A few clarifications

As the bathroom debate heats up, the level of discourse surrounding it sinks lower and lower. People are either fighting to save trans lives or they’re hateful bigots who don’t want to allow them to pee. All nuance is lost, nobody cares what anybody’s actual position is or where they’re coming from, they just want to slam them immediately. This is not getting us anywhere. Just the other day I read on a lesbian’s blog that radical feminists are the same as the right wing and that we’re all bigots who are preventing people from using washrooms safely. For fuck’s sake!

I would like to clarify a few things:

  • I am a radical feminist, and I want everyone to have a safe place to pee. I am fully on board with single-stall unisex washrooms so that everyone can access them without worrying about their gender.
  • I do NOT want trans people “exterminated” or to die of suicide. I want them to lead happy, healthy lives.
  • I do not hate or fear trans people. I’ve interacted with several trans people before in real life and I treat them with the same respect as I’d treat anyone else. I merely disagree with the popular trans dogma that is being enforced these days by certain activists. Disagreement is not hatred.
  • Conversations about bathroom bills should be nuanced discussions that are grounded in reality. There is such a thing as autogynephilia, there is such a thing as men who dress as women and abuse actual women, and these need to be a part of the discussion or else it’s not an honest discussion.
  • Radical feminists have very little in common with conservatives. Our views only overlap in a couple of small places and for the most part we are the opposite. You can also draw parallels between the views of liberal feminists and MRAs. (Both believe in the decriminalization of pimps and johns, for example). That doesn’t mean that we go around saying liberal feminists are the same as MRAs because they’re also very different in many ways. (Okay, I’m sure that a few people on the Internet are saying that libfems are the exact same as MRAs. You can find someone saying anything on the Internet if you look for it. But I’m not saying that because I believe in nuanced, honest discussion.) Here is a chart showing the differences between radical feminists and conservatives, in case you’re not sure about this:

Rad vs. Con

Now, I know I make fun of certain trans people on this blog. I make fun of people who are making absolutely ridiculous claims, and I make fun of men who claim to be lesbians or women of colour (which are also ridiculous claims that are offensive toward lesbians and women of colour). Maybe I shouldn’t do this, who knows, but I do it because women need to know what these men are saying and because we have a right to laugh at our oppressors, especially when they’re being particularly ridiculous. I never make fun of people who are trying to share their experiences of dysphoria in honest ways. I really appreciate when people with dysphoria add intelligent insight into the discussion. The detransitioners and butch lesbians I follow on WordPress are really fantastic people who I’m happy to know.

You could compare this whole thing to an atheist making fun of religious people on a blog. I don’t have much interest in making fun of religious people, but they make ridiculous claims too. Sometimes they try to take away women’s rights due to claims that an invisible, magical man in the sky wants it that way. This is completely insane and offensive, just like it’s insane and offensive to take away women’s rights just because certain men have sparkly, magical feelings inside. However, just because I mock someone’s nonsensical claims of magical gods or magical genderfeelz, doesn’t mean I want that person dead, or their civil rights taken away. People with stupid beliefs of all sorts have the right to safely access education, housing, health care and employment and should not be discriminated against for their stupid beliefs.

We also have the right to free speech, which is why I can say what I want to, and since I have published my opinions on a blog, other people can mock me right back. There are currently several threads on Reddit where they are making fun of me, usually while misrepresenting my actual position, and where they call me a stupid idiot who is doing feminism wrong and is oppressing people by voicing my belief that human biology exists. They are completely welcome to talk this way if they want and they can have lots of fun with it. However, I would expect that both them and I should be able to keep all our civil rights after we have trashed each other on the Internet—I don’t want anyone’s rights taken way, no matter their beliefs.

Advertisements

73 thoughts on “A few clarifications

  1. Yep my issue is with the “gender identity” stufff, and how this is supposed to override all common sense.

    “Woman” now means “anyone who claims that they are female” and this is the problem. Now anyone who does not accept this – who refuses to admit admitted transvestite fetishists into the woman’s shower at the Y – is now labelled a bigot for refusing to accept unfalsifiable claims. And then the gall to compare sex segregated change rooms etc to race segregation in the US South is just ?????

    This video sums up the gender identity laws perfectly. Oh, the horrible anti-LGBT laws that are being passed are a reaction to the left pushing the gender identity stuff. The right wingers get everyone talking about bathrooms and then slip in a bunch of awful discriminatory laws. Gender identity is too vague. It is a step too far. It can be easily abused by fetishists and predators. The old way worked fine – if you pass, no one will care. If you don’t pass and still have your genitals, go to the facility that matches your sex. It isn’t the job of society to validate your belief that your penis is female. And to force that on women, comparing yourself to a victim of apartheid, is just plain narcissistic and disgusting.

    Liked by 5 people

    • That guy is anti feminist, anti gay and lesbian rights and conflates sex with gender. People like him are more than happy to use the excesses of trans politics, i.e; gender identity protections that allow men to access female sex segregated spaces on the basis of their personal gender beliefs, to attack or take away civil rights for gay and lesbian and trans people. Like what has just happened in NC and Houston. Uncritically sharing right wing anti trans propaganda doesn’t help dissuade anyone that radical feminists aren’t aligned with the right wing.

      Like

      • Sadly, the only people willing to criticise the foolish “gender identity” bills are right wingers.

        However, I am not going to ignore a good argument just because the messenger is right wing and I am left wing. I gave up identity politics when I quit hanging out with SJWs. SJWs will accept any and all bad logic provided the messenger ticks all of the right boxes regarding race, religion, transness etc.

        Just because someone is a fellow leftie does *not* make them right on all things. Furthermore, just because someone is a rightie, does not make them wrong on all things.

        The message of this particular video is spot on. That’s why I posted it. And I might add that it is the SJWs themselves who conflate sex with gender – stating that gender identity can make the penis female. That gender identity gives them the right to demand PIV sex from lesbians. That gender identity equals a right to stroke it in the woman’s shower.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Oops I mean “sadly, the only people willing to criticise this insanity are radfems and rightwingers”

          And I would like to add that I have debated fellow lefties anonymously – people that I used to debate alongside in the past. And they , not knowing who I am, dismiss my logic by accusing me of being a religious, right-wing bigot.

          I reject identity politics wholeheartedly. This is what got us into this mess. Blind allegiance to a group instead of engaging in critical thought.

          I put critical thought ahead of group identity.

          Always question.

          Liked by 4 people

        • Which is the SJW argument. That gender identity = physical sex. That is why they claim that penises are female.

          And it is gender roles, specifically, stereotypes, that the right wingers and the SJWs claim are innate. That girls like dolls and boys like trucks.

          Liked by 4 people

        • I like the vid. It demonstrates how to handle a pervert in the ladies’ room. I’ve been wondering how this is going to work in parts of the country where everyone, including your 90-year old grandmother, is packing heat.

          Unfortunately, even some right wingers, who you’d think you could count on to, at least, give the appearance of opposing sexual depravity – those who are under the spell of Donald Trump, anyway- are saying that this is not a big deal. Some men on Fox news, including Chris Wallace, just said this a couple of days ago and they are claiming that the FBI has no stats to show that these crimes are occurring. Of course, they are occurring and feminists have been documenting them since, at least, 2011 right here at WordPress. Also, I’m sure I’m not the only one who has had the experience of being followed by men into locker rooms or dressing rooms. I have been sexually assaulted and had a man try to keep me from leaving a dressing room – little was done about it, but now with these laws, if anyone even tries to help you or if you go for help, you could be the one on the wrong side of the law.

          Radical feminists fight for women’s rights – not anyone else’s and not for anything else. I don’t stand for gay men or black men and I don’t care one iota who that offends. I’m sure it does offend plenty of people on the left, but those people aren’t feminists – they’re liberals. But, I assure you, I’m equally offensive to the people on the right for daring to believe that women and girls are human beings deserving of the rights of human beings, and not to be treated as things or as livestock.

          Liked by 1 person

      • And if I had not left behind identity politics, I would still be where I was over a year ago – thinking that radfems were the devil. But I chose to think for myself and study the arguments. I now defend radefems wherever I go. Most people assume that radfems and SJWfems are the same. They blame radfems for *everything*.

        And yes, the NC bill is awful as the SJWs are responsible for this right-wing backlash. They keep pushing “gender identity” and the real bigots take it as an opportunity to harm the LGB.

        This NC bill is not about bathrooms. It is about discrimination against LGB. The bathrooms are a smokescreen, all because the idiot SJWs threw common sense in the garbage. This kind of thing is red meat to the bigots. The LGB will suffer because SJWs keep trying to force this idiocy on everyone.

        Liked by 2 people

      • The guy in this video? He didn’t say gender was innate. He made the distinction between gender and biological sex. He got all the facts right. If you don’t like him I can understand that. But most of that video was really good. The woman in the bathroom that just got out of the shower giving him stink guy? And then having a gun? I liked that.

        OK we need somebody left wing to steal all his good how it was dramatized ideas and make a new video. 😊

        He explained the inane genderfluid concept: that a person’s supposed sex can change from day to day. According to the trans dipshit ideology. And he told very clearly that the majority of transwomen keep their penises. And keep them because if they have the surgery then they won’t have sexual function at all. I’m not sure if that’s always true but it’s certainly a strong possibility. And people need to know that. Because that’s a strong motive for them not having genital surgery.

        We need to get people to think “man with a penis” when they hear the phrase ‘gender identity laws’. That will strengthen resistance to these horrible laws.

        And when those laws are got rid of gay rights will go back to being just about gay people.

        Liked by 1 person

        • I’m not clear on the post-surgery sexual function capacity. I’ve read stuff suggesting it can be quite high, but there is I believe a high complication rate.

          More importantly, though, it’s becoming more widely known that this is not normal plastic surgery, this business of creating and maintaining a wound. It has to be treated with antibiotics to prevent infection, and dilated daily to prevent healing. It doesn’t smell like a vagina. It can smell quite bad, apparently. There can be bowel complications. It can just fall out.

          The more this is pointed out the more obvious it becomes to people that it’s crazy surgery to have if you want to be sexually attractive. Better to keep your dick and aim for a somewhat different niche market.

          Liked by 3 people

        • Well, there must be sebaceous glands in there, right? Sebaceous glands are supposed to be external, what happens when you stick them inside? I mean, we’re talking some serious dick cheese here.

          I hadn’t heard about the mats of hair. What are these doctors doing, sticking scrotal tissue in there?

          Of course it can get contaminated with fecal matter. It can get contaminated with anything it’s exposed to, just like any uncovered wound. Most idiotic surgical idea ever.

          Liked by 2 people

        • Yuppers. When you think about it, any bits they use for it are going to be disgusting. Scrotal skin? Colon tissue? Hello, those are fine in the roles they developed for. They are not fine as purported substitutes for the self-cleaning, acidic, muscular vagina. Says a lot about the men demanding this surgery, and the (largely male) doctors doing it, that they even think this is a good idea. Shows they know zip about female anatomy.

          Liked by 3 people

        • Miep & depaysement, they use scrotal tissue. Yes 😖. In this article
          http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2007/may/23/healthandwellbeing.health
          about a gay man who is pressurized into getting a sex change by his bisexual boyfriend, he got hairballs in there. Why? They’re supposed to do electrolysis and remove all the hair from scrotal tissue before they do the surgery. His surgeon didn’t do that. So it’s not just as you said “most idiotic surgical idea ever” it’s also sometimes done half assed.

          “Niche market”, exactly. The hormones and boobs growing process existed in the 70s as well. That’s what a tranny kind of was. Someone with breasts and a penis. Part of that y’know weird subculture 🙄. Nobody should be having this surgery and consequently no natal males should be using the women’s bathroom.

          Liked by 3 people

      • The video is 100% accurate. We should stand with people when they are right (regardless of political affiliation) and depart from them when they are wrong. Also, there is zero conflation of gender and sex. The guy got it right! I do not care about labels; I care about accuracy. The video is accurate.

        Like

        • +1 lovethrucourage

          I am tired of identity politics. IP is what got us in this mess. Liberals all over are supporting this trans nonsense because ‘that’s what good liberals do’. Republicans support anti-abortion bills without thought because ‘that’s what good republicans do’. Identity politics are what is behind the polarization that we see the unthinking knee-jerk reactions to things.

          Bring critical thinking back. I don’t care who is behind it. Go with what is accurate. Listen to the *message* not the messenger. A FACT isn’t less true because the messenger is the wrong sex, or colour, or political affiliation.

          Liked by 1 person

  2. I apologize for the length of this quote. It is a comment by a male, at a VERY conservative blog. I thought the community here would appreciate it.

    xxx
    “This activist cultural move [for transexual “rights”] is just leaving me more and more exasperated.

    “And here’s why: male sexuality exists. It’s on a spectrum. Some people have better impulse control. Some people have much, much worse impulse control. Some people have weaker urges. Some people have much, much stronger urges. Some people have entirely tedious and decent things that turn them on. Other people, unfortunately, have much less respectable things that turn them on.

    “What I’m about to say is pretty gross, but it probably has to be said – if you are a woman, and you have an open house with random middle class people coming and going through your house, and you leave a hamper of dirty laundry in your publicly available bathroom, you can expect a certain amount of the men who come through your house to rummage through your undergarments and to use that to titillate themselves. No amount of scolding and public stigmatizing is going to undo that fact. It will not be a function of ignorance and lack of education. The best solution, it should go without saying, is to not leave your stuff somewhere accessible like that.

    “If you are willing to poke around the darker (but still trivially accessible) corners of the internet, you will discover that there are massive amounts of hidden camera videos of women changing in dressing rooms, and women changing in locker rooms, and women using toilets, from all over the world. This stuff isn’t even all that hard to find. There is a smaller but corresponding amount of stuff of men – but it’s almost exclusively made for gay men. Candid upskirt and downblouse images have all sorts of popular forums dedicated to them.

    “Want to procure undergarments that have been worn by women? There’s plenty of markets for that too.

    “We already have strong social stigmas against all this stuff. Most of it is obviously hugely violating. The people who take these films are reckless and foolhardy in the extreme (in addition to behaving reprehensibly). A lot of this stuff is gross and unsanitary. The people partaking are not just low class idiots who’ve never read a book.

    “I keep seeing these comments from activists, though, that are like, “No men are ever going to claim that their true identities are as women so that they can go into a locker room and see all the women they know in normal life nude or try to pilfer someone’s used underwear.” And “No men are going to claim to have their true nature as women so that they can be going into women’s restrooms and pleasure themselves in a stall or try to film people.”

    “Really? Have you ever been on the internet, like, ever? This kind of stuff isn’t that hard to find if you go looking for it. Male sexuality is an incredibly powerful force, vital for the propagation of the species, but it’s a huge amount of cultural work to steer it away from totally stupid, depraved, self-defeating directions for a lot of people, especially for when men are young and at their most addled-headed.

    “I keep thinking that the people behind this activism must either be women, or men with incredibly good impulse control, no interesting fetishes, and extremely low libidos. As someone who does not fall in to any of those camps, I am much happier having a bunch of physical social structures in place to help keep people with worse impulse control on the straight and narrow.”
    xxx

    Not all women, of course, support this nonsense! I’m still waiting for common sense to kick in here.

    Liked by 5 people

      • It is suggestive of it, but may I wryly observe that men can’t help raping, otherwise they’d stop.

        It’s interesting, he knows and admits that a certain subset of men cannot help themselves, but he puts it to “male sexuality” rather than that men have social licence to have such urges and often to display them (albeit surreptitiously, but that of itself is part of the titillation) all of which tend to involve gross invasion of the privacy and boundaries of women. I can’t help thinking of my father, back when I used to see him at all, and what he would do would be standing there in my home visiting and he’d pull open a drawer and have a look, or maybe be in the lounge and open up a cupboard. Right in front of me, just like he had a complete right to do so. I have no idea whether he’d do that another place or to another person, but it creeped me out, however subtle the behaviour was. It was invasive, whether he was consciously aware of it or not. I think he was on one level knowing though, I don’t think he could miss I’d noticed and was uncomfortable. One thing he’s dead right on is that it’s a spectrum, some men feel more licence than others. Think they can get away with more, with escalating over time, and in fact they often do. Just couldn’t help themselves.

        Paraphilias are almost solely located in men. Men don’t normally like admitting to it and the dark nature of male perversions except to say they can’t help themselves really, it’s just a attraction they have, don’t judge them for it. In the context of what that person is talking about they at least admit women should be protected against what men can do to men. That’s something at least, working against the great wall of denial of what men can do to women.

        Liked by 5 people

        • Oh and P.S. really, we shouldn’t have to apologise for stating facts, for having concerns. It’s a shame that the OP has to be written at all, that anyone has to write screeds to explain an eminently reasonable concern and that they aren’t bigots for saying so.

          Liked by 4 people

        • If we could trust all men not to misbehave what a bright world this would be. This guy is just being realistic I think. At least he thinks we deserve protection!

          Liked by 4 people

        • Yeah, but the problem is that if you argue that (some) men are hopelessly rapey, you condemn female humans to a world of terrorism and lay the burden on us to protect ourselves from these monsters. From this argument stems the position that some women take, that men are hopeless and the only answer is to arrange to have fewer men. This position of course completely freaks men out, but there are only three possible positions to take here: 1. Men are inherently dangerous to a statistically significant degree, and women are people and have the right to take whatever measures necessary to protect themselves and their children; 2. Male violence is a social construction and men can change, but they have to get behind seeing why this is necessary, and meanwhile the protections referred to in #2 apply; and 3. Women aren’t people, only men are people, so it’s natural and acceptable for men to use women however they wish, and it doesn’t matter where this desire to transgress comes from.

          Liked by 5 people

      • He’s not, at least in this piece, making that argument. His idea that male sexuality is this thing that overwhelms them blah blah blah is consistent with that argument yes.

        But I really like how he’s pointing out that anyone who bothers to look can see that there’s all this fetishistic, voyeurist, boundary violating based weird sexual activity. I wonder how much the crappy in accurate coverage of the North Carolina Bill is influenced by the fact that the reporters just don’t want to have to talk, especially on camera, about that kind of thing.

        I like most of this piece. Not that I’d want to go out to lunch with this guy.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Well I don’t want to have lunch with him either, though I’d rather lunch with him than with some guy who claims that all sexual violence is my fault somehow because I dress wrong. At least he puts the blame where it belongs, on men.

          Ladies, there is such a thing as imperfect human behavior. (Not confined to males by the way, but right now we’re talking about men.) Society is or should be set up to discourage imperfect (or criminal) behavior, and to punish it afterwards when possible. In my opinion. It should not be set up to offer unreasonably easy opportunity for bad behavior on the assumption that everyone is or should be better than that. Yes yes, everyone should behave well all the time, men should not be sexual perverts or worse, and society should socialize children so that these problems never exist in the first place. Be sure to call me up when all this comes about.

          In the meantime, as a gesture to the fact that there are perverts in the world, almost all of whom are male, and most of whom have no desire whatever to improve their behavior, could we keep men out of women’s private spaces? Yes all men because you can’t tell the goodies from the baddies at first glance. An injustice to them perhaps, but we’ve had lots of injustice, let them have some for a change.

          Liked by 4 people

        • I only disagree with this on one point, and that even if men all suddenly became well-behaved tomorrow, I *still* don’t want them in female-only spaces. The dynamic is different without men there, and there is no reason to assume that this is only because some men behave badly. They can have male-only spaces too, that’s fine, they may need that. But it shouldn’t be predicated on bad behavior.

          Liked by 3 people

    • I am now seeing SJW libfem men argue that women have no right to question the presence of transvestite fetishists in the woman’s change room. That we are bigots for even questioning the presence of someone like Carlotta Sklodowska watching us undress.

      This is how far SJW identity politics has taken us. They have abandoned women.

      Liked by 6 people

      • I just want to mention that on the “scale” meaning psychiatric test, for diagnosing Autogynephilia it actually includes “going to the women’s bathroom or lockeroom in public” as one of the things that the scale asks if a subject finds “sexually arousing”. Using the women’s bathroom or lockeroom is a known fetishistic turn on for some men. Just saying. 😊

        You can find that here.
        https://autogynephiliatruth.wordpress.com/2015/05/25/new-scale-for-diagnosing-autogynephilia-is-very-telling/
        (I copied the chart and highlighted it. But there’s no way to make a picture show up in WordPress comments unless it’s on the web as a JPG! Ugh.)

        Liked by 2 people

        • Petunia: Yeah, I started reading that autogynephilia site a few days ago. Interesting stuff. I think that I even pasted it here on another article.

          I am now more sure than ever that the transexuals with BDD are the rarity, and that it is the fetishists who are leading the charge for the ‘right’ to use women’s facilities. Cotton ceiling, etc.

          Liked by 2 people

        • There is at least one WP plugin available that enables image upload in comments, but I’ve never used one.

          What I do wish WP would do would be to make it possible to upload images to one’s own blog without putting them in posts and still be able to link to them. I’ve never been able to get that to work.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Jessica, yes! You pasted a link to this very article. The other day on purplesage and I went looked at it. Thank you so much.

          Then I read another post on that site, an interview with Michael Bailey about Jenner when he came out as trans. It is really interesting. Bailey, who was brutally harassed by three super horrible trans women, however strikes me as a somewhat unrealistic person. An unrealistic psychology professor. but fascinating and pleasant to hear someone talking about Jenner as an autogynephile in a completely matter-of-fact way.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Miep, I know with the YouTube videos, if it’s on YouTube you get the link from there you pasted into comments and it shows up in the comment. Hunky-dory. The impression I have is if say you had a Flickr account you could do the same thing. post a photo there, and get the URL. But I have not tried this. Because I don’t have a petuniacat Flickr. and all my petuniacat stuff is separate from my real me stuff for security reasons.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Right. But while it’s possible to upload images to WordPress, I have not found it possible to share them as links unless they are actually part of a post, though it looks like you ought to be able to.

          Liked by 1 person

    • Women support this stuff because they have been groomed to. Social grooming is a really strong force and it’s not easy to resist.

      Equally, men are groomed to believe it’s edgy and admirable to be sexually transgressive.

      I don’t know how to make essentialist arguments in the face of all this extremely active cultural enforcement. If men are naturally transgressive, why is it necessary to encourage it so much? Why is it necessary for them to lie so much? This indicates an understanding that it’s wrong.

      Also, why is it necessary to gay-bash so much? An obvious solution to an overabundance of male sex drive would be to enthusiastically encourage homosexuality among men.

      I would be more impressed by essentialist arguments if they didn’t require so much propping up.

      Liked by 4 people

  3. Oy. I’ve found that the internet is less a place for good-natured debate, discussion and learning and more “Thunderdome: Battle Ground for the Disaffected Masses.”

    I rarely find anyone who listens, more often it’s some forms of mental masturbation in which the writer is only concerned with their own satisfaction. I made a critical comment on a video making fun of the bathroom debate and was met with overwhelming vitriol. One commenter seemed to listen. I guess it’s a start.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. I tend to frame this in two different ways. One is that trans activists have a serious troll problem, which could be said to include all the sex offender cross dressers, but also all the Internet guys who harass women.

    The other is that any real feminism must insist that women’s boundaries are inviolate and that we do not owe anybody any explanation why we need women’s private spaces, and that trying to justify why, may be coming from a weak position. We need them because we say so, and our having access to women-only spaces does not infringe on anybody else’s rights, men are welcome to start their own spaces, but not take over ours.

    It all went wrong with the invention of SRS. This created a wedge and it’s been broadening ever since. I don’t know how to sort that out with men who have had SRS and say they are happier that way, but I really can’t see a way around insisting that men not get to be legally redefined as female, no matter what they have done to them. The problems gender defiant people have can be seen as all coming from the same place, and we can all agree that these enforcers of gender must be fought, but insisting that noncompliant men are actually women is fighting FOR the enforcers. I would argue for a legal status of third gender, except *that* enforces gender too.

    Eventually there will be enough data on people who have experienced medical feminizing or masculinizing as to how effective this is as a treatment option, but even then it will suffer terribly from subjectivity and the general cultural context.

    All this does help to explain why the pro-trans crowd is so unhappy with the anti-civ crowd, though. Because without civ you don’t get to take estrogen because without civ there will be no synthetic hormones, and don’t they still make Premarin from tortured mare’s urine? Why is this so rarely addressed? Who gets tortured to make testosterone?

    Medicalized transgenderism is a completely artificial phenomenon and medical resources in general are not infinite, so in some ways it plays out as a fight over who is entitled to what, and how to tell what really helps from what is just acting as a placebo. Placebo effect is quite strong with conditions that have no identifiable biological marker, and lots of people see medicine as a kind of religion.

    Liked by 4 people

      • Thanks, but it’s more a function of obsession. I’ve been focusing on this stuff since 2010 or so. I can understand some of the earlier confronters of the excesses of transgenderism getting burnt out on it. Hurling one’s self onto the rocks of circular logic gets old after awhile.

        The only route out I see is more women realizing that supporting transgenderist laws that are so easy to abuse is not in our interests and that it’s okay to put ourselves first. They seem to understand the existence of predatory crossdressers, but they either think it’s somehow easily possible to distinguish those guys from non-dangerous ones, or else they have been groomed into believing women should be self-sacrificing and just take the hit so that transgenders get full rights, as they see it.

        Ignoring the problem (male violence) won’t make it go away, and as is illustrated upthread, the right is well aware that it exists, though there are differences in opinion as to its causes. I am not the only one who has been predicting for awhile that the right will lead the backlash, too. As another blogger we know has pointed out, this business of “men get to use women’s facilities because they sez so” is handing a huge gift to the gender-enforcing crowd, and is likely to bring a world of pain to gender defiant people who respect boundaries.

        Liked by 4 people

        • They also say that it isn’t possible to stop men from assaulting women in bathrooms, so why bother putting up laws preventing men from entering women’s facilities?

          They are also pretty blunt about how they do *not* care for women. When you bring up the safety and peace of mind of women, they just counter it with ‘but the trans face a gruesome death if they use the men’s bathroom, the poor things’.

          They really don’t give a flying f*ck about women.

          Liked by 4 people

        • I see a lot of derailment in these discussions, such as quibbling about how common bathroom violence is. Male violence is the problem, women do not commit male violence, and the idea that we have some sort of responsibility to prevent it presumes powers we do not have. The guy who’d beat up the guy in a dress is not interested in our opinions on the subject. He might just as easily like to beat us up too. So while male transgenders and women both suffer from male violence, and for related reasons, any arguments that we should be allies ignores the fact that feminism only works as an independent political movement by and for women, and when it’s associated with other movements women invariably wind up taking a back seat. So the appropriate leaders of the fight against violence inflicted on gender defiant men, are men. Saying it’s women’s work is just more gender b.s.

          Liked by 4 people

        • Well said Miep!

          I forgot to mention, they also defend Patrick Hagan, the MTT who punched 5 teeth out of a woman’s mouth. They say that she *deserved*to have her teeth knocked out because she kicked the door of his stall open, and that he had to ‘defend himself’.

          As if a 6ft5 280lb male can’t subdue an itty bitty woman?

          Oh, and under any other circumstance, these ‘progressives’ will speak out against violence against women. But, if it it’s MTTs or Muslim rapists, they side with the group that they perceive to be the most oppressed, and that group doesn’t include women.

          Liked by 2 people

        • The underlying idea is that being a woman is the worst possible thing ever, so how tragic for these poor men who are stuck being women and not even accepted by all those other low-caste creatures! It’s like being despised by the Untouchable caste, so tragic.

          This is really important in understanding how the dynamics are different for men and women. A woman who identifies as a man and tries to push it puts herself at risk for rape and other forms of violence, because she is pushing up in the hierarchy and this is seen as unacceptable by the enforcers, while the men who “fail” at manhood are seen as victims, because they are punished by the other men for wanting to be members of the punishable caste.

          Liked by 4 people

  5. Interesting discussion on FB about whether or not manly bearded men who identify as women should be able to use women’s restrooms and so on:

    Danielle Muscato shows up, this person and starts blocking people who disagree with his hirsute self:


    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/11/17/today-im-saying-goodbye-to-my-old-self/

    Danielle Muscato identifies as a woman. She needs to use the woman’s loo for her own safety. She has said so on twitter. As you can clearly see from the photo, she will become a victim of violence if she uses a man’s bathroom looking like that!

    Like

    • Thank you Jessica for this. Holy crap. I already knew about Muscato. But I hadn’t seen the stupid Jim Crow picture. WTF? And how come there’s only one “colored” can? Also people misunderstand Jim Crow when they use it in the trans context. There very often weren’t facilities for Black people. “Segregation” meant denial of services to black people and never actually just meant segregation.

      Is that Muscato in the photograph on the beach? He’s just some weirdo. On the bathroom stuff he makes our case for us. He looks exactly like a man. And a man going into the women’s bathroom to rape a woman would look exactly like that. FFS. I don’t know why the other trans aren’t telling him to shut the fuck up. He makes their position on this issue look 100% crazy. Oh wait, it is 100% crazy.

      Mind if I use these pictures on my blog and Twitter?

      Liked by 1 person

      • This is him, talking about how he needs to use the woman’s restroom cuz it would be too dangerous for a big hairy be-penised man like him to use the men’s.
        https://m.facebook.com/comment/replies/?ctoken=10154035574290856_10154035639965856&count=120&pc=1&ft_ent_identifier=10154035574290856&gfid=AQC3V2fWxQc5hLwS

        He is revolting.

        And then there are idiots on that thread who are shaming people who don’t want to embrace nudity at every opportunity.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Holy macaroni! Thanks. That thread is very very interesting. The one guy just flat out tells Muscato he’s not trans and is “unhinged”. That was very pleasant. 🙂 Muscato is either an autogynephile or has no unusual sexual anything at all. And is just totally faking this to be an asshole. Or he’s a peeper. So many possibilities. Good gravy on a train though. I can’t believe American Atheists continues to employ somebody who such a fucking nutcase. SJW-like political ineptitude. 🙄

          Liked by 1 person

        • I expect transgenderism to continue to become increasingly popular with pedophiles, at the rate this is going. I wish all the gay men who support it would pay better attention because this is likely to bite them in the ass bigtime.

          Liked by 3 people

        • Miep wrote:

          I expect transgenderism to continue to become increasingly popular with pedophiles, at the rate this is going. I wish all the gay men who support it would pay better attention because this is likely to bite them in the ass bigtime.

          Sarah Nyberg aka SRH Butts is a trans woman and admitted pedophile. The SJWs sided with Nyberg who is an anti-gamergater. When Nyberg was outed for being a pedo, the SJWs showed their support for him by sending him photos of their pre-teen kids in swimwear.

          Liked by 1 person

        • I grew up during the “sexual revolution” in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, and I keep thinking that this is its logical outcome.

          At the same time we had a solid women’s rights movement and solid gay and lesbian’s rights movements, and this is what we are left with? Celebrating dishonesty and pedophilia?

          No wonder the right is freaking out. If I was twenty years older I’d want to just die because this party isn’t any fun and I want to go home. As it is, there are severe limits on how much I want to interact with people, including online.

          I was reading Holly Wood’s excellent Harry Potter tweet parody series on Medium today. It’s great stuff. Then I went to Twitter to read the ones she published later (I am assuming this is a woman). Block botted.

          Well, I can only console myself with the fact that a lot of kickass artists were blacklisted during the McCarthy era, for wanting to end an economic system that oppressed people along the lines of economic class. Now I’m being blacklisted for wanting women’s liberation and the end of a socially enforced system of sex stereotyping, and for acknowledging that this system is based on oppression along the lines of biological sex. The more it changes, the more it stays the same.

          Liked by 1 person

        • UPDATE:


          Muscato wrote:
          Danielle Muscato wrote:
          Male. Female. Unisex.
          That should solve the problem. Because I am not sharing a public bathroom that allows men in because of way too many experiences that don’t work in the favour of the argument.
          And people who are adamantly against the three bathroom model are illogical and I can’t bother debating with them.

          : Also that doesn’t really answer the question of where trans women who don’t pass should go. For example, if there are three bathrooms as you suggested, I would want to the women’s room, seeing as I’m a woman.
          it doesn’t matter if we’re talking about 1/20 of 1%, discrimination is not acceptable. That’s why anti-discrimination laws *exist,* to protect oppressed minorities from oppressive majorities.

          As it happens there are a lot more trans people than that; the figure you’re referring to is drawn from the number of people who have legally changed their names with the Social Security Administration and changed their government-database gender markers, which is DEFINITELY not all trans people. I have done neither, for example. But as I said it doesn’t even matter what the percentage is, you can’t discriminate against people just because they are in the minority.

          ————

          Yep. When presented with unisex bathrooms these autogynephiles demand use of the women’s bathroom etc because that is how they get their jollies.

          Liked by 2 people

  6. Ok here is what I want to know. Why are the MTTs always smirking in their selfies?

    They *all* have that lopsided smirk. Wtf is going on?

    It doesn’t matter if they are pre-op or post-op. Drreessed as women or as men…they have the same smirk.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s