Tuesday, 25 May 2021

Guilt By Association

I'm aware of a few people who used to follow me on Twitter – who I still follow –who’ve unfollowed me because they’ve been pressured into doing so by one or more of a gaggle of busy-bodies seemingly with nothing better to do in their lives but bustle around policing other people's social media accounts.

I was witness to one of these bizzies pressuring someone I’ve followed and who has followed me for several years, to unfollow/block me because I was said to be “a bit TERFy”. To her credit, she refused to do so but she did ask me if I was a TERF to which I replied honestly that I do not see myself as either trans exclusionary or a radical feminist, so if TERF is indeed just a neutral descriptor (NB. it's not) I am not one – but I do have issues with the current transgender orthodoxy – explicated at length in this blog. (1)

I could also have pointed out that my interest in the CTO is in relation to my wider interest in the role that identity politics, post-modern academic theory, hyper-individualism, the cult of celebrity, anti-communism, and transhumanism etc etc played/are playing in the genesis and perpetuation of wider neo-liberal ideology. 


If, in the arse-uppards’ politics and logic of some people, that makes me a TERF, I suspect it says way more about them than it does about me.

 

This sort of busy-bodying reached the heights (or is it depths) of absurdity in a scenario in which someone (A) was upset by seeing tweets written by a person who had caused them harm (B) appearing in their Twitter feed because a mutual follower (C) had liked a tweet B wrote. 

 

I find that algorithm irritating and tweets by people who have unfollowed me, and even the very few I have unfollowed, show up in my time line because a mutual liked, or retweeted them – but this aspect of the algorithm upset A so much she expressed her concerns, and some people who follow her leapt into action to unfollow C. One (D) took it upon herself to act as head girl, privately sending C’s user name to people, so they could unfollow / block him/her.

 

I know there are people with vulnerabilities on social media, and bullying, harassing behaviour affects them far worse than it does thick-skinned, old political campaigners like me – but surely the best thing A’s caring followers could have done would have been to help A find ways to take charge of the situation – not elbow in to increase their own kindness quotient.The worst thing, it seemed to me, was  what D did – try to organise a mass unfollow of C – behind his/her back. In other words, the only way D could envisage assisting or supporting A was to share C’s name privately so mutuals could unfollow / block him/her.

  

I don’t know or follow any of these people nor do I have a clue who they are, and ironically, the thread showed up on my timeline because of the offending algorithm. I am sure A is genuinely in need of support, but this was the worst kind of support - instead of presenting the range of ways A could control her own feed, the bizzies took charge and organised a ganging-up on a third party whose crime was to follow someone, and like some of their tweets. 


The implicit patronisation aside, it's also classic guilt by association. Not only is following a banned person deemed to be a crime, liking a tweet of a banned person is assumed to indicate support for every facet of that banned person’s being. 


I'm surely not alone in resenting being told by a bunch of bizzies, who to follow on social media. I follow people whose views I'm interested in. Most of those I follow, I respect – some I don't but I still want to have the right to see what they have to say. 

 

I continue to follow people who I know have unfollowed or muted me because of pressure from the bizzies. I understand there are some who are genuinely between a rock and a hard place and I give them a pass but others – especially those whose rocks and hard places are pretty much of their own manufacture or choosing, and/or who are well cushioned by class &/or skin privilege –  they get my disrespect. 


But all this is leading up to exposing another more recent and exceptionally nasty example of a Twitter bizzy at work.


A few weeks ago, a pseudonymous bizzy (X) slid into a thread to warn someone, (Y), that one of the people he was engaging with in a conversation was (gasp) a known TERF. 


Y thanked X for the info, claiming to have not known this woman – who was tagged into the conversation – was a TERF. He sought to wriggle off the guilt-by-association hook by claiming he does not engage much with trans issues because as a cisgender man, he does not feel he has the right, and that not many TERFs  follow him because the mere fact of being in his cyber-presence confronts them with being fascist-adjacent –  or weasel words to that effect.


X thanked Y for the clarification and said :

 "I assumed she was a known quantity – as 'allies' have been debating her for years for ...kicks(?) – she's avoided cancellation because her methodology is very much of the "I have reasonable concerns" strain but a search of her history speaks for itself." (My emphasis) 

X went on to say – and bear in mind, the woman was still tagged into the thread – that:

"she occupies a unique space in that she's defo a leftist, writes for XX, seemed fine, (we were mutuals) until that R Stewart column which spurred a fixation with the trans debate, encouraged by leftist 'ally' supporters also hellbent on debating trans rights."  (My redaction)

X then proceeded to list the names of lots of other people who

"have a history of putting their transphobic views online or consorting with/promoting those who do."

Now call me an old leftwing cynic but to me X would scream either, vexatious, passive-aggressive busy-body, or rightwing agent provocateur (the two are not mutually exclusive) –  but not Y who dumped on a left-wing woman without as much as missing a beat, without batting a misogynistic eyelid because - why? 


Is he just a coward? Or is he demonstrating that deep-rooted resentment of women which crosses boundaries of class, political affiliation, age, ethnicity etc and which the CTO gives license to let off the leash?


The two of them demonstrated a stunning arrogance and callousness not just by smearing a good woman's reputation, but by talking about her as if she was not there, as if, by having been declared to be a TERF by someone hiding behind a pseudonym – she became a non-person.


It seems to be par for X's course but what's Ys excuse?  


What is going on here, with all you self-proclaimed lefties most of whom never gave a damn or said a word about trans people up to a couple of years ago? How is it that suddenly, the transphobe test, largely devised and administered by anonymous social media trolls has become the litmus test of leftwing ideological purity?


Seems to me you are being played, sirs and mesdames. Royally.



1. Update: To her discredit, I have just realised she has blocked me.