First there was Jess Bradley, then the Challenors, now Edward Lord...

Dammit, italic fail

Just looked up "post-modernism", and one description was that it’s when you put everything in quotation marks.

Is it just me, or does it seem that most things to do with trans/pomo are basically trying to undo everything the First Wave Feminists did (age of consent, female public toilets, female political representation)? With a side serve of undoing Second Wave Feminist gains (affirmative action > AWSL)?

Funny that.

Weirdy pervy men are in fact pervy and weird shocker.
In other news, sky blue, water wet, and women want good solid doors between them and these chaps.

Oh YES!

This messing about removing boundaries all starts to makes sense. Aren't Bradley and their mate, Ada Cable (co-opted onto a NUS committee at one stage, as I recall), promoting prison abolition, wanting to replace it with restorative justice?

Restorative justice brings together people harmed by crime or conflict with those responsible for the harm, to find a positive way forward.
Restorative justice gives victims the chance to tell offenders the real impact of their crime, get answers to their questions and get an apology.
Restorative justice holds offenders to account for what they have done. It helps them understand the real impact, take responsibility, and make amends.

www.gov.uk/government/collections/restorative-justice-action-plan

Yep, I can see why David Challenor might prefer that to a 22 year jail sentence.

Good podcast here with an interview between radical feminist ecologists Derrek Jessen and Sheila Jefferies (the original terf) chatting about queer theory. Really interesting chat about the split between gay liberation movement and lesbian feminism - and the way queer theory grew out of this milleau - as a backlash against HIV
Best thing I have found so far

Dear God.

Am I mad or are these period fetishists flirting with Toxic Shock and all manner of disease risk? A constructed neovagina isn't the most bacterially balanced place as it is from all accounts; adding in someone else's bacteria, yeasts and potentially blood-borne disease like hepatitis is like playing on the motorway. I don't want to think about the bacteria from...other insertions.

Pound to a penny they won't use a condom with a partner either.

Blanchard does. And they hate him for it.

I'm pretty sure it was Blanchard who tweeted something along the lines "they're trying to get me off twitter, so if I disappear, that's the reason" recently. The silencing of dissenting voices is awful.

Blanchard sees them all for what they are.

Call me a bigot, I don't care. If you're a pedophile apologist then I hate you. Rationally.

Men are fucking weird aren't they?

No. First there was Liam Madigan, publicly claiming to be "Savile's Apprentice".
Then there was Shon Faye and his appalling "get tits early" advice for school children.

Weirdy pervy men are in fact pervy and weird shocker.

In other news, sky blue, water wet, and women want good solid doors between them and these chaps.

Oh good god - there are some screen shots posted on Sarge's "panties man" twitter thread that need to be seen BY EVERYONE.

Presented without comment.

I'm all for moral panic when it comes to paedophilia

Call me old fashioned

"childhood’ itself is not a biological given but an historically produced social object

Think we need to watch out for this argument in particular. They've successfully claimed that sex is a social construct therefore men should be allowed in women's spaces. If it can be successfully argued that childhood is a social construct, the implications are appalling."

There are thought around this and puberty blockers. In theory you can have a person who is "old enough" in years but not having been through puberty and had the physical emotional changes ie they have not "grown up". Messing with ideas around children/ age/ sex and following with the idea that age is not relevant/ subjective etc...

In older threads on here, pro trans posters frequently claimed childhood was a social construct.

Stopthisnow

Thank you for that. I do ask periodically for people to explain queer theory to me, and now I understand why they sometimes struggle.

I can feel the appeal of blurring boundaries and ripping up rules and starting again. So I get why quite a lot of youngsters find it attractive.

But what I see, far more, is exactly how exploitable it is. And the patronising criticism almost forcing people to be 'considerably more open minded than yow'.

Very interesting. Thank you.

childhood’ itself is not a biological given but an historically produced social object

Think we need to watch out for this argument in particular. They've successfully claimed that sex is a social construct therefore men should be allowed in women's spaces. If it can be successfully argued that childhood is a social construct, the implications are appalling.

The more stuff we uncover about various individuals recently in the press & their associates, the more sickened I feel about a select group of men-there is NO way they’re going to get in our spaces & it’s imperative children feel comfortable telling them to fuck off.

I think it's about time the parliamentary committee reconvened and and cross-examined Stonewall.

^ this

I think people have put far too much faith in that organisation, which in my opinion is nothing more than a men’s sexual rights organisation. I also think some queer theory academics campaigning for changes in law and policy, have decided among themselves how to frame our objections. It seems these people have decided to frame our legitimate objections to the removal of safeguarding and women/girls and children’s rights as a ‘moral panic’.

For example, they accuse the media of reporting on a few isolated cases to make their proposed changes to the law and policy unpopular. We, and the rest of the public, can then be accused of over reacting to these reports, out of ignorance, misunderstanding, unfounded fear and/or bigotry. Interestingly, queer theory academic Meg Barker wrote an article in 2017 framing objections to changes to law and policy as a ‘transgender moral panic’. I doubt this is the only person supporting changes in law and policy who frames our objections in this way.
www.rewriting-the-rules.com/gender/2017-review-transgender-moral-panic/

By framing things in this way they have enabled more people and groups/orgs etc, to agree to go along with them, and helped to ease any reservations they may have otherwise had. I think some academics, as well as advisors from the queer theory orgs, have informed various parties, groups, etc, of their ‘moral panic’ narrative, and people who have been exposed to it will then tend to sing from that hymn sheet and also claim our objections are no more than a ‘moral panic’.

Can you précis, by any chance?

I agree with the other criticisms of queer theory people have made here. In my view it is at heart anti-feminist and allows the existing power structures in society to remain while it’s followers claim they are progressive.

In a nutshell it is a nonsense academic theory that is harmful to many different people, particularly women and girls. It is cloaked in highly academic language, which disguises what it is actually about, and makes it appear more than it actually is. It is about blurring the boundaries of categories of things and claims this will somehow lead to a better society. In reality it harms many different groups of people for a great many reasons and is in direct opposition of actual feminism. For example, in the video they talk about how queer theorists would say that two gay men hiring a woman to be a surrogate, and have their baby is “queering birth” and so is progressive. It doesn’t acknowledge that the men are using women’s bodies for their own purposes, and often using women from poor countries, which could more accurately be called exploitation than progressive. Then of course there is the idea that the words girl/woman should mean femininity, and boy/man should mean masculinity, instead of human female/male. It also allows sexual fetishes and other dangerous sexual practices to be made more socially acceptable. The fact that it is full of so much obfuscation means its follows can argue we have just misunderstood it if we criticise it.

I'm bookmarking the most excellent 'jeopardy' video by Derrick Jensen too. Very effective in demonstrating the links between the Q and trying to slip normalisation of paedophilia through the back door.

And people yelling 'transphobe' and 'bigot' at him....

A bloke talking about his 'addiction' leading him to 'some very dark images'

Yes, and rightly so....