Stephen Fry

[zanahoria]

“But it isn’t possible if each side looks on the other as an enemy and the trans people just shout ‘terf’ (trans-exclusionary radical feminist) and the feminists seem to, as it were, undermine the dignity and rights of the trans community, if I can use the word community – it is a bit of a greasy word, but there you go.”

^www.aol.co.uk/stephen-fry-urges-calm-debate-180132887.html^

Stephen Fry urges clam then compares what one side is doing with what the other side seems to be doing

Yes, I think what he means by this is he finds it uncomfortable when women point out the nitty gritty details of biological sex, the effects it has on women and males, the existence of bad actors (no pun intended) with unsavoury intent, and exactly why women don't want males in their spaces.

I think of the male shouting 'I'mma beat your ass' while fondling their chest, the person in the rubber duck face pouring urine over themself, and Jordan Grey playing the piano with their penis, and I think that women are not actually the ones undermining anyone's dignity, here.

I once saw Stephen Fry described as "a stupid person's idea of an intelligent man", and I couldn't have said it better myself.

It's a perfect description of him

yes YES!

and to consider that is possible for trans people to live full, accepted lives according to their terms in society, and for women to have all the rights and dignities they demand.

It's interesting that SF uses the word women to distinguish us from trans people. It accidentally reveals that SF like everyone else knows exactly what women are and uses the word women with the shared assumption we all know it means biological females.

There's always the reveal within the lie that everyone knows exactly what a woman is really.

How transphobic of SF.

It's interesting that SF uses the word women to distinguish us from trans people. It accidentally reveals that SF like everyone else knows exactly what women are and uses the word women with the shared assumption we all know it means biological females.

Yes, indeed.

This.

And women want the rights and dignities they demand.

Demand.

Apart from anything else, women taking their clothes off in front of random men is bloody dangerous for women. Vulnerable women being incarcerated with rapists is dangerous, and inhumane. Women being forced into contact sport with men is bloody dangerous.

Framing women's objections to this as demands is a disgraceful display of sexism.

Who exactly does he think is making these requirements necessary??

Honestly, I've had it with these men and their utter blindness.

Try flipping it:

to consider that is possible for women to live full, accepted lives according to their terms in society, and for trans people to have all the rights and dignities they demand.

The right and dignity being demanded is that females get their kit off and/or accepts intimate touch from and in front of any male who feels like it, and accepts the sword waving, wanking, behaviours, all while pretending convincingly for the male person's benefit that they believe the male is female. Or accepts that if they're not able to do this, that they are now excluded from all women's services, healthcare, resources, for the crime of being biologically female while not therapising males at their own expense.

Fuck off Stephen.

Females are fucking human too, and their dignity and privacy is not any less important than a male person's. And we're talking here about dignity as:

'I want the real, actual, basic human rights dignity of not getting undressed in a vulnerable space in sight of a male stranger' compared to 'I want the metaphorical and ephemoral dignity of female people not contradicting my self belief at any time'.

How big does the sexism and double standards have to get before some of these men are able to see it?

How big does the sexism and double standards have to get before some of these men are able to see it?

Good question. Some of them will never see it because women are irrelevant to them.

JanieAllen · Today 12:29
This is Stephen Fry who lectured straight women on their sex lives right????

What?😮

TheKeatingFive · Today 12:48
As Graham Norton demonstrated, this is a risky topic to weigh in on trying to be the 'voice of reason' in the middle. Because the voice of reason is already represented.

Oh yes!!

ArabellaScott · Today 13:06
'calm down, dear'.

Exactly!

(At times like this I love MN.)

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1325299/Stephen-Fry-Women-dont-really-like-sex-What-know-ask-feminists.html

This.

SF doesn't seem to understand our position at all.

Although he hasn't got it quite as wrong as mimmymum.

I look forward to hearing Stephen Fry and other men will make their spaces more welcoming so that Transwomen feel more comfortable using them. I feel so sorry for this community are made to feel so vulnerable that they seek sanctuary in a completely different groups sphere.

But that would involve males actually getting up off their bums and doing something instead of pontificating.

They leave the shitwork to women.

They have no problem at all in knowing who the women are. No genital inspections needed.

You're not alone:

twitter.com/runthinkwrite/status/1593966183753175040?s=46&t=FKYhmwfHR3wMr60G0e2Stg

It's amusing to see that the main backlash seems to be coming from the TRAs when he obviously thought his 'some of my best friends are gentle thoughtful trans folk' bullshit would keep them onside.

I would love to see Stephen Fry and JK Rowling discuss this topic! I wonder if he would be brave enough?

Most of the rest of us went through the "things could be sorted out if both sides could discuss them calmly" phase about five years ago.

Good lord.

Broadcaster and writer Stephen Fry has tried to establish himself as an unlikely authority on female sexuality, claiming that straight women only go to bed with men "because sex is the price they are willing to pay for a relationship".

In uncharacteristically extreme comments, the openly gay Twitter champion said he believed most straight men felt that "they disgust women" as they "find it difficult to believe that women are as interested in sex as they are".

"For good reason," he declares in a candid interview in the November issue of Attitude magazine. "If women liked sex as much as men, there would be straight cruising areas in the way there are gay cruising areas. Women would go and hang around in churchyards thinking: 'God, I've got to get my fucking rocks off', or they'd go to Hampstead Heath and meet strangers to shag behind a bush. It doesn't happen. Why? Because the only women you can have sex with like that wish to be paid for it."

He may have taken the arguable position that in general, men seem to have higher sex drives and run with it there - to the foothills of extreme, past the extreme, onwards to the Cliffs of No Hope, cleverly avoided the possible Valley of Context and escaped the Forest of Variables, and continued on right off the edge of batshit into the wide blue yonder.

www.theguardian.com/media/2010/oct/31/stephen-fry-sex-women-relationships-attitude

Based on the stuff some of the community post online they undermine their own dignity, no-one needs to do that for them.

I suspect Fry thinks there could be a reasonable compromise, and is not aware of the extent to which anything like that was rejected long ago because of the claim that TW are literally, biologically, women. And I very much doubt he is up on things like AGP which complicates the scenario significantly.

He is basically back in the old days of the gay transexual and can't figure out why no one is making what seem like the obvious approaches that would make sense.

Why are these men always so thick? Go read Helen Joyce's book before wading in, you arrogant fucks. Just gets one decent background on the issue before spouting off.

As for the sex comments... maybe if he lives in a physically weaker body that could get pregnant he might be less keen on shagging random strangers in bushes too. Fuckssake.

He's right, there are almost no women that are interested in that kind of thing.

I think where he has gone wrong is he thinks that because women don't seem to enjoy that kind of anonymous sex, they also are not enjoying the more intimate encounters. He doesn't see that there is a change in the physical experience because of the change in the emotional or mental situation.

And it is also the case that there are women for whom what he says is true, maybe especially younger women who haven't figured out how to have satisfying sex yet. Many women are prepared to spend some time having less satisfying sex in order to get to a play where it will be more satisfying. Or some do it without even expecting that, they do exactly what he said they are doing.

So it may be that he has observed that, or heard women talk about it, and has over-extrapolated.