All we ask is the right to redefine everything
Now there’s an argument for you. Trans woman Gemma Stone has always leaned Labour but there’s just one problem: all this here transphobia.
A number of transphobes retain their membership despite using the hashtag #ExpelMe to ask to be expelled for transphobia. Many of them support hate groups which almost exclusively push for trans exclusionary policies. While Keir Starmer himself refused to sign a pledge condemning these groups stating he doesn’t want the issue to become a “political football”, two of his fellow contenders in the Labour leadership race did.
The fourth contender who didn’t sign, Emily Thornberry, spoke out in support of trans rights after the event, but said we should be careful about calling things hate groups. Whereas I do agree with the sentiment, I don’t think there’s any difficulty in applying “hate group” to organisations who invariably espouse what many trans people like me perceive as hatred.
There it is: the top class argument. Yes, we should be careful about calling things hate groups, but first we have to stipulate that “hate group” means any organization that espouses what we perceive as hatred. That’s careful enough, surely, and not at all circular.
It doesn’t take much to look at some websites or social media and see they are single-issue lobby groups and nothing else. We are being told to tolerate intolerance just because they themselves say they aren’t bigoted when they clearly are.
A compelling point. All we have to do is look, and we see what I see. They say they aren’t bigoted but THEY CLEARLY ARE I tell you. What more do you want?
Meanwhile, the hate groups themselves are becoming more and more emboldened. This, of course, results in more and more harassment and abuse of trans people online. Every day that politicians dither on the issue, trans people, like me, are forced to face bigotry down on our own.
I wonder if Gemma Stone is aware of abuse of women online and off.
Starmer is right that the issue shouldn’t become a political football but has seemingly failed to understand that the political dithering is itself what’s making it a political football. We need strong and robust support for the human rights of trans people, we need to put the bigots back in their box and tell them they won’t be tolerated.
But what human rights? What are the human rights of trans people that need strong and robust support? Do trans people not already have the human rights that other humans have? There is no “human right” to force other people to accept your counter-factual claims about yourself. That’s not a human right and never can be, because it would make a hash of everyone else’s human rights.
They need to be told they don’t have reasonable concerns because right now the lack of clearly and pointedly telling them “no” is leaving them the open window to assume a “yes” is still on the table somewhere. They need to know it isn’t. Otherwise they’ll just keep coming and trans people will continue to be degraded, abused and harassed. Labour is no place for transphobia. Say it.
Telling them “no” in reply to what? What specifically is Gemma Stone talking about? Why can’t he say?
And what is wrong with being a single-issue lobby group? What else does the author think trans-rights groups are? If a group forms around an issue, being a single issue lobby group seems to be the norm, not some evil aberration of hateful TERFs.
And the writing! This was painful to read not just for the lack of cogent, logical argumentation but because it is so poorly written. I realize not all people can write, but it would be nice if those who are unable to write coherently would utilize the talents they do have, and leave the writing to people who can write. I know, I know, hopelessly elitist, listen-to-the-experts nonsense, but, well, that’s me. I prefer to read writers who can, you know, actually write.
I’ve got an even worse sample than that, one that was posted on Medium yesterday and later removed. I might post about it or I might let it fall of its own weight, haven’t decided yet.
Oh, post about it. Your commentary to bad writing is like MST3K to bad movies.
It’s interesting that only one side in this discussion/clusterfuck is capable of clearly articulating its concerns and goals, is capable of pointing to actual hatred and intimidatioin being used against it, and can demonstrate actual harm and injury already suffered as a result of the intended course of action (self ID) proposed by their opponents.
Compare the above waffling and obfuscation with this masterfull, detailed dissection of the (now apparently removed) Medium article noted in the OP by Dr. Jane Clare Jones: https://mobile.twitter.com/janeclarejones/status/1249603195615182854
TAs (I’m going to use “TA” “Trans Activists,” rather than “TRA,” because the “Rights” they are demanding, as noted in this post, aren’t “rights” at all, so why give them that tiny rhetorical victory?) can’t let slip that, according to their view, material reality itself, and the mere statement or description of it, is “transphobic.” That’s why they have to be vague about what is actually “transphobic” in the writing of GC feminists, who, in turn have no difficulty in finding, quoting and describing the actual misogyny present in the words and actions of TAs.
Which “bigots?” The trans people or the gender critical? If we’re going to go by what’s clearly obvious, we’re going to have to decide who gets to define the obvious.
Sastra, since they are allowed to identify us as bigots, we should be allowed to identify them as same, right? And to self-identify as non-bigots?
I identify as a non-bigot, and anybody who disagrees with that is doing me real, actual violence.
You can go further than that. There’s no human right to force other people to accept (or reject) any claim aside from that of humanity.
Well I put it only that far because it depends on what you mean by “claim” and “accept.” I think there is a right to compel (via the courts for instance, if it becomes necessary) other people to “accept” “claims” of the type: you have no right to kill / rape / torture me. You have no right to consign me to inferior schools or jobs or housing because of my race or sex or national origin. I have the right to equal treatment under the law. Claims of that kind. Nobody can force anybody to believe they’re true, not least because it’s not possible to force belief that way, but acceptance, however grudging, is another matter.