Matthew E
I know that postmodernism is one of your favourite topics, but consider that a lot of what you are portraying as postmodernism in the response letter is just an attempt to point out the context of the original letter.
The original letter is not a very strong statement. It's not provocatively written, and the things it champions are uncontroversial. To the extent that its signers knew what they were signing and actually agreed to sign it, I think it's likely that most of them did so in good faith and with the best of intentions. If it existed in a vacuum, I'd sign it myself, if anyone asked me to. (Although maybe not: I do get a strong whiff of the-peasants-shouldn't-talk-about-their-betters from it. Also, "The way to defeat bad ideas is by exposure, argument, and persuasion, not by trying to silence or wish them away"? No. But that's a different conversation.) But it doesn't exist in a vacuum.
One problem with the letter's context is that, currently, the right wing has mostly taken over the conversation about free speech. Free speech has come to mean, for example, the freedom to deny the Holocaust happened, and the left wing is portrayed as the threat to free speech. And this letter plays into that, reinforcing the idea that it's the left wing that is against free speech. In real life, I am assured, the opposite is more often true. (I can look for examples if you want 'em.)
Another problem is something that the response letter pointed out: some of the signers are people who have conspicuously and legitimately drawn the wrath of lots of people online, and who don't like the reactions they're getting. So their sincerity in signing this letter is dubious. In the case of J.K. Rowling, for example, she has said and repeated some nasty things about trans people, and thousands have reacted angrily... and now she can produce this letter in defense of herself. Again, I can look for examples if you want me to: the original letter has increased attacks on trans people online; it's seen by defenders of Rowling and Singal and other antitrans signers as justification for their positions.
The phenomenon of the internet, where anyone and everyone can have their public say, is something that human society hasn't seen before. The people who signed this letter might do better to consider that this is what the marketplace of ideas actually looks and acts like. That if they do or say something that draws a wave of strong criticism, maybe they should take a second to see if it has a point.
Nice to see you, Matthew.
In mainstream journalism and academia almost the entire threat to free speech is from the Left--so much so that in academia almost no one will challenge orthodoxy any more. (Mark Lilla, Laura Kipnis and John McWhorter, all signatories, are three of the ones who still will. And it almost cost Kipnis her job at one point.) That is why, ironically, at least one reader I know in academia complained that I even mentioned Trump at the outset of the piece--she thinks he's no threat compared to leftists. I don't agree with that, but I totally disagree with you on this one.
As for Rowling, I think that there is a big difference between expressing skepticism about transgender identities as they have evolved at the current moment, and "saying nasty things about trans people." I think the phenomenon includes very different kinds of people with different motives. One motive, clearly, is people rejecting the labels "man" and "woman" because they insist they mean "oppressor" and "oppressed" and they don't want to be labeled as either one. I don't think that some one (like myself) who believes sex--male and femaleness--is, for 99% of the population, an immutable biological reality, is "saying nasty things about trans people."
For the record, here's an account of what originally got Rowling into trouble:
J.K. Rowling, the author of the beloved “Harry Potter” book series, came under attack Thursday for a tweet defending a researcher who lost her job for saying that “men cannot change into women.”
Rowling tweeted Thursday in defense of British researcher Maya Forstater, who lost her job after tweeting that “men cannot change into women,” the Independent reported Thursday. Forstater was referring to biological males who identify as transgender women.
“Dress however you please,” Rowling tweeted. “Call yourself whatever you like. Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you. Live your best life in peace and security. But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real?”
I hope all is well with you.
No comments:
Post a Comment