I'm disappointed - Zoe Williams on language

[Pinkfairylights]

An infuriating article smearing women for not wanting the word mother to be excised from discussions around childbirth. We're apparently right wingers who don't believe trans people exist.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/14/language-society-trans-people-tolerance-debate-words

It's the guardian 🤷🏻‍♀️

And Zoe Williams, the worst of the Guardian

I know.

Scottish government taking the word women out of a public health campaign for cervical smears

Scottish government taking the word mother out of maternity services

And we are just mean bitches for saying it’s wrong to do these things

And she said in her piece. As a cis woman 🤣🤣🤣🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️

I am surprised you’re disappointed. She’s been spouting the Hand maiden line for quite some time.

I went to primary school with her. Before I was sent off to the local mixed sex comperhensive and witnessed and experiances horrific sexist bullying from the boys, and she went off to her private girls school, to become, well what she is now.

She was the archtype popular cool girl, then and now it seems.

Zoe Williams is an infuriating writer in any case. I always struggle to follow her articles. When I think about how much I dislike The Guardian, I think of her and Owen Jones.

No idea how she's managed to get to her position in life.

That article, is 'the' example of Vichy Feminism

Mixed view on it. In some ways I think the concern about language as been amplified by those who deny genuine trans people exist.
I also think that some people are falling over themselves to appear woke and are making changes when nobody asked them to. Reminds me of when the local community centre proposed no more Halloween or Christmas decorations out of respect for other religions. Parents up in arms and it fed into racist tensions in the area. The Muslim families in the area thought that was ridiculous and didn't ask, let alone demand changes to be made and now they were the target of abuse for something they never wanted.
I think the average trans person would be just as concerned at men pulling out the trans card to get into a female prison and may find the term chestfeeding unnecessary. It's the people on both extremes of the left and right stirring up tensions and making it very difficult to have a proper civil conversation.
It is extremely frustrating to not be able to discuss concerns about changes to language and women's rights without being immediately labelled a far right bigot.

It's a really badly-argued piece, lots of contradictions and non sequiturs. Her light-hearted amusing columns are very funny, but she's not as good at the serious stuff IMO.

According to Wikipedia she has two children. I bet she has always been referred to as 'mother' and has no idea what it is like to be referred to as a 'birthing person'.

I do. It makes me feel like a piece of meat or a breeding animal.

Reading the Guardian is like being in an abusive relationship. They will publish the odd article, like the Susanna Rustin one the other day, that makes you think, "They're not so bad, this reminds me of the good old days, I'll stay and hope this is a sign of real change." Next thing you know, they are punching you in the head - again.

I've never liked her writing at all - it gives the strong impression of being cobbled together in 25 mins and is often internally incoherent. She will say anything off the top of her head IMO and it doesn't surprise me she's not on the scientific side of this argument.

One side of the debate doesn’t think trans people are real; they might feel what they feel, but the rest of us don’t have to join them in that reality.

This is one of many untruths in that article that show a massive misunderstanding of the issue, failure to look into the facts, and willingness to lap up anything trans ideology teaches without questioning it.

If we wrote this sentence about, for example, Christians, it would instantly be clear that you can disagree with someone's unevidenced beliefs and feelings, while still respecting that they are entitled to have those beliefs and feelings, and of course that they exist.

"You don't think we exist/have a right to exist" is absolutely classic genderist projection and straw-manning but Williams lacks the critical thinking capacity to interrogate it.

Williams has nothing to say of any interest or note.

I only used to see her in the Saturday Guardian. Now we get the Sunday Times instead (even though Rod Liddel and Jeremy Clarkson :) )
She just wittered about keeping fit, so don't miss her at all....

I've never liked her writing at all - it gives the strong impression of being cobbled together in 25 mins and is often internally incoherent.

I agree. I've always felt that her writing had a giddy, babbly energy. I just really struggle with it.

She's been a handmaiden for ages. Like the rest of them, her case is based entirely on a misrepresentation of the other side.

She also demonstrates how much this is a luxury belief: she doesn't care about women in prison being locked up with rapists, because she'll never be in prison; she doesn't care about women sharing space in domestic violence refuges with abusers, because she believes she'll never need a domestic violence refuge; she doesn't care about female athletes competing with males, because she's not a professional athlete.

Please see the post above and calculate yourself how much shame you think Im feeling right now

Sensible letters on Kathleen Stick are being published … so worth writing in?

Stock, Stock - damn autocorrect

Grauniad, innit?

I hate the Guardian but read Marina Hyde's column. I feel icky, but I like Marina.

@Thulian

I've never liked her writing at all - it gives the strong impression of being cobbled together in 25 mins and is often internally incoherent. She will say anything off the top of her head IMO and it doesn't surprise me she's not on the scientific side of this argument.

One side of the debate doesn’t think trans people are real; they might feel what they feel, but the rest of us don’t have to join them in that reality.

This is one of many untruths in that article that show a massive misunderstanding of the issue, failure to look into the facts, and willingness to lap up anything trans ideology teaches without questioning it.

If we wrote this sentence about, for example, Christians, it would instantly be clear that you can disagree with someone's unevidenced beliefs and feelings, while still respecting that they are entitled to have those beliefs and feelings, and of course that they exist.

"You don't think we exist/have a right to exist" is absolutely classic genderist projection and straw-manning but Williams lacks the critical thinking capacity to interrogate it.

I agree. That's what stood out for me in this piece; she sets up a straw man and then 'dismantles' it. I'm disappointed because generally I quite like her. Maybe she is just better at the more light-hearted stuff, which is what I tend to read of hers.

@UpshittsCreek

Mixed view on it. In some ways I think the concern about language as been amplified by those who deny genuine trans people exist. I also think that some people are falling over themselves to appear woke and are making changes when nobody asked them to. Reminds me of when the local community centre proposed no more Halloween or Christmas decorations out of respect for other religions. Parents up in arms and it fed into racist tensions in the area. The Muslim families in the area thought that was ridiculous and didn't ask, let alone demand changes to be made and now they were the target of abuse for something they never wanted. I think the average trans person would be just as concerned at men pulling out the trans card to get into a female prison and may find the term chestfeeding unnecessary. It's the people on both extremes of the left and right stirring up tensions and making it very difficult to have a proper civil conversation. It is extremely frustrating to not be able to discuss concerns about changes to language and women's rights without being immediately labelled a far right bigot.

I agree with this. I don't defend the Zoe Williams article, I think it's a lazy misrepresentation of the (broad) GC position, but I do think a lot of the "inclusive language" debate includes misguided and unhelpful interventions from allies and also genuine transphobia.

Ironic though that this is in relation to Kathleen Stock, who has been consistent in calling out transphobia where it actually exists on 'our side' of the fence.

More broadly, I feel like ZW used to be a better and more incisive writer than she is now - like going back 20 years or something - but I might just be reflecting that I was younger with less refined judgment then?