transposed to the position only previously held by Christians in the 80's, for starving black babies
So, unlike the silly, neurotic and hateful fake feminists, Penny has a deep, rich understanding of power dynamics and oppression. She has an exceptional ability to separate the nuance from the nuisance, the narrative from the noise. More light, less heat, in the wise words of Labour's Lisa Nandy.
Just look at this objective and well reasoned take, in response to a bad faith question from a dogwhistle transphobe set on provoking a whole genocide -
"How am I supposed to know how she would feel? I haven't met your daughter, and I'm not her parent. But I'd advise her not to stare at other people's genitals without their permission, because it's rude"
Now, squawk all yee like, you strawmanning, pitchfork yokels, this is just sensible advice: like telling someone being stalked to keep a log of incidents and block dodgy phone numbers - And maybe mentioning they stop giving men any more mixed messages. Rein in that coquettish eyelash fluttering, for God's sake. We know it's all about your self esteem, you fucking tease.
Some have called her an apologist for sex offenders and part of a broader culture which pours scorn, suspicion and blame on victims. That's, like, totally not what she stands for. She stands for hashtag-MeToo, and a unified feminist movement where we all stand together (except when calling out 'TERFs' and claiming they have no place within feminism... but that was taken out of context too - just see how that douche King Critical malevolently mangles her words here, being a proper dick about it and everything)
 |
| Feminism, Laurie Penny style. Look at how happy they all are! Why aren't you like that, miserable terven? |
So, Penny, gawd bless 'er, has managed to keep the furtive eyebrow aloft, continuing to look daring and incisive despite a mobbing of other, supposedly feminist, women. The silly, misled fools. Standing strong, we are reminded of the linguistic complexity of Penny's prose and how, like you can't take Jordan Peterson at face value and must watch all 10,000 hours of lectures before deciding what it was he said in a 30 second clip, you'd be a fool if you thought "don't stare" was in any way placing the responsibility on the kid.
Read her books. All of them. Also pre-order her next one.
As above, with the insistence attacking trans people (suggesting single sex spaces should be, er... single sex) makes your feminism bad and as a moral imperative you should feel bad, Penny has a fondness for a bit of benevolent diktat, enjoying dispensing gentle instruction on how you should feel about things.
With her scrupulous record of fearlessly furthering the public discourse, she also hopes to have a political term all of her own, a dedicated reference to her smarting acumen: Penny's Iron Law
According to Merriam-Webster, Iron Law is;
iron law
To save this word, you'll need to log in.
What can we make of this? That there is always an idiot; that is as certain and as inescapable as eggs is eggs.
And, it is true that Penny holds an important cultural position, by ensuring that we never forget this.
Thusly, if your politics relying on there not being an idiot means your politics are bad, then your policy of allowing all males to enter female only spaces relying on there not being a pervy bastard around to take advantage means your feminism is ... banging and you should feel great..?
It has, I must admit, given me a bit of a headache trying to work out - although I'm sure it does, given the persuasive and cogent arguments these blue tick people have. Some things we (the uneducated oi polloi - i.e. me) have to take on trust - vaccines, the existence of DNA, climate change etc. This is why we look to the gracious alumni of public literary life; we commoners aren't built to understand, and I guess it's a complex area...
Well, that's what I'm going with anyway. Being called a transphobic bigot who wants trans people dead and being depicted as an evil, frigid troll isn't appealing to me right now. I suppose I should just be thankful for the live demonstration of moral purity and follow suit...
Nothing compares to a vapid ideologue who entirely conforms to the current zeitgeist, thrashing these points out with such compelling confidence. And, the fact it's performed with a furrowed brow and power-suit doesn't hurt.
A true feminist, who rejects the identity of woman (she's non-binary, doncha know) - if only there were more squeaky posh women who can't bear to be called 'she' or 'her' on our platforms, giving such sage instructions to us little women and leading the way in devising the correct etiquette for those close encounters with the oppressed penis-havers (not to be confused with the generally bad, sans gender identity ones).
Due to the violent ridicule and outrageous anger directed Penny's way, she has felt the need to write a manifesto of sorts. That awful man Glinner has been mean to her, and she is fighting back. Let's take a look at:
"Where We're going, We Don't Need Platforms....
When does free speech absolutism become moral cowardice?"
Penny begins with a full five (and a bit) paragraphs of set the scene:
It's a thought experiment, and it asks us how we would manage a drunk man at a party we've put a lot of effort into - one where we'd agonised over the drinks options, but could be any kind of social gathering, even a rave (warm special brew, decent controlled substances and, if you're lucky, a cold tap left on in the toilets are my lowly expectations of refreshments, built from bitter experience - Penny sounds so rad).
At this party, whatever and wherever it is, this drunken, 'orrible bloke is being homophobic, and Penny gracefully conjures up a list a potential factors to consider - is the man well known to you? Is he having a breakdown? Do you just so happen to live in a 'fascist, homophobic dictatorship where gay people are persecuted every day?' Are there other, undercover or inchoate homophobes who could be activated, radicalised by it? And could they end up queer bashing all over the place?
I'd never before considered that multiple factors may play a part in how people behave or deal with stuff. Already, I am enlightened. And to imagine someone being such a terrible, nasty wanker - urgh, I struggle to guess what the protocol is for this occurrence. Typically, any faux pas at a gathering of mine is swiftly resolved with a "oi, thassa' nuff nahh mate, fuck off" and, potentially, some limited violence. But this drunken bastard really sounds terrible. An arsehole. A big, unrepentant sphincter.
He is "loud and mouthing off with the vilest bigotry you can imagine" which is a great way of painting a defamatory image of Glinner from behind a genius rhetorical trick. I suppose if you take what Glinner's actually said and tailor it to this scenario, it's likely to be heinous homophobia like "so, I hear this civil partnership of yours is coming up - how exciting!" or even "that's your other half? Ah, for some reason I thought you were single" and the infamously murderous "you're making a fool of yourself, hitting on her - she's a lesbian, and your host is her wife".
Penny wants you to consider just how many variables are possible, because this helps you to know how clever she is & how she knows such a thing as context exists. Remarkable, the multidimensional and faceted comprehension this woman has.
It's also important to understanding free speech. Which has nothing to do with letting a drunk man spew homophobic abuse at your party, she informs us. By jove, she's got something!
"This is my first post on Substack, and it's partly about why I'm on this platform, given that Substack continues to host and profit from the propaganda of, among others, transphobic hatemonger Graham Linehan."
This is by now a lot of text to make her judicious move to a more regular gig, sound like something she wrestled with ethically for some time and only chose so she could fight the good fight. It's important you hear her out..
"The best and most comprehensive breakdown of Linehan's behavior and why it's so abhorrent comes from Grace Lavery.... I share her conviction that Substack ought to throw this deranged bigot out of their party right now, before anyone else gets hurt"
Who exactly has been hurt by the Glinner man we don't know, and I'll be damned if I have to wade through Lavery's shit too today. I do know Lavery has a similar victim complex to Penny (opining that JK Rowling will be the first to be asked for a quote in the event of his assassination) and thinks transwomen needing to access abortion is aspirational. (Which, for the love of women I've known who are hurt, some traumatised, by undergoing it - or the reasons which forced it - fills me with rage).
Lavery also gets a bit of a hard/wide-on (suspect it's neither, but whatever a knackered and cross-sex hormone filled male body does to show excitement) over being sexually objectified by men (like a proper lady) and shoving his fist in his girlfriend's mouth, or posing her after leaving bite marks in her face, for cute little selfies on Twitter (in fact, Daniel Lavery, as she is now known, transitioned rapidly after Grace Lavery, and is apparently now a man. So the lovely couple have done a little switcheroo but the ineradicable power dynamic remains - Grace boasts about making Daniel cut off her family and generally abusing her. If you can bear looking at Kiwi Farms, this run down explains the whole sordid affair)
 |
| Penny suggests we listen to Lavery (above, talking about his wife), to hear how Glinner is a bad guy... |
Back to Penny:
"I think I can do a lot of good work here, with the tools and structure Substack offers, and that that work outweighs what I’d achieve with a public boycott."Making getting on Substack sound like a major contract signing with hefty negotiations, Penny regales us on how she spoke with other 'queer content creators and allies' who have left / are boycotting the platform. Why the big deal about SS? It's that deranged bigot Glinner, the big old bastard. The presence of this man, who made a mockery of the bepenised beardy-weirdy 'women' on lesbian dating sites, is just too much. Or, I dunno, I guess it's manageable as long as she's being heard and doing all that good work.
Penny raised the existence of Glinner in her first conversations with SS, being a forthright woman who's ready to sacrifice herself for the greater good. When that didn't work though, she decided the best move was to stick with SS and get the word out. Boycotting will not hit them, or Glinner, where it hurts - oh no, Penny has her mighty pen to right the world.
"Before I made that choice, I told my contacts at Substack that they ought to ban Linehan, along with anyone else doing deliberate, wilful, hateful harm to any oppressed minority."
 |
| "Like you should have been there! I told 'em, damn straight I did. Like bish, bosh, fucked' em up, innit" |
Ok. At this stage, a serious amount of text has been typed (thank me for cutting it. I've definitely done you a favour. It was brave and morally right). I myself am prone to waffle, but I'm waiting for the substance here. See how I've mentioned actual things you and Lavery have said, Penny? Yeah, next time, try that.
"I didn’t actually expect them to change their policy based on my objection. They’re libertarians"
Yes, I'm sure it hinged entirely on their libertarian values, and it took some fine lady balls (these exist) to resist the temptation of submitting to the demands of a heavyweight such as yourself...
"I also told them that at some point soon, whether they like the idea or not, they’ll find themselves having to make an active moral choice about whose ideas are worthy.... all platforms and publishers will need to take a stand somewhere, and I advised them to start thinking now about how to do so with dignity."
This is lovely - we love your advice Laurie Penny! You really should give more. What I'm waiting to hear, however, considering I've invested ages in this fucking article - does Penny have any ideas? How do we assess their worth?
"What does it mean, then, when a company like Substack chooses to host this sort of malicious hate speech- and to do so in the name of free speech?"
It means it's not hate speech, you dumme wurst. Consider, Penny, the law on hate speech being pretty strictly enforced in the UK: that autistic schoolkids have had to challenge 'non crime hate incident' records kept on file for saying in class biology trumps gender. Consider the fact there are laws on libel. The normal limitations on free speech are tighter than ever, and perhaps the time has come for those... ideas you have?
"This is a post about platforming, and censorship, and moral choices, and why they matter"
"The question of who does and does not deserve a ‘platform’ is a massive, active issue. So much of our political speech and action is now effectively also publishing- and publishing using platforms that function as public space but are owned by private companies. Every platform is now having to make decisions about what it will and will not tolerate, and those decisions set the political agenda and shape our social world"
Yes. And, I'm actually not that content with massive, multinational corporations having such an iron grip on our expression. It's startling Penny is clearly depleted of fucks to give the community standards of Facebook, where violent misogyny and certain forms or expressions of racism go unpunished while others (i.e. women) are suspended or banned for unexplained reasons, or the blatant and revolting misogyny allowed on Twitter. She's even writing a book (out 2022 - order yours now!) about anti capitalist feminism. Can't fuckin wait for that.
How transparent Penny thinks she can get away with being is anyone's guess- she can't see the hypocrisy in urging the public and private media to censor people whos writing does not break the law, encouraging multinational companies to choose who to silence with the insanely stupid idea they'll be using a moral code to decipher what is worthy and what's not, all while claiming to want an anti capitalist world. The most bitterly ironic part of this is that Penny has lazily surfed the crest of a wave called privilege her whole life, and wants a marketplace of ideas based on worth because she still can't conjure anything up that's convincing, interesting or original.
It's interesting, too, that finding SS abhorrent with its platforming of Glinner, she's not done what I did and set up an account elsewhere which doesn't make money. Why? I began this blog as I need to talk about issues I really care about. Because I strongly believe in what I'm saying on here. It's not a grift, it's a kind of activism - which Penny claims to be inspired by.
If anyone has genuinely bought the story Penny is virtuously fighting for others by attacking Glinner, who has actually sacrificed much to stand up for what he believes in, I don't know what to say to you, except, perhaps - this person below is who Laurie Penny described as her girlfriend:
This is Margaret Killjoy, who inadvisably (is this your fault too, Penny?) made a heinous aural mess called 'we are not ashamed'. It's a grotty affair, with a video stuffed with ketamine casualties who meander about, clearly unaware of what they're actually doing and, I presume, not getting the drugs they were promised. All while Maggie stands looking pensive and brooding in another nightie. It's a look I myself pulled off in the 90s, although I had the excuse of actually being on large amounts of drugs. The cringe I experience at the thought of Penny and Killjoy larking around in L.A. at 'raves' with a drinks list, dress code and ear protectors has both a terrible consequence of wrenching my pelvis up to my thorax and the incredible pelvic floor enhancing qualities a woman in late pregnancy could only dream of. There's always a silver lining...
Penny is non-binary and queer, of course. She's definitely not some dull, straight, upper-middle class, high pitched and banal pretender clutching onto a label in the vain hopes she will find meaning within herself.
She really is a bad feminist, a bad writer, devoid of original, independent thought and pretty much swaddled up in her own ring. She believes she can be made edgy and relevant by a hair colour and the endless repetition of doctrine she's swallowed with unquestioning gullibility. Because of her inability to construct arguments, the complete mundanity of personality, the mediocre entirety of her being, she has turned this hairy trustafarian into her girlfiend. Phwoar, look at the beard on that. What a proper 'queer' she is.
I may return to the rest of Penny's manifesto another time, cos my god she goes on and I can see fascism and 'cis men' are mentioned. It should be amusing, although right now I can wait.
Update - theybies and gentlethem, I did a part two, which you can read here
No comments:
Post a Comment