Transactivism as a cover for misogynistic attacks on women

[pisacake]

This seems to be a major issue.

And it's one reason why transwomen should not be referred to as women, because it opens up the 'I can't be misogynistic, I'm a woman' defence.

I was looking at this:

www.artlyst.com/news/intersex-denier-mary-beard-issues-one-word-apology-non-binary-hunger-striker/

Basically the man there is transgender, and isn't intersex, but imagines he is. broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/43ggpw/ela-xora-the-trans-artist-and-campaigner-in-the-silver-mask. He campaigns for intersex people (I bet they wish he didn't), and he decided to completely make up some lies about Mary Beard being an 'intersex denier', went on 'hunger strike', tweeting her about how he was going to kill himself if she didn't apologise for some sort of conspiracy theory about hiding all the intersex statues from antiquity.

www.world-arts.com/artist-on-sleeping-hermaphroditus-hunger-strike-performance-2/ twitter.com/ElaXora/status/933612515426172928

He claims to have Stephen Fry on his side:

twitter.com/ElaXora/status/934407669934379008

Is there ANY precedent for male academics being told what to say and think by men on threat of suicide? Or is this just something that happens to women?

It is clear to me that men will ALWAYS trump women when the men play the oppression card (something, something Roman intersex babies drowned, something something not even intersex).

Because what can be a better woman than a man?

It wouldn t be the first time historical artefacts have been hidden out of view, disguised or altered to alter the view of history or erase the historical presence/contribution. This has been done loads with regards to race, especially in terms eradication of African history. After all its very hard to justify oppressing people if history shows them as some of greatest civilisation of their time. So it seems perfectly plausible that historic artefacts relating to say evidence of non-binery people have been sanitised over the years to fit the ruling narrative.

They're not 'non-binary', though. That is a modern not ancient term. There are hermaphrodite statues, many of which doubtless have an interesting post-classical history. But you can't just take a modern term and crudely project it onto history, and of all scholars Mary is one of the most sensitive to the way we and our forebears have used the Classics for political ends.

I would've loved Mary's apology to have read "oh do fuck off you whining manchild"

Of course, art produced by women has been airbrushed out of history for centuries...

True, Sgb. That's probably Mary's fault too.

Beard is superb, as well as being a walking demonstration that (admirable) womanhood is not synonymous with femininity.

I can see why people might feel that she's causing problems for their narrative, even if they've misinterpreted the actual reason for this

pisacake
Statue, originally showing a reclining hermaphrodite. The male characteristics and the infants around his breasts were removed from the figure. Two years after its purchase Blundell mentioned them in his Account, but by the time the Engravings catalogue was published the genitals and the infants had been removed.
www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/wml/collections/antiquities/roman/ince-blundell/item-442125.aspx

I find it interesting because it echoes Leo Steinberg's The sexuality of Christ in Renaissance art and in modern oblivion, about another sort of cover up.

pisacake
Statue, originally showing a reclining hermaphrodite. The male characteristics and the infants around his breasts were removed from the figure. Two years after its purchase Blundell mentioned them in his Account, but by the time the Engravings catalogue was published the genitals and the infants had been removed.
www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/wml/collections/antiquities/roman/ince-blundell/item-442125.aspx

I find it interesting because it echoes Leo Steinberg's The sexuality of Christ in Renaissance art and in modern oblivion, about another sort of cover up.

Poor Mary Beard. She gets shit heaped on her for openly knowing what she is talking about and not feeling she needs to dye her hair or be injected with botox before saying it. This brazen self-assurance in a woman drives misogynists absolutely potty - they have such a visceral reaction to it - it beggars belief.

btw - i didn't read the article I think i might lose my shit over it today.

I'm struggling to make sense of these articles. Have I got this right?:

• this person identifies as having a medical condition which they don't actually have.

• this person - a young artist - believes they know more about the classical figure Hermaphroditus than an actual professor of classics, whose academic works are widely published and who has been lecturing in classics since before the artist was even born.

• this person simultaneously holds the beliefs that Mary Beard deliberately keeps Hermaphroditus a secret AND teaches about them in a manner of which the artist does not approve.

• this person is going on hunger strike because they object to a discussion about the representation of Hermaphroditus between Mary Beard, another classics lecturer and their final year Cambridge classics students. The artist was not present at this discussion and does not know what it included, but has decided that it was 'unethical', based on a couple of lines in Mary Beard's blog describing a museum visit.

• this person is trying to link instances of surgery on intersex children to Mary Beard not actively campaigning against it herself.

• they are also trying to link Mary Beard to museum displays curated by completely different people, some of whom are Victorian.

"I imagine the 'sorry!' was a typo for 'fuck off'."

Well it was a reply to asking to being untagged, so not clear if it was 'fuck off you twat', or a 'I'll untag you'

This is the supposed apology twitter.com/wmarybeard/status/936346678260584448

I would love to have seen Mary Beard’s face when she was called a “gender binary merkin”.

I struggle to follow twitter at the best of times... that thread there isn't the best.

What a muddle.

What an absolute wanker.

Apparently he went on another hunger strike and claims to have been taken to hospital

www.artlyst.com/features/transgender-artist-ela-xora-hospitalised-hunger-strike-piers-morgan-comment/

Absolute twat.

Who told you to change it? Where did the pressure come from?

"We've just been told to change a scene where a female character disguises herself as a man, because apparently having a woman pretend to be male is "transphobic."

Oh dear. Poor old Shakespeare is going to be in trouble, as dressing up as the opposite sex is a common occurrence in his plays; Cordelia and Portia immediately springing to mind.

No more Dames in Panto then.

It's historically accurate. Women did disguise themselves as male in order to access areas of opportunities that women were banned from. Or to pass as male for safety reasons.

Why aren't these people who make these demands laughed at and told not to be so silly?

Poor old Shakespeare is going to be in trouble, as dressing up as the opposite sex is a common occurrence in his plays

So ridiculous. How can you do a "historical project" when you don't respect history? Women weren't allowed to be on the stage until the Restoration so all the woman parts had to be played by men. And women wanting to travel alone, run away, escape the structures of society did often dress as men. Eleanor of Aquitaine dressed as a man to flee from her husband Henry II after she encouraged her sons to rebel.

Why aren't these people who make these demands laughed at and told not to be so silly?

Why indeed. And yes, I look forward to next Christmas's Non Transphobic Panto Season.

Bananas - so a woman dressing up as a man pretending to be a man is transphobic? Presumably a man dressing up as a woman and pretending to be a woman is also transphobic? So the GRA is transphobic?

Just other people working on the project. Mostly young women.

It doesn't surprise me. It's just very stupid. Silly little girls.

Have you asked them if it's also transphobic for a man to put on a dress and pretend (and even demand) that he is a woman?

I can't see any transphobia in your proposals whatsoever.