Lalalaletmeexplain #2 LalalaletmePatronise

1
I find her version of feminism very skewed and actually farcical once you scratch the surface. She’s applauding a biological man (with whatever condition has caused a DSD) for beating up women in a Boxing match.
 
Is the "online bullying" referring to people posting her photo here previously?
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20240816-085454.png
    Screenshot_20240816-085454.png
    102.9 KB · Views: 21
Idc about the mushrooms lol but I remember her criticising (fairly enough) unqualified people online for giving advice around complex social/psychological etc. issues that come under the umbrella of social work, relationships, child protection, or whatever else. She seemed to think that a personal interest or lived experience was not enough and you had to have proper training or work experience if you wanted to be advising others.

But when it comes to topics related to trans issues it literally feels like she treats random trans/ally Patrons who talk about these subjects online as THE experts and it’s usually only ones with a specific view. Sometimes it feels like she treats it as gospel rather than one of many angles on it.

Part of what makes this whole topic so contentious is randoms with little qualification get elevated to the spokespeople and make it taboo for anyone who actually is qualified to figure tit out to step out line (on whichever side).
 
greenvelvet said:
Idc about the mushrooms lol but I remember her criticising (fairly enough) unqualified people online for giving advice around complex social/psychological etc. issues that come under the umbrella of social work, relationships, child protection, or whatever else. She seemed to think that a personal interest or lived experience was not enough and you had to have proper training or work experience if you wanted to be advising others.

But when it comes to topics related to trans issues it literally feels like she treats random trans/ally Patrons who talk about these subjects online as THE experts and it’s usually only ones with a specific view. Sometimes it feels like she treats it as gospel rather than one of many angles on it.

Part of what makes this whole topic so contentious is randoms with little qualification get elevated to the spokespeople and make it taboo for anyone who actually is qualified to figure tit out to step out line (on whichever side).
Click to expand...

I get what she's saying but she is living proof that being 'qualified' in a particular field doesn't exclude/protect you from being mad problematic, number 1) being an assumption that your privilege (ie professional qualifications, a career that gives you power over vulnerable groups) means you get to silence those with lived experience, and gatekeep who gets to talk about issues impacting them. twit.

(agreed on the rest of your point too).
 
It seems like she's presenting herself as an authority on a wide range of topics: drugs, dating, relationships, and even sex, despite her main qualification being in social work. It feels like the attention and influence might have gone to her head. As for those old photos, more recent ones have surfaced, and even with all the work she's had done, she really hasn't changed... still middle aged and still white.
 
paula365 said:
It seems like she's presenting herself as an authority on a wide range of topics: drugs, dating, relationships, and even sex, despite her main qualification being in social work. It feels like the attention and influence might have gone to her head. As for those old photos, more recent ones have surfaced, and even with all the work she's had done, she really hasn't changed... still middle aged and still white.
Click to expand...
Where can we see the new photos?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top