Grace Lavery on Woman’s Hour Today (7 April)

[CaveMum]

Why on earth I do not know, but the “delightful” Grace Lavery is on Woman’s Hour today.

This Grace Lavery

"solidarity with all gender non-conforming butch women forever!"

Followed by all those gender non-conforming pink hearts. Now what's wrong with a nice truck? 🚙🚙🚙

@DyingForACuppa

Couldn't resist asking my 'drunk on the trans kool aid' family member who I know listens to woman's hour what they thought.

Apparently there was a trans woman on who talked a lot of sense.

There's no hope for them...

That's why I think EB should have made it clear exactly why and how women are oppressed (with concrete examples, not just sport), and what sex-based rights are, so that GL would have had to confirm that yes, no shits are given about any of that, as far as GL is concerned. So many (mainly young) people believe this crap, they believe the 'most oppressed and marginalised' narrative, and they're the people in universities and EDI positions hounding out GC women.

@MoonOnASpoon

I really, really don't like what I see of GL's treatment of their spouse, it's horrible. And also banging on about being a pervert. It's this weird paradigm where it would be so bigoted and transphobic to find anything about a trans person peverted or morally doubtful, that whatever they do it must not be questioned or seen as bad, because that would be transphobia.

So when se see GL boasting about forcing DL to do bodily things against DL's will and openly claiming to be a pervert and clearly being penis-obsessed, we're all supposed to go "oh what admirable queerness" and pretend we understand. Thus GL can just carry on in plain sight plus have a top job and be a pillar of the community.

If it was a bogstandard bloke wanging on endlessly about his penis and openly admitting to being a pervert, then posting about abusing his female partner, people would just call the police.

@MoonOnASpoon Yes, agree.

How have things come to the point where someone can proclaim a TQ++ identity and this somehow gives them immunity from any consequences if they behave abusively and with no regard for other people's boundaries?

I have no problem with Grace Lavery or anyone writing a book, promoting a book, giving a public talk, being interviewed. But spouting misogyny on WH in the guise of feminism is not OK.

Back in 2010, Susan Faludi wrote about what she calls "feminism's ritual matricide": how every generation, much of the work of feminism/work towards equality for women is wiped out or hidden so the next generation are effectively starting from scratch.

I think that partially explains what we're seeing now: a noticeable trend for non- and anti-feminists to take a proactive role in speaking not just about feminism but on behalf of feminists (or "as a feminist") without understanding or respecting the basic point of feminism or any of the history surrounding grassroots battles for women's rights over time and internationally. And the lack of ability or willingness of some genuinely well-intentioned feminists to call out nonsense (Caitlin Jenner! ).

Of course, feminism's a broad and diverse (and to some extent leaderless) movement and feminists may and do in good faith disagree on the best way to achieve its aims. But feminism CAN'T be just anything anyone says is feminist, or it's meaningless. If something is more likely to increase rather than decrease structural sex-based marginalisation and/or exploitation of women, it's not feminist. Journalists really need to start calling people out: if you're speaking as a feminist, better tell us all just what "feminism" means.

Shock frock.
Abusive person allowed to witter on on Woman’s Hour about their penis.

Because it’s not like “women with penises” literally are the patriarchy.

Yes indeed.

@DomesticatedZombie

.. I was standing in a hot tub and I felt those words leaving my body ... I would describe this as a spiritual experience ... what it might mean to no longer be a man ...

Has Grace the first clue how this comes across?

I would suggest the hot tub was set far too hot!

This whole interview was from a male in their own bubble. It was like listening to a early teenager who has just swallow a genre of the internet. It was never compelling. Never convincing.

The way that Lavery described the queen and the monarchy and having no regrets that they said they wished the queen died was again, like a early teenager.

I really doubt this person has a mature approach to any aspect of live.

@terryleather

Because it’s not like “women with penises” literally are the patriarchy.

Yes indeed.

And, to the surprise of no-one everyone, the people at the apex of the sex castes (as per Sheila Jeffreys) also happen to those at the apex of the business as normal power hierarchies with an extra helping of being able to operate in a culture of impunity. 🤔

Just listened
'memememememememememe'

This is my favourite bit.
I think perhaps us feminists do have quite a lot to learn from Gracie after all.

"One of the things that I’ve been working on in my scholarly work for the last few years and is really important to me is thinking about little techniques that seem newly necessary when one transitions but never seemed necessary before and so for example I had never worn make up to work and now I don’t wear make up at all really, I mean very very rarely, I’m not wearing make-up now and if you don’t wear make-up when you are doing an interview with Woman’s Hour you don’t wear make-up very often but I mean I but back in the early days I used to wear make-up to work a little more and Danny would occasionally give me help, but I was terrible at it I really was you know it’s just not something I done but you know and this is another thing that I sometimes think about tensions around trans people in the UK is umm so many of the problems that seem to be generated by, you know, what we might call the kind of trans liberalism of the present moment, so many of those problems seem have to do specifically with the moment of transition and much less to do with the question of how trans people exist in the world on a longer term basis, you know it has to do with moments where people don’t really know what pronouns to use or don’t really know how to talk or think about things or, you know, people feel disorientated in the wake of a transition. When one is first beginning to transition socially there are all kinds of complicated consequences, which of course affect trans people far more than they do those around us but which affect those around us too and sometimes in ways that are unpredictable and sometimes even intense so… all by way of saying I think it’s not an uncommon story for people to sort of start wearing make-up when they first transition as a way of flagging look something really different is happening in my life now, and then at a certain point to sort of start thinking well you know really I don’t need to do that I don’t really want to do that it’s not really who I am."

I think perhaps us feminists do have quite a lot to learn from Gracie after all.

Quite, we could all learn from Graceless’ remarkable ability to put across a point succinctly and clearly.

That wall of text, is it a magic eye picture?

What was the question, "oh I love your lipstick, can I borrow it?" Yknow, the sort of question women supposedly ask all the time to strangers in the toilets.

I wonder if Grace is also campaigning for the abolition of sentences as well as sex-based rights?

@Signalbox

This is my favourite bit. I think perhaps us feminists do have quite a lot to learn from Gracie after all.

"One of the things that I’ve been working on in my scholarly work for the last few years and is really important to me is thinking about little techniques that seem newly necessary when one transitions but never seemed necessary before and so for example I had never worn make up to work and now I don’t wear make up at all really, I mean very very rarely, I’m not wearing make-up now and if you don’t wear make-up when you are doing an interview with Woman’s Hour you don’t wear make-up very often but I mean I but back in the early days I used to wear make-up to work a little more and Danny would occasionally give me help, but I was terrible at it I really was you know it’s just not something I done but you know and this is another thing that I sometimes think about tensions around trans people in the UK is umm so many of the problems that seem to be generated by, you know, what we might call the kind of trans liberalism of the present moment, so many of those problems seem have to do specifically with the moment of transition and much less to do with the question of how trans people exist in the world on a longer term basis, you know it has to do with moments where people don’t really know what pronouns to use or don’t really know how to talk or think about things or, you know, people feel disorientated in the wake of a transition. When one is first beginning to transition socially there are all kinds of complicated consequences, which of course affect trans people far more than they do those around us but which affect those around us too and sometimes in ways that are unpredictable and sometimes even intense so… all by way of saying I think it’s not an uncommon story for people to sort of start wearing make-up when they first transition as a way of flagging look something really different is happening in my life now, and then at a certain point to sort of start thinking well you know really I don’t need to do that I don’t really want to do that it’s not really who I am."

stop hogging the blunt man.

Slightly nervous to get into my hot tub now in case I emerge as a man.

Never heard such a load nonsensical drivel in my life. Poor Emma having to sit through it. Phd in utter self absorption more like.

How have things come to the point where someone can proclaim a TQ++ identity and this somehow gives them immunity from any consequences if they behave abusively and with no regard for other people's boundaries?

A cynic might say that was reverse-engineering.

I expect its true that the phrase 'sex based rights' didn't occur before 2015.

^ i was thinking similarly, "women's rights" was sufficient as a term. We all knew what that meant but allaren now it's confusing.

Back in 2010, Susan Faludi wrote about what she calls "feminism's ritual matricide": how every generation, much of the work of feminism/work towards equality for women is wiped out or hidden so the next generation are effectively starting from scratch.

^ this is very interesting. In male dominated cultures all over the world progress for women's rights seems to be made in silos, only for it to be halted or end up coming full circle and needing a new approach to achieve what had already been achieved and perhaps a tiny bit less.

@PrelateChuckles

That wall of text, is it a magic eye picture?

What was the question, "oh I love your lipstick, can I borrow it?" Yknow, the sort of question women supposedly ask all the time to strangers in the toilets.

It was really hard to work out where to put the commas!

"feminism's ritual matricide"

That is a really interesting idea.

A cynic might say that was reverse-engineering.

Or hiding in plain sight.

@WinterTrees

I wonder if Grace is also campaigning for the abolition of sentences as well as sex-based rights?

Just returned to this thread after being out for a little while, and am amazed by all the deletions… Do you think the monitors every read the posts they report, or do they just scan for certain words….