Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

David Aaronovitch Review of Helen Joyce's Book

183 replies

Igneococcus · 16/07/2021 06:08

In the Times today:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/a9738a12-e57d-11eb-afdb-c7b01afbcfc5?shareToken=bde4e05d2955fb1682ae3da09be1f707

Final paragaph:

"I’m off the fence. I will call people by the name and pronouns they tell me they want to be called by. I am prepared to defend their right not to be discriminated against at work and in shops, to defend them against bullying and harassment. But as Joyce says so passionately, that doesn’t change reality. A penis is a male sex organ, men don’t have babies. Women exist."

OP posts:
Thread gallery
10
toffeebutterpopcorn · 17/07/2021 20:15

Coach Linda? Oh goody.

cariadlet · 17/07/2021 20:37

Just added my Amazon review (although I used the link posted earlier and bought it from Hive).

toffeebutterpopcorn · 17/07/2021 20:43

Oh. You can read a reviewers other reviews. It’s better than finding a shopping list in a trolley!

ScreamingMeMe · 18/07/2021 07:53

Looks like Helen Joyce is asking people to remove tweets accusing her of being antisemitic. Good.

grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/faux-feminist-beclowns-herself

Ekofisk · 18/07/2021 09:10

Thanks to the wonders of technology I can tell you all that Soros is only mentioned once in the entire book. The only point made is that he is one of a number of billionaires who have made large donations to groups like HRC (American equivalent of Stonewall) which are therefore well funded. Given that his donations are quite open this is hardly an allegation that he is involved in a conspiracy.

Trouble is, Soros’s OSF didn’t donate $100 million to HRC (Human Rights Campaign, US equivalent of Stonewall) in 2010.

It did donate $100 million to HRW (Human Rights Watch) in 2010 though.

merrymouse · 18/07/2021 09:19

Trouble is, Soros’s OSF didn’t donate $100 million to HRC (Human Rights Campaign, US equivalent of Stonewall) in 2010.

It did donate $100 million to HRW (Human Rights Watch) in 2010 though.

If a mistake has been made, an immediate correction should be issued.

ScreamingMeMe · 18/07/2021 09:29

@MellieBellie

Just had a look on Twitter. David tweeted his article and now he's being accused of promoting anti-semitic conspiracy theories.

This appears to be fuelled by some Katy Montgomerie tweets:

twitter.com/KatyMontgomerie/status/1415946905482321921?s=19

As usual, no one has read the book and no one intends to.

My book just arrived, so I'm off to find out exactly what Helen said.

Tweets now gone. Don't post libel, Katy.
Ekofisk · 18/07/2021 09:30

There’s certainly an OSF press statement for the 2010 HRW funding.

OSF does donate to HRC and may have donated a large sum in 2010 but no press releases are popping up.

ScreamingMeMe · 18/07/2021 09:38

Dickhead.

twitter.com/KatyMontgomerie/status/1416568804730183681?s=20

somethinginoffensive · 18/07/2021 09:43

Just in the interests of accuracy, can someone with the book quote the section where Soros is mentioned?

JustSpeculation · 18/07/2021 09:47

@OvaHere

Helen discusses billionaire funding in her chapter Behind the Scenes - Transactivism's long march through the institutions.

This is an excerpt.

A movement that focuses on the levers of power rather than building grassroots support is one in which a few wealthy people can have considerable sway. They have shaped the global agenda by funding briefing documents, campaign groups, research and legal actions; endowing university chairs; and influencing health-care protocols. One is an American transwoman billionaire, Jennifer (James) Pritzker, a retired soldier and one of the heirs to a vast family fortune. Pritzker’s personal foundation, Tawani, makes grants to universities, the ACLU, GLAAD, HRC and smaller activist groups. To cite a couple of examples, in 2016 it gave the University of Victoria $2 million to endow a chair of trans-gender studies, and throughout the ‘bathroom wars’ it supported Equality Illinois Education Project, which is linked to a group campaigning for gender self-ID in the state.

Two other billionaires, neither transgender, also spend lavishly on transactivism. One is Jon Stryker, another heir to a fortune. His foundation, Arcus, supports LGBT campaign group ILGA, and Transgender Europe, which channels funding to national self-ID campaigns. Arcus funds the LGBT Movement Advancement Project, which tracks gender-identity advocacy in dozens of countries (and partners with President Biden’s personal foundation on the Advancing Acceptance Initiative, which promotes early childhood transition). In 2015 Arcus announced that it would give $15 million in the next five years to American trans-rights groups. Among the recipients were the ACLU, the Transgender Law Center, the Trans Justice Funding Project and the Freedom Center for Social Justice, which campaigned against North Carolina’s bathroom law. In 2019, it gave $2 million to found a queer-studies programme at Spelman College in Atlanta, Georgia, and it funds Athlete Ally, the group that dropped Martina Navratilova as an ambassador when she opposed trans inclusion in female sports. In March 2021 he gave a further $15m to the ACLU, to be spent in part on pressing for legal change.

The third billionaire funder of transactivism is George Soros, via his Open Society Foundations (OSF), a network of independently managed philanthropic institutions. OSF has made multi-million-dollar donations to both the ACLU and Planned Parenthood, and in 2010 gave $100 million to the HRC, the largest donation the campaign group had ever received. OSF pays for the production of model laws and ‘best-practice’ documents on trans-related issues. To highlight just one example, in 2014 it supported ‘License to be Yourself’, a guide to campaigning for national gender self-ID laws. This argued, among other things, that children of any age should be able to change their legal sex at will. This pattern of funding helps explain the gap between trans campaign groups’ rhetoric and the policies they pursue. The talk is about the world’s downtrodden: poor, homeless trans people forced into survival sex work, lacking health care and harassed by the police. But the money comes in large part from the world’s most powerful people: rich, white American males. The two groups’ needs and desires barely overlap at all.

@OvaHere already has
somethinginoffensive · 18/07/2021 09:53

Oops sorry, missed that. Thanks.

ValancyRedfern · 18/07/2021 10:12

Excellent review by Kathleen Stock (whose book 'Material Girls' is equally brilliant IMHO)
www.pressreader.com/uk/the-daily-telegraph-review/20210717/281754157334563

somethinginoffensive · 18/07/2021 10:29

Unless I am mistaken (easily possible), it does look as though the figure of $100 million to HRC must be an error.

HRC had far less than $100 million in total in either 2010 or 2011.

https://assets2.hrc.org/files/assets/resources/HRCAnnuall_Report2010.pdf??_ga=2.8484277.1851203648.1626598731-1159091512.1626598731

https://assets2.hrc.org/files/assets/resources/AnnualReport2011.pdf??_ga=2.71873939.1851203648.1626598731-1159091512.1626598731

Links from here

www.hrc.org/about/annual-reports

Ekofisk · 18/07/2021 10:43

Yes, that’s what I think too - from its annual reports, HRC annual revenues are generally in the region of $30 - $40 million.

EmbarrassingAdmissions · 18/07/2021 10:50

As it looks like an error, I should think that both HJ and the publishers would include it in an erratum list (I like it when these are online rather than waiting to attend lectures where they're given out on paper slips) ahead of any second edition.

bellinisurge · 18/07/2021 11:54

If the only thing keeping males on the TRA side is sympathy for anyone so distressed they want to get their genitalia cut off, they are in for a shock when they discover that most male born with a GRC don't do it. That is what peaked me as a woman.

SnoopyLights · 18/07/2021 13:28

@bellinisurge

If the only thing keeping males on the TRA side is sympathy for anyone so distressed they want to get their genitalia cut off, they are in for a shock when they discover that most male born with a GRC don't do it. That is what peaked me as a woman.
I think this is what is keeping most people sympathetic.

People are assuming that the word trans actually means some sort of physical transition (surgery) has taken place and they have very little idea that in reality all that's happened is someone has just said some words and is now presenting an unchanged body to anyone they feel like showing it to.

RoyalCorgi · 18/07/2021 13:42

Gaby Hinsliff has reviewed Helen Joyce's book along with Kathleen Stock's book for the Observer:

www.theguardian.com/books/2021/jul/18/trans-by-helen-joyce-material-girls-by-kathleen-stock-reviews

She seems to miss the point of Joyce's book by a country mile, but pretty much what I've come to expect.

RoyalCorgi · 18/07/2021 13:49

Have just realised there's a separate thread on the Hinsliff review - sorry. So far there have been reviews in the Evening Standard, The Times, Daily Telegraph and the Observer - anywhere else? I'd have expected reviews in the Sunday Times and the Spectator, at least.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 18/07/2021 13:49

Gaby Hinsliff is the writer who made me stop reading the Guardian with her disingenuous apologist take on the New Year sexual assaults in Cologne.

merrymouse · 18/07/2021 14:01

Hinsliff says of Joyce’s book

it would have benefited from fewer pages of highly contentious speculation about what makes people trans

She misses the point that this is not speculation about what the one thing that would make somebody trans, but observation of the many groups of people included in the idea of ‘trans’. None are genuinely contentious unless you seek to objectively exclude particular groups from the trans umbrella.

I wonder if it’s just easier for Hinsliff to construct her own fiction if she excludes them?

RoyalCorgi · 18/07/2021 14:11

Gaby Hinsliff is the writer who made me stop reading the Guardian with her disingenuous apologist take on the New Year sexual assaults in Cologne.

She is the perfect example of someone holding a crony belief. She even alludes to it in the review: 'She sees support for the idea that individuals can change biological sex as a “crony belief”, one people mostly hold to look good in front of others, and that may be dropped quite easily if enough of those others start publicly challenging it.'

Perhaps it's the fact that she recognises herself in that sentence that has made her so dismissive of the book's arguments. Truth hurts.

HPFA · 19/07/2021 14:12

In my professional life I found myself choosing how many copies of the title would be purchased by a library service. I did my best to make a professional judgement and opted for three copies.

So far there are eight reservations - two more will trigger the purchasing of another copy.

I'm pleased - I did worry whether I was being biased but so far my judgement is about right!