The immigration analogy for transwomen

[MrsCollinssettled]

Did anyone see the article in Saturday's Telegraph magazine about Diana Thomas? Diana said "I use the immigration analogy because in the same way that immigrants bring to their host nation things from their own culture - food, music, whatever I think I can bring- or we can bring- something new and interesting to the female experience. And I absolutely don't deny the guy in me. I am not pretending I am not still him in many ways."

Diana believes that being female is all about the clothes (says she "has almost caught up on the 40 years of shopping she missed out on") and nurturing "I have earned my way for long enough, so yes, put a pinny round my neck and let me be a homemaker, please!"

This relates to someone else but is relevant, especially with the person coming out with the "non-compliant feminists are like racists" shit:

twitter.com/belivetsgloves/status/1239259298120818695

It's a submission fantasy

The woman's 'role' in sex, for people like this, is to be submissive, they see being penetrated as ultimate submission. This idea is all over both popular culture and porn.

The whole thing reeks of extreme misogny

Immigration or imperialism? How long before trans women re-educate native women in the right way to have a ‘female experience’? How long before trans women are claiming that they were the real women all along and the natives are just some unimportant minority who were so crap at being women that womanhood didn’t even exist before trans women came along? If she wants a good analogy then colonisation would be the go to.

There is a lot of talk about the agony of childbirth, but you don’t get an epidural when you have your legs lasered spoken as only a particularly obtuse man could.

I doubt this person has anything to add.

It reads like a wind up doesn't it

But given this person has actually written a book which is incredibly misogynistic, we can only assume it's real.

If anyone else came out with this shit they would be lambasted.

And yet the people who get silenced are the women discussing it

This person is misogynistic in the extreme. I've heard the same sentiments shared quite freely and much more honestly from men who were much more comfortable in owning their beliefs.

The only thing this person has changed is their outward appearance, that opinon piece (I can't call it journalism) in the DM was just horrible, not just the views expressed but the piss poor writing too. Could they be more obvious?

It reads like a wind up doesn't it

Making someone have to accept and agree with something, even implicitly, that they strongly disagree with is about control. It can also be about deriving pleasure from seeing the discomfort that the successful application of control causes.

To me it reads like a bad stereotype. All that self stroking justification of damaged public school wankery. Farcical.

He knows women still die in childbirth, does he?
He knows that in countries where abortion is banned, children end up giving birth?
He knows about tears, prolapses, fistula, the high risk of mental health issues related to pregnancy and the aftermath?
Has he heard of the vaginal mesh scandal?
Etc etc

The more you think about it the more you realise that this person is, essentially, a total bastard.

Oh this woman is dead and this one has life changing injuries and this one is suicidal, they have it easy, I'm having some hair on my legs removed! And women will never know that pain, as women are naturally hairless and glossy all over.

The things I find about being a woman that are a faff are all the things that Criado Perez writes about in Invisible Women - that things designed to be unisex don't fit or work properly for female bodies. Having to deal with periods and fluctuating hormones can also be a faff.

Titivating (which is what Thomas is describing) is nothing to do with being a woman.

Mmmm Faff, marvellously minimising.

Thank you for the responses about AGP - makes total sense now.

I’ve just found this great 1993 review by Michele Roberts of David Thomas’s book - “Not Guilty -

in Defence of the Modern Man” referenced in the DT article: www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/book-review-now-who-started-it-she-did-not-guilty-in-defence-of-the-modern-man-by-david-thomas-1471605.html

Sounds like there was some cross-dressing going on even then and an expectation that the women in the author’s life should find this a turn-on (a foreshadowing of the “genital preferences are transphobic” argument perhaps?).

For me, the most interesting part of the review is this:

“ One strand of feminist enquiry Thomas ignores completely is the psychoanalytical. He writes as though 'male' automatically equals 'masculine', as though differences between the sexes are God-given and natural, not socially constructed. Differences between women don't get a look in. Nor do differences to do with class and race.

“After criticising women for not fancying men who want to wear frocks [...], and after suggesting that masculinity is culturally imposed on men, Thomas urges us not to forget the positive values associated with masculinity: 'It is possible to be strong without being oppressive. It is possible to be assertive without being domineering. And it is possible to possess energy, determination and even aggression without being violent or bullying.' Yes, but the qualities spoken of here can be associated with women just as much as with men.“

It certainly sounds as if D Thomas’s views haven’t changed one iota.

BeetrootRocks this person would report on women dying in childbirth while commenting on what they were wearing they are so focused on frothy frocks as evidenced by two of their previous articles.

They used to love to disparage what they supposed women truly loved and obsessed about - fashion, while secretly coveting it for themselves. Never understanding that only a small percentage of women are ever obsessed about it. I wonder if D Thomas actually found a women that will talk as much about their love of fashion and glamour as they imagined. I can’t think of my last conversation about fashion was that wasn’t telling my daughter that buying cargo pants from the men’s section is what we did in the 80s and so it is still ok to do it in 2020.

Bit of a sweeping generalisation (and am aware that anecdotes are not data) but the late transitioning men I know were all massive misogynists before transition. I've not seen any evidence (nor can I see any reason) why transitioning would change that outlook.

And from the transwidows accounts I have read seem to bear that out. Plus I think all of them crossdressed before transitioning. This doesn't come out of nowhere

Thomas is more of a colonist. Thinks he has the right to make the rules that the natives are to abide by

Absolutely! Colonisation is exactly what is going on......invade; redefine; suppress the population; impose your own rules; ban certain words or native language; forbid free association........

I've also been considering the contemporary, international issues and pre-occupations around boundaries and borders: their over-permeability; the inability to control or maintain boundaries, is very much connected with radical transgenderism in a symbolic kind of way.

By the way, I'm not 'disappointed' as its par for the course around here these days.

This wouldn’t have happened if this was a BAME site
Wouldnt happen on Twitter, FB, Reddit and any 'mens site'
Only women are disallowed from speaking that which should not be spoke.

Why does anyone need 50K of surgery and a pinny to become a homemaker?

If you have a roof over your head and a family then you make it into a home. It doesn't happen when you are ready for it. You do the best that you can at the time that it is needed.

If you have time and money then you can do fluffy baking etc, but to make a home you need to get together the money and the love and the effort to make sure everyone is provided for loved and have an environment in which they can thrive.

And as an adult that is your responsibility.

A lot of men start cooking and 'homemaking' when they get to Thomas's sort of age and downshift or retire.

DH seems to manage it without a pinny somehow.

SonEtLumiere has it. Not only is immigration to a different sex impossible, it is quite manifestly not what transwomen are doing, and if they tried to conduct themselves as immigrants the way they conduct themselves as transwomen they'd be refused citizenship and put on the next flight home.

Quite.

One of the reasons why the misogyny is so apparent, is that it's patently obvious that a lot of men believe women are gatekeepers to sex and therefore have all the power. That women get offered sex all the live long day and are just sitting there with a big box of chocolates, idly picking out the, um, soft centres as and when they fancy it.

And if only they could be that women, they also, would be inundated with offers of sex.

Quite failing to understand that a) show us your tits love, or get your coat you've pulled, doesn't light up the eyes, or erogenous zones, of most women.

And b) they have, according to most accounts, actually restricted their dating pool to the power of a zillion by transitioning.

The fact that sex seems to be a preoccupation of so many> who will sleep with me, why won't they sleep with me, you ought to sleep with me, oooh I'm all sexually submissive like a real woman, my sexuality has gone all soft and weepy etc etc

And the prevalence of revealing clothing that would be laughed at if worn by most women the same age

Points to the people with these thoughts being a certain sex.

A lot of them sound like whining teenage boys trying to persuade a girl into whatever it is they fancy a try at.

Also, if they consider women gatekeepers to sex etc as per previous post then they are doubly deluded due to their age. 50+ women do not get pestered for sex constantly in the way that 18 yo do. So they must see themselves as very young? Or what is that about.

So they must see themselves as very young? Or what is that about.

I guess 50 grand is enough to knock quite a few years off anyone!