Gappy Tales: Laurie Penny's T*RF Wars: Aguide to cognitive dissonance

It's like this never happened.

Brilliant thread as ever from Jane Clare Jones, but I do wonder how she has the energy for it. Arguing with stupid people - particularly people who choose to be stupid - has few rewards, in my experience.

Talking of which, does anyone else remember the time Laurie Penny came on here to lecture us about how silly we all were?

Laurie Penny says:

"Since we’re obsessing about makeup and manicures, when a trans woman paints her nails neon pink, that is, in fact, a tiny action with different implications than when a cis woman does the same — because when a trans woman paints her nails she is betraying the uniform of her assigned sex and gender, and there is courage in that. These things are not frivolous. They matter. They are small, intimate acts of identity formation, which are experienced differently depending on who we are."

No.

Gwyneth Bebb showed courage when she took the law society to court, arguing that she was a “person” within the meaning of the Solicitors Act 1843.

Women show courage when they campaign to be allowed to wear flat shoes at work:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-36265545

Celia Kitzinger and Sue Wilkinson showed courage when they fought for their marriage to be legally recognised in the UK.

These people were fighting for their rights, as humans.

It would take courage to fight for every human's right to wear nail varnish. Laurie Penny is just fighting for the right to trap everyone in a gender box.

Jane Clare Jones lacerates it.

mobile.twitter.com/janeclarejones/status/1272909480888537089

"A woman is a person who identifies as a woman," says a GP working in the NHS.

This does actually prove the 'sex is real' point in my view.

The only response to this is '...identifies as a what, though?'
The fact that they think there is a concept of woman, that can be 'identified as', and it needs no further definition or explanation reveals that we all KNOW what a woman is, physically.

If you were to respond, 'oh right, you mean someone who identifies as a 4-legged amphibian' you would know that was not at all something that could be inferred from their 'definition of woman'. Because we all know what a woman is.

ThePurported

He also, if I recall correctly, accuses women of appropriating the word woman. 🤣

Thank you Beetch. I had actually only seen it once yonks ago.
"A woman is a person who identifies as a woman," says a GP working in the NHS.
Extraordinary.

So Adult Human Female is right after all?

And Adrian Harrop's epic humiliation by Posie Parker was all for nothing?

Is there a video?

I thought the Doctor has been pretty consistent in his views - biology is real, but it's transphobic to talk about it.

"There are two sexes, and for some very significant things, SEX MATTERS."

This has been the concept underpinning all of my thinking in this. Wasn't there a group or campaign called "sex matters" a while ago?

What was Maya F's case about if it wasn't about disagreement with (and ruling against) the belief that sex was real?

Oh forgot to add. These are the arguments I have seen from activists this past two weeks.

Well. As you all know sex is a spectrum so of course no one can change sex. There are numerous scientists and academics who discuss this theory in as much depth as an espresso cup but use big words so they must be experts. One is even a marine biologist and therefore their expertise is clear.

Of course, the science behind knowing you were always the gender you identify with will be proven. It is just a matter of time. Just like in the future, people will be able modify themselves permanently down to the cellular level so they will be living the authentic lives they say are living today.

Transwomen were always female. Don’t you know that were never male at all? I am surprised at you all for being so behind science.

It's very Orwellian - and indeed very Trumpian - to deny having said something you know perfectly well they said, because actually you have multiple screen shots of them saying just that thing. Hence one of my favourite pieces, which I've shared before, is a piece entitled 'An Open Letter to the Guy on Twitter Who Wonders if Biological Sex is Real'

medium.com/@genderdetective/an-open-letter-to-the-guy-on-twitter-who-wonders-if-biological-sex-is-real-58d2cb4403f5

We know that academics like Sally Hines and co are forever denying that biological sex is real, and that it's simply an idea dreamt up by Western colonialists who then imposed it on the hapless indigenous peoples of the world.

You almost have to admire Penny's nerve in coming out with this shit.

So called biological sex George, which, as a gay man, you know all about

I used to follow him on Facebook- shame, he was funny before he started coming out with all this woman hating bullshit

Originally, when you asked them to describe how they know they're a woman, they would reel off a whole load of gender stereotypes.

Until we said you're reeling off a whole load of gender stereotypes.

Then it became an indefinable essence, formless but ever-changing and unique.

So Adult Human Female is right after all?

And Adrian Harrop's epic humiliation by Posie Parker was all for nothing?

Does the gender identity lobby even know what it's arguing for?

If you've been paying attention for the last few years you'll have noticed that their arguments evolve in response to ours. What I mean is, we say "no, you can't have what you want because X" and they then respond with "yeah but is X even real anyway? it's all about Y anyway", at which point we go "ah but you're not actually Y either", and then they go "actually Y never did matter, it's all about Z". And on and on in that same pattern. They weren't claiming that transwomen were biologically female or that sex doesn't exist until women started saying "regardless of what your gender may be your sex is male so no, you can't come in to this space".

If you've ever had the misfortune to argue with an abuser the pattern will feel very familiar.

I know Medium won't be editing the articles submitted to them but JFC Laurie could use an editor.

Gappy Tales is a brilliant writer.

And judging from her response to it, there's no way want to read the actual article.

The bits she's quoted are just more of the same male centric bull that some people don't even realise they're wedded to.

And I agree the whole 'we're not akcherly saying sex isn't real, dur' is damage limitation.

Excellent.

Then a) it matters obvs.

And b) you can now, at long last, define it then?

yes definitely Flosime - they know they are not convincing the public so they are shifting the goalposts

such a shame the interent is forever.....;)

I like your post Floral. Yes they are trying to change tack - which is what you do when you know you're losing ground.

"Nobody is actually saying there is no such thing as natal sex."

Yes they are. Dawn Butler MP is one, and given her close contacts with some of the most influential TRA campaigners in the UK, I doubt she made it up herself.

It doesn't matter whether these people actually believe that biology is just a construct and sex is arbitrarily 'assigned' at birth. They want to elevate gender identity above sex, and the end result is the erasure of sex in all contexts where it matters.
I assume Mama Doctor Jones would be happy to include girldicks in her gynaecology?