Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

How British feminism became anti-trans - according to the New York Times

295 replies

NotTerfNorCis · 07/02/2019 14:54

www.nytimes.com/2019/02/07/opinion/terf-trans-women-britain.html

A surprisingly mainstream movement of feminists known as TERFs oppose transgender rights as a symptom of “female erasure.”

Beginning to suspect the writer has a bias...

There, the most vocal trans-exclusionary voices are, ostensibly, “feminist” ones, and anti-trans lobbying is a mainstream activity. Case in point: Ms. Parker told the podcast “Feminist Current” that she’d changed her thinking on trans women after spending time on Mumsnet, a site where parents exchange tips on toilet training and how to get their children to eat vegetables. If such a place sounds benign, consider the words of British writer Edie Miller: “Mumsnet is to British transphobia,” she wrote “what 4Chan is to American fascism.”

The term coined to identify women like Ms. Parker and Ms. Long is TERF, which stands for Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist. In Britain, TERFs are a powerful force. If, in the United States, the mainstream media has been alarmingly ready to hear “both sides” on the question of trans people’s right to exist, in Britain, TERFs have effectively succeeded in framing the question of trans rights entirely around their own concerns: that is, how these rights for others could contribute to “female erasure.”

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
DancelikeEmmaGoldman · 08/02/2019 07:00

I’ve managed to plough my way through Julia Kristeva and Hélène Cixous, and as difficult as I found them, they made more sense than this piece of more-post-modernist-scribble-words-than-thou piece of nonsense. It really, actually, makes no sense. And when the words are coherent the content is bullshit.

Penis + vagina is heterosexual sex; trying to define it as some form of lesbian sex is not only offensive but fanciful.

The article transformed me into a stake-holder, I’m feeling more than a little stabby at this vampire article which sucks meaning and sense out of words and leaves them pale and trembling on the side of the page.

On the other hand, FWR is apparently much more powerful than we realised.

How British feminism became anti-trans - according to the New York Times
DodoPatrol · 08/02/2019 07:22

Meanwhile, I’m getting adverts for flea and tick treatment. Does my app have a very odd sense of humour?

DisrespectfulAdultFemale · 08/02/2019 07:59

Fuck off, NYT.

hackmum · 08/02/2019 08:01

Please, everyone, do read the Jane Clare Jones rebuttal. It's one of the most magnificent things I've ever read.

NotBadConsidering · 08/02/2019 08:06

rare subtype of lesbian sex that involves vaginal penetration with bio-cock

I just...can’t even...

DisrespectfulAdultFemale · 08/02/2019 08:09

The full stop stores may have been colonised by the inverted commas.

Or colons. If you see what I mean.

OnTheDarkSideOfTheSpoon · 08/02/2019 08:12

bostonreview.net/forum/all-reproduction-assisted/sophie-lewis-mothering

This is the article written by the author of the nyt piece where the quote about being a stakeholder because she has a trans fiancé came from

Bowlofbabelfish · 08/02/2019 08:16

They are rattled. FWR, the women on and off FWR who are getting this into the public eye to talk about it and shine light on it - we worry them. We are asking awkward questions that don’t have the ‘right’ answers

Keep talking.

FlyingOink · 08/02/2019 08:35

Three word summary:

‘Eat me last’

Grin
NotTerfNorCis · 08/02/2019 08:45

Speaking of desperate and lashing out, I see McKinnon is in a frenzy again. twitter.com/rachelvmckinnon/status/1093563584058028032?s=19

Being a transphobic piece of shit is a CHOICE and is mutable. If you don't want to be called a TERF, just stop being a transphobic shitbag.

OP posts:
boatyardblues · 08/02/2019 08:46

McKinnon’s hissy fits on Twitter bring out my inner teenager. “Whatevahhh!”

merrymouse · 08/02/2019 08:49

She writes re: 'Full surrogacy now':

"This might sound like a radical proposal, but expanding our idea of who children belong to would be a good thing. Taking collective responsibility for children, rather than only caring for the ones we share DNA with, would radically transform notions of kinship. "

But there's nothing particularly radical about this. Lots of societies have developed ways to share childcare, whether it's by having multiple wives, sending your child out to a wet nurse or forming kibbutzes. The common thread is that women still have to have the children, and women still end up doing all the child care.

As a solution to liberate women it's as detached from reality as suggesting 'purity rings' are a reliable form of contraception. On the other hand 'taking collective responsibility for children' while keeping the women pregnant seems to be popular practice in cults.

CuriousaboutSamphire · 08/02/2019 08:53

I legitimately believe that many TERFs, cops, etc, have internalised their beliefs to the point they basically consider them immutable parts of their being If anyone can translate that last twitter reply for me, I'd be less bemused!

Legitimatley believe = ??

And the rest of it is just weird, lacks internal coherence.. or am I just too tired?

whatsthecomingoverthehill · 08/02/2019 08:56

Ironic that she's going on about how transphobic the UK is when it is the USA which has been introducing laws to actively limit what trans people can do.

And again, it is focusing on women as being the nasty bigots when it is almost exclusively men who actively harm trans people.

nettie434 · 08/02/2019 09:03

‘Potential changes to a law called the Gender Recognition Act, which would allow people in Britain to self-define’
That is a really misleading statement. Somebody who did not know about the consultation would just assume transgender people had no existing legal rights here. And to imply that the media coverage is all one sided. Confused Think I will offer NYT an op ed on something I know very little about. I could not do any worse.

frazzled1 · 08/02/2019 09:04

bio-cock ? Hmm

Ladycock surely?...... . Being a rare subtype and all that.

procreative timing question Is that 'possibility of pregnancy' in standard speak?

Utter twaddle. PIV sex is standard ol' hetero sex however speshul brave & stunning you consider yourself to be.

OrchidInTheSun · 08/02/2019 09:09

Dear Sophie,

If you're fucking someone with a penis, you're not in a rare subset of lesbian relationships, you're in a heterosexual one.

Stop with the homophobia

R0wantrees · 08/02/2019 09:09

This article is worth saving as a valuable teaching resource.

nettie434 · 08/02/2019 09:20

There are too many witty posts on this thread to thank everyone but Flyingoink pachyderm especially made me splutter into my coffee.

Needmoresleep · 08/02/2019 09:31

MN has come a long way. Wasn't the first media focus about asking a politician what sort of biscuits they preferred. Now MN is accused by the NYT of leading some sort of facist movement. What next?

CaptainKirksSpookyghost · 08/02/2019 09:34

What next

THE WORLD!!!!!

OvaHere · 08/02/2019 09:34

This author seems to be the ultimate student in Humpty Dumptyish words mean whatever I say they mean.

Chaotica · 08/02/2019 10:20

Jane Clare Jones Star Star Star

pachyderm · 08/02/2019 10:42

So Sophie is a straight woman in a hetero relationship with a man then?😣 Bio cock??

I cannot believe these relentless attacks on lesbians, it's the worst publicly sanctioned homophobia I've seen in my 40something years.

Also, how do these people get degrees from Oxford?

hackmum · 08/02/2019 11:29

Needmoresleep: "Wasn't the first media focus about asking a politician what sort of biscuits they preferred."

That was predated by the great furore over She Who Shall Not Be Named. (OK, Gina Ford. But pretend I didn't mention it.)

Swipe left for the next trending thread