Munroe Bergdorf

[ripples101]

I am trans.

I was a follower of Munroe Bergdorf’s Instagram.

Munroe wrote a post about JK Rowling, calling her a dangerous woman to the trans community. Munroe stayed something along the lines of

“JKR is a dangerous cisgendered, white woman who is causing harm”

I replied to this post, asking why Munroe felt it necessary to mention JK Rowing’s racial identity.

I wasn’t Abusive. I just felt that it wasn’t necessary, in regards to what Munroe was being critical of, to mention JK Rowling’s ethnicity.

Within minutes my post was deleted and I was blocked.

I am trans, and Munroe has silenced me.

So it seems nothing can be questioned. Any intent to ask a question, or to strike up debate, will be met with being silenced.

This is fast turning into propaganda. This is fast turning into thought crime. This is fast turning into silencing. This is fast turning into something it should never have been.

When a trans person isn’t even able to question another trans person, what chance do “people who belong to sex that menstruate”* have?

• Christ, I don’t even feel like I can use the word women here without being controversial.

I am so sorry for people to whom I thought I identified alongside (trans people) who are doing this to you. I feel sick and ashamed of what I am, because of people who are representing me.

I feel like I literally have no space left. And I can’t help but feel that a lot of biological woman are feeling the same way. And you have so much more to lose than I ever will, so I simply can’t imagine how this is making you all feel.

"But JKR does have white privilege. I think she would possibly defuse critics like MB if she addressed that."

How on earth do you know she hasn't? You haven't bothered reading her essay. Nor has Munroe Bergdorf, most likely.

"'black lives matter' is shorthand for 'black lives should matter more than they currently and historically do.' which is to me a no-brainer and I can't believe I'm worn out my fucking keyboard trying to get that acknowledged here."

No, you're trying to make it the only legitimate cause. On a forum about feminism. Have you considered not using BLM to prop up your misogyny? Just a thought.

notyourhandmaid the main point I was pushing was OP's privilege. They couldn't conceive of any reason why MB would block them for asking what they did.
If MB mentioned JKR was 'white' then that's their right and its not like thats all they said. Focussing on it exclusively is such a petty, bad faith move. Like is that all you've got?

MadBadDaddy I think my uncle Ed used to stammer this kind of nonsense about it being his right whenever I inquired why he used to drop in irrelevant racial descriptions. I'd ask 'er, why is it relevant that she was Asian?' and so on.

Of course, I knew exactly why he added these particular extraneous details and if you have ethnic minority heritage or any kind of nous, so do you.

It's much rarer IME to see it from someone of an ethnic minority towards someone white the other way round, but the linguistic technique of adding little irrelevant details to cast added shade on the other person's deeds or views remains the same. My advice to Ms Bergdorf is the same to any one else: if you don't like the pushback you get when you add in these irrelevant 'facts' (that's a quote from uncle Ed- 'but it's a fact that the man who stood on my foot was black! I just don't see the problem!'), stop doing it.

Incidentally, if you're interested, Uncle Ed did stop doing it eventually.

Extra "other way around" there.

Thank you for cnp my whole post there Eresh.

I would be really interested to know if there are any lurkers, with any views, what you make of all this?!

Or the whole part of the relevant bit.

I have another question

If white women can't speak on women's rights
And black women who are called 'cis' can't speak on women's rights

Who can speak on women's rights?

I'm disabled, can I? (Guessing answer is no)

OP is a transwoman and has been told they were out of line. As well.

So. Who can speak on women's rights? Who is left?

PS I love that in a thread where the whole thing has centred around individual oppression points, lemonade has had the revelation that oppression is at a class level! WOW! and yet also thinks women and girls globally are in a position of privilege due to them being the sex class that can bear children... Hmmm...

Lurked here since just before last Christmas .
Came looking for further understanding of the Trans debate , proposed changes to the GRC , proposed changes to the word 'woman' , the prescribing of drugs and performing of extensive surgeries on non-adults and the wide implications of all these things ...and stayed for the educated , open , informed , articulate and witty debate from many of the regular contributors .
I think it helps that we have posters from other viewpoints and am disappointed when posts are deleted (especially before I catch up) , something against which to push .
Even though I'm quite sciencey I rather hoped I could be persuaded that it was all going to be fine , that TRAs had everyone's privacy , safety , dignity at heart and nothing bad , or even more bad would happen , although of course it already did .
I wasn't persuaded . Sex is binary . Sex is determined when the man's Y or X spermatazoo fertilizes the woman's X or X gamete . One cannot change sex . With drugs and surgery one may pass as the opposite sex but not be so .

I thought JKR spoke the truth (Because biological sex is framed as a necessary referent to transgender status . Bostock Decision ). The truth is hard for people who really want to be something , but are not that thing and cannot truly achieve it by any means ; they have our sympathy and as much understanding as is humanly possible . She should not have been described as white .That she is white is irrelevant and I think most women of all colours would agree with this .
Datum and DuLangDuLangDuLang , thank you .

That was to @ShinyFootball .
No idea what Jullyria means .

@Cagedbirdsinging

That was to *@ShinyFootball* . No idea what Jullyria means .

They are spamming all the boards. We that sort of troll fairly often at night.

Should say 'we get'

Sex is binary . Sex is determined when the man's Y or X spermatazoo fertilizes the woman's X or X gamete . One cannot change sex.

So you’d think.

TRAs
Sex isn’t binary, it’s on a spectrum.

Also TRAs
You’re either transgender or cisgender.

TRAs
You need to stand for us

Also TRAs
Sit down and educate yourself

TRAs
You should be a better trans ally

Also TRAs
Stay in your lane

Basically which means that no one can ever be right, or right on enough. All seems a bit gas lighty to me.

Just want everyone to know, before it reaches its limit, that I’ve been reading the thread, and to thank everyone involved.

Not only did Bergdorf involve Rowling’s race in the debate, Bergdorf also tweeted the ridiculous and offensive lie that Rowling took her pen name Robert Galbraith from the name of someone who did conversion therapy whosemiddle namewas Galbraith

Galbraith is a posh Scottish surname. JKR lives in Edinburgh and Perthshire- both noted for their poshness.

For example there is an upmarket estate and land agency firm called Galbraiths which deals with sales of country estates, big houses, farms and land management.

Hi OP, nice to see you back on the thread.

You don't have to answer this of course, but I have always been of the opinion that biological women are more privileged than trans women. I see race a an additional privilege so a biological white woman will be twice as privileged as a black trans woman.

A black trans woman could face discrimination, harassment and prejudice for being trans as well as racism for being black. Things white biological women do not ever face in their lifetimes.

Yes females often face discrimination and harassment due to their sex, but I see trans women as being equally vulnerable to this.

I know you cannot speak for all trans women but as a trans woman, do you feel more or less privileged than a biological woman?

If you feel more privileged then I apologise for assuming otherwise.

And STILL no one has told us who is permitted to talk on women's issues (although a biological male POC can, unchallenged apparently)

Mad I'd also like to understand, if discussions (well, Pride exempted) stops for BLM, when we can resume discussions.

But saphos, biological women get discrimination for their sex AND their gender so that's two axis same as trans women who get gender and...well it's just gender discrimination

If matters affecting women and girls were crass to speak of in the aftermath of George Floyd's death, should the path of the 'rough sex' bill have been halted? Should women protesting about various things around the world have gone home? Should women have stopped talking about and trying to change things of urgent importance to women and girls in various countries have paused?

I noticed that MBD and Lemonade never answer these questions asked repeatedly in the thread shiny.

Obviously easy to dismiss as it doesn’t fit their narrative.

Because of course any discussion about progressing ‘women’s rights’ includes ALL women.

Incidentally, Home did not come back to clarify whether she deliberately missed that fact or just believed that when women talk about women’s rights they only effected the females she was seeking to shame for discussing them at the time.

And to be honest why is that relevant to feminism. Gay men face oppression and discrimination as do black men, do they get to tell JKR to shut up when talking about womens rights.

you didn't fit into my definition of someone who spoke powerfully.

!!

Ok, I take back my earlier post. I can still be surprised at the lack of self-awareness.

Privilege, we're talking about, yes? And how if you have it, it can be hard to spot it? Interesting.

midgebabe I've never heard your argument being put forward by an actual trans person which is why I'm interested in hearing from the OP.

It has been eye opening to watch MBD in action though and I am sure anyone reading in the future will simply see the usual activist pattern.

Personally attacking and denigrating ripples seemed to main point.

Dismissing or ignoring any counter argument that doesn’t fit their agenda. eg Through the entire back half of the thread after they started posting they dismissed any other poster who said they were a POC and disagrees with them. After stating that we should have been only listening to POC.

And they dismissed the fact that the poster who they supported on the thread had facts very wrong and seemed to forget that more than half the items she wanted to be covered by discussions on rights .... were actively being discussed on this board (which that poster seems to think is about only safe spaces) and by women fighting for women’s rights. So, she had large inconsistencies in her post that she did not come back and address.

Oh and that MB, a person who is notoriously aggressive. Someone who has their own brand of feminism it seems and attributes GC feminists to saying women are not useful if they can’t have children. Anyone who even thinks of a sentence like that is projecting their own beliefs which is unsurprising from a misogynist.

be the main point.

And they were upfront about that.

Joe Lycett and Zoe Ball have just been singing Munroe’s praises on R2 breakfast show. Joe actually referred to Munroe as a brilliant trans activist!

attributes GC feminists to saying women are not useful if they can’t have children

How dense must you be to say this out loud? Glamour report this without question so you can only interpret from that decision that it suits them to smear people with Bergdorfs fake news.

Whatever it is Bergdorf thinks about women, feminism doesn't feature if they are driven to writing this silliness.

Bergdorf should pick a cause that meets their needs for relevance without having to make up lies about others already engaged in one.