Superb article from Victoria Smith in The Critic

There is a word for people who find a female “no” intolerable, and it is not “marginalised” or “victimised”. I find it grotesque that there is a call to shower even more pity and attention on people who hold such deeply entitled, misogynistic views that the prospect of having a noun — just one noun! — that remains exclusive to female humans is enough to prompt a week-long tantrum.

That’s bloody good. One of the best analyses of the trans backlash to the Supreme Court judgement that I have read.

She is just the most pithy writer:

Like many feminists, while I find the concept of gender identity fundamentally sexist, rooted in regressive and often pornified stereotypes, I have never had any particular desire to tell men who believe themselves to be women that in actual fact, they are not. It’s not just that this would be needlessly hurtful; it’s also that their beliefs aren’t remotely interesting. Scratch the surface and it’s bog-standard fantasising about how women lack complex emotional lives, or enjoy being hurt, or really get off on getting dressed up. It’s not some great challenge to “the gender binary”; it’s conservative and it’s boring.

Great! Loved this
The trouble with trans ideology is that an absence of empathy for female people is so deeply ingrained — so essential to the maintenance of the passive femininity myth — that any assertion of female needs, desires and boundaries is instantly translated into an attack on trans women. It is as though female humans, those eternal looking-glasses, only operate on two emotional settings: the desire to serve males by saying “yes”, or to hurt them by saying “no”.This is why every time women have suggested that we are a class of humans in our own right, we’ve been accused of wilfully denying trans women’s “right to exist”. It’s why the supreme court ruling has been swiftly reinterpreted, not as something about and for women, but as cruelly targeting males, just for the sheer hell of it.