Emma D'arcy: "I thought ^I^ was the one who was critical of gender."

I felt exactly the same.

Never really fit in with the other girls. But it doesn't mean I wasnt one.

Genderists are entirely committed to enforcing gender stereotypes as rigidly as possible. It's their founding principle - no wonder the advertising industry loves them as much as pharma does. If the world reverted to a belief that anyone can wear anything quite a few income streams would dry up.

If the non-binaries really understood what was going on and had any integrity they would be trying to create miles of distance between themselves and the trans umbrella.

Language matters, this kind of distinctive phrasing is clearly coming direct from rainbow-progress lessons & marketing, &, ironically, it very clearly implies that gender IS "binary", that you ARE either one or the other. How can people like Emma D'Arcy not realise that they're moving us away from 'girls & boys can behave however the heck they want' into reinforcing the rigid binary she believes they believe they're breaking down?!?

It is truly amazing and disturbing how logical and equalitarian thought has been swept away in an Orwellian tsunami of this doublespeak, retrograde, reductive and sexist ideology. How those claiming to be non-binary can’t see they’re simply reinforcing a binary. How those supporting transgenderism can’t see they are reinforcing sexist gender stereotypes for both boys and girls. And the young have so just absorbed it all. I just despair.

Is it ever not time for a Rebecca Reilly-Cooper quote?! 😀

Time for a Rebecca Reilly-Cooper quote:

"To call yourself non-binary or genderfluid while demanding that others call themselves cisgender is to insist that the vast majority of humans must stay in their boxes, because you identify as boxless."

(And if I'd not used "she" there, that last sentence would have been ambiguous / what I intended to emphasise would be diluted, which is a whole other story).

Recently ended up talking to a few 11-13-year-olds about why a girl may dress up as & pretend to be a boy, now & historically (eg. to increase freedom of movement in Afghanistan; to be safer on the streets when homeless; to access an otherwise inaccessible location/resource in different times & places...) The language they used was fascinating, & disturbing to me. Our focus was wholly unrelated to transgenderism, yet one repeatedly referred to her "changing into a boy" / "becoming a boy", & another to "changing her gender".

It's easy to assume this was just clumsy expression from young-ish children, but, if so, surely "dressing up as" & "pretending to be" are just as accessible? And, certainly, they'd feel more accurate, logical & natural to me, given the context.

I do feel this fairly clearly shows how this movement is changing our language. Which would be fine IF these changes weren't so politically-driven & problematic. As it is, these kids are using words that, whether they consciously recognise (& believe!) this or not, DO reinforce the message that it's not natural to a girl/female to wear boys' clothes or behave in ways a society may regard as "boyish". In order to adopt this image, these behaviours, she must "change" into / "become" something else.

It's something so very slight, so easy to dismiss as insignificant, but it really concerned me. Language matters, this kind of distinctive phrasing is clearly coming direct from rainbow-progress lessons & marketing, &, ironically, it very clearly implies that gender IS "binary", that you ARE either one or the other. How can people like Emma D'Arcy not realise that they're moving us away from 'girls & boys can behave however the heck they want' into reinforcing the rigid binary she believes they believe they're breaking down?!?

There is a common denominator about all these actors who declare a non-binary identity, which seems to me to be a total lack of curiosity and awareness about feminism and women's rights.

I can understand a little, I think, as when I was younger I felt out of the loop when comparing myself to what was expected of girls and women. I just wasn't interested in behaving in those ways or having those interests. So I thought I was some kind of oddity. But then I very quickly realised that there was nothing wrong with me, and it was the world that had the problem! And then I read up about women's rights and feminism and realised that sex-based stereotyping and socialisation were the issues to be challenged. Not inventing a special category of non-woman for myself.

Gosh, she's dangerously close to understanding what feminism is all about.

*raised

Identifying as "non-binary" sort of is being critical of gender on a personal basis, but without the realisation or understanding that you have the option to entirely reject the ideology of gender identity. That said, she's 30 now so should really know better than the kids who've been raided to believe all this crap.

"Gender Abolitionist" is a better term than "Gender Critical" - people don't understand the word "Critical".

Keep it simple: Gender is sexism. No one who isn't sexist really has much in the way of a "gender" except in as much as we have all got a few bits and bobs in our psyche from having been brought up in more sexist times. Everyone has a sex though.