ContraPoints

At one point in the video, Wynn refutes parts of Rowling's essay before pointing out that while she could go on, that's not the point she's trying to make. I think you're right that some of her videos are deeper than others, and some are broader. Videos like Cancelling and Pronouns make coherent and specific arguments against a narrow talking point or trend. Videos like Opulence and The West moreso provide a broad explanation of concepts that are frequently talked about, but less frequently analyzed. I think that Contrapoints videos on a specific person — Jordan Peterson being the other notable example — fall into a third category, where Wynn is moreso examining the behaviour of that person instead of focusing on diving in to one concept or argument.

Another point that I'm glad she brought up in the video is the blurred line between "victim" and "abuser". Some abusers can be victims, and sometime victims take their righteous anger too far. It's even more ironic that I've seen a couple of trans people who are really mad at her, because the mere thought of "sympathizing with a rich white transphobe" is too much of a heinous act to them (And some of them take the opportunity to call Natalie a rich white transphobe, how fun).

Edited by HottoKenai on Jan 27th 2021 at 10:33:48 AM

Natalie often takes a position that I often do which is 'It sucks that this happened to you, and I'm sorry it did, but it doesn't justify your actions and you are still bad' which INFURIATES a lot of terminally online people, as it defies the tribalism that most online discourse falls into.

(jgrif) That's a good point. I guess it's the difference between intentionally obfuscating a point and making a statement without knowing all the background.

Edited by ciyinwanderer on Jan 28th 2021 at 4:17:03 AM

I couldn’t help but remember that "Joanne" was the pseudonym she gave to the girl she had a crush on in the "Shame" video… That made this one a bit weird.

It looks like Natalie is perfectly willing to die on Buck Angel's hill. Very disappointing:

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2021/jun/17/contrapoints-natalie-wynn-youtube-interview

Now this article offended me.

The word "provocateuse" doesn’t exist, it should be "provocatrice", goddammit!

…It’s been a while since her last video, now that I think of it. Guess that "Envy" episode she talks about is gonna be a big one.

> The word "provocateuse" doesn’t exist

well,it does now!

The talk about Fyre Festival is so true. XD

Aaand we have a new record with 108 minutes! I’ll watch it when I have the time. X)

Worth noting that she stumbles onto the core of the appeal of the Tsundere at 1:41:37

Overall a pretty good video that has interesting ideas on the nature of Envy.

That was a really good examination of Sponge Bob Square Pants.

Edited by Whowho on Aug 10th 2021 at 3:51:00 PM

I found the vid a bit too long and messy… I kinda lost track of whatever point she was trying to make by the end, and I think she did too?

Some interesting musings though. I liked the part where she defended (?) Marie-Antoinette, but it’s worth noting that she wasn’t beheaded because of some blind ressentment but because she was deemed complicit in an act of treason (the Varennes escape and all that)… That "let them eat brioche" is still one of the most infamous misquotes in our history though.

I will said one issue natalie never touch that much is that envy as response to ego isnt much a simple feelling but a sort of "answer" to that percibe slight against one.

TO use some examples: part of why many conservative hate inmigrants is because thy got against the nothin every american worth their salt should just go, want something, reaaaaaally work for it and take it, but many of them still retain their own language, never fully "asimilied" to main culture and acept a lot of work for low wages mean they are against the idea of "How things work" and how things should be.

Its pretty much the "is not fair" feelling a child have and a sort of "the only natural things to have is what I can" which is why the whole "if I cant have it..." exist.

Regarding the interview in the Guardian above: it seems like she will never admit that having Buck on was a mistake. I just wish she would say, "I saw him as a kind of legend, one of the first trans people I saw and realized there might be hope for myself. BUT I understand now that his actions and the ideas he spreads are extremely harmful and I shouldn't have included him, not matter how small the part."

Like, Buck is trash, please just acknowledge that and move on.

As for the latest video, I also felt it was overly long and unfocused. It really seems like we're still dealing with the aftermath of Opulence and that is going to leave it's touch on all her work for the foreseeable future. I don't want to hypothesize on her private life and motivations too much, but I feel like part of this was Natalie trying to process her rapid and enormous success, change in financial situation, and increased visibility that came with much more criticism (with varying amounts of validity).

the issue with butch is dificult, for one part she clearly still see as icon which make his other actions harsh for her, on the other I feel she still dont want to validate the abuse in a sense of "well, they were right, isnt?" which is the issue with the internet.

I dont know if unfocus in the issue but is VERY long indeed, and she take a lot of pauses about it which make lost focus a little bit, even them there indeed this sense were envy of all sins is the one we dont like to talk about it, we praise pride, we praise sloth, lust and even greed but envy? envy feel shamefull.

Seems like a real heavy watch in those last 20 minutes.

Oh man, how long has it been?

Going by the title, I assume it’ll be about eating disorders… We’ll see.

I'm assuming it's about content and the need to CONSUME

context would really help here!

I'm not sure I have the appitite for this video.

The first 40 minutes or so are a skit between leftist insert Justine Tableau, conservative Christian strawman Virginia Lamm and centrist host Jackie Jackson. A lot of entertaining moments in a skit that don't even come off as satire, with a lot of comments noting that the stuff Virginia says could be taken directly from what actual Christians say.

The last 20 minutes are... intense. It has Justine who while earlier rightly tells off Virginia for morally condescending to her about how conservative Christianity is the way to go, is now revealed to be struggling with addiction. I think the effect Contra is trying to show here is the parallels between Virginia who sees the solution to addiction as suppressing yourself through religious orthodoxy and Justine who tries to downplay her problem.

actually nm I think I found this comment that summarises it better than I do lol:

Edited by Pachylad on May 30th 2022 at 11:10:48 PM

Oof, that was… intense, indeed.

Though having no experience with drug addiction myself, I kinda related more to the "podcast" part. I’ve had talks with fundamentalist Christians a couple times and I was always disturbed. They seemed like they genuinely wanted to do good, but they used a language and logic that couldn’t possibly reach me. It was like talking with aliens.

About the addiction part… what scares me is that it doesn’t seem like it took her much acting. When she played the piano with that absolutely miserable expression at the end, I’m not even sure she was acting.

Dark Mother is back with anither video about J.K. Rowling (and some sides about civility politics, transphobia et al.):

I honestly find her take on dealing with JK Rowling to be baffling, because the woman directly influences policies and actions that harm people even now. You can’t divorce her from the problem because she’s made herself intrinsically part of the Anti-Trans problem in Britain. Much like Desantis or Libs of Tik Tok have done in America with GOP following the formers example in laws and being influenced by the latter who even received protection to spread such hate by Twitter.

Even helping to fund the hate groups who help propagate the problem so they can afford to fund the extermination campaigns they wouldn’t by themselves.

Edited by OmegaRadiance on Apr 23rd 2023 at 3:58:51 AM

You're referring to Contra's suggestion of blocking her and ignoring her, no? The whole video, which I think is some of their best work, is them point by point building up to the opinion and explaining how they got there.

Because what do you want to do about Rowling? Rather, more importantly, what can you actually do about her? In the real world sense, when it comes to her specifically? She has her opinions and no amount of passionate attempts at various volumes to convince her she's wrong have worked thus far. Because, as Contra points out in the video, Rowling is coming at this from a place of emotion. Those kinds of convictions are hardest to change, and frankly attempting to do so is a waste of time.

So you can't affect Rowling's behavior by your own nor, I'm pretty sure, can you deny her her platform built from clout or money^note I'm very much for boycotting her products and other similar actions, but I would not expect that to have a notable material effect either.. What other reasons are there to focus on her then?

The only answer I can come up for that is that she is currently the face of the anti-trans movement. So by opposing her, you oppose that movement. This is somewhat valid, but the video addresses this expertly. Because the truth is, if she was not the face of the movement, somebody else, probably also a woman, would be. Fundamentally Rowling is just a stalking horse for the conservative forces who use her for their own ends.

So block and ignore Rowling. Understand that she, as a person, is not important and that she's ultimately interchangeable for the anti-trans movement. You somehow topple her and another will rise up. Because there's always someone willing to serve as both the point of the spear and a hate sink.

That does not mean do nothing, of course. Protest loudly and impolitely any anti-trans legislation or rallies. Speak publicly for the rights of trans people while making it about them, not about Rowling. Donate your own money if you can spare some. Focus on the things you can actually change. Rowling is doing the same on the other side, sure, which is regrettable as she has better tools than most. Yet ultimately this is not about her making this about her serves her side more than not.