Terrible article from the Independent

[catgirl1976]

Here www.indy100.com/article/trans-lives-matter-shon-faye-juno-dawson-riley-carter-india-willoughby-travis-alabanza-annie-wallace-8099866

What can 'cis' people do to be better allies to transpeople in 2018.

I don't even know where to start with this.

That's the Guardian and the Independent off my list now. Politically homeless and driven to reading The Times.

It's not all terrible. Linda Bellos and I think Germaine Greer would use preferred pronouns because it's the kind thing to do. I would do that. I wouldn't ask intrusive questions about the state of their genitals.

However, I equally would not refer to myself as cis-gendered and I would refute the notion that I had a gender identity.

Excellent article.

""During 2017, the press published a lot of myth and misinformation about trans people..."

Oh yes. Lots of it. In the Times and the Daily Fuhrer Wail Mail, huge amounts of time, energy and print wasted outright prejudice and bigotry. The Daily Fuhrer Wail Mail published naked photo's of trans youth without those youths permission. Because apparently using naked photo's of youths without consent isn't wrong if those young people are trans.

I find the repeated use of the phrase "moral panic" to be extremely annoying. Some people might have a "moral panic" about the increase in trans identifying people, but that's nothing to do with the issues raised by feminists. It's a dismissive sweep to try and put you in your place - if you raise issues around the demands of trans activists then you are some kind of right-wing moraliser who thinks being trans is immoral.

Yes I started reading it but they are just droning on about their self obsessed selves. And they are all Really Fucking Dull

Couldn’t get beyond Shon Faye, who on Twitter has looked forward to women being ‘erased’ and who has threads on which his followers argue that women shouldnt worry about safety when trans women are around as “feminists are too ugly to rape” telling me what to do to make him feel nice.

Exactly Assassinated

Women wanting to be consulted on potential legislation that affects them is not moral panic.

Believing that giving hormones to children of any age with no regulation is abusive and dangerous is not moral panic.

@ALunerExplorer did the DM have to issue an apology for that? It would seem like a big transgression of the press code of conduct, if not actually illegal?

Look at me striking out words is so clever

Lol, a load of fetishistic males and the token females telling women how to be better handmaidens. Shon Faye is creepy as fuck and also wrote an article a few years back about how he was a man who enjoyed wearing makeup and that's ok, yet now he's doing the whole 'I'm a woman and always have been' thing. Except for that article though, obvs.

If they did issue an apology, then I missed it.

I did see lots and lots and lots of 'feminists' sharing the article without any pause or hesitation - because the fact of that lack of consent wasn't even remotely as important to them as trying to back up some anti-trans argument.

Not to divert from the OP too much, but I failed to understand why the we weren't all getting outraged at Lewis Hamilton because the worst thing he did wasn't shouting at his nephew: it was shouting at his nephew and then parading his nephew in front of his millions of social media followers - something a 2 year old cannot give their consent to.

Honestly, if I see one more article monstering and commodifying trans children, pumping out distorted information and outright lies, I am going to scream.

I found myself sympathetic to the first couple of writers but when I'm being told not to use 'He, She' Miss, Sir' I"m afraid they have lost me.....

Of course people were upset about Lewis Hamilton. It was all over my social media with comments about how appalling his behaviour was.

I don't want to ask you to link to the DM article as it sounds like it shouldn't in any way be promoted, but I really don't know what article you mean. I don't think I saw anything like it being shared on social media by the feminists that I follow.

So you don't have a comment to make about the Daily Mail not seeking consent and - essentially - engaging in 'revenge porn'?

Duly noted.

Oh dear ALuner that sounds a lot like an MRA line, "why weren't you feminists outraged at xxxx?"

I saw lots of outrage over Lewis Hamilton, both for his cruel comments and also for putting a small child on social media in order to ridicule him. Maybe you were looking elsewhere?

Wtf?

" It would seem like a big transgression of the press code of conduct, if not actually illegal?"

These articles are idiotic. Full of nonsense and very hostile to women.

Back in ... November, if I recall correctly. It was focussed on Alex Bertie who is a trans man, and the excuse used for using those pictures without consent, was because it was about breast binding.

Maybe, but my point is not 'why aren't feminists xx'

My point is - why are some feminists prepared to throw something as absolutely fundamental as consent, out of the window when it supports an anti-trans agenda?

Why are some feminists prepared to look the other way when the naked children being exploited are trans?

And why are some feminists always looking for ways to avoid talking about that whenever it is raised?

Whilst I despise the Daily Heil it is worth pointing out that the pictures they used were taken from Alex Berties public Youtube videos so whilst morally consent should have been required, legally it wasn't.

And he was 20 when the picture were taken. So not really a child.

I'm not defending the Mail but facts are always important.

Alex Bertie- that would be the same Alex Bertie who is all over YouTube talking about transitioning including showing their torso after their mastectomy?

That's the one.

Thank you Catgirl1976 - now I know what is being spoken about.

Surely images on youtube are designed to be shared??

Cross posted Catgirl Alex Bertie put those photographs in the public domain. Luner was writing as if the Mail had snapped the photos without consent.