Joan of Arc was trans????

[Greenandcabbagelooking]

It's Schools Diversity Week this week. There has been no mention of any kind of diversity other than LGBTQIA+. Heavy on the T. We've been reminded every day for weeks about this.

Today's update says Joan of Arc was trans because she didn't dress like a woman. There's even a discussion on the pronouns she (sorry, he/they) would have used. Silly me, I though Joan was just a woman who was fed up with the limitations her sex imposed on her. Clearly short hair + trousers = man.

I'm all for showing young people a diverse range of role models, but transing people who lived several hundred years ago is not all that helpful.

Kick off. Massively. This is so bloody insulting. It's anachronistic, not borne out by any of the evidence, and reinforces stereotypes.

Worth telling the school that gender-critical beliefs are legally on the same footing as any other set of beliefs. That wouldn't, of itself, make it illegal to plug genderism, if that were the school's mission; but the sort of people who organise Diversity Weeks are sometimes swayed by people telling them they're discriminating against a protected belief.

If you google "Joan of Arc trans" plenty of stuff comes up, including a book on the subject. It's hardly surprising if it's filtering down into schools.

Here's a book discussing whether Joan of Arc was transgender.
www.joan-of-arc-book.com/transgender.html

The entire argument seems to be that she preferred wearing men's clothes to women's clothes. Is transgenderism really about nothing but clothing choices?

@OldCrone

If you google "Joan of Arc trans" plenty of stuff comes up, including a book on the subject. It's hardly surprising if it's filtering down into schools.

Here's a book discussing whether Joan of Arc was transgender.
www.joan-of-arc-book.com/transgender.html

The entire argument seems to be that she preferred wearing men's clothes to women's clothes. Is transgenderism really about nothing but clothing choices?

I’m as GC as the next viper, but I would think it’s more “clothes are one of this society’s social indicators of gender, therefore as gender X, I would prefer to wear the clothes of gender X”. Not “I like women’s clothes therefore I am a woman”, but “I am a woman therefore I will wear the clothes socially coded as women’s”.

The trans-ing of historic women is interesting. If one genuinely believes that woman-ness and man-ness are attributes of the mind and behaviour not the body, then yes, Joan of Arc is a man by that definition. And the fact she would have considered herself a woman is just because the definition of woman she was working from was wrong, and if she’d had the right definition she’d have recognised herself to be a man.

I mean, it’s sexist, reductive bollocks obviously, but it is a consistent argument. And it would even work OK alongside Feminism IF we all agreed that femaleness also exists, it’s the state of being female-bodied, and shifted all the single-sex stuff out of Woman and into Female, leaving Woman a simple self identity label like goth or cricket fan.

It’s when the ideology tries to claim simultaneously that woman-ness and man-ness are attributes of the mind and behaviour AND it’s got nothing to do with stereotypes that it moves from “just utterly wrong” to “not even a coherent position”.

[quote Hazycoffeek]Are any teachers to able to share screenshots of the materials schools are being provided with this week for Schools Diversity week? This Joan of Arc wording for example?

Googling seems to indicate that this an initiative from Just Like Us but only schools that have signed up can access the materials.

www.justlikeus.org/schools[/quote]
Given some of their other materials this would not surprise me...

The attached is for KS1...

Ok. Harley has fucked up.

Someone sensible needs to buy enough water for all the runners.

Harley possibly needs to concentrate on the job in hand and could do with understanding that runners don’t like being dehydrated and strongly feel that someone had one job and failed miserably.

Do I pass itsallgoingtobefine?

@OldCrone

If you google "Joan of Arc trans" plenty of stuff comes up, including a book on the subject. It's hardly surprising if it's filtering down into schools.

Here's a book discussing whether Joan of Arc was transgender.
www.joan-of-arc-book.com/transgender.html

The entire argument seems to be that she preferred wearing men's clothes to women's clothes. Is transgenderism really about nothing but clothing choices?

I'm not sure what else a Trans person could do in the 1400's other than adopt the style of their true gender.
It's not like hormones and surgery were an option.

Rewriting history is a very old and effective strategy used by tyrannical regimes or invaders to invalidate dissent among the people they’re ruling. It’s a bit weird to invite people into your school to do it.

I'm not sure what else a Trans person could do in the 1400's other than adopt the style of their true gender.

People don't have a true gender - gender has always been a spectrum and a moveable feast, which changes massively over time and from place to place. Many people have stepped outside of strict sexist gender roles to some extent, and certain people to a great extent, and that goes far back in history.

If a woman didn't like the strict gender roles imposed on her, and refused to stay within them, that makes her an individual, not someone who really has a male "gender". It is because of women like this that we have managed to break gender down – for example it's now normal in most of the world for women to wear trousers, go to university, work as a surgeon, fight in battle, etc etc etc. These things don't make them male - it's gender that has been challenged and defied. Just because the patriarchy has tried to stop women from doing things, doesn't mean they stop being a woman if they do those things. Standing up to sexism doesn't make you male. As should be quite obvious.

As should be quite obvious
Indeed. The idiocy of historical transing never ceases to amaze me.

If she had had access to hormones and surgery back then, she would still have been a woman. There is literally nothing she could do to stop being a woman.

At best, she could have been a woman who wished she was a man...

It's possible to be sympathetic to people wishing they were the opposite sex, without pandering to magical thinking that has them believe they can change sex. There are many hard realities in life and #beingkind is helping people to face up to those realities, not distorting facts to make them feel comfortable.

Just because the patriarchy has tried to stop women from doing things, doesn't mean they stop being a woman if they do those things. Standing up to sexism doesn't make you male. As should be quite obvious.

I agree it’s quite ill-making to see this idea in op pushed anywhere esp in schools.

If a woman didn't like the strict gender roles imposed on her, and refused to stay within them, that makes her an individual, not someone who really has a male "gender". It is because of women like this that we have managed to break gender down – for example it's now normal in most of the world for women to wear trousers, go to university, work as a surgeon, fight in battle, etc etc etc.

Exactly. We have these women to thank for the fact that women are so much freer today than in the past.

How can anyone not see the misogyny in saying that they weren't really women? And how regressive it is to say that all those brave, strong, pioneering women were 'really' men?

It's just another way of saying the only role available for women should be having babies and looking after men.

I'm not sure what else a Trans person could do in the 1400's other than adopt the style of their true gender.

What do you mean by 'trans person'?

And why do you think being a trans person is the only reason for wearing the clothes of the opposite sex? According to the link I posted, she wore men's clothing because she believed God had told her to, not because she thought she was a man.

Maybe they meant transvestite rather than transgender? You don't seem to hear it so much now but it used to be much more common than transgender although I think it was used more for men dressing as women but presumably it could apply to women in mens clothes.

@OldCrone

I'm not sure what else a Trans person could do in the 1400's other than adopt the style of their true gender.

What do you mean by 'trans person'?

And why do you think being a trans person is the only reason for wearing the clothes of the opposite sex? According to the link I posted, she wore men's clothing because she believed God had told her to, not because she thought she was a man.

Firstly I think the whole idea of her being Trans is ridiculous, I have already said so in this thread.

I don't think I have ever said that being Trans is the only reason for wearing clothes normally associated with your opposite sex !!
There are a hundred and one reasons for doing that.

The only argument I have made within this debate is that we will never know one or the other, she should be remembered for what she did not what she wore.

Do you not think its possible that the voice of God could have been her way or trying to rationalise or process relentless dysphoria?

Absolute rot! We do know... she talked about being a woman.

Stop trying to shoehorn your ideology into everything!

@GoingGently

Absolute rot! We do know... she talked about being a woman.

Stop trying to shoehorn your ideology into everything!

Not sure I understand what you mean

Do you not think its possible that the voice of God could have been her way or trying to rationalise or process relentless dysphoria?

And there you go again.

What do you mean by 'relentless dysphoria'? What makes you think she felt like that?

You're just speculating to fit your belief that there is such a thing as 'being trans' beyond just hating the stereotypes imposed on you because of your sex and/or hating the sexual characteristics of your body.

@Imasoulman you realise that in one and the same post you say that you think the idea of her being trans is ridiculous, but then go on to suggest that her hearing voices she attributed to God might have been her way of trying to rationalise or process relentless dysphoria!!

There is no evidence to suggest she felt any dysphoria or in any way felt she was a man. In fact, the records we have of what she said make it clear that she knew and understood herself to be a woman. Notes were taken daily during her trial as she was speaking, which have survived as they were taken to this day. That's probably about as certain as you're ever going to get for historical records.

Most if not all saints m and f 'heard voices from god'. It kind of goes with the saint territory.

Enough now, with the gender bollocks (no pun intended)

@OldCrone

Do you not think its possible that the voice of God could have been her way or trying to rationalise or process relentless dysphoria?

And there you go again.

What do you mean by 'relentless dysphoria'? What makes you think she felt like that?

You're just speculating to fit your belief that there is such a thing as 'being trans' beyond just hating the stereotypes imposed on you because of your sex and/or hating the sexual characteristics of your body.

How many times do I have to say that I don't believe she was Trans ?

I'm not speculating on anything, I was joining in with a discussion, offering points of views and thoughts.
Sorry but if you want a bun fight I'm not interested.

[quote AssassinatedBeauty]@Imasoulman you realise that in one and the same post you say that you think the idea of her being trans is ridiculous, but then go on to suggest that her hearing voices she attributed to God might have been her way of trying to rationalise or process relentless dysphoria!!

There is no evidence to suggest she felt any dysphoria or in any way felt she was a man. In fact, the records we have of what she said make it clear that she knew and understood herself to be a woman. Notes were taken daily during her trial as she was speaking, which have survived as they were taken to this day. That's probably about as certain as you're ever going to get for historical records.[/quote]

I know the two comments may sound conflicting but to be clear I don't believe she was Trans.
But in the spirit of discussion and exploring different views I thought the voice of God thing was an interesting point

If Joan had been trans, when there was a prophecy that France would be saved by "a maiden from Lorraine" then presumably 'Jean' would have ignored it, since he'd consider himself a man.

To believe that she was the maiden from the prophecy, she must have considered herself a maiden...

Do you not think its possible that the voice of God could have been her way or trying to rationalise or process relentless dysphoria?

I'm not speculating on anything

Do you understand what speculate means? Here's a dictionary definition for you.

speculate verb [I] (GUESS)
to guess possible answers to a question when you do not have enough information to be certain:
I don't know why she did it - I'm just speculating.

@OldCrone

Do you not think its possible that the voice of God could have been her way or trying to rationalise or process relentless dysphoria?

I'm not speculating on anything

Do you understand what speculate means? Here's a dictionary definition for you.

speculate verb [I] (GUESS)
to guess possible answers to a question when you do not have enough information to be certain:
I don't know why she did it - I'm just speculating.

You will have to explain that again!
You have quoted a question that I asked, not a speculative answer !!
You seem confused