Not having sex with someone because they don't have the right genitals is transphobic. No prizes for guessing who's claiming this

[Doyoumind]

RM is busy trying to justify their support for a particularly unpleasant tweet yesterday. For those of you who are blocked, I'll add some grabs.

This has to be a joke in some weird way? Sorry, I've only just read it but what the actual fuck??

Yeah I felt that McKinnon was attention seeking or self justifying.

Maybe both. Who knows

It's also 'literally' (one of their fave words) RM's job to disagree with people on Twitter, so they say. No one else's arguments can stand up to theirs because they are a philosopher, don't you know.

Or even trolling

If a male person wants to have sex with a woman, but not in the typical man's role, may I suggest the novel idea of being considerate and not just jackhammering away?

When TRAs talk about sex they always sound like they're picturing two stereotypes stereotyping away at each other. It's so weird.

then what the hell are you supposed to do

Makes rather clear that you're a prop in the situation rather than an equal and active participant.

Mind you, it doesn't send the shudder down my spine that the tweet does about the poor woman with ptsd about penises whose partner with a penis makes it (sex) work . I suspect I've read too many accounts from transwidows who have been the subject of sex being made to work for the benefit of the most important person in the relationship.

Freedom programme. Seriously. I don't care if you're male, female, trans, pan, Klingon, unicorn, furry, whatever. Run a mile from someone who doesn't treat you as an equal and doesn't treat your feelings and needs and sexual pleasure with the same importance they expect you to treat theirs. Unequal expectations where one partner has the right of more and better than the other is the hallmark of an abusive relationship. No one has to settle for that. No one.

Sex as described by the transwidows sounds like a trip to the dentist, but afterwards you have more decay than you did when you first walked in the door.

When TRAs talk about sex they always sound like they're picturing two stereotypes stereotyping away at each other. It's so weird.

That's a great description! And yes, it is.

Oh dear...

twitter.com/rachelvmckinnon/status/1179732800473305089?s=20

First question for McKinnon about trans athletes:

Are they all as unhinged as you?

Second question:

Do you honestly believe that if you position yourself as a spokesperson and work to get yourself heard, you won’t be asked about all the other shit you’ve posted? Sexuality? Dancing on the grave of a dead person? Wanting people to die in grease fires?

They mean supererogatory. Maybe they don't know what they're talking about.

"They mean supererogatory. Maybe they don't know what they're talking about."

According to McK's philosophy work, his entire paper/thesis or whatever it is called was based on exactly that theory.

Yes I linked to the Amazon page for it upthread. There are only 3 reviews, but they are amusing.

Do you honestly believe that if you position yourself as a spokesperson and work to get yourself heard, you won’t be asked about all the other shit you’ve posted? Sexuality? Dancing on the grave of a dead person? Wanting people to die in grease fires?

I know right? Everyone else can see it except McKinnon. It's extraordinary. Their credibility is forever fucked.

I know right? Everyone else can see it except McKinnon.

Tokenism is a very powerful tool for people like them, it doesn't matter what he does their will be no consequences..

His university may not be imposing sanctions. But no-one bought McKinnon's book, their talk was cancelled, and now their interview. Plus even hard-core allies are dumping on them.

There is a difference between supererogatory and suberogatory. Supererogatory means something that is good to do but you don't have to do it (like giving to charity.) Suberogatory would mean something that is not wrong to do, but it's not good either.

There's a massive difference between something being immoral and something being suberogatory though. I would say that suberogatory acts aren't even in the moral realm at all - it's not wrong to chew gum but it's not particularly morally good either.

But McKinnon literally just tweeted that rejecting people based on their genitals is 'problematic' which suggests that it's wrong - not a morally neutral act. So 'suberogatory' isn't the right word - immoral was the best term to use all along!

As an aside, I used to work in academic philosophy and I'm very embarrassed by the way Rachel is behaving. Rachel is not a good representative of the discipline. In fact, Rachel resembles some of my worst, most obnoxious students.

I'd like to meet RM. We could have a wee chat over a coffee and see if they can keep this stuff up in person, like Dustin Hoffman method acting, or whether they turn it on only with their laptop.

Remarkable, anyway. And, this person is an academic? cancels all plans to send MiniVivariums to Canada for university

Surely after releasing the research paper thing , taking back the tweet is pointless ?

I mean theres an actual paper explaining it all..

If ever there was a film about McKinnon, then I think the lead role would have to go to someone like Will Ferrell.
If this whole thing is not a parody, then I think McKinnon is going to crash and burn spectacularly.

The reverse ferret! Never thought McKinnon would be one to cave. Wonder if they'll welcome the sinner back into the fold.

I guess it shouldn't be surprising that a professional cyclist should be so adept at back-pedalling and astute enough to realise you can delete away to your little heart's content but when the screenshots and the receipts are out there...guess it sucks to be RM today.

There was a tweet somewhere in that car crash thread which was RM saying something like "I thought this [their POV] was pretty accepted in the trans community"

Looks like they tried to do a dog whistle post to stoke the fires up, but it massively backfired.

So RM is either saying they were completely wrong in the first place; or that they are at odds with the wider community they purport to be a leading light in.

The reverse ferret!

Fun, but not as fun as Owen's eventual reverse ferret will be.