Grace Lavery - online talk - 18 March 2022

To gynaesaur: hear hear!!!
Well put. I agree with you completely.

Gynosaur, that entire post was a thing of beauty and I agree with every word.

I have found myself on common ground with this issue alongside people I know that I disagree with on other issues. And that's okay, because like you I see again and again who the TRAs go after. If they really wanted peaceful and productive lives for trans people, "TERFs" really wouldn't be in the picture at all.

Can't type. TEAIMSM was supposed to be TEAMAM.

Most GC supporters aren't really feminists. They're just old-fashioned right wing reactionaries

I wouldn't call them GC necessarily (as most aren't critical of gender in the way I would define it- social roles and stereotypes ascribed to men and women- but are critical of males "identifying as women" or vice versa).
However it isn't wrong that a lot of the vocal opposition to trans ideology - especially in the US - are not from people who could ever be conceivably described as feminists. They're from people who've figured out that nominally left wing parties have fucked up big time on this and intend to keep banging the trans drum.

It does not bother me that, on the issue of "is sex real and important"/"can males be women", I am in agreement with quite a lot of right wing Christian reactionaries in the US who wouldn't have a higher opinion of me (lesbian, atheist, typical lefty liberal) than they have of trans people. Or, within the UK, that the majority of MPs speaking out about it are people I'd probably never vote for because I strongly disagree with MOST of their political positions. It doesn't bother me because the reality of sexual dimorphism, and the historical and contemporary discrimination against women on the basis of their sex, is not contingent upon only people I like believing it.

I've gone off on an odd and possibly pointless tangent here but, essentially, of the many people who oppose trans ideology and TRAs, only a small number also consistently support policies which are to the benefit of women.
However, it is that small number of people who've been attacked most viciously by this movement. The acronym is TERF. Not TEEC (trans exclusionary evangelical Christian) or TECP (trans exclusionary conservative politician) or TEAIMSM (Trans exclusionary average middle aged man).

It is women they've gone after. And women who support the protection and advancement of women in particular. And, alongside the wealth of other evidence, one thing that will always convince me that this movement is misogynistic is the fact that, out of the myriad groups who opposed them (many of whom held far more conservative positions on other social issues than feminists ever typically have) , it was women and feminists they went after again and again and again.

I always try and look at opposing views to assess the merit of their arguments. I fear becoming entrenched and unquestioning in my own viewpoint. Grace hasn't managed to dissuade me.

I salute anyone who actually tuned into any of that waffle. I decided I needed to be busy washing my hair.

Grace had an 'interesting' viewpoint:
UK academics are attempting to shut down critical debate from the young (I.e It's a generational thing)
The UK environment enables academics to be overly litigious and to make vexatious legal claims
Most GC supporters aren't really feminists. They're just old-fashioned right wing reactionaries.

It seems unfair for UCL to host this event allowing Lavery to litigate social media grievances unchallenged without providing Rosa Freedman, Kathleen Stock, Alice Sullivan and Jo Phoenix a right of reply.

Grace Lavery's presentation of the students' actions also seemed very biased compared to what actually went down in these cases.

I'd certainly view the email Rosa Freedman got as threatening if I received it. And the Masters student talk in which they stated:

"If Ts think trans is an endemic threat to feminism, let us be the threat to feminism…Picture this: I hold a knife to your throat and spit my transness into your ear. Does that turn you on? Are you scared? I sure fucking hope so.”
sex-matters.org/posts/updates/gender-studies-and-sexualised-threats/

How can that not be seen as anything but threatening for feminist staff and students in that department and university. Could they get away with saying those things about BME students?

mediocre male academic talks down more talented female academics

plus ca change

I think she misrepresented the actions of those academics she sited - Kathleen Stock got a particular hammering - but I'd like to think that as feminists we hold ourselves to a much higher standard of behaviour than that we've seen displayed against KS, JKR , MF et al. We cannot let ourselves be dragged down to the same level as those who criticise us.

am i allowed to say grace is clearly a massive chancer who needs to jump on a bandwagon to get anywhere do you think?

oh man

i hadn't heard the "reason" for ducking out of the debate with bindel

grace is a one isn't grace?

Yeah that’s the vibe I got

GL is a weirdo, a crank and a misogynist.

I'm not agreeing with the reasons given BTW. Just reporting what was said.

She gave her reasons for not debating with uk feminists;
Helen Joyce event was organised by a far-right anti-Semitic group (UnHerd)
After agreeing to debate with Julie Bindel, GC supporters sent photos to Grace's mum of Grace having sex with her husband.

DARVO

Airing personal grievances with Twitter screen shots. Is this person 12?

The argument seems to be that powerful GC academics are silencing, harrassing and threatening with legal action their vulnerable, brave and truthful students

Think I've had enough.

It’s really really bizarre

(Also known as “making up propaganda that suits your own narrative”….)

Seems to be accusing Stock & Freedman of harrassing students.