Graham Linehan was first banned from the platform back in 2020 for violating the network’s policy on hateful conduct (Picture: Getty)
Over the weekend, the Irish television writer Graham Linehan was, once again, temporarily banned from Twitter after he said he was going to ‘kill’ protestors – though he later claimed he was joking.
Better known today for his hard-line stance on trans issues, the former IT Crowd writer was first banned from the platform back in 2020 for violating the network’s policy on hateful conduct, but was later allowed back on the app as part of Elon Musk’s ‘amnesty’ for suspended accounts – a move that also saw far-right activists return to the platform.
Yet it appears Linehan’s behaviour, which included calling trans rights activism ‘evil’, branding those who criticise him ‘groomer’ – and joking about killing people this weekend, breached even Twitter’s new, more laissez-faire content moderation rules.
After appearing to delete the offending post, the writer was swiftly reinstated.
But while this outcome was of little surprise to anyone who regularly spends time on social media, it’s important to remember Linehan hasn’t always been like this.
His journey to this point over the last 10 years sheds light on the threat of transphobia as a radicalising influence, and unless we recognise – and react – to this threat now, we run the risk of allowing a dangerous force to emerge right under our noses; a force that could be tempted by the allure of violence against marginalised groups.
When first criticised by viewers back in 2013 for the episode of the IT Crowd that saw a trans woman on the losing end of a fistfight, Linehan appeared to take the criticism on-board, remarking that making a trans woman the butt of the joke was ‘not how it was intended’ and that it was ‘bad writing’ on his part.
Ten years on, Linehan’s position has become dramatically more militant. Prior to his suspension, the Father Ted co-creator’s feed showed him seeking out and targeting transgender people and pro-trans voices on a near-daily basis – and he’d even begun attacking other members of the LGBTQ+ community, such as those who identify as bisexual.
This is not normal behaviour, and belies an unhealthy fixation on an issue that we typically see from radicalised individuals.
I believe a similar pattern, though to a lesser degree, can be seen in JK Rowling.
Rowling wearing a t-shirt accusing then-first minister Nicola Sturgeon of ‘destroying’ women’s rights (Picture: Getty / Twitter)
As recently as 2020, the Harry Potter author’s position on trans rights was that she respected ‘every trans person’s right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them.’ That she’d ‘march with them if they were ‘discriminated against on the basis of being trans.’
But in 2023, it seems to me this is clearly no longer the position that Rowling holds.
The author’s association with protests in Scotland, which opposed the SNP government’s attempt to reform the gender recognition act, now suggests to many that Rowling takes a more hardline view – as evidenced by the author wearing a t-shirt accusing then-first minister Nicola Sturgeon of ‘destroying’ women’s rights.
In both cases, we see examples of people who, having previously held more moderate positions on an issue, now taking much more extreme stances – a stance bordering on the obsessive.
How did this happen? In a cruel twist of fate, those who support the protection and expansion of trans rights are, in my view, partly responsible for this.
Those who oppose trans rights now seek to portray transgender people as an existential threat
From my time working in social media, I’ve seen a clear pattern play out: criticise someone once and they might repent, but criticise someone a hundred times and you’ll only solidify views they might once have held loosely – driving them into the arms of those who validate those beliefs instead.
The multiplier effect of social media, more commonly called the ‘pile on’, creates the perception of an angry mob assailing someone from all sides.
Algorithms, programmed for engagement and attention, warp our often well-meaning intentions, turning isolated instances of valid criticism and attempts to correct into a tidal wave of digital sound and fury that can overwhelm even the most hardened internet native
Exposure to this can ultimately drive people towards groups that might offer them respite. In both Rowling and Linehan’s case, this backlash appears to have sent them towards anti-trans groups.
This means social media can act as an echo chamber, feeding even intelligent, successful people a steady stream of content that reinforces a sense of fear and threat.
In the US, the QAnon movement and the alt-right radicalised a sect of the population who felt isolated and rejected by wider society, creating a network that at first made them felt safe and accepted, and then drove them to the extreme view that society is run by a cabal of paedophiles.
We can see the same pattern emerging within the anti-trans movement.
Those who oppose trans rights now seek to portray transgender people as an existential threat: suggesting that they seek access to women’s spaces in a bid to commit sexual assault, or that trans people want to medically castrate and sexually groom children.
The outcome of this radicalisation online has real-world consequences: bomb threats sent to Budweiser factories after the brand partnered with a trans influencer, harassment of Daniel Radcliffe’s girlfriend – and suggestions that she might secretly be trans – after he held a roundtable with trans teens, and a raft of anti-transgender legislation seeking to curtail gender-affirming care in a number of US states.
This radicalisation leads us down a dark path: one that only ends in violence unless it’s quickly mitigated.
But we can navigate our way out of this.
We can achieve this by educating people, calmly and rationally, that trans people are not a threat – and by giving trans people more space in the media to show the public that treatment for gender dysphoria is essential, not dangerous.
Just as importantly, we must recognise the role we all play in perpetuating this cycle. It may feel morally ‘just’ to call out someone’s indiscretions to a wide audience, but even well-meaning posts can be radicalising when passed through the corrupting prism of social media.
In some cases, this corruption may be too deep-rooted to tackle. It’s hard to see how the likes of Linehan can return to a more balanced – and less vicious – place on trans rights given how far he’s fallen.
More: Live News Coverage
But others can be helped before they go down the rabbit hole.
Through better education on what trans rights *actually* means for women’s rights, and more political courage from our leaders in calling out the very real danger of transphobia, we can create an environment that makes people more wary of groups looking to play on the public’s darkest fears about marginalised groups.
That way, we can prevent more people from becoming radicalised, and improve the lot of the people that radicalisation harms.
Criticise someone a hundred times and you’ll only solidify views they might once have held loosely.
