Read this appalling article on The Pool and weep (about Rose McGowan and Andi Dier)

I think the person who said they don't identify as a feminist any more was siding with the Rose defence, not Andi's.

I've had another look and can see some more sensible comments and wondered if they were from here Thanks for commenting and injecting a bit of sanity into that thread. Funny to see the same old in that thread that when a TRA/handmaiden is backed into a corner of common sense they will just shout TERF and then bugger off!

I've commented, trying to be careful.

Rose McGowan might not be perfect, but I know who I'd rather have with me on the feminist bench and it's not Andi Dier.

I also don't get this transwomen have always been women thing. I haven't always been a woman, I was a girl first! What are they transitioning from then?

If anyone still wonders why women don't speak out about their sexual abuse then Rose McGowan is a great example. A woman who has been raped and assaulted and has stuck her head right up above the parapet to expose it, getting shit left right and centre because she doesn't centre trans women in her discourse.

The comments under the article on FB are depressing, one is basically saying that it doesn't matter what Andi Dier has done, what matters is that he has exposed Rose as 'not intersectional'.

The only saving thing is that I am sure there are many more women like me who would love to get stuck in on that comments feed but can't because of the public nature of it.

Also, the pool have just put another article on FB about what a long way to go we still have despite being 100 years from women getting the vote. I read it, waiting for the inevitable mention of trans struggles, but it never came

Aargh, I just read the Pool article and came here to see if anyone else had noticed how biased it was towards the pedophile trans heckler. Glad I'm not alone.

But good god, what has Rose done wrong to warrant all this hate from other women? The trans hate I get, as the shouty ones hate all women it seems.

That tweet
It's such a head fuck!!! This is all just so distressing. Pure misogyny.

"Similarly, Rose McGowan – who has a growing back catalogue of reprehensible statements concerning trans women and women of colour – is fronting a movement for all women – one she isn’t equipped to lead."

What does this mean?! WHY is she not equipped to front a movement for all women? By 'equipped' does the author mean not 'equipped' with a penis?!

And re the 12-14 old women ... I read it as though she were calling girls women and so minimising the offences. I think to call it clumsy wording is probably quite generous. The way we use language matters.

Is "white fragility" something else for which I'm supposed to apologise now?

Thehair
Yes you’re right. Now I’ve re-read it that is the correct interpretation. Problem of reading articles that enrage me while doing two things at once!

I read this yesterday in Facebook and thought I’d gone mad. The author started out saying Dier was correct to call out Rose McGowan. What the fuck was “right” about hauranging a vulnerable woman at her own book signing?

So let's see:

One person has said something insensitive on twitter, while admitting to be under the influence of drugs, and deleted it and walked it back after being told it was racist.

The other person has sexually assaulted teenage girls.

Both of these people are on the exact same moral footing, according to the author of the article.

That about the gist of it?

You know who's probably loving this? Harvey Weinstein and his ilk.

Yeah, but clumsy wording is enough to get others (like Mcgowan) hung out to dry....

To be fair, the quote was:

'Women who were aged between 12 and 14 at the time have accused Dier of grooming them and claim that content posted from her Tumblr account features both paedophilic and racist images.'

It's fairly obvious to me that she means that the people who made the accusations are women now, but were aged 12-14 at the time. It needs commas:

' Women, who were aged 12-14 at the time, have accused Dier.....'.

It's just clumsy wording, I don't think she meant anything by it at all.

Oh I wasn't saying that there is nothing troubling about that analogy, CapnHaddock If some women find it exclusionary, I accept that. But I don't think that making that analogy in one tweet adds up to "a growing back catalogue of reprehensible statements concerning [trans women and] women of colour"

She also didn't mention Dier's 'It's not rape if she's smiling through the tears' comment did she?

Really poor article for a number of reasons but the one part I found most worrying was the on-the-surface-of-it innocuous statement “women aged 12-14.” Since when have children aged 12-14 been women? I know we’re down the rabbit hole with what woman means and all that shit but I don’t think it now includes adolescent girls does it? To me, it seems like an attempt to minimise Dier’s (alleged) crimes by suggesting they were committed against adult women, not girls, and while most people would condemn a man attacking women, many hold a special place in hell for those who sexually assault children.

I saw this on FB this morning and am itching to comment but I'm not ready to out TERFy self on FB yet.

The Pool has been very pro trans up until recently. But then there was nothing about Paris Lees being on Vogue (they had done a article on Munroe Bergdorf being a Loreal model) or the self id issue in the Labour Party, and I wondered if they were peak transing. The tone of this article seems to be that Andi Dier is a twat, and the author doesn't really believe he is a 'woman' but as a black woman she has to be 'inclusive' and also because TRAs have appropriated the struggle of black women so that its 'us versus white cis feminists' she can't really slag them off.