Author Topic: Canadaland Podcast  (Read 867 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: Canadaland Podcast
« Reply #15 on: August 22, 2019, 01:36:53 am »
https://www.canadalandshow.com/podcast/291-why-are-trans-issues-suddenly-everywhere/

THE best take on the Jessica Yaniv issue....

I've taken the time to listen to this podcast, and I have to disagree with you.  This is not a good take at all.  I wish I had a transcript so I could rip this apart in detail.  Instead I'll just remark on some of the more egregious aspects of it.

In his intro he starts by riffing on Quillette and gives his listeners the false impression that trans issues are an "obsession" of Quillette. (they aren't.  Even right now, when trans issues are allegedly "everywhere" I don't see a single article on the Quillette main page on that topic.)   To demonstrate his point he reads some headlines from past Quillette articles.  Titles referencing things like women's athletics, silencing feminists, the campaign against "terfs", homophobia in the trans movement, trans-radicalism's effect on kids, and so on.  He implies that these are topics without merit and that Quillette is simply scaremongering.   But these are real and valid topics; we've discussed most of them in some depth in the "Gender Culture" thread.  That people like Jesse Brown are so dismissive of these topics is one of the main reasons that sites like Quillette can brand themselves as "a platform for free thought."  Brown proposes that the transgender movement is just about "basic human rights", but things like male-bodied people demanding to compete in women's sports or demanding that lesbians not exclude your lady-**** from their dating pool, or  taking an aesthetician to the Human Rights Commission because she wouldn't wax your lady-testicles certainly stretch far beyond the notion of "basic human rights".   Brown suggests that since transgender people make up about 0.6% of the population, they're getting far too much much attention.  That's a stupid argument, because while trans people might make up only around 0.6% of the population, trans issues make up a much larger portion of new and changing practices in our society.  Straight white males might be a large segment of our population, but there's not a lot of new issues regarding the straight white male role in our society that is going to keep people up at night.  "It continues to be pretty great to be a straight white man in Canada!" isn't really that newsworthy.  Aboriginal people, like trans people, are actually a small portion of Canada's population, but I bet Jesse Brown wouldn't say "Aboriginal people only make up 4% of Canada's population, so why are there so many news articles about Aboriginal people?"   Jesse, assuming he's not a moron, understands that because of numerous historical and ongoing issues, news revolving around aboriginal topics will continue to occupy a place in the national conversation that is outsize compared to their actual portion of the Canadian populace.  And if Jesse isn't a moron he should be able to figure out that evolving legal issues surrounding transgender people are in the headlines for pretty much the same reason.    And, it bears repeating, that Jesse hasn't actually established that Quillette (or anybody else) is actually giving an outsized share of attention to trans issues; reading a handful of headlines doesn't make the case that they're over-reporting the topic.  So Brown is off to a shitty start, in my estimation.  He goes on to suggest that this allegedly outsized share of attention is because people are bigoted, at which point he introduces the Yaniv issue and argues that Yaniv is in the headlines because she's the perfect trans bogeyman that bigots have been waiting for. But "nobody has ever actually been forced to wax Yaniv's genitals," Brown smugly informs us.  Well, there's a disclaimer with that, which Brown neglects to mention for some reason.  The disclaimer is that some of the people who refused to wax Yaniv's balls were forced out of business, others who refused to wax his balls had to pay a settlement because they didn't have the resources or ability to defend themselves in the HRC process, and most importantly, if Yaniv does win his HRC cases, a precedent will be set such that yes, aestheticians pretty much will have to wax his testicles.  So that's why this HRC issue is actually a pretty big deal.  But Brown doesn't mention any of those things, because he's either an ignoramus or a propagandist.

Brown goes on to argue that we shouldn't take Yaniv seriously because there's reason to believe Yaniv is acting in bad faith and isn't a real activist.  Well, guess what: Yaniv's case is going to set a precedent whether Yaniv is acting in good faith or not. Yaniv might well be a creep or a predator or a racist or a goon trying to shake down immigrants by filing bogus HRC claims, or all of the above. But the HRC has decided that they have to give these complaints a fair hearing, and rule on the merits of the complaint regardless of how scummy Yaniv's character may be, and when the ruling is delivered it will affect real people in the real world who have to live with the results.  Jesse Brown seems oblivious to all of this.  He seems to think that since Yaniv is a scumbag the HRC process isn't real, or something. Brown is wrong.


So that's just the intro.  Then he introduces trans journalist Mary Rogan, and they talk about a lot of stuff that for the most part doesn't have much to do with Yaniv. They talk about Jordan Peterson's rise to fame. They talk about pronouns, and how hard it is to get the media to talk about "real" trans issues (implying that Yaniv's HRC cases are somehow not "real".)

A couple of things I did want to point out.  First off, they keep dismissing those who have criticisms or concerns about trans ideology as being "afraid that western civilization is gonna fuckin' collapse if they use my pronouns."  They don't acknowledge that there are any reasonable concerns; they keep rewinding "western civilization is gonna fuckin' collapse if they use my pronouns".

They mock the "we're protecting the children" angle.  They mockingly talk about the hysterical fear that "some trans cabal is trying to get tomboys to transition" or something like that. But there has been a major controversy at the UK's Tavistock clinic over a report that says young people are being fast-tracked for medical transition without adequate evaluation, so maybe it's not so hysterical after all.   And they imply that the "man in a dress preying on young girls in a bathroom" is a preposterous boogeyman scenario, even though Yaniv is literally exactly that, and then immediately move on to "we don't need to talk about Yaniv, because Yaniv is just an outlier, he's the worst case scenario, he's not representative of trans people in general."

(a transgender writer at Canadaland, Niko Stratis, wrote this MUCH BETTER take on Yaniv, explaining why Brown and Rogan are completely wrong in saying "we" don't need to talk about Yaniv. Give it a read here:  https://www.canadalandshow.com/we-need-to-talk-about-jessica-yaniv/  )

And then they go back to talking about Peterson, pronouns, "the downfall of western civilization", and so on. They rant about how people won't defend their arguments, while they themselves talk about pronouns and completely ignore any real issues that have been raised.

And then they complain about how Yaniv somehow got to be considered an activist or a representative for trans people.  Well, Yaniv is the one before the HRC arguing their case.   The HRC has ruled that these cases need to be heard. The HRC representative, Devyn Cousineau, ruled that she can't throw out these charges based on the possibility that Yaniv may be playing the system. Cousineau also isn't allowed to consider that Yaniv might be a scumbag or a child predator either. She has to consider the merits of the case.  They don't get to "no true Scotsman" Yaniv out of the movement just because she's not a very appealing activist.

They also mock the conservatives who suddenly care about the marginalized immigrant women who Yaniv targeted.  But that argument cuts both ways.   Why are the progressives who'd normally fight tooth and nail for marginalized immigrant women so silent on this?  Why do progressives no longer give a **** about standing up for feminists, or for women's sports, or for lesbians?  Why are progressives so quiet when it comes to trans issues?  And as I've said before, I reject the notion that these women's racial or cultural background changes the case anyway: I think that all of these women, be they marginalized immigrants or white and affluent, have the right to refuse to handle a dong.     And why do Jesse and Mary think that conservative "concern trolling" on the issue is a reasonable response?  "Conservatives don't really care that Yaniv targeted marginalized immigrant women, therefore we should not care about the marginalized immigrant women that Yaniv targeted either."  Is that the argument? Is that what they're saying?  Not really, it's just a deflection. They think they've found a "gotcha"-- that by pointing out conservative hypocrisy, they don't have to address the much tougher question of whether women should be compelled to handle a ****. It's a dodge. It's cowardly.


I could go on and look at more of this podcast.   But basically my complaint is that none of it is balanced. It dismisses opposing viewpoints out of hand, either mocking, trivializing, or dismissing them out of hand. It's less a "take" on the Yaniv situation and more a pro-trans public relations piece.  So overall, Michael, I don't agree that this was "THE BEST" take on the Yaniv situation.  In fact I'd say it's a steaming pile of dogshit.


 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City
Like Like x 1 Agree Agree x 1 View List