Jezebel.com lumps GC feminists in with the alt-right

At Lesbians on Chairs Julia Long did a brilliant talk on not letting ourselves get dragged in to arguments about trans rights and distracted from our focus on women’s rights. I thought there was a lot in that.

This thread being a most marvellous example.

No intersex conditions are completely different as they are identified at birth and are not the same as transgender.
I’m talking about hidden conditions. There is so much about the human body and mind that we haven’t even begun exploring, I don’t know how it can be shut down with a blasé attitude.
The fact is on many of these threads, whenever a subject or points are raised that aren’t just agreeing or adding positive input, it tends to go ignored. It may have been said before but never really commented on much.
People on MN seem very sure of themselves and what they are saying and believe they will be on the right side of history but a lot of the time, aren’t willing to engage in other thoughts much or detail their own thoughts beyond the ‘boring’ reponse of AHF on a loop.
I’ve watched these threads for a long time, it was datun I think that first explained it all to me and I found her very insightful but it does seem to have moved away from discussing implications on woman’s rights and more towards discussions on various TRA individuals.
I think a lot of people like me will have moved away from the GC movement since the ‘USA incident’ and this thread felt like a good place to get back involved and find out where it’s all going but it seems other views and discussions aren’t welcome much as is evident. More than happy to be disagreed with, but not with stupid responses such as ‘JAQ JAQ’ and ‘she would’ve shut it down’ etc.

We should be suspicious of subjective things like what women say.

If a person identified as left-wing, would they be left-wing?

Quite possibly, because political beliefs are abstract.

If a British person identified as French, would they be French?

No, because nationality goes beyond individual belief. But there are things they could do to become French, e.g. apply for citizenship. Abstract identities can be changed.

If a human identified as a cat, would they be a cat?

No, they would be a person who identified as a cat. They can never actually be a cat because of biological reality.

Do you see the difference?

Tbh though, your argument to me is coming across as basically..you big meanies won't condemn Posie for doing stuff so therefor its obvious you are aligned with the far right or something.

I’d hoped for some healthy discussion, I see that if you do not nod along to the hive you are shown the door though.

But, people are answering you? Most disagreeing does not mean anyone is being 'hounded off' or 'shown the door' or anything? Its odd how so many come on here and think that tbh.

Who is Jaques?

Speaking of Posie. At Lesbians on Chairs Julia Long did a brilliant talk on not letting ourselves get dragged in to arguments about trans rights and distracted from our focus on women’s rights. I thought there was a lot in that.

There are many disorders that cannot be explained or seen, how can you be so sure that transgender people are not suffering from a hidden malfunction at birth of being born with the mismatched reproductive organs and chromosomes?

You're talking about intersex conditions.
With respect spag, you're painting yourself as someone with a critical mind, but you're just repeating old, old arguments that have no basis in fact or logic, and in the space of one thread you've gone from criticising reactions to Posie's American trip to suggesting that trans could be a form of intersex. As someone who claims to have been reading threads here for years, you shouldn't be surprised if the response is "boring".

Amazing how nobody's talking about Jezebel's disingenuous conflation of feminism with the alt-right.

I (JAQ) wonder (JAQ) why (JAQ) that (JAQ) could (JAQ) be?

Yes! We should be suspicious of subjective things like what women say. And instead focus on what they objectively (after physical verification) are! Bodies are much simpler and less equivocal than minds or identities, which fall all over the map and are too difficult to investigate. Anyone trying to carry out that literally impossible task will just be lying and failing to get their story straight.

errant 'else' in there, soz.

There is no discussion on the post you reference spag. Someone said you can't know these things. And, quite evidently, you can.

Women's experience of being who they are, will vary. But the fact that they are a woman, won't.

No one would care, if women weren't oppressed by men. But when men try to tell women that being a woman can be figment of a man's else's imagination, they will, funnily enough, refute that.

Oh dear cross posted

Who is showing you the door? It might have helped if you'd not adopted such a very condescending tone from the outset for your "healthy discussion".

As I said, there are plenty of threads where you can find answers to your not particularly original questions.

all of this 'some parts of our brains' blah blah

why is feminism needed? on what basis are women oppressed Spag?

I would argue it is on the basis of our perceived potential to become pregnant - i.e. our biology

what would your argument be?

And the spaghetti bowl explodes.

Thereby confirming my suspicions.

I ok thanks, you sound confused though?

I ok hun?

You’ve become a very hostile bunch havent you.
I realise I am not in the click as I don’t just bow down and agree without engaging my mind to ask questions.
I did used to join in and read threads under tens of names over the years, lately it’s turned into simply ‘this transwoman said this’ and things majorly unrelated to woman’s rights and tbh for people that call themselves ‘gender critical’ not a lot of critical thinking so much as bashing these days.
I’d hoped for some healthy discussion, I see that if you do not nod along to the hive you are shown the door though.
I’m sure repeating ‘adult human female’ and not much help will really make a difference though, well done suffragettes.

I thought the idea that we just don't know was about how identity works.

As far as gender identity, to me it seems the closest comparisons would be to other things that are constructed identity. Race, nationality, etc.

It does seem to be a sort of innate capacity, to create these, maybe it facilitates group coherence in small traditional communities.

I still miss TheBewilderness...

Goddess, so do I. She was the best at shutting down crapola. The best.

Isn't it.

JAQ
JAQ
JAQ
JAQ
JAQ

BORING.

Is it because both groups are using material reality as the baseline? Rather than POMO 'reality is whatever you want it to be' nonsense. (I admit, as a scientist, I don't really understand what postmodernism is all about, but that's how it appears to me).

Yes, in the west I think that's a big factor. Religious conservatives aren't materialists, but they do think the physical world is real and substantial and also that it is rational. That's why the scientific method comes out of that perspective, or the medievals came up with the idea that gee, maybe we could apply mathematics to the study of the physical world.

The other overlap that's important is what you might call class analysis over individualism though they might not use that language. Liberal progressives tend to understand the need for legal and social controls in economics, but not really in the social sphere. So, they want something like pornography to be a question for individual freedoms.

Religious conservatives tend to see questions like that as impacting behaviours at a group level, and also impacting what they would call the formation of people's souls. Virtue is in part about good habits, both physical and mental, and people don't have those unless they are brought up to them - they are much harder for adults to acquire. They are also likely to see right thinking and habit in one area as impacting on people's behaviours in other areas. This isn't all that dissimilar to many rad fem ideas.

I still miss TheBewilderness...

So do I. I see her on Twitter, but it's not the same.