Such disputes

Jun 18th, 2024 8:30 am | By

The Telegraph on the Deep Rifts:

It was an inauspicious start to Britain’s biggest LGBT celebration.

In a social media post featuring the rainbow flag and entitled “Can men get ovarian cancer?”, the charity Ovarian Cancer Action said it was marking the start of Pride Month by reminding its followers that “anyone with ovaries, regardless of gender identity, can be at risk for ovarian cancer”.

Last year, Oxfam was forced to apologise after posting an animation for Pride Month featuring a character who many said resembled JK Rowling, depicted with red eyes and wearing a badge bearing the word “Terf”…

Such disputes may on the surface appear minor, but there are worries among those who were there in the early days of the Pride marches that they are a sign of a more dangerous malaise. They warn that transgender activism has sown bitter divisions within the LGBT community and is now threatening to derail the movement they helped to build.

Nah such disputes don’t seem minor, not unless you’re dropping in from Planet Zog and know nothing about any of it. Of course they’re a sign of a “dangerous malaise”; in fact they are the dangerous malaise. Women are entirely fed up with being pushed to the margins of everything including feminism by men wearing lipstick.

“The big division has been around the idea of believing that trans women are women,” says Simon Fanshawe, one of the founding members of Stonewall

And around being forced to say it, and ferociously punished if you refuse.

Liane Timmermann, a member of “Get the L Out”, says: “Pride was previously a political movement for lesbians and gays and then it was totally hijacked by this gender-identity movement. “Trans activists have got higher up on the Pride board and it’s just become shocking. Lesbians who are same-sex attracted are not welcome at Pride now.”

Read the whole thing.



The messages of support

Jun 18th, 2024 7:30 am | By

Michael Cashman admits that his brief vague pseudo-apology to Rosie Duffield was not even an attempt at an apology but merely an attempt to get away with being a woman-hating pig.

https://twitter.com/mcashmanCBE/status/1803005132772102184

There you go. He wasn’t apologizing at all; he thinks he’s the one who’s been wronged. He thinks he deserves “support” for rudely publicly insulting Rosie Duffield. What a horrible man.



Epaulette mockery crime

Jun 18th, 2024 7:09 am | By

Urgent news from the BBC:

Fire boss says he was abused over Pride image

Seriously? With all the horrors there are in the world, the BBC finds time and space to report on public reactions to a “Pride” image?

A senior fire service official says he was sent “reprehensible and homophobic” messages after he posted a picture of Pride-themed epaulettes.

Simon Tuhill, Northamptonshire’s deputy chief fire officer posted the image on X, formally known as Twitter, last week. He said he was “appalled and shocked” at the overwhelmingly negative messages he received. He said the fire service remains committed to supporting diversity.

Nonsense. It’s not “supporting diversity” to focus on one purported marginalized communinny while ignoring all the others. Where are the feminism-themed fire service epaulettes? Where are the anti-racism-themed fire service epaulettes? Where are the epaulettes for poverty, mental illness, handicaps, immigration status?

Mr Tuhill said: “I’ve been clear that the fire service culture, working as a team and embracing our diversity as an organisation, is really important. Because we’re much better at our job when we properly reflect it, because we understand what the community needs from us.”

No you don’t. You don’t understand any such thing. If you did you would either diversify your epaulettes or skip the whole epaulette-signaling routine entirely.



Guest post: Vignettes of corporate capture

Jun 17th, 2024 6:19 pm | By

Originally a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? at Miscellany Room.

Vignettes of corporate capture; neighbourhood incursions.

Last week I recounted some of my feelings around a local Pride event. Here are some thoughts around neighbourhood examples of corporate Pride “celebrations.”

Our neighbourhood bank has its windows decorated for its nationwide Pride Month campaign, featuring the LGB rainbow + trans colours. One of the windows is filled with the slogan “Nothing beats the feeling of being accepted for who you really are.” That’s all well and good, but what they’re promoting, and enforcing through said promotion, is forcing everyone to accept a very small, specific subset of people for who they are not, to be precise, Trans Identified Males. They are not women. Never have been, never will be, because humans can’t change sex. Because they are male, and will always be male, they have no place in women’s spaces, women’s facilities, women’s positions. It is not hateful or bigoted to say these things, but through campaigns like this, they’re going to try to tell us it is. Their choice of colours and initiatives shows they are all-in with forced teaming.

The company’s Pride campaign web page features a number of stories and initiatives, all under a photo of a heavily made-up TiM, all under the ominous (and to me, frankly threatening) sub-heading “Recognize what was. Celebrate what is. Work for what should be.”

Pardon me if I distrust what their idea of “what should be.” With their slogan in favour of expecting us to accept people for who they are not, I’m not at all confident in the soundness or benevolence of their concept of “what should be.”

For some years our local grocery store has featured a Pride/Progress flag sticker with the caption “All are welcome.” Well why wouldn’t everyone feel welcome? Why do they have to advertise this fact? Apart from virtue signalling, I don’t see the point. Do trans people always, automatically assume they are unwelcome if such anodyne, placating assurances are not on prominent display in the establishments they frequent? Do they risk starving to death while searching for stores with the trans-parasitized pride colours in the window, sighing with relief that they and their money will not be turned away at the check-out?

I went to a local drugstore today, one that’s part of a nation-wide chain. The sales clerk, who was obviously female, wore an official company name tag that told me, helpfully, (Name) She/Her. Thanks, but I’d figured that out for myself. You didn’t need to tell me. More importantly you don’t get to tell me. So not really so much “helpful”, as “”pushy. She was in an official, company T-shirt inscribed with “Pride Vibes” in rainbow+ trans colours. She also wore a badge with the forced-teaming Pride/Progress colours that said “Ally.” So what? Who cares? Why am I being confronted with a bipedal political campaign while buying allergy meds and dental floss? What other political movement has Head Office promoted with such vigour? What about women’s rights? Remember them? Well kiss them goodbye. The company’s so-called Foundation for Women’s Health has the now inevitable, obviating qualification:

Supporting All Women

As part of our commitment, we recognize that the term “women’s health” is understood in a variety of ways. Our work goes beyond the sex and gender binary, welcoming the experiences of all women and gender-diverse people.

Some “commitment.” Some “understanding.” Your “variety” of “understanding” includes incorrect ones, wrong ones. But they are somehow “welcome”. And what does mean for women’s health? Nothing good. But look at the colourful t-shirts, name tags, and badges!

Some observations. (Not that any of these are new or earth-shatteringly original, but some of them are new to me. Or, they’re nagging suspicions that are now confirmed. Some are the reiteration of all-too-familiar truths. I’m figuring this stuff out as I go along, with the help of the readership here. Thank you all. Each bit of the puzzle adds a bit more to the whole, depressing picture. Preaching to the choir is not always pointless or redundant, as members of the choir do not spend their entire lives in church, but live and act in the wider world between sermons. Onwards!)

Trans activism, whether or not it ever was any kind of grassroots, bottom-up movement, is now a fully corporatized, top-down priority initiative, with power and money behind it. It is no threat to corporate practice and governance at all. Certainly not in the way that enacting women’s rights, or recognizing indigenous rights would effect how companies operated, and how much either of them would cost. If trans “rights” were in conflict with corporate interests, companies would be manning the ramparts to fight against them, not leading the charge to have them enacted and entrenched. Promoting and enforcing trans “rights” costs them nothing beyond the price of glossy publicity materials. Oh, and their credibility, and their reputations.

Campaigns like this de-politicize trans “rights” by pushing them safely beyond the reach of public scrutiny and debate’ while offering them support of powerful. influential allies who don’t have to answer to the electorate every few years. Not quite as big a prize as complete, unfettered access to the levers of government policy, but a coup nonetheless. There are fewer hearts and minds to win over, and direct input to corporate policy and practice once they are won. The corporate image might suffer (though this is something activists aren’t going to care about as long as they get what they want), and companies are better able to push through and back against opposition and plow on with the “Pride” agenda, which centers trans activism. If public boycotts ensue, that’s not the concern of the activists. For the companies, it might be a different matter, but resistance that hurts the bottom line takes more effort and organization than opposition through electoral politics, where there is always the potential for a party to take up a cause and run with it, if it thinks it will have the potential to win them votes. Consumer boycotts will always take more work and organization to identify and consolidate others who oppose the corporate pushing of the trans agenda.

As the T is in no way “oppressed” or “marginalized”, the point of these campaigns is not to “uplift” or “include” them, but to empower them. Not in the kind of “self-actualizing” way that women are supposedly “empowered” by sex work, but in the way that allows them to take what they want and to control other people’s lives. Real power, like that which corporations have. Pride events and campaigns are less about “celebrating” than they are about normalizing the impossible, and enforcing that normalization by marginalizing and discrediting any resistance to it.

I once likened the “transified” Pride flag to the banner of a hostile, occupying power. Well, that banner flies in more places than ever, with companies retooling their own identities with “Pride” colours. But this isn’t the celebration of a marginalized, downtrodden “community”, but the ownership (by a tiny, opportunistic, and manipulative minority) of the living space and mental imagination of a much larger, silenced and disempowered community.

The occupiers are, in reality, a very tiny force, but the presence of their colours everywhere and on everything gives the impression of much larger numbers, boldly pretending to wield a higher degree of public support than it actually has. Salute, and repeat after us: “We’re ALL on Big, Happy, Pride Family.” And while all those colours are supposed to be festive and fun, they hide a darker subtext; the iron fist concealed in the velvet, rainbow glove, or a tank painted in sparkles and glitter. They are a call for compliance and obedience printed on the packaging of the products and services we buy, and in the places of business that offer them to us. Our passive acceptance of this repetitive messaging, the ever present display of trans power and influence is intended to wear us down and dull our defiance. “Who am I in the face of all of these rainbow flags? I am isolated and alone, surrounded by the colours of command and control wherever I look. They are everywhere. I can’t hide. I can’t run away. I can’t escape them. They have won.”

All those signs, badges and stickers are not-so-subtle cues that criticism and pushback of trans ideology are not welcome. They are not an invitation to the poor, huddling trans folk on the verge of being genocided, they are a warning to potential critics to watch our mouths and keep our doubts to ourselves. They are an “invitation” to “Be Kind: OR ELSE.” To put it in their own terms, we are being told up front that the space we are about to enter is Officially Unsafe. You are entering occupied territory. This place is not yours, but OURS.

In debates about who is allowed into women’s facilities under the control of a captured company, a woman who might want to complain is being told exactly whose side the corporation is on. Her battle is to be considered lost before the first shot is fired. The T has won, this is their territory. All the flags and bunting are happy, cheerful gang colours, proclaiming victory, control and jurisdiction, all with corporate blessing. Trans activism has already lifted its leg and pissed on everything in sight. Be KInd and shut the fuck up, because nobody will hear you.



Not bitter

Jun 17th, 2024 5:52 pm | By

If you do a Google news search for Rosie Duffield Michael Cashman you find headline after headline after headline on Cashman’s delayed punishment. It’s all so familiar, isn’t it – the endless bullying bullying bullying, and the impunity of the bullies. Cashman got away with it for days; it’s only because a lot of people screamed themselves hoarse that Starmer finally realized the poisonous sneer wasn’t just going to fade out of the collective memory.

So here’s some happier news.

Trans-Identified Male Who Exposed His Breasts At The White House Now Accused Of Sexually Assaulting Another Transgender Person

Ok so not better exactly, but…a little different.

The trans activist who received criticism for exposing his augmented breasts at the White House during a Pride event last June has now been accused of sexual assault. The alleged victim is a biological female who identifies as a “man.”

Hahaha of course she is. I shouldn’t laugh, but then they shouldn’t be such fools, should they.

That butt is not a male butt. I don’t know what the magicians put in there but whatever it is they put in a lot of it.

Anyway. There’s Biden saying [at 20 seconds] “[some of] the bravest and most inspiring people I’ve ever known.” I’m not sure about the “some of” because it’s mumbled, but I include it because surely he can’t possibly have said the bravest and most inspiring. But even “some of” is bad enough. What is so inspiring about them? What, in this political climate, is so brave about them? Why burble about how brave and inspiring they are when there are so many people in the world doing actually valuable things? What is all this trans bravery and inspiration in aid of? Narcissism. Vanity projects. Attention-seeking. Kicking up a fuss about nothing. Stealing other people’s rights. Giving yourself enormous buttocks. Swanning around in a tight dress. I see neither courage nor inspiration.



A step

Jun 17th, 2024 10:02 am | By

The Beeb:

Labour peer suspended for ‘frit or lazy’ post

A Labour peer has been suspended from the parliamentary party after calling a candidate “frit or lazy” for withdrawing from local husting events over safety concerns. Lord Cashman had made the comment on social media after Rosie Duffield, who is standing to be reelected as Labour MP for Canterbury, said “constant trolling” made her attendance at hustings “impossible”.

The former EastEnders actor and Labour MEP apologised “unreservedly” for the post on Sunday.

Well he did and he didn’t. He did apologize and he did say it was unreservedly, but he also did fail to mention Rosie Duffield, so it wasn’t in fact a full or “unreserved” apology.

Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer told reporters the comment was “particularly inappropriate” and the whip was withdrawn “very swiftly”. This means Lord Cashman will sit as a crossbench peer in the House of Lords, without a party affiliation.

I wonder if Sir Keir told reporters why the comment was particularly inappropriate. I wonder if he’s said anything at all to defend or be in solidarity with Rosie Duffield. I wonder if he gets it at all yet.



Excellent example

Jun 17th, 2024 9:26 am | By

I tried to watch it but couldn’t; too annoying. But in case you want to, here it is:



He wants stacks of bodies

Jun 17th, 2024 5:20 am | By

Trump has this pattern of trying or hoping to get people executed. He did it to the Central Park 5, and now we learn he did it to staffers.

Former White House communications director Alyssa Farah Griffin has disclosed that Donald Trump repeatedly mused out loud about executing people at several meetings while she worked for him during his presidency.

The former communications director for the Trump administration told the outlet she had been at a meeting at which he “straight up said a staffer who leaked … should be executed”, referring to an anonymously sourced report that the former president had gone into a secure bunker at the White House at the height of the racial justice protests prompted by a Minneapolis police officer’s murder of George Floyd.

Ah yes, the death penalty for denting the vanity of the dictator. Highly appropriate and sane.

During the final three months of Trump’s first term

Let me stop you right there. What’s this “first term” shit? He’s only had the one.

During the final three months of Trump’s first term, the US executed 13 federal prisoners by lethal injection – a significant acceleration in the use of the death penalty by the federal government.

Prior to that, only three people had been executed since 1963. But under the Trump administration, the federal government allowed any method of execution that was legal in the state where the death penalty was being carried out.

So he’s had the joy of killing 13 people. We know he was and is profoundly gratified by this treat.



After

Jun 17th, 2024 3:52 am | By

Even the headline gets it wrong.

Labour peer says sorry for calling Rosie Duffield too ‘frit or lazy’ to go to hustings

No, he doesn’t, you fucking fools. That’s exactly what he didn’t do. He’s such a rude abusive man that he conspicuously failed i.e. refused to do that. He did the “sorry you’re so offended” thing instead. He said “I apologize” but didn’t say for what.

The lede is accurate. (Editors write the headlines. I wish they would manage to make them accurate.)

Labour peer has apologised after accusing the party’s Canterbury candidate, Rosie Duffield, of being too “frit or lazy” to attend hustings.

Exactly: after rather than for. It should have been for.

The row comes on the eight-year anniversary of Jo Cox’s murder. The Batley and Spen Labour MP was stabbed and shot by a far-right extremist in Birstall, West Yorkshire on 16 June 2016.

Cashman didn’t mention that either.



Council apologises

Jun 16th, 2024 6:14 pm | By

Good news:

The Hobart City Council’s discrimination towards me has finally been resolved. The depth of the lying, scheming, gaslighting, privacy breaches, and frustration of processes has been astounding.

The culture that facilitated this appalling conduct has radiated from the top. I’m pleased that the extent of the discrimination has finally been admitted and owned. I’m optimistic that there will be change; there has to be as what happened was illegal and immoral.

You can have all the diversity plans, flags, and photo opportunities you like, but they’re worthless showboating if words and action don’t align. Discrimination is not ‘welcoming’ or ‘inclusive’.

I tried to book a public venue, and I should have been able to hold my event. It was shameful for the Council to censor political beliefs, especially when these beliefs are fair, fact-based, and held by millions of Australians. It’s wrong and anti-democratic.

And anti-women.



Guest post: Real life is richer without the gender horseshit

Jun 16th, 2024 4:18 pm | By

Originally a comment by Artymorty on Next phase.

The “whatever genitals Alex was born with is not common knowledge” part conflates identities with biological sexes, and that’s the most dangerous part.

It’s one thing for a young person to imagine in her own mind a suite of gender-role personas, like characters in a story, and then to declare which of these imaginary gender-role characters she has cast herself to play. So far, so foolish.

But to then cross over into declaring that these different characters have different biological sex characteristics… that’s where the irreversible harm comes in. Harm to herself, because she’s likely to develop psychological distress over the mismatch between her imaginary character’s body and her real-life body, and harm to everyone else, by promoting the erasure of women’s rights by undefining the words man, woman, male, and female.

Human experiences are inevitably richer than the categories we carve out for them.

I want to say to that writer, it’s you who’s impoverishing the human experience by turning the biological sexes into cardboard characters. Real life is a lot richer without all the hokey gender horseshit. As Julie Bindel said twenty years ago, “Think about a world inhabited just by transsexuals. It would look like the set of Grease.” Even the names gender roleplayers choose for themselves have a whiff of soap opera cheese to them: it’s a world of lissome, wispy Chloés and rugged, raspy Chases.

If Gender: Phase Two involves discovering that none of the characters you’ve created in your mind are three-dimensional enough to capture your true complexity, then Gender: Phase Three will be discovering that the whole exercise was a colossal waste of time and energy. If you’re lucky, you get to Phase Three with most of your body intact. But many won’t. And publications like Nature share the blame for that.



They are concerned for her

Jun 16th, 2024 3:43 pm | By

Wouldn’t you think if you’re the police looking for a missing person you’d want to put out the most accurate information possible in order to…you know…find the missing person?

Bromley Metropolitan Police Service thinks not.

People mocked, and also pointed out that searching for a missing person does depend on accurate description. Bromley Police got in a huff. No progress in finding missing person was recorded.

They meant perpetrating, not perpetuating, but anyway – why aren’t they doing their damn job competently instead of bullying the public for recognizing a man when they see one?


Those who have encouraged them

Jun 16th, 2024 12:38 pm | By

Victoria Smith on Starmer’s refusal to defend Rosie Duffield:

This week Duffield announced that she would not be attending local hustings due to threats of violence. To anyone who has witnessed the escalating abuse she has received for defending sex-based rights, this was not surprising. Then again, nor was it surprising to fellow MPs such as Jess Phillips, who has also faced threats to her own and her family’s safety, simply for doing her job.

Many of those who threaten MPs are paranoid, mentally unwell, in thrall to conspiracy theories, and/or egged on by extremist groups. They must be held responsible for their actions, but we also cannot ignore those who have encouraged them.

The truth is that in Duffield’s situation, some of this encouragement has come from Labour activists themselves, and in some cases sitting MPs. I am sure these people would claim that they would never advocate violence. I believe them. However, I would ask them this: if you are going to sign a pledge that denounces feminist organisations who believe sex matters as “hate groups”, or permit mob harassment of feminists at your conference, or accuse female MPs speaking of male violence of making “transphobic, dog-whistle speeches”, what do you expect to happen? To be clear, the events I refer to are not recent, nor are they specific to Rosie Duffield. This has been going on for years.

A lot of years. We’ve become accustomed to seeing former friends talk about us as if we were Nazis bent on genocide.

To be fair to Keir Starmer, he has not been involved in the worst of it (he did not sign the infamous pledge). However, if you are going to link the death of a child to Rosie Duffield saying “only women have a cervix”, what do you think that signals to someone who has been radicalised into thinking feminists want trans children dead? One response to Jess Phillips’ tweet claimed that since Duffield “spreads hate about trans people daily” she has no right to “play the victim”. Plenty of Labour activists have endorsed this view and no one in authority has told them to stop.

People who threaten or commit violence often delude themselves that it is in self-defence. Once someone has reached this state, it is hard to convince them otherwise. Labour’s “both sides” approach to the trans debate has told some deeply unhappy people that feminist MPs really are out to get them. Why should anyone be surprised if some of them believe it?

Never mind. Starmer has football to watch.



Women are expendable

Jun 16th, 2024 12:05 pm | By

Keir Starmer has time to blather about football but not time to say a word for Rosie Duffield.

We will be with you; England is behind you. That pesky female colleague? Not so much.

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1802412249627132088
Pesky women who speak up? Not so much.


Next phase

Jun 16th, 2024 9:46 am | By

Your brain on gender ideology:

“Are you transgender?” Participating in a study for their public-health class, neither Alex nor Luna knew how to answer. Alex uses they/them pronouns and identifies as agender. They are also among a growing number of young people who have been raised in a gender-neutral manner: their parents did not refer to them as a boy or a girl until they were old enough to choose for themselves. Whatever genitals Alex was born with is not common knowledge. If you are agender and were never assigned a gender, does that make you transgender?

If you were raised by deranged parents, does that make you deranged or just tragically confused?

As for Luna, today she identifies as a woman, which aligns with the gender she was assigned at birth. But this is a recent development: Luna identified as a boy for as long as she can remember and, after coming out as trans, lived openly as one throughout her childhood and adolescence. As a woman who has detransitioned, she often feels that she has more in common with transgender women than with cisgender ones, whose gender identity corresponds to the gender they were assigned at birth. Although Luna doesn’t call herself transgender, she fears that answering ‘no’ to the study’s question means that her gender trajectory and experiences will be erased.

So Luna is so tragically under-educated that she thinks participating in a study is the same as an autobiography.

The difficulties Alex and Luna experienced might seem unusual. But many individuals find themselves unmoored from binary terms such as male and female, or cis and trans

Ah here we go. Phase 2. Trans is no longer the Hot New Thing that it’s treason and heresy to ignore. Trans is now your parents’ boring old politics and the new thing is to see “cis and trans” as evil binaries. Perfect.

These identities are not trivial. How people identify shapes not only their experiences of marginalization, but also their bodies.

For sure. If you identify as a rock then that shapes your body – you become a turnip.

Human experiences are inevitably richer than the categories we carve out for them. But finding the right concepts and language to describe their diversity is an essential part of the scientific endeavour. It helps researchers to capture the experiences of participants more accurately, enhances analytical clarity and contributes to people feeling included and respected. 

That’s science!



Sorry about that thing with wotsername

Jun 16th, 2024 7:45 am | By

The special subtle luxury notpology in which the apology is there but the recipient is carefully not named.

Cashman claims to be apologizing unreservedly yet he carefully does not name Rosie Duffield. I call that reservedly. Very, absurdly, childishly reservedly.

The “readers added context” note tell us:

Michael Cashman CBE fails to provide a lot of important context. MP he mocked is Rosie Duffield. He accused Duffield of being ‘frit or lazy’ for safety fears after death threats. He did so on anniversary of murder of Jo Cox MP. Research shows abuse of women MPs is real concern.

I didn’t know “unreservedly” meant “minus a lot of important context.”

It’s so depressing, all this passionate enthusiastic noisy hatred of women. I’m so tired of it.



Guest post: What you thought when you were a child

Jun 15th, 2024 4:35 pm | By

Originally a comment by Arcadia on Erring on the side of ruining kids’ lives.

I am not sure why this is apparently so difficult to understand. Everybody (I think) can come up with a description of a gender non conforming child in their mind. The likely options are that the kid will grow up to be gay, and keep not conforming; straight and non conforming; straight and more conforming (because for some kids it is a stage they go through); or lately, “trans”. Out of those four likely options, three will want their bodies intact and fully functional, and some of the fourth category will too. But all those kids are likely to be treated as the subset of category four that want blockers, cross sex hormones, and surgeries. All of those things make life harder, period, but especially if you’re trying to get on with life in any of the other categories.

It’s absolutely shocking that the conclusions that child comes to depends on what teaching/media/culture/content the child is exposed to (which these days leans heavily towards trans conclusions), which professionals the child is exposed to (which here, with these laws, are having their hands tied) and their friends and family, which are also struggling in the current culture.

But simply, whether or not your body works as nature intended when you grow up really shouldn’t hinge on what you thought when you were a child. Period.



UN v women

Jun 15th, 2024 4:30 pm | By

UN Women tells us how much it hates women again.

Recent decades have marked major advances for the human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, and queer (LGBTIQ+) people in many places, including the legalization of same-sex relations, legal recognition of gender identity on the basis of self-identification, better access to essential healthcare, restrictions on interventions on intersex minors, and increased protections against discrimination and hate crimes. 

Shut up. Those are different things. They can’t all be dropped into a food processor and blended. Lesbian, gay and bisexual are not like transgender or intersex, and “queer” doesn’t mean anything. Legal recognition of gender identity on the basis of self-identification is not an advance, it’s a nightmare and a mortal injury to women’s rights. Trying to change sex is not “essential healthcare.” Minors should not be trying to change sex. It’s not “discrimination” in the pejorative sense to know and say that men are not women. It’s not a hate crime to know and say that men are not women and don’t belong in women’s sports or rape crisis centers.

State and non-state actors in many countries are attempting to roll back hard-won progress and further entrench stigma, endangering the rights and lives of LGBTIQ+ people.

Don’t lump them together and don’t pretend that defending women’s rights endangers the rights and lives of lesbians and gay men.

These movements use hateful propaganda and disinformation to target and attempt to delegitimize people with diverse sexual orientations, gender identities, gender expressions, and sex characteristics. 

Stop lying. Feminist women defending women’s rights are not “using hateful propaganda and disinformation.” The UN should stop saying that.

Media and political campaigns have positioned the rights of LGBTIQ+ people as negotiable and debatable. Some try to frame the human rights of transgender people as being at odds with women’s rights, even asserting that trans women do not face gender-based discrimination or that they pose a threat to the rights, spaces, and safety of cisgender women. 

The demands of men who claim to be women are at odds with women’s rights. See Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre for more. Trans women are men, so they no doubt do face discrimination for turning their backs on dudeness, but that doesn’t mean they face the kind of sexism, let alone misogyny, that women do. They do, of course, pose a huge threat to the rights, spaces, and safety of women.

Falsely portraying the rights of LGBTIQ+ people, and particularly of trans people, as competing with women’s rights only widens divisions in the broader gender equality movement.

Not “particularly trans people”; entirely men who claim to be trans. We don’t portray the rights of lesbians and gay men as competing with our rights; don’t be schewpid. We say that some of the rights that some trans women demand compete with our rights. We say that because it’s true. If men can be in all our spaces then we lose the right to have some spaces away from men. If men can take our prizes and awards and honors then we lose them. That’s why we’re resisting.



UN Quislings

Jun 15th, 2024 1:48 pm | By

UN Women. Again.

https://twitter.com/SexMattersOrg/status/1801556209872298191

UN Women jumps up and down on women wearing its heaviest hobnailed boots.



Not quite le mot juste

Jun 15th, 2024 12:02 pm | By

Uh huh.

Trump is “preparing” by doing nothing at all apart from his usual chaotic stream of blather. He doesn’t know how to prepare; he couldn’t prepare if he tried. All he has, always, is his foul mouth and the foul mind that fuels it. He has an infinite supply of invective and abuse. That’s what he’ll bring to the “debate” – which of course won’t be a debate at all.