Julie Burchill - I knew I was right...

[CircleSquareCircleSquare]

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/04/i-knew-i-was-right/

“If only the trans-lobby had an iota of self-knowledge and respect towards women who have come by their consciousness through the long hard slog of growing up female rather than by the skill of the surgeon’s knife. And if only the likes of Mumsnet and the Guardian – who are belatedly taking on the trans-lobby – had had the nerve to be feminists five years ago.”

so is it really unreasonable to suggest that the industrial qualities of artificial hormones which are vital to male-to-female transition might make the lucky recipients a little, um, excitable?

teehee just watched a very funny BBT episode last night, the one where Wolowitz has been applying oestregen ointment to his mother, without wearing gloves. 😂

"If y'all want to support a homophobe who only targets female bisexuals, and call yourself feminists"

Found the TRA. What is it with them and that word? Also, have they been back yet after being provided with links about trans women committing assaults in women only spaces? No? Thought not.

They did stick around longer than usual. Perhaps they will be back once they've had their script updated.

I agree that Dittany was waaaay ahead of the game several years ago. I too thought she was too hard line and transwomen just wanted to be who they felt they were, couldn't see the problem with that then. I still don't see a problem with transwomen being who they are BUT I totally disagree with the current trend for self-ID without any safeguards, AND the erosion of women's rights.

I also will never subscribe to being called a cis-woman.

The article was mostly about Julie burchhill and about how male to female transsexuals can be aggressive and intimidating on Twitter.

It didn't go into specifics on why many people object to the agenda that the most aggressive transwomen are pushing. I read it as how JB and her mates have suffered at the hands of TRAs, which makes it look like a media/internet spat. I don't think anyone not knowing the details of what is actually happening would be anymore enlightened.

Answering the post about wether Bi-Sexual women exists, yes they do , many of us have been caught out over the years, meeting women who claim to be Lesbians then finding out the lodger is the boyfriend !
and then wants to join in or watch , I don't share my g/F with nobody and certainly not men! which leaves more for the straight women
these days its fashionable to be Pansexual , whatever rocks your boat ?

I have many straight women colleagues and friends they know and I know there is nothing there for either of us , its like straight women falling in love with Gay men
I don't hate anyone , apart from my brother ha ha

but even if I was single I wouldn't date a bi-woman , or mess with one or mess with our straight female friends if she was drunk !

but that hasn't stopped their husbands and boyfriends trying it on , when we have our womens only dinner partys , and their DH turn up early to our house to collect our straight female friends , and get pissed off when my G/F or myself wont let them in our house !

we right all the worlds wrongs ! you should try it sometime !

The Burch is back

I like the coffeehouse bits of the Spectator but the comments always seem dominated by people who enjoy the posh people opinion pieces at the back that I skim through.

I've lost track of which Julie did the bisexual piece - Bindel I think - but what I took from it wasn't at all that bisexuals don't exist. It was that all the women being sold the 'bi-curious' makes you more interesting line back in the day was an insult to actual bisexuals.

“"If y'all want to support a homophobe who only targets female bisexuals, and call yourself feminists"

Found the TRA. What is it with them and that word? “

Like ‘literal’ or ‘literally’ - the new word for “let’s pretend”.

Tanith Yes, I was thinking the same.

Y'all and folks sound fine if the speaker is from Alabama, but awfully silly if they're from Aberdeen.

I looked back at that thread from 2013 that discussed the Julie Burchill article. I notice it was started by kim147, who is trans, and who I've always found very likeable. Her posts have been deleted, though.

I was curious to see if I'd posted on the thread, and I had done. What I wrote was:

"Julie Burchill isn't really known for understating her case, is she? I've been reading articles by her for over 30 years and I've never thought "Well, that was a reasonable, fair-minded summary of the arguments."

"She gets work partly because she's a professional controversialist - but then so are lots of people. She also has a gift for the telling jibe, the cutting barb, that far fewer people possess.

"I notice in this piece she uses one of her favourite attack methods - I'm working class, and you aren't, so there! Bless."

I still stand by that. At the time, though, I was angry that the Observer pulled the article and wrote to tell them so. It was because it was obvious to me that the outrage wasn't coming from ordinary Observer/Guardian readers but had been orchestrated by people whipping up a fuss on social media. I thought it was a very bad idea on the Observer's part to allow itself to be manipulated by a group of people who weren't even the paper's readers. It seemed to set an unfortunate precedent. I absolutely stand by that too - that initial success must have given them confidence in the use of tactics to close down free speech. Look where it's got us today.

Angry - that is just what I tell the dds when language creeps in from them binge watching “the next step “...

Maybe with all this "y'all" and "folks", they're trying to channel Dolly Parton?

Shame they're not channeling her talent and charm too.

Jesus do they not employ editors at The Spectator? So many typos it's hard not to get distracted by them.

@AngryAttackKittens Indeed.

“Y'all and folks sound fine if the speaker is from Alabama, but awfully silly if they're from Aberdeen.”

I think it demostrates how suggestible these people are. They’re evidently conversing with Americans who use these idioms. How quickly they have adopted these speech patterns for themselves!

I had a look at threads from 2011-12 and it was discussed on here and I had contributed to them. I wasn't quite where I am yet but I can tell I was getting there at that point. Anyway my point is that Mumsnet was discussing it but the issue was extremely contentious then as it is now. The passing of time has only made the issues more significant. I am glad people Like Burchill addressed it then and more please they are STILL addressing it rather than backing down.

It is an issue which is still deliberately misrepresented as being a problem with 'all trans' when it isn't about individuals at all it is about ideology, policing of language and zealous dogma. It has never been about transgender people in toilets really but about upholding rights of women and the potential for people who are not genuinely transgender to abuse a vague and imprecise law. The fact it keeps being turned into this 'hatred of trans', 'eradication of all trans people', 'literal violence' and all those emotive catch phrases we have come to know so well is evidence of the discussion not being had and little tidbits and slogans monopolising the debate. I'm sure some people do little more than read Twitter statuses and believe them without looking any further. The mindless repetition of dogma and unthinking capitulation to altering language and blurring definitions is one of the most problematic aspects - it is very difficult to have a reasonable discussion in this situation. I'm sure most of us have wondered whether that is the point; to make critical discussion impossible; to make reasonable criticism seem like hate.

Can we even meet in the middle without the language to proceed?

I hope we can - there are vulnerable people on both sides.

*contributed under another name - I might add.

Do you mean Isi’s private garden ?

Oops. Totally wrong place for that

I think it is vital to keep in mind that TRAs do not have the support of a lot of Trans people, in the same way that MRA's do not have the support of many men.

I am very clear that I have concerns around the actions of some TRA's, not around the Trans community, who I have been supportive of for nearly 30 years.

And yet, inexplicably, TRAs do seem to have significant ideological support from senior politicians.

I know. Politicians tend to pay attention to whoever is shouting loudest, especially when those shouting are fully paid up misogynists. And at the moment, this is a smashing distraction from lots of problems both at home and internationally - bread and circuses and all that.