When/How did the transgender debate start?

Helen Lewis providing a recent case in point on Twitter.

That exact tweet was what I was thinking of when I posted. The "both sides are as bad and radfems are being rude by misgendering" stance is such a wilful misunderstanding, propagation of a lie really.

www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/08/04/woman-2

Robin Morgan quoted here about something that might be called misgendering. There is a political argument for women being able to name things accurately.
Particularly when it comes to gender politics.

That quote and speech by Robin Morgan in 1973 is the earliest reference I can find to the debate.

LaSqqrl

I think our main crime appears to be telling the truth, which includes correctly identifying men. I think you have misunderstood me, I'm a radical feminist pissed off with the constant erasure of women's work because it is 'rude/mean'. I think we are on the same side :)

That is a very interesting article R0wantrees. A couple of bits that stood out to me -

1. Christine Burns admitting that they got the 2004 GRA through by deliberately trying to keep people from knowing it was happening or talking about it, something they are trying hard to do again with self ID:

Much of their campaigning remained on the quiet. The passage of the 2004 law to give trans people legal status was "remarkable," says Burns, because "the government was able to pass an entire act in parliament without anyone throwing a fit in the press"

2. This bit alluding to a network of trans activists using social media to 'transform' society to their liking, which also mentions Trans Media Action, a pressure group who were responsible for imposing the new trans definitions and guidelines on mainstream media reporting:

In 25 years, Barrett has seen trans people become "a networked bunch" – more so than other people, he thinks – thanks to the internet. Lees, who also works for Trans Media Action, says social media is the "essential catalyst" for the transformation of trans people in society.

Is that our main crime, Rosenberg? The 'misgendering'? And that 'misgendering' is equated with "literal violence" (totally fabricated)?

If that is what you have 'got' for 'proof' that radical feminists are 'just as bad', then I urge you to look again.

BTW, 'brainwashing' is not a personal insult. Even I was brainwashed until my 20s (with compulsory heterosexuality). It really is liberating to see through the malestream brainwashing.

It's been lesbians, the old second wavers and women working in crisis situations who have been warning about this for all that time and we are still being pushed aside by the "why can't we all get along, misgendering is so rude, eeew lesbians" crowd. Well, this is where it's got us.

Thank you so much xxmarks.

For the longest time, we did think we were 'pissing into the wind' on this one. But now it has fully revealed itself, the agenda. And even 'outsiders' looking in can see it, and do. We are really just waiting for 'the average woman' to shirk her brainwashing and see what is really going on.

Helen Lewis providing a recent case in point on Twitter. And the opaque rules here on Mumsnet around pronouns and identifying males and male violence when they say they are women.

This 2014 article is interesting as it explains how Press for Change started and also features some of those who have played/play such influential roles within the transgender community.
www.theguardian.com/society/2013/jan/22/voices-from-trans-community-prejudice

Michfest as well

www.feministcurrent.com/2016/08/05/women-grieve-michfest-look-forward-new-gatherings/

It has been going on for a long time. Lots of good links already given, including the Kimberley Nixon case, a man setting out to destroy a rape crisis centre for his own selfish fantasies. I've been around long enough to remember this at the time and have been horrified at how things have got steadily worse and worse since then, while women have been pushed aside and our spaces and rights harmed so much.

It's been lesbians, the old second wavers and women working in crisis situations who have been warning about this for all that time and we are still being pushed aside by the "why can't we all get along, misgendering is so rude, eeew lesbians" crowd. Well, this is where it's got us.

You can read The Transexual Empire in different ways. I think that at the time JR meant to criticise the industry and institutions relating to transsexuality but the way it's interpreted now, you would think it was worse than Mein Kampf.
I think she consulted with transexual people

Look back towards Janice Raymond's 'Transsexual Empire' (1979). I would date that as the start of the critique of transsexualism from a feminist perspective. Of course, this very much pre-dates 'transgenderism' which is reasonably distinct from transsexualism (most so-called 'tru-scum' come from the latter). Neither is good for females though. But transgenderism is far more aggressive and worse for female-kind.

As for the ECP, they are 'guns for hire', and will (and do) protest any issue their sex-poz male backers tell them to. A rather interesting history if you look at the financing of their building in Kings Cross. No actual feminist org has that kind of money. Also, an ECP member attacked a woman at Million Women Rise back in the early 2010s. I was there at the time.

Marking my place as there is lots of interesting stuff here.

This thread is fascinating.

One thing that amazed me when I v recently got into feminist activism through this very feminism board was that you can just set up a group, call it Women For This Thing To Happen (say) and then use it to write to mps and newspapers, print leaflets, hold events. With hard work and organising mind.

And I was like but don't we have to ask someone first and there must be rules and no. It turns out we can do more or less whatever the fuck we want.

Twas a revelation.

And if some people choose to advocate for housewives being prostituted, then that's their lookout.

Thank you so much for the history lesson, everyone. Very timely

Bruce/ Caitlyn Jenner did it for me

& reminder of thread with discussion of presentation at NUS Women's 18 associated with EH's breach of MN member's data.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3222263-Slide-show-on-How-to-Deal-with-TERFs

link also to Students4decrim at NUS (student members of SWARM)

www.swarmcollective.org/blog/2018/4/18/swarm-joint-statement-with-students4decrim-on-nus-conference-2018

As if on cue, here is Sisters Uncut tonight tweeting solidarity to SWARM ('sexworkershive'). Google SWARM and ECP and see how they organise demos together and release statements together. Connecting dot to dot to dot.

I bet they don't answer that question.

Definitely.

Understanding these groups entryist tactics also helps make sense of how a small number of prominent TAs have become fairly evenly spread around as LGBT representatives in the Greens, LibDems and Labour, all with matching goals. And then weird cross party things happen, like Green TAs complaining to Labour about Miranda Yardley. Just odd little things that seem a bit off on their own but collectively start to make a pattern.

It kind of seems like a strong reason for Trans activists to do a massive character assassination of radical feminists, eh?

Yes AA, lots of these fake 'sex worker' groups about, e.g. here is a good piece about the International Union of Sex Workers: www.toomuchtosayformyself.com/2009/01/09/the-great-iusw-con

If anyone ever wondered why Amnesty are pro prostitution, their draft proposal on 'sex work' was written by IUSW activist and pimp, Douglas Fox:
thefeministahood.wordpress.com/2015/08/24/what-amnesty-did-wrong

I know I'm going off topic but all these things are connected by little threads. Entryism and appropriation tactics, antifeminism as "feminism", 'sex workers rights' as 'trans rights', why "TERF!" is so often followed by "SWERF!".

A good detective could cover a wall with string and pins connecting it all I'm sure.

I think the people involved in all these things, just like in trans activism, start many small groups with grand sounding names and set themselves up as 'experts' in those areas. It is never clear who the membership is or how representative it is. They also specialise in entryism, which is to say that they enter political groups and movements in order to subvert them to these activists own goals (see for e.g. Sisters Uncut - were they always antifeminist or have they been infiltrated? I don't know, but they started around the time of Occupy I think? And I think a lot of entryist and other dodgy activity happened around Occupy)

And in those days the English Collective Of Prostitutes was much more open about the fact that 99% of them had never worked as prostitutes, but were taking a political stand. (Actual prostitutes hated them.)