Renouncing the heresy of Terfism

[Driechdrizzle]

This seems to be a new trend in the TRA sphere. Claim to have been taken in by evil TERFs (it's a cult!) for less than principled reasons, then see the light and publicly renounce TERFs and their wicked ways. This one's from New Zealand:

www.metromag.co.nz/society/society-society/terf-trans-activism-cis-gender-critical

What felt “right” or persuasive about what you read?

"I’m struggling to remember the exact thing, but it was something about male and female being clear biological realities and the concept of a man who felt he was in the wrong body was a logical impossibility (I now understand that’s a metaphor which approximates the way people feel).

"The other terrible thing to admit is that there’s something exciting and stimulating about being at the centre of a big drama on Twitter. I said the other day that TERFs were cult-like and I think that’s true. It’s the ‘us against the world’ mentality."

One little addition from the article's author, which is something else they're trying to get written into history -

However the acronym [TERF] was used for a long time by those who agreed with the political philosophy to self-identify.

A great big lie. TERF was invented by useless libfems Hoyden About Town who couldn't stand that radical feminists had better politics than them and weren't afraid to stand up to men. For those sins radical feminists had an insult invented especially for them. An insult that men now use to threaten women with violence. Not much ever changes.

He manages one tiny bit of insight:

I’m an outlier. Most TERFs are women, I assume, mostly lesbians. Their perspective is utterly different to mine.

Yes pal,, radical feminists' perspective is completely different from yours, a man's. No kidding.

I am sure it is a deliberate strategy because, in reality, nobody ever goes from GC to TRA, the traffic is all in the other direction. I have often seen comments to this effect on Twitter & Reddit. Clearly the TRAs are now trying to correct this imbalance by faking being Peak GC.

Meh, each to their own.

I've seen on Twitter someone saying that this is a pattern - there are people claiming to be gender critical but posting very nasty stuff about trans people, then having a damascene conversion and confessing the whole thing in print.

I used to have some fairly uselss libfem views, with an addition of internalised misogyny, but I've never felt the urge to write confessional articles denouncing my previous views and blame remaining lib fems for them.

The giveaway is they can never give a good reason for being GC, it's always to go along with the crowd or something similar.

It's happening on twitter, that's all you need to say.

Bauer Media who own this publication have over 600 titles and a turnover of 2.24 billion Euros, so I don't think this is just happening on Twitter. There is an editorial policy being pursued in publishing this article, not just randoms posting on Twitter.

There is an editorial policy being pursued in publishing this article, not just randoms posting on Twitter.

Yes, and they have the right to do so.

It'll make no difference in the end anyway.

am sure it is a deliberate strategy because, in reality, nobody ever goes from GC to TRA, the traffic is all in the other direction

This. 100%. I speak to and peak people daily, I never hear of anyone going the other way.

The knee jerk inclusivity is to accept TRA arguments in a non-reflexive 'nice' way, and then critical thinking sets in and none of it makes sense.

They are trying to mirror our peak / awakening moments. Which to be fair is a good idea. Even if transparent and unconvincing.

"Yes, and they have the right to do so."

Yes, men have awarded themselves the "right" to own massive media conglomerates and print denunciations of women they see as threatening their interests. You're quite correct.

How do you mean that it will make no difference in the end. What do you see as the end?

I can actually think of 2 people who have very publicly dropped womens rights like a hot potato and embraced TRA politics, but there's been something sinister about the speed and totality of the conversion that makes me want to say 'blink if you need help'.

What do you see as the end?

It's a top down removal of safeguards and rights isn't it, with anyone who objects too loudly currently being put on police lists ready for the future.
Because it's coming from inside governments all over the world it won't be stopped, it's been carefully planned for years.

I think what we are currently doing, informing the public what is happening is great, as they will see it as it happens and for what it is, but it won't be stopped by any kind of authority, it'll be small trusted groups who will stick together.

Weird, I was going to ask on here whether people had heard of ppl changing opinion from GC to TRA, as I'd read many going the other way.

I guess maybe a true transphobe could become accepting of trans people being human beings but that's not what I mean.

"it's been carefully planned for years."

Has it? This is news to me. Could you expand?

Has it? This is news to me. Could you expand?

Look up PIE, look up their history and tactics, look up Peter Gary Tatchell look at work he is currently doing, including around sex education in schools, then look up his views on friends of his having sex with children as young as 9.

Wow that article is really garbled. There doesn't seem to be a coherent actual train of thought there? I don't really get the idea he understood any GC premise or argument, from what that article says. And a healthy dose of 'doubting the alarmist claims' of things that have happened.

Inebriati, back in the day when the rad fem wars were simply around the sex industry and men's right to buy and sell women, there were a few vocal rad fems who suddenly changed their minds and embraced the sex positive gang. Basically they were people without terribly strong boundaries who'd been lovebombed, they'd never really meant any of the radical feminism they'd espoused. Having their ego catered to was more important. There could be something similar going on here.

Look up the BBC and their peadophile ring, also have a look at the Westminster paedophile dossier.

This has been going on behind the scenes for decades Dreich for example the original yogyakarta principles are now 13 years old.
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3228002-Yogyakarta-principles

The GRA was passed in '04 very quietly.
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3375587-Press-for-Change

I know trans activism and the legal changes that have accompanied them have been going on for years, I've been carefully watching this unfold since 2002.

CaptainKirk is linking all this to the Westminster paedophile ring and to Peter Tatchell however, this is what is news to me.

This thread was about a propaganda campaign with talking points that TRAs are currently running, it seems to be being diverted.

I guess it's possible to go from GC to TRA, like some people go from atheist to religious zealot? If the emotional pull is strong enough.

People have said this so many times before but I always recognise this kind of behaviour because it reminds me so much of the abusive relationship I was in.

Any GC argument and narrative eventually gets turned around and used by the other side. We talked about science supporting us. They talk about science supporting them. We talked about it being like a cult. They talk about us being like a cult. We've been peak-transed. They've been peak-GCed. I find it quite amusing.

Yes their accusing GC feminists of being a cult is a bizarre piece of projection. The vast majority of people are GC in that they don't believe that a penis can be female or that it's fair for a man to compete in women's sports. That's not cultish, it's mainstream.

''I used to support Issue X until I discovered they were all being paid by the Kremlin'' was was a tactic used by intelligence agencies against organisations such as CND.
You have to be a bit credulous to fall for it but what do I know? I am a member of a cult that doesn't believe humans can change sex.

As has been pointed out numerous times, the whole schtick with the trans movement is cribbing stuff from everyone else. Patriarchy was being nibbled at quite effectively, and MRAs weren't making headway, but Transactivism, as a hybrid of MRA and wokery, looks like the golden ticket for the fightback of man centred everything.

So you watch the language - totally key, and why FWR has been such a battleground wrt permitted terms and the continual encroachment on what lines we get to hold here.

We talk about basic, proven science. They counter with sub-creationist nonsense about clownfish. We talk about physical realities, they co-opt the abuses of early surgeries on intersex people. We talk about uniquely female experiences, they say that a male not being able to gestate a child is the same as an infertile woman. We use the language feminists have had to create to describe the controlling, manipulative behaviour of abusive men, they tell us feminists are gaslighting and doing a DARVO. We mention the importance of safeguarding, the word behind to crop up in all their propaganda, context free. We describe in detail the way transactivism functions as a neo-religion, with mantras, loyalty pledges, positive affirmation mind control, banishment for heretics etc. they attempt a reversal again, with their usual inept but eager enthusiasm.

All of this cribbing is perhaps not surprising given that the raison d'etre of the entire movement is men cuckooing women in the first place. It should make us laugh, and who knows, maybe in 50 years time some of us may be able to ruefully do that. Right now, it should just make us angry and determined.

I guess maybe a true transphobe could become accepting of trans people being human beings but that's not what I mean

Well yes, if you objected to trans people for being 'different', in the same way that homophobes object to gay people, I am sure you could change your mind by getting to know trans people (as long as they weren't crazed JY TRA types, of course..). But then you would be an actual transphobe, as opposed to a T**F woman who thinks trans rights should not automatically supercede women's rights. Funny how all the TRAs' energy is directed at the latter, not the former...