So Owen Jones is as full of shit as ever he was...

[CallaLilli]

Here's his latest output for the Guardian. Note the penultimate paragraph where he claims to have been victimised by various Twitter feminists and has a very selective memory of what really happened.

Ego... you have proved my point. Again. Thank you.

Until I read your endless hatred toward women, I was pretty ambivalent toward the subject. You are the reason I am gender critical. You are the reason a lot of women have become more and more gender critical.

It is utterly pointless discussing an issue when you come onto a thread, because you have to constantly reframe all discussion toward you. I am sorry that you have such a hard time. I hope you find the life you want.

Hiding the thread now actually hiding it, unlike you who just says they will and doesn't because it's now going to be all about you, which makes discussion difficult. If you want answers to your demands, you'll find them in my earlier posts.

I would not want sex with a woman. I would not want to have sex using my penis or to have my penis used during sex. I am waiting for surgery and hope to have sex after that.

Ego What sex would you want to have then?

Apologies for calling you brave. I've obviously misunderstood.

Um, yes you have mentioned you, see my post above. A most personal posting regarding what sort of sex you didn't want.

Personally, I've experienced a whole load of shit too. And it's comparable to lots of women I know.

What do you bring to the table Ego

Ego When you use 'I' in a statement, which you did three times, it is always about you.

Try a post without using I.

To go back to OJ, I think to be fair to him, the bit I hated most about that article was actually the Paris Lees quotation "Trans is hot, it's sexy, it's aspirational".

Aspirational? I thought it was a painful journey that some people feel absolutely compelled to go through, at some personal physical, social and probably financial cost because they simply can't not do it, because they're realising their essential self. Aspirational takes it right back to being about shoes and make up. She's not really helping, Paris Lees, is she?

Elendon But that is confirmation bias

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10716738

Perhaps you should tell the authors their research is confirmation bias.

I can't actually think of anyone I hate - but especially not strangers on the internet no matter what they identify themselves as.

I can certainly find people baffling, misguided, manipulative, perhaps even evil, I might dislike them as a person, or dislike their opinions or what they stand for, but I can't hate anyone I don't actually know.

Just because someone disagrees with you, doesn't mean they hate you, doesn't mean they don't want you to exist and be happy and live your life. I strongly suspect that they'll barely think about you at all.

I really don't think the full quotation makes it any better...I do understand what aspirational means, and I grasped what she was getting at, but surely it's completely trivialising the issue. Why would trans people welcome being the new version of "gay best friend" or "token black" to be paraded around because it's so HOT right now?? (can only do that in a Zoolander voice)

You do not talk for all trans people, nor does this thread seek to talk for all lesbians.

You are talking about yourself. Try looking at it from another perspective.

Lesbianism, bisexuality and homosexuality exist as a sexual preference. All united to engage the public at large to the discrimination they faced. This is history. And it's well known that radical feminists started the change. However, it seems that homosexuals, like Owen, have ignored history and just tagged himself along with those that will follow him. Transgender was new at that time, but was certainly accepted, especially within rad fem circles, not so much within homosexual circles.

BTW, I make the difference in lesbianism and homosexuality historically, because now they are both 'gay'. Thank goodness!

But it doesn't surprise you historically that there was no acceptance within the homosexual community at that time.?

Yet, as a transwoman* you do not validate the help that was given at that time by radfems.

You mean this paragraph?

"The struggle is complicated for another reason. When I wrote about trans rights earlier this year, I encountered one of the angriest and most determined backlashes against anything I have written. It did not come from knuckle-dragging bigots but from self-described radical feminists who are not, to say the least, inclusive of trans people. I was a misogynist; I was obsessively asked if I would perform cunnilingus on a trans man; female friends who communicated with me were informed I hated women; my trans friends were really “pouty men”; and so on. They do not want trans women in toilets, a cause being championed by the Republican right in the United States. It made me slightly anxious about engaging with this issue again. Again, this isn’t about me, but it educated me about the cruel perverse prejudice that trans people encounter, not simply from the bigoted right, but from supposed progressives too."

I would deduce from that paragraph that OJ doesn't like women much. Also he has appropriated heterosexual male speak i.e. describing women as 'bigoted right'. And he also used the phrase 'Republican right in the United States'. As well as 'progressives'.

So a clever shutting down of discussion, but you know, women have the same brain structure as him, and, surprisingly are just as clever. So we will speak.

Look it up if it's not something you know about. Do your research and fact check your answers.