|
Post by Ela on Jun 6, 2019 5:26:09 GMT
I read Gareth Roberts' explanatory Medium post. I was unimpressed. He's just trying to excuse himself for actually being transphobic.
|
|
lidar2
Castellan
You know, now that you mention it, I actually do rather like Attack of the Cybermen ...
Likes: 5,811
|
Post by lidar2 on Jun 6, 2019 8:34:55 GMT
I haven't actually read Roberts' posts so I am posing in ignorance, but I think I have got the gist of them.
I find the unforgiving and intolerant nature of so much of the internet very off-putting. There is a mob mentality and anyone who says anything that transgresses the new public morality is descended upon by the thought police and abused online. And that is no way to treat anyone, whether you agree or disagree with them.
I have always seen the principle of "I could not disagree more with what you are saying, but I would defend to the death your right to say it" as the measure of true tolerance and broadmindedness, but I think that principle has been lost by so many.
I have in no way condoned/justified/defended/agreed with anything Roberts has said, but he's a human being and I find the whole online bullying of "let's jump on the bandwagon and give Roberts a good kicking" utterly wrong.
As for BBC books, they are a private company and if they take a commercial decision to exclude Roberts, that is their prerogative. I don't have an issue with them taking a commercial decision, provided they honour the contract and pay Roberts which they have done. They are accountable only to their shareholders and that's a matter for them. Anyway, enough said. I'm sure plenty will disagree with me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2019 8:48:47 GMT
I haven't actually read Roberts' posts so I am posing in ignorance, but I think I have got the gist of them.
I find the unforgiving and intolerant nature of so much of the internet very off-putting. There is a mob mentality and anyone who says anything that transgresses the new public morality is descended upon by the thought police and abused online. And that is no way to treat anyone, whether you agree or disagree with them.
I have always seen the principle of "I could not disagree more with what you are saying, but I would defend to the death your right to say it" as the measure of true tolerance and broadmindedness, but I think that principle has been lost by so many.
I have in no way condoned/justified/defended/agreed with anything Roberts has said, but he's a human being and I find the whole online bullying of "let's jump on the bandwagon and give Roberts a good kicking" utterly wrong.
As for BBC books, they are a private company and if they take a commercial decision to exclude Roberts, that is their prerogative. I don't have an issue with them taking a commercial decision, provided they honour the contract and pay Roberts which they have done. They are accountable only to their shareholders and that's a matter for them. Anyway, enough said. I'm sure plenty will disagree with me.
Its more the fact he used the slur tr**** whi h is similar to n**** for the trans comunity. Add that with his unprofesional attitude, openingly slating the moffat era and moffat himself, and its a miricale he got hired im the first place. obvioulsy some editor who wasnt aware of his presence saw he had worked on the show amd thought he was vetted.
|
|
|
Post by masterdoctor on Jun 6, 2019 13:18:47 GMT
I don’t think I really was clear on this aspect, but I agree with Lidar on the point that I will fight for everyone to be able to express their opinion, whether I agree with them or not. Roberts is fully allowed to express his opinions and in no way should that be taken away from him. I think Roberts is wrong in what he says completely, but I will never stand by people who wish to take away his freedom to say that, and anything else.
|
|
|
Post by sherlock on Jun 6, 2019 13:26:37 GMT
Roberts’ free speech remains intact, as proven by his statement.
He used his free speech in such a way that his employer no longer wanted him to work for them. They are entitled to do that.
Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences.
|
|
|
Post by masterdoctor on Jun 6, 2019 13:28:53 GMT
Roberts’ free speech remains intact, as proven by his statement. He used his free speech in such a way that his employer no longer wanted him to work for them. They are entitled to do that. Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences. And for all that I have said on the matter, sherlock has put in a much more succinct way. Please refer to his brilliance now instead of my bumble.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Jun 6, 2019 13:53:47 GMT
I'm not going to make any judgement calls: I've said my two pieces and Sherlock's eloquently summarized the core events.
I will leave on this: this is not about free speech. Roberts merely lost a job (that's he's already been paid for), not a platform to speak. This is about decency: Roberts, a gay man, willingly and knowingly, choosing to inflict the kind of harm once visited on people like him, on another part of his community by de-personing them and denying science. He has shown he's wasn't A) just having a laugh and B) that he can't, or won't learn from his mistakes. Who, as a franchise, is all about understanding and aiding those who are marginalized: it should be a place where trans fans feel safe and able to have fun, not be told by one of the big names that they're 'not real'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2019 14:06:13 GMT
.
|
|
|
Post by Ela on Jun 6, 2019 15:19:11 GMT
I'm not going to make any judgement calls: I've said my two pieces and Sherlock's eloquently summarized the core events. I will leave on is: this is not about free speech. Roberts merely lost a job (that's he's already been paid for), not a platform to speak. This is about decency: Roberts, a gay man, willingly and knowingly, choosing to inflict the kind of harm once visited on people like him, on another part of his community by de-personing them and denying science. He has shown he's wasn't A) just having a laugh and B) that he can't, or won't learn from his mistakes. Who, as a franchise, is all about understanding and aiding those who are marginalized: it should be a place where trans fans feel safe and able to have fun, not be told by one of the big names that they're 'not real'. Very well said. I couldn't have said it better.
|
|
|
Post by coffeeaddict on Jun 6, 2019 20:42:06 GMT
The only thing I will say on this topic is that when someone has to defend comments they make with statements along the lines of "I was only having a laugh, it was a joke, etc", what is really said is they know it isn't remotely amusing and don't have the courage to own their actions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2019 19:53:57 GMT
I had no wish to make comment on this issue, but one thing has bugged me so I may as well add my pennyworth. Gareth seems a well rounded (no pun intended) but flawed individual as many writers are. I have no desire to defend someone who can either dig himself out of a hole of his own making (or keep digging, as is too often the case). His mistakes are his own to deal with. My issue, however, is that very reasonable comments online by Tom Spilsbury, were met by such quite aggressive and uncharitable responses. Idlar2 sought a similarly balanced view in this thread and was faced with some abuse too.
People who are nice, or too polite, get pressured to carry other peoples baggage.
|
|
|
Post by charlesuirdhein on Jun 7, 2019 22:08:23 GMT
Just my couple of cents. 1) The things he stated are simply lies. 2) It's a blatant nonsense that a community HAS to be inclusive of people who are continually expressing lies, because he's being doing this for a while now, and they're not JUST opinions, he hasn't been asked his opinion on this, he keeps volunteering this crap. 3) People instinctively don't want to believe that talented creators can also be terrible people, but they can be. An extreme example is Roman Polanski, and on the exact same topic Graham Linehan more recently. 4) Sherlock said it best above. I'll leave a link here to a wonderful book. Trans Britain As Gareth Roberts himself said, "My opinions on transgenderism are neither extreme nor unusual." Nope, they're not. But they're still provably wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Wearer of Hats on Jun 7, 2019 22:13:21 GMT
Some corners of the Internet have bred the most terrible things, tweets that stand against everything that we believe in. They must be fought.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Wearer of Hats on Jun 7, 2019 22:16:47 GMT
No group will ever be truly 100% inclusive, all we can do is try and create an environment wherein everyone can feel comfortable as possible - BUT some people’s actions mean their solo inclusion will reduce or even destroy the environment of comfort for others. To quote Spock this time “The needs of the many outweighs those of the one”.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Jun 7, 2019 22:39:56 GMT
I feel like a good use for this thread now as alluded by charles, since we've kind of milked what can be said of Roberts, might be to educate more on transgenderism and raise a little more awareness about it. Here's a handy FAQ courtesy of GLAAD that covers the basics if you're not fully clear: www.glaad.org/transgender/transfaqHere's the official site for the National Center for Transgender Equality, which talks more about the issues and problems facing transpeople, as well as what rights they have: transequality.org/issuesHere's a collection of surveys, conducted by Stonewall, on abuses and discrimination towards transpeople over the last couple of years: www.stonewall.org.uk/sites/default/files/trans_stats.pdf
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2019 23:05:29 GMT
I feel like a good use for this thread now as alluded by charles, since we've kind of milked what can be said of Roberts, might be to educate more on transgenderism and raise a little more awareness about it. Here's a handy FAQ courtesy of GLAAD that covers the basics if you're not fully clear: www.glaad.org/transgender/transfaqHere's the official site for the National Center for Transgender Equality, which talks more about the issues and problems facing transpeople, as well as what rights they have: transequality.org/issuesHere's a collection of surveys, conducted by Stonewall, on abuses and discrimination towards transpeople over the last couple of years: www.stonewall.org.uk/sites/default/files/trans_stats.pdfOn the matter of informative links - This shocked and shamed me that such incidences can still happen in modern society: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48563393
|
|
|
Post by frisby78 on Jun 7, 2019 23:33:37 GMT
I met him once at a convention., he was a complete pillock then.
|
|
shutupbanks
Castellan
There’s a horror movie called Alien? That’s really offensive. No wonder everyone keeps invading you.
Likes: 5,661
|
Post by shutupbanks on Jun 8, 2019 0:01:01 GMT
I had no wish to make comment on this issue, but one thing has bugged me so I may as well add my pennyworth. Gareth seems a well rounded (no pun intended) but flawed individual as many writers are. I have no desire to defend someone who can either dig himself out of a hole of his own making (or keep digging, as is too often the case). His mistakes are his own to deal with. My issue, however, is that very reasonable comments online by Tom Spilsbury, were met by such quite aggressive and uncharitable responses. Idlar2 sought a similarly balanced view in this thread and was faced with some abuse too.
People who are nice, or too polite, get pressured to carry other peoples baggage. I’m going to risk escalating this conversation by saying that Mr Spilsbury’s comment reminds me a lot of right-wing arguments that the “tolerant” society doesn’t tolerate some viewpoints and is therefore hypocritical.
|
|
|
Post by nucleusofswarm on Jun 8, 2019 0:18:40 GMT
I feel like a good use for this thread now as alluded by charles, since we've kind of milked what can be said of Roberts, might be to educate more on transgenderism and raise a little more awareness about it. Here's a handy FAQ courtesy of GLAAD that covers the basics if you're not fully clear: www.glaad.org/transgender/transfaqHere's the official site for the National Center for Transgender Equality, which talks more about the issues and problems facing transpeople, as well as what rights they have: transequality.org/issuesHere's a collection of surveys, conducted by Stonewall, on abuses and discrimination towards transpeople over the last couple of years: www.stonewall.org.uk/sites/default/files/trans_stats.pdfOn the matter of informative links - This shocked and shamed me that such incidences can still happen in modern society: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48563393Terrible. Speaking of the Beeb, they did a bit on a transwoman who fought in WW2 (Fitting time, too):
Speaking of history I suggest people look up the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft, a pioneer facility in gay and trans research in early 20th century Germany, destroyed by the Nazis.
|
|
|
Post by charlesuirdhein on Jun 8, 2019 2:04:43 GMT
I had no wish to make comment on this issue, but one thing has bugged me so I may as well add my pennyworth. Gareth seems a well rounded (no pun intended) but flawed individual as many writers are. I have no desire to defend someone who can either dig himself out of a hole of his own making (or keep digging, as is too often the case). His mistakes are his own to deal with. My issue, however, is that very reasonable comments online by Tom Spilsbury, were met by such quite aggressive and uncharitable responses. Idlar2 sought a similarly balanced view in this thread and was faced with some abuse too.
People who are nice, or too polite, get pressured to carry other peoples baggage. I’m going to risk escalating this conversation by saying that Mr Spilsbury’s comment reminds me a lot of right-wing arguments that the “tolerant” society doesn’t tolerate some viewpoints and is therefore hypocritical. I don't know Tom Spilsbury, and as far as I know he's never made any statements like Gareth Roberts, so giving him the benefit of the doubt I'm making the assumption that while his post sounds like that, it could be as simple as defending a friend, assuming they're friends that is, and that's understandable, if misguided in this instance. I sincerely hope it is simply that. There's a presumed ...I'm searching for the right phrase here...notion, that arguing from a point of passion, or even anger, disqualifies an argument. This is nonsense. It's just another tool in the attempt to shut down an argument. It's a tool that has evolved over the years, from assuming women are the weaker, more emotional sex, to the trope of the angry person of colour, to the notion that you can't take a joke, it's in the toolbox of every bully who seeks to lessen someone else's life, for whatever reason. And how dare you fight back or be offended by my 'logic'. Never cruel or cowardly. Gareth Roberts hasn't learned that lesson. I hope he does.
|
|