Natacha Kennedy for Open Democracy (ha): Anti-trans activists are using ‘mirror propaganda'. Here's how to spot it

Yes, the ratio is encouraging: archive.ph/pwAct

Because they had to spice it up somehow darling!!!

I mean, the nickname could be natch.

If there's mirror how come I've not seen those images of women in balaclavas, women screaming in faces and women with baseball bats?

So you can get it wrong along with their pronouns and be denounced, I would guess...

Why the fuck do they have to have an “interesting “ spelling of their name?

I believe Kennedy works at Goldsmiths and teaches in the Department of Educational Studies? Imagine training to be a teacher there? How can students ever raise any nuanced issues about child psychology / development, the research into sex based issues in the classroom, school systems and relating to learning?
No wonder so many young teachers arrive in schools believing that people can literally change sex and that concerns about children being exploited and gaslit by lobby groups is bigotry if they're faced daily with such appalling un evidenced and inflammatory drivel?

Yes, completely agree, Charlie. To compare the UK with Nazi Germany or Rwanda is breathtakingly crass.

A single example here would have been helpful in trying to understand this dense drivel.

I tend to agree with the view that if you must resort to accusing your opponents of being like Hitler you have already lost the argument.

(I do find these comparisons offensive. Nazi Germany, Hitler and Fascism were extremely violent, extremely inhumane and their victims deserve better than this. These comparisons cheapen their suffering to gotchas from second-rate academics.)

And Scotland, sadly...!

"Co authors papers with themself for some reason. Natacha Kennedy/Mark Hellen."

Because they know that a paper written by a woman doesn't count, but a paper validated by a man...

Where's he hidden it? In his tache?

😁

Ms Kennedy seems such a stable and well rounded woman. So glad she has warned us of this ! Absolutely no need for us to bother our pretty head about anything at all with Natascha(remember the "c") patrolling the press for us wimmen!

Fascinating, given that I have seen trans activists on Twitter call gender critical people 'a cult', probably because some aspects of their movement in fact shares certain cult-like aspects.

Recently I have wondered if arguing that gender critical people don't want transgender people to exist (very frequently used on Twitter as a thought-stopping cliche) isn't actually a reversal of the fact that their movement tries to linguistically erase the existence of the female sex?

But transgender activists are certainly not voiceless in the West at all but powerful, having the ear of the governments in several countries (Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Norway, Ireland, Finland, Germany, Spain etc.) where radical feminists, in particular, are not listened to at all.

For mirror propaganda to work, you need complete control over mainstream media

The levels of conspiracy theorist paranoia here are ridiculous.

I think Graham Norton's role as the hider of this secret network will come as a bit of a surprise to him too.

So half a dozen transphobes in a church hall are simultaneously capable of holding global power in the media? Hardcore military grade propaganda being delivered alongside a creaky urn. Really? Seems a bit unlikely...

He came dangerously close to exposing organised transphobia’s core campaign strategy, something they don’t want people talking about.

I thought it was the other side that didn’t want others to know their campaign strategy? I’m thinking of the Dentons document here.

For mirror propaganda to work, you need complete control over mainstream media.

As TRAs had until relatively recently. Methinks someone is furious a little annoyed this is no longer the case.

In a situation where mainstream media is entirely one-sided, its writers can no longer be considered ‘journalists’, but propagandists.

Yes. Pink News are the worst of this, but there’s stiff competition from other outlets.

Accusations are admissions indeed.

Is it just my feed or is no one actually defending that piece at all?!

Let's break this down a bit.

So Kennedy characterises meetings as a couple of dozen women at best, i.e. a tiny group of women meeting at a time. Kennedy is doing this to make us seem insignificant, and unworthy of being listened to.

However, that is also an admission that the group of women is not a physical threat, and that any group of males outside will be extremely intimidating. You cannot have it both ways, mate.

These meetings occur in church halls, described as draughty. So vulnerable to the elements, and also noise from protestors outside. This is also serving as an appeal to ridicule, emphasising that we have shoe-string budgets, restricting us to cheaper church halls, because we can't afford purpose-built conference facilities. But I thought feminists were supposed to be in receipt of "millions" of American money? It says that here! Again, you cannot have it both ways, mate.

But the awful thing in all this is if a journalist in attendance speaks out about the protest. Not the protest. If someone describes what it is like for a teeny-tiny group of women to know men are gathering outside the building, and to be confronted by that organised mass of men outside.

What about if activists simply did not mob a church hall in the first place?

Those who platform them while excluding those they target are not ‘editors’, they are censors."

How ironic. The Guardian's statement to Woman's Hour yesterday said of its refusal to allow Hadley Freeman to write about Mermaids and gender ideology, "That is not censorship it is editing".

a couple of dozen transphobes in a draughty church hall

Ha, doesn't Natacha just wish that was the case. Unfortunately for Natacha, all the Woman's Place UK meetings I've been to have been attended by several hundred women and many of them have been in very nice venues, not draughty church halls. A particularly memorable one was the one on sports held at the Queen Elizabeth Centre in Westminster. Sharron Davies spoke from the platform, and Daley Thompson was in the audience. I can say with some confidence that if Natacha and Natacha's chums held a meeting, they would be lucky to attract an audience of half a dozen, and certainly not any sporting legends. I can also assure Natacha that none of us gender-critical women would bother to hold a protest meeting outside because, frankly, they're not worth the tube fare.

What's it called when you publish in academia with your "deadname" as the main author, and your new name as the co-author?

Ummmm.... 'wanting the best of both worlds' by trading on your male privilege while claiming 'double credit'.

Maybe fraudulent in that you have just presented a concept to the world that now 'two' academics support.

Hypocritical to ever claim people are hateful using a 'deadname'.

Or just plain old dishonest.

The twitter responses are interesting, and not what I'd expected.