Oh #MediaWatch is trending, there's a happy surprise. I just watched their special report on the unending "bias" attacks on the ABC. It's quite even-handed and informative. abc.net.au/mediawatch/tra…
It'll surprise no one, I'm sure, but I support the ABC remaining a strong, independent, uniquely Australian voice that is held in the public trust. #MediaWatch. I'm not Aussie, but the ABC was my first window into the country, from 10,000 miles away.
36AUD/year is a bargain for what the ABC offers. Its storied "bias" is really just a reflection of how ostentatiously right wing so much of the rest of the Australian media landscape is, which highlights the need for an independent outlet all the more.
Public broadcasting is essential to democracy. You pay for it, yes, but you pay for any corporate broadcaster any time you spend money at one of their umpteen advertisers. I'd rather have a broadcaster that was free of their influence.
One final note, I have adored #MediaWatch for well over a decade now; witty commentary on journalism and ethics. I wish we had something like it in the US. It's one of many reasons Australia's lucky to have Auntie.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This is what @CaseyExplosion usefully calls "privilege flexing"--doing something destructive and foolish because you can, and because you want to *show* that you can. But this is also a form of parental abuse, quite frankly.
This is why I say casual parental Luddism and anti-video game attitudes are not consequence-free. It leads to this Lord of the Flies bullshit.
It feels perverse to invest a normatively sexed body with this much importance, particularly for a feminist, but here we are.
To her point, bigots always assume a marginalised group's rights conflict with theirs. To this day, gay people are accused of wanting "special rights."
It's a debate that rages still with every discussion of the Masterpiece Cakeshop ruling. Yes, homophobic het people perceive gay rights as an imposition on their rights, religious or otherwise. They also use the same threat-rhetoric.
i.e. all the rhetoric about gays and lesbians "indoctrinating" children, sexualising safe spaces, and, of course, the shameful endurance of the "gay pedo" stereotype. This still results in material inequities, like that SCOTUS ruling or the ban on gay male blood donations.
As someone once said, "You don't support free speech if you think it should have limitations. You don't support free speech if you do not defend your enemy's right to use it." And that someone was...*checks notes* Huh, Blaire White. Go figure.
In deference to these ideals, she sent her considerable following after me; hundreds spammed me with this screencap and some variation on a gleeful threat.
Just so you all know, this is the sort of thing I've been inundated with since yesterday morning. Tweet 1 is mildly criticising me, tweet 2 is the same guy attacking another trans woman. These are White's fans.
Of course, the "joke" being defended is the "Aryan" thing. Such japes! There are so many similar japes as well, like this uproarious post about gassing refugees, or coyly tweeting at Richard Spencer. pbs.twimg.com/media/C5ZprHgV…archive.is/XsAdW
In the name of defending this I've had a torrent of tweets directed at me, encouraging me to respond to a quixotic legal threat. When I tweeted my condolences about Jacksonville, White's fans flooded the comments; it gives a clear sense of priorities.
I love all these folks decrying Ocasio-Cortez for being "nasty" to Ben Shapiro--a man who's danced on the grave of murdered children.
Just as we saw with Sarah Jeong, it's one set of rules for them, another for women they hate. Shapiro can hurl witless abuse at Palestinians, or make hay attacking trans people with cliches, but AOC's the witch for not giving him the time of day.
But all the trending hullaballoo--and the fact that I've now mentioned the man's name twice--illustrates what these "debate" propositions are really about, and why it's usually only people like Shapiro who make them. It's about showmanship.
May as well hit the ground running: here's some nonsense I saw bubble up earlier. In this white woman's words I see so much of the sneering that has been directed at me and other Latinas who didn't go to the "right" schools/social groups. We're lazy and talking above ourselves.
To say AOC did not "do the work" is staggeringly infuriating. She joins many first-time candidates whose previous political experience was confined to volunteer work. Her legwork (of a literal sort) won her longshot primary; that much should be beyond dispute.
Whatever else you may say about her, to claim she didn't "do the work" is a dismissal that verges on bigotry. And to say that she should be rejected simply because she's new is to spit in the face of all those young women *you said should run for office.*