When Orwellian justice becomes a Darwinian survival of the "wokest." The public and private internet dramas orbiting the Society of Authors and its chair, Joanne Harris.
“Pullman, who has no qualms virtue signaling to women his dim immaterial definition of womanhood, has a tendency to respond on twitter as if he had just woken from a bad dream or walked in on a conversation and just started speaking. When a Rabbi condemned a trans individual, previously arrested for antisemitic graffiti, after being arrested for hitting women’s rights campaigners in the head with a military grade smoke bomb, Pullman replied, “I despise transphobia.””
This bit is the funniest thing I’ve read in a while!! It’s like a short story. Great writing. You definitely have a way with words.
As far as I can see, no one comes out of this looking good. Harris has form for "Oh sorry, did you think I meant you?" subtweeting snark, Pullman seems to drop his metaphorical trousers on Twitter on a regular basis, and the behaviour of the Angry Left needs no further explanation.
But Clanchy's account is partial and self-serving, omitting flashpoints like her very public claim that she was being smeared (by named individuals) with fabrications, when every word used to criticise her work had been taken directly from it.
To me the story isn’t about who had the best or worst twitter pile on. The story is that heads of unions and other groups use struggle sessions to manipulate power within those orgs. However it played out on twitter the real world consequences were for Pullman and Clanchy. While Singh is now joining the SoA. My view is only to show the tactics of using identity politics as a manipulation of power. Not to take a side.
What a ridiculous letter and article. I have been a member of the Society for almost 20 years, and this vicious campaign from Clanchy wilfully misunderstands what my trade union exists for. Clanchy's approach is petty, vindictive and pointless, instead of choosing to learn from this.
Although as you say yourself, you are not an SoA member and you know none of the people involved, and you appear to have adopted the flawed approach of treating Clanchy's account as gospel. The truth is inevitably more nuanced than that.
The core issue for me isn't even about Clanchy and Singh having the more righteous claim to victim status, the issue is The SoA acting in a partisan way to orchestrate or involve itself in twitter flame wars. It's unbecoming of a Union.
“Pullman, who has no qualms virtue signaling to women his dim immaterial definition of womanhood, has a tendency to respond on twitter as if he had just woken from a bad dream or walked in on a conversation and just started speaking. When a Rabbi condemned a trans individual, previously arrested for antisemitic graffiti, after being arrested for hitting women’s rights campaigners in the head with a military grade smoke bomb, Pullman replied, “I despise transphobia.””
This bit is the funniest thing I’ve read in a while!! It’s like a short story. Great writing. You definitely have a way with words.
Pullman rekt
As far as I can see, no one comes out of this looking good. Harris has form for "Oh sorry, did you think I meant you?" subtweeting snark, Pullman seems to drop his metaphorical trousers on Twitter on a regular basis, and the behaviour of the Angry Left needs no further explanation.
But Clanchy's account is partial and self-serving, omitting flashpoints like her very public claim that she was being smeared (by named individuals) with fabrications, when every word used to criticise her work had been taken directly from it.
To me the story isn’t about who had the best or worst twitter pile on. The story is that heads of unions and other groups use struggle sessions to manipulate power within those orgs. However it played out on twitter the real world consequences were for Pullman and Clanchy. While Singh is now joining the SoA. My view is only to show the tactics of using identity politics as a manipulation of power. Not to take a side.
What a ridiculous letter and article. I have been a member of the Society for almost 20 years, and this vicious campaign from Clanchy wilfully misunderstands what my trade union exists for. Clanchy's approach is petty, vindictive and pointless, instead of choosing to learn from this.
You are entitled to your opinion. I just don’t find it very convincing.
Although as you say yourself, you are not an SoA member and you know none of the people involved, and you appear to have adopted the flawed approach of treating Clanchy's account as gospel. The truth is inevitably more nuanced than that.
The core issue for me isn't even about Clanchy and Singh having the more righteous claim to victim status, the issue is The SoA acting in a partisan way to orchestrate or involve itself in twitter flame wars. It's unbecoming of a Union.