Dilbert comic dropped
Discussion
chrispmartha said:
donkmeister said:
AC43 said:
Dracoro said:
ApexCult said:
GroundEffect said:
It's a bit like Graham Linehan. Fantastic writer but more and more desperate and disgusting viewpoints.
Loved his shows, didn't realise some of his views!Odd collection of views though, pro abortion, NHS & atheist. But also anti-trans.
Lost his wife over it.
He had an anti-trans bullseye stuck on his back after that hilarious IT Crowd episode where Reynholm misheard "I was born a man" as "I was born in Iran". The portrayal of a post-op transperson as a pint-swilling fist-fighting bloke who just happened to look like a woman was clearly absurd, it wasn't meant as a sensitive documentary on gender dysphoria, any more than Father Ted was a documentary about the Catholic church.
Now what has he said since then... I'm not his biographer, I don't know, so if you tell me he's been... I dunno... calling for violence against transfolk then sure, that's transphobic. However the original thing that got him labelled as transphobic was not transphobic, it was hilarious.
What has he said since then? literally thousands and thousands of things. He calls trans people peados, people who disagree with him groomers, people nonces, any women who dare disagree with him dick pandering handmaidens.
Graham Linehan is a strange hill for you to die on to be honest.
His wife and kids left him because he was posting and harassing people on twitter night and day, his family asked him to stop and he wouldn’t.
He’s not been cancelled he’s done it to himself.
Graham Linehan pro debate? Seriously?
Edited by chrispmartha on Monday 27th February 17:22
People should be free to live their lives as they wish when it doesn't harm anyone else, and that extends to being able to live free of judgement from others about whether the contents of your pants matches the name you go by. It also means people should be free to write comedy that takes the piss out of all aspects of the human condition including transgender.
I'm not "dying on a hill" (I f
king hate that phrase - it is always used to try and reduce the recipient to a one dimensional person who, because they have an opinion on something, must be some sort of fundamentalist obsessed with that one opinion), I simply don't think GL was a transphobe until he got the st bullied out of him and his livelihood and creative outlet taken away from him. All for an episode of the IT Crowd that was clearly not meant as a documentary about transgenderism.
InitialDave said:
That is a lampoon of a group of people. It is precisely what GL was doing about a trans character in the IT Crowd. Would you say it's "working class American white guy phobic"? I wouldn't, I'd say it's making a clearly ridiculous but humourous set up about a group of people... Why shouldn't that be allowed?skwdenyer said:
I said that activism is pushing a very absolutist agenda.
What aspects of the "absolutist agenda" do you deplore?And is the "agenda" coming from trans people or from the 'gender critical' ? I note your use of language highly reminiscent of the exact words that Rowling uses in her famous essay of June 2020, and repeated in interviews for this month's 'Witch Trials' podcast. I quote: "I'm worried about the new trans activism, and decided I needed to speak up."
You see "activists" pushing an "agenda". I see one of the most oppressed and misunderstood groups in society trying to achieve recognition and acceptance. And there is no one speaking on behalf of trans people who gets anywhere close to the level of influence that Rowling has. Billy Bragg is probably the most famous, and look at the abuse he gets.
skwdenyer said:
Until trans activism became so widespread and so heated, public sentiment towards trans people appears to have been far *greater* than it is today.
That sounds a lot like my mate who in 2023 still claims that he has no problem with homosexuals, until they choose to flaunt their homosexuality in his face. Expecting groups who suffer systematic oppression to politely stay in their lane is a good definition of intolerance.skwdenyer said:
If the experience of trans people is mainly of a hectoring absolutist nature, how are people going to react, do you think?
On what basis do you claim that people's "experience of trans people is mainly of a hectoring absolutist nature" ? Most people don't know a trans person. Their opinions are shaped the media. If most people actually had a trans person as a friend, colleague or family member then we would not be the position we are today. Rather like how immigration is most fiercely opposed in the geographies where there are fewest immigrants.ZedLeg said:
I'll need to find it but I found the original exchange that started his downward spiral and it's the tamest criticism of a bad joke. He overreacted and the rest his history, the other people in the show have spoken about it since and none of them have been "cancelled" or whatever.
I'd imagine that would make a very interesting Media Studies/Sociology dissertation. InitialDave said:
BrassMan said:
InitialDave said:
That may be the most egregious strawman I've seen since I discovered the Block option.donkmeister said:
I simply don't think GL was a transphobe until he got the st bullied out of him
t bullied out of him 
donkmeister said:
Yes, and in response to your post I agreed that it is totally fine to lampoon a group of people by setting up a ridiculous character that clearly isn't meant to be a wide ranging and deep study of the sensitivities of that group. Y'know, like having a trans character who, despite being able to pass as an attractive woman, likes to neck lager whilst watching the darts and eating pizza, and can punch someone through a wall (which was exactly what kicked off the "GL is a transphobe" hysteria").
Except the issue for him isn’t what may or may not have started it. It’s where he went with it. He would be in the position of the likes of JK Rowling had he handled it like a normal person.What makes him different is going off the deep end and setting up fake dating profiles and the like.
donkmeister said:
Yes, and in response to your post I agreed that it is totally fine to lampoon a group of people by setting up a ridiculous character that clearly isn't meant to be a wide ranging and deep study of the sensitivities of that group.Y'know, like having a trans character who, despite being able to pass as an attractive woman, likes to neck lager whilst watching the darts and eating pizza, and can punch someone through a wall (which was exactly what kicked off the "GL is a transphobe" hysteria").
None of these aspects were the ones that got that episode its original - very mild - criticism. It was that April, the trans character, wasn't actually played by a trans person, and that Matt Berry's character's immediate response to learning that April was trans was to start a fight, and that was played for laughs even if Douglas comes off much worse as part of the joke. There have been, and still are, comedy series that lampoon or joke about trans people or the 'trans experience'. Often in virtually the same way as you summarised and I emphasised in bold. Some of them are even written by trans people. They don't get the same criticism because it's perfectly possible to do those things in a generally positive way where the humour doesn't boil down to "haha, it's a bloke in a dress" or "let's beat up the non-comforming person".
And Linehan's reaction to the mild retrospective criticism the B Plot of one episode of his series got was to become obsessed with the nefarious trans menace and start harassing trans people online and in real life, to start doing the very thing he claimed trans people were a threat for ('invading' women-only spaces and forcing themselves on lesbian women) in some bizarre attempt to prove a point and apparently burning all his personal and professional bridges.
Electro1980 said:
donkmeister said:
Yes, and in response to your post I agreed that it is totally fine to lampoon a group of people by setting up a ridiculous character that clearly isn't meant to be a wide ranging and deep study of the sensitivities of that group. Y'know, like having a trans character who, despite being able to pass as an attractive woman, likes to neck lager whilst watching the darts and eating pizza, and can punch someone through a wall (which was exactly what kicked off the "GL is a transphobe" hysteria").
Except the issue for him isn’t what may or may not have started it. It’s where he went with it. He would be in the position of the likes of JK Rowling had he handled it like a normal person.What makes him different is going off the deep end and setting up fake dating profiles and the like.
skwdenyer said:
JK Rowling is being treated well?
It does feel like a lot of what you’re saying is coming from the witch trials podcast. Some thoughts on that from Natalie Wynn who was interviewed as part of it.
https://twitter.com/ContraPoints/status/1626231558...
Edited by gregs656 on Tuesday 21st March 13:43
donkmeister said:
I don't think there's a debate to be had about trans, so I couldn't give a toss if Graham Lineham is pro or anti it.
People should be free to live their lives as they wish when it doesn't harm anyone else, and that extends to being able to live free of judgement from others about whether the contents of your pants matches the name you go by. It also means people should be free to write comedy that takes the piss out of all aspects of the human condition including transgender.
I'm not "dying on a hill" (I fking hate that phrase - it is always used to try and reduce the recipient to a one dimensional person who, because they have an opinion on something, must be some sort of fundamentalist obsessed with that one opinion), I simply don't think GL was a transphobe until he got the st bullied out of him and his livelihood and creative outlet taken away from him. All for an episode of the IT Crowd that was clearly not meant as a documentary about transgenderism.
Honestly look at the timeline of him going down this rabbit hole, its not as you suggest.People should be free to live their lives as they wish when it doesn't harm anyone else, and that extends to being able to live free of judgement from others about whether the contents of your pants matches the name you go by. It also means people should be free to write comedy that takes the piss out of all aspects of the human condition including transgender.
I'm not "dying on a hill" (I f
king hate that phrase - it is always used to try and reduce the recipient to a one dimensional person who, because they have an opinion on something, must be some sort of fundamentalist obsessed with that one opinion), I simply don't think GL was a transphobe until he got the st bullied out of him and his livelihood and creative outlet taken away from him. All for an episode of the IT Crowd that was clearly not meant as a documentary about transgenderism.He didn’t get anything ‘taken away’ from him he dod it to himself. Nobody is forcing him to post transphobic tweets all day everyday, it’s simply not normal behaviour and its all of his own making. Other creative people have been criticised for past work and managed not to throw their family and career down the pan
chrispmartha said:
Honestly look at the timeline of him going down this rabbit hole, its not as you suggest.
He didn’t get anything ‘taken away’ from him he dod it to himself. Nobody is forcing him to post transphobic tweets all day everyday, it’s simply not normal behaviour and its all of his own making. Other creative people have been criticised for past work and managed not to throw their family and career down the pan
That, for all his crying all his misfortune has been self inflicted.He didn’t get anything ‘taken away’ from him he dod it to himself. Nobody is forcing him to post transphobic tweets all day everyday, it’s simply not normal behaviour and its all of his own making. Other creative people have been criticised for past work and managed not to throw their family and career down the pan
skwdenyer said:
JK Rowling is being treated well?
Recent Hogwarts game came out and did rather well, Rowling herself is continuing to publish books, which are charting well. I’d say she is doing fine and has managed to not turn her life in to a dumpster fire, which is more than can be said for Linham.gregs656 said:
Some thoughts on that from Natalie Wynn who was interviewed as part of it.
https://twitter.com/ContraPoints/status/1626231558...
Thanks for sharing that link - I hadn't seen it. Describes rather well the problem with bothsideism, especially when one side is being championed by someone as intelligent, articulate, persuasive and followed as Rowling is.https://twitter.com/ContraPoints/status/1626231558...
gregs656 said:
skwdenyer said:
JK Rowling is being treated well?
It does feel like a lot of what you’re saying is coming from the witch trials podcast. Some thoughts on that from Natalie Wynn who was interviewed as part of it.
https://twitter.com/ContraPoints/status/1626231558...
Edited by gregs656 on Tuesday 21st March 13:43
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff