Was Hatshepsut transgender?

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

Just saw this tweet form amnesty:

During #LGBTHistoryMonth we are highlighting notable LGBT+ figures from history. Hatshepsut (1507 BC - 1458 BC) fifth Pharaoh of the 18th Dynasty of Egypt, one of the most successful pharaohs in history. born a woman, used female pronouns but presented herself as a King #LGBTHM19 t.co/H4GWvcj7lg

I have to confess my historical knowledge is massively lacking, but I hadn't heard that before?

Of course she presented as a King, that was the top job in royal terms and she didn’t want to be second place. See also: Elizabeth I’s refusal to marry.

It’s like history has no context for TRAs, doesn’t it?

Somebody predicted this on the thread about the crossdressing surgeon.

She was a godwife wasn't she?
Woman is implied.

So the logic is that any woman who acquired a traditionally male title, in an era when this was usually forbidden for women, must be a transman??

I find it offensive that the achievements of notable women are being erased and re-categorised as transgender.

In this case it's even more stupid because there was no doubt at all that she was female. So which one of LGBT+ are they claiming her for?

She was the one with the fake golden beard wasn't she?

Fake gold beard and voracious appetite for her slaves if I remember the tour so not lbtq?

I find it offensive that the achievements of notable women are being erased and re-categorised as transgender

So do i

No. Mulan isn't trans either. Nor is Merida from Brave. Nor George from the Famous Five. Nor the Bronte sisters. Nor George Elliot. Nor Joan of Arc. Nor any other woman who had to use male costume or male names in order to be taken seriously or survive in a patriarchy that didn't let women step out of the social box created for them. To call it trans is missing the point so badly the person doing it has to be hard of thinking.

Just reading a book about her interestingly. She would have have had no choice but to present herself in this way given the context of the time so it’s a particularly daft thing to say.

I'm surprised there hasn't been a clear claim made on Elizabeth 1st, as she made the speech about having the body of a weak and feeble woman, but the heart and stomach of a king. Surely no clearer sign that she was a transman?

the logic is that any woman who acquired a traditionally male title, in an era when this was usually forbidden for women, must be a transman??

As far as I can make sense of this lunacy, bearing in mind new loops appear on a weekly basis:

Trans WAS defined by body dysphoria - who knows if any historical woman had that or experienced a sense of their gender essence not matching their bodily sex - but now that's all wrong and bad for some reason.

So now it's anyone who thinks they are/chooses to be.

Which is evolving to any female who steps even slightly out of the extremely stereotypical rigid box that seems to be being defined solely by trans people and not women - there was one on FWR the other day saying women didn't swear/talk like that/have views like that so we were all obviously men in denial. So women who at any point put on stereotypical male costume or used a mans name obviously were transmen.

Which by extension means that pretty much the ONLY women left inside the rigid sex stereotypes box is TW, since women hate those stereotypes and very very few follow them in any meaningful way.

Which is why we're being told now that there are women and cis women, and women don't actually exist anyway.

Which is why, when you've reached the end of this convoluted rubbish, you regret having lost the minutes of your life trying to make sense of it, go back to the beginning of the loop which said gender was a Thing, and say no. Women are a biological reality. Gender for women is a hierarchical game at which their job is to lose. So fuck that.

To call it trans is missing the point so badly the person doing it has to be hard of thinking.

Or they're wise to what trans ideology actually is: enforcing gender (stereotypes) . A woman takes on a stereotypically male role? She must be a man!

Elizabeth I wouldn't be an attractive grab as she never dressed as a man nor called herself King, despite that speech, as far as I know.

Right, we need a Martina of history to get outraged about this wholesale theft and recasting of women's history, and step up to speak out - any suggestions? Mary Beard?

Oh FFS
Are they really this thick.

Assassinated there are several books by people who for decades have been trying to prove that Elizabeth 1 had an intersex condition, because she messes up their internal sex stereotypes by not having obviously had any sexual partners and being anti marriage.

The trauma of experiencing her father murdering women left right and centre including her mother, the appalling manipulation and fates of women born with royal blood by men who wanted to puppet them to have the throne (all the Grey sisters for a start, Margaret Countess of Salisbury for another) and the slow and horrible death of her sister in the power of the man she married, not being considered a good enough reason for her to want to stay single.

Louise

Brilliant

Was she the one with ‘She Whose Every Wish Is Carried Out’ written on her throne? That’s always made me smile.

I find it offensive that the achievements of notable women are being erased and re-categorised as transgender.

I can't help but feel the long term aim is to leave 3.5 billion women with no role models save for Doris Day, circa 1955.

(I have even seen it argued that all GC feminists who point to their childhood tomboy phase in arguing against automatic transing of gender non-conforming children, or who mention that being a woman can't be down to stereotypes because they wear jeans, steel-capped work boots and work in stereotypically masculine jobs - all of us are apparently saying this because we are trans but in denial due to internalised transphobia. As my mother would have said, "Aye, that'll be right...")

It was only a matter of time before they came for her!
silentcrow Yes, we need Mary Beard and the amazing Joann Fletcher, expert Egyptologist who was clear on her BBC programmes that Hatshepsut was a woman with ovaries of steel!.

cinemacities.wordpress.com/2017/04/03/doris-day-in-calamity-jane-1953/ I strongly doubt we will be permitted Doris Day tbh

gaychristiangeek.blogspot.com/2012/07/bear-bow-and-boy-queering-pixars-brave.html Has everyone already seen this on Merida btw?

“So the logic is that any woman who acquired a traditionally male title, in an era when this was usually forbidden for women, must be a Transman?”
There was a Twitter move yesterday to suggest that Martina was trans....

I would love to see Joann Fletcher take apart this load of shite! Can envisage it now, would be incredible :)

I thought that Hatshepsut married her half brother Thutmose 2nd aged 12, and they had a daughter Neferure.
She ordered that she be portrayed in images and statues with big muscles and a beard, but apparently wore female regalia.

Transgender ideology's slavish belief in gender stereotypes supports a belief that only male people could rule Ancient Egypt, and that any female ruler must have been a transgender person.

Some sources say that pharaoh means king; some other sources say that pharaoh means ruler or monarch. Transgender ideology can use the king meaning of pharaoh to trans a female pharaoh because transgender supporters claim she a king (not a ruler/monarch) and gender stereotypes dictate that a king must be a man. Using the ruler/monarch meaning of pharaoh, however, does not require transing of a female pharaoh.

Wherearemyminions
I absolutely love Joann Fletcher & I'm seriously hoping she catches wind of this. I'd pay to witness the takedown!