Not just threats
It’s not ok to threaten women with death or rape, yes yes, blah blah, but what’s really not ok is to have “gender critical views” i.e. to have the view that women are women and men are not women.
Having such a “view” is not just view-having, in Jamil’s [cough] view, it’s rhetoric, meaning it could well be utter bullshit deployed for nefarious reasons. Having the “view” that women are women and men are not women “is what contributes to” [meaning, is the sole source of? the wording is meant to be precise but is actually confused and confusing] i.e. causes the actual rape and actual murder of trans women, not just threats. Not just threats.
Got that, women? Yes yes threats are bad, men shouldn’t threaten women with violence and rape and murder, BUT – the real bad, the bad that counts, the bad that matters, is women who say that women are women and men are not women – that actually gets trans women (i.e. men who say they are women) raped and killed.
I mean which would you choose? Just bratty privileged cis white Karens whining about threats? Or heroic stunning brave men who say they are women who face actual rape and actual death because of those bratty privileged cis white Karens who think that women are women and that men who say they are women are men?
Be logical.
WTaF? Am I reading this right? It’s not okay to send women death and rape threats, but if they say men in skirts aren’t women, they’re asking for it?
What about the actual rape and actual murder of actual women? That doesn’t matter anymore?
We’re both reading it right. There’s no other way to read it. It’s what she wrote.
I wish someone (besides Jane Clare Jones) would at least attempt to lay out the connection between a woman pointing out that men who claim to be women aren’t women and the rape and murder of said men.
Never mind that transwomen have a lower rate of murder than women (or men, especially black men). Never mind that they are co-opting statistics for the gay community that are not trans. Never mind that most of the trans murdered are black prostitutes (two groups with higher murder rates than trans, so who can tell why they were murdered in the absence of statements to that effect) or are murdered by intimate partners who have not objected to their being trans, but are instead enacting all-too-familiar domestic violence scenarios.
Never mind that trans murdered are murdered BY MEN. It is women – white, straight, cis-women, of course, because all black women and all non-straight women are so down with full wokeness trans-dogma – women are the greatest threat they know.
Women are simply easier to attack than men, and most of these dudes probably have a long history of dominating women and expecting them to do their bidding. Why should that change just because they put on a dress?
Oh, don’t be coy, iknklast. You know damn well how frequently things do down like this:
1) A man thinks to himself, “Hmm, a nice Saturday afternoon to sit outside and read. What shall I read? Perhaps some feminist philosophy?”
2) (hours pass)
3) “Welp, it’s getting dark. The transsexual streetwalkers should be starting their rounds. Time to go downtown and murder one.”
Consider these possible examples of violent rhetoric:
(a) “TERFS should be killed.”
(b) Silhouette of a woman labelled “TERF” being hanged
(c) Carrying a baseball bat labelled “TERFs”
(d) Saying “there is more to being a woman than simply identifying as one.”
One of these things is not like the other….
And yet, (a) through (c) are routinely excused as, at worst, mildly excessive but understandable reactions.
And you know what else about (d)? Along with the fact that it’s not violent? It applies to EVERYTHING – especially to everything that’s a material reality as opposed to an allegiance or taste or orientation or worldview. There’s more to being
a dog
a house
a tree
an ocean
a planet
a galaxy
an atom
than simply identifying as one.
Whew. For a minute there, I thought you were going to include otters in that list, and then things would have gotten ugly with our resident trans-otter.
Screechy, you’ve got it the wrong way around. She identifies as a human.
Yeah, funny that, just like it’s easier to win against female cyclists, weightlifters, runners, cricketers….It’s like they’re averse to a level playing field or something. For all their efforts to confuse and blur the definitions of sex and gender for the rest of us, TIMs themselves have no trouble at all recognizing the difference between the sexes, and unfailingly, preferentialy choosing the spaces and sports of the female one for the gratification of their own needs and interests. How do they manage to do this when, according to them, sex is a spectrum that is complex and difficult, and harder to pin down than a cloud on a bulletin board? It’s like the way police magically reach the conclusion that unarmed, black demonstrators are more worthwhile and appropriate recipients for volleys of tear gas and rubber bullets rather than heavily armed white “militia” types.
How is this supposed to work? Violent rage-filled entitled misogynist hears “trans women are not actually women” and thinks “don’t you try telling me who is or isn’t a woman you uppity bitch” and goes out to rape a trans woman just to spite the woman who has expressed the gender critical view? They never explain this. Or anything, really.
Its not okay to threaten any women with rape. Also, watch me use rape as a threat against gender critical women by blaming their rhetoric for the crime.
I mean the second part of that statement is basically “Better keep quiet GC women, or someone’s gonna get raped.”