Gruaniad staffer credited with coming up with the term terf says it's cis-hetero-centric to credit her for it

[QuietContraryMary]

Really.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/29/im-credited-with-having-coined-the-acronym-terf-heres-how-it-happened

This is like peak Guardian.

"Due to a short series of blogposts from 2008, I have retrospectively been credited as the coiner of the acronym “Terf” (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists). I suspect I’m merely the first person who wrote it on a website that still exists"

"It was passionate trans women activists online whose strong advocacy of their right to exist as women in the world showed me just how dehumanising the trans-hostile rhetoric is from some radfems about them. Yet as a cis-het woman with a mainly digital activism history, I have been credited while contributions of dedicated trans inclusion advocates such as Lisa Harney to those discussions have been overlooked. The pseudonyms common back then do complicate attributions, but it’s also an ongoing problem in this feminist discussion – it’s rarely been trans women who are handed the microphone to voice their own experiences, "

So to summarise:

• men starting shouting 'TERF' at women, and accompanying this with male violence directed at said women
• people started noticing and looking for the original source of the word, as you do.

They found an article here, from 2008 hoydenabouttown.com/2008/08/17/carnivalia-transgenderism-and-the-gender-binary/ with 'TERF' in it.

And hence in etymological terms that's the source. (If someone else could be found who used the term first then they would be credited, etymology/word history doesn't care about your feelings)

And the response of that author is some utter bollocks about 'transwomen not being handed the microphone', as if it was that hard to post something on the internet or transwomen are somehow absent from the internet, like some sort of tropical island uncontacted tribe with no-one to record their folklore.

Incidentally there is a point here, aside from the 'cishet' nonsense that libfems (such as Ruth Hunt) do deserve a great deal of the 'credit' for the current state of trans rights.

What an embarrassing thing to be remembered for. I almost feel sorry for her.

Well, at least the myth that GC women started calling themselves TERFs or that it is a scientific/scholarly term is laid to rest.

That the woman who introduced the term into the mainstream tries to hide behind some unnamed TRAs (presumably male) speaks for itself.

Im not a Terf. I think im going to try and coin Pew. Penis exclusionary women. If you have a penis your not a woman (imo). Also makes me think of pepe le pew totally unrelated.

I had the misfortune of reading this article over breakfast. Check out this paragraph which, among all the other nonsense, stands out as being particularly untrue:

God is it any wonder the Guardian's circulation is in the toilet.

Well, who cares if Karen White or Jacinta (?) pretended to be trans or are real trans? That they happened is reason enough not to send bepenised people to women‘s prison. Idiot author.

behind some unnamed TRAs

She's named one too.

The fact that they are male and women's privacy and dignity should be respected is (or should be if you're not a misogynist) a good enough reason to exclude them from women's spaces.

True. One named. Of course women’s dignity should be reason enough. But I find it enraging that the author talks about hypotheticals, as if White had never happened (or as if categorizing White as honest trans would change anything).

deepwater
But I find it enraging that the author talks about hypotheticals, as if White had never happened (or as if categorizing White as honest trans would change anything)
Exactly.
When coupled with the claim that "processes are far tighter than many would have others believe", it's clear that facts count for absolutely nothing unless they are being used and distorted to strengthen the argument for self-id.
It isn't enough that women have a right to privacy and safety and still it isn't enough when we have evidence that predators are abusing the current system and have actually harmed women.

It isn't enough that women have a right to privacy and safety and still it isn't enough when we have evidence that predators are abusing the current system and have actually harmed women.

YY

Lol, so modest.

Growing up I wanted to be a journalist. Despite being a vaguely competent writer, my teachers repeatedly told me that it was really really hard to get paid work or ever write for any of the big, respected papers. So I went off in a different direction. So when I read this kind of rubbish, I feel more than a bit cheesed off that it turns out they let any old person through the door and I could have made something of myself after all.

It's so embarrassing anyone will even print these terrible articles. Self-flagellation in print is what it is. 'I'm too privileged. I'm so sorry'

it’s rarely been trans women who are handed the microphone to voice their own experiences

Sheesh, someone actually wrote that with a straight face?

Yes, the kind of blithering self hating panderer who wrote this abject excuse for a guardian article.

from the article
I, for example, avoid being in company with proudly public misogynists,

I bet she spends a lot of time with proud misogynists, they're just not wearing T Shirts or badges with it written on

ultimately arguments based on theoretical machinations of hypothetical predatory individuals don’t strike me as anywhere near good enough reason to exclude every trans woman from the circle of feminist trust.

Protecting women's spaces is about safety, privacy and dignity.
These are sex-based rights

The spaces exist & are neccessary for all women and girls. Many of whom are not feminists.

This article comes from Guardian Australia.
The similarly bad one that was written a few weeks ago came from Guardian USA.

I'm curious to know where editorial responsibiliity and power is vested with what seem to be franchised versions.

It was (I presume) the Guardian Australia which churned out all of the supportive pieces about and by Hannah Mouncey.

arguments based on theoretical machinations of hypothetical predatory individuals...

Does this woman have no idea how prevalent sexual abuse is? Has she read none of the recent articles on the epidemic of sexual violence in our schools?

ultimately arguments based on theoretical machinations of hypothetical predatory individuals don’t strike me as anywhere near good enough reason to exclude every trans woman from the circle of feminist trust.

It doesnt matter whether it strikes her as good enough. She doesn't get to override other women's refusal to consent.

At its core, that's what this whole thing boils down to. Does a male-bodied person have the right to override a woman's 'no' when she wants privacy and enter that space without her consent?
Can someone else override her consent if they deem her unreasonable?
AFAIK a woman's right to say no when it comes to her body and privacy is absolute.
But TRAs apparently think there are exceptions.

‘Why I am so far up my own a* I can taste my own tonsils’ by Ace Reporter.l, aged 14 and 3/4

"I do find the renewed interest over the last few years in writing of mine from a decade ago disconcerting."

I wonder - has there been a lot of renewed interest in her writing, or did she just want to talk about terfs in the Guardian? Because the crux of the piece seems to be "here's why Viv Smythe doesn't like terfs," not "here's how the word 'terf' came to be attributed to Viv Smythe."

I wish the Guardian would stop publishing this irresponsible guff.

LordFekko

Gosh, that's impenetrable copy with lots of long, long sentences with identity-politic-speak.

Can't be arsed to click through to read it all!

Did she really use the phrase 'circle of trust'?

I need a Robert DeNiro gif right about here...