Joan of Arc was trans????

I thought diversity was about different ethnicities, different nationalities etc. why is it now only about trans?

And that’s nor diverse. I assume most trans are white so how is this still not centering white people? And I thought we were trying to not center white people all the time.. hence the whole diversity thing in the 1st place?!

I keep telling my husband that the sooner we are back in Stockholm the better. I just don’t understand what is going on here.

How dare they try to revise history like that? And "steal" a strong female role model.
That is truly awful.

So does this mean Mulan is trans now too?

I asked DS2 this the other day (it's his favourite Disney film.) He laughed. Luckily, unlike so many of his age group he hasn't fallen for the TWAW/TMAM. He said Mulan is a badass girl who's better than boys.

OP can you link to the material?

I thought her nick name was “the maid”? Due to the fact that she was a virgin and that’s why god used her as his instrument. She was the mascot of the army so and so was dressed in armour on the battle field so she would be safer and a more visible rallying point.

I remember Catherine Bohart joking about Joan being lesbian on the You’re Dead to Me episode. Fortunately Helen Castor confirmed that there’s no evidence of that.

Worth a listen.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p07pj5m9

Don't forget the Bronte Brothers, or would that be the Bell Brothers?

Where would that leave Branwell?

So in fact, rather than being trans, she was gender nonconforming, or, indeed (dare I say it) GC! Gasp.

But in those days, it was the only way she could do what she needed to do. Saying that any woman who didn’t meekly conform to the stereotypes of the time was actually a man is ridiculous.

So does this mean Mulan is trans now too?

Joan of Arc trans 🤣she was made a saint, they will have to take the church on. Good luck with that 🤣 I'd have burst out laughing of I was there.

World's gone mad, I need to get off it.

No she didn't. She wore armour and men's clothes. That isn't "presenting as a man". She said she was a woman. Everyone knew she was a woman. She was burnt at the stake because she was a young woman, who dared to be different and refused to back down. It is beyond offensive to regard those as male qualities only.

She did dress and present as a man though, one of the reasons the poor woman was executed I believe

Oh I get it.

So Queen Elizabeth didn't just have the heart and stomach of a King, she was a King?

And Marie and Pierre Curie were actually a same sex relationship?

And Jane Austin now goes by "John"?

And basically any and all women who were ever interesting and impressive in any way other than being pretty ... were actually men? Thereby women have never actually achieved anything?

Wow, that's much easier than having to go to the trouble of actually stealing a woman's writing, art, scientific discovery etc and put a man's name on it and give him all the prizes and adulation, now we simply later re-write her as a man!

Alchemy! Marvellous.

Joan of Arc dressed in "men's clothing" for protection, both on the battle field aswell as in prison. She couldn't wear a dress on a horse and go fight. In prison she refused to wear a dress, because when she did the guards sexually assaulted her every night. When she refused to wear a dress she got burned at the stake.

It was an impossible situation. She was setup to fail.

Jo Cox as a young and passionate politician who died a terrible death at the hands of an extremist.

And why Ian McKellen? Because he's gay? That's hardly unusual in the acting profession.

I haven't checked these quotations back to source but:

"I was admonished to adopt feminine clothes; I refused, and still refuse. As for other avocations of women, there are plenty of other women to perform them."

She often called herself the maid/maiden.
"The Maid and her soldiers will have the victory."

So who should we listen to - Joan herself or someone else? Not only did she say she was a woman; she was also clear that what she wore didn't change that and she wouldn't be limited to supposed womanly pursuits but was happy to leave them to "other women".

Hadn't twigged you are a teacher, rather than a parent @Greenandcabbagelooking, sorry. I can see that it might be tricky for you to push back on this if you think it will bring negative consequences for you personally.

I believe someone's had a go at claiming Elizabeth I was trans too. Ludicrous.

This shit is demoting women and girls, once again, to being second class human beings.

If we have short hair and if we are brave, clever or original, we must be boys / trans. These are simply not attributes that women or girls can possibly have.

Women and girls' permitted attributes are decorative, submissive, "kind" and compliant.

We are back 100 years.

I'm sure the Daily Mail would like this OP!