bloodofthekings wrote:Whilst Vicky of course doesn't deserve direct abuse or threats (correct me if I'm wrong but I haven't seen any such content), this is very different to receiving criticism or reading the opinions other people have about her character based on the way she presents herself on social media, which she has quite frankly brought upon herself.
Unless she's received threats, she's not the victim in all of this. For someone who is so prevalent on social media, she is very aware of what that environment is like so tbh, it really comes down to the fact that she shouldn't dish it out if she can't take it.
This isn't the first time she has (unprovoked I might add), chosen to post something that she knows damn well will offend people and cause controversy. And it just comes across like she's being confrontational for the sake of it and trying to start online arguments for no reason, which all seems just a bit juvenile.
And this isn't a freedom of speech issue at all - there was nothing stopping her posting that tweet and there would be nothing stopping her posting it again if she wanted to. But freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from the criticism of others when you speak in/on a public form.
When you post on a public form such as social media, then you have to accept that other people will comment, particularly when you are the public face of a brand such as an international music festival. Despite what some people might think, the original aim of social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook is to connect with others and create discourse, not to massage your own fucking ego by convincing yourself that everyone agrees with you. If she didn't want other people to comment, then she should write a blog, not a fucking Twitter post. Or if she only wants comments from people who agree with her then a) social media is not the place for that and b) that's rather sad.
And if you're not as "free" to post whatever you like on social media because you're the face of a brand and your posts could affect the reputation or the business activities of the brand you represent, then boo-fucking-hoo; that comes with the territory and the privileged position that you're in, deal with it.
I was not making it a freedom of speech issue, though you could take that stance. However, again its a complex thing, so I will leave it be for now.
However, I was pointing out that the simplistic reactions on Facebook are not taking into account that going with the Pro trans stance has a negative social impact as well as a positive one. People are unhappy with the pronoun issues not necessarily because they are bigoted but because of the internal perception that they are part of a lie when they use pronouns that feel incorrect. My post was pointing out the it could be seen as going beyond annoying and is infact potentially socially destabilising. The mob (and bloodstock themselves) are ignoring this, and many other problems inherent in trans politics.
The 'educating herself' was a particularly icky aspect of the bloodstock response. It appears nobody on twitter/Facebook appears capable af such a thing.