Owen Jones guardian piece attacking Duffield

[Dadalus]

In case anyone is interested ...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/30/lgbtq-labour-thatcher-section-28

It's basically some waffle around historic labour homophobia building up to the real point which is trying to get Rosie Duffield in trouble for saying men can't be mothers.

Surely he needs to be getting a visit from the police for hate crime for this? As a pp said its quite dangerous incitement considering the way tra behave and talk about wanting to murder rape and decapitation of women who won't follow compelled speech and worship the brave men.

Always a good reminder of who we are reading about isn’t it.

Once a misogynist who wants to exploit women’s bodies, always a misogynist.

'When Peter Tatchell stood as the party’s candidate in the 1983 Bermondsey byelection, he was subjected to a viciously homophobic campaign – the Liberal party described its candidate as the “straight choice” – and the Labour establishment did little to defend him'

Peter Tatchell who has written in defence of children having sex with adults? That Peter Tatchell?

So apparently Duffield's tweet was anti trans abuse. I've never seen abuse which starts with "i'm sure the individual is a lovely, intelligent and decent human being' before. Is it abuse to simply tweet and point out basic facts about individuals now? Duffield said this person wasn't a mother which is correct. They aren't a mother in law, as per the Gender Recognition Act and a Supreme Court judgment which says in the common law mothers are the one who give birth to children (this was the Freddie McConnell case.)

They aren't a mother societally, either. The vast, vast majority of people would agree that a male cannot be a mother.

I just don't quite get what her crime is supposed to be. Is it that the person is a private individual? But they put themselves on TV. Surely you are allowed to comment on people in the public eye. if a clearly adult man was on TV and it labelled him as a 'child', and he discussed how hard things were for children like him, are we not entiteld to say 'hang on, this dude isn't a kid?"

It seems that women have to put up with being called bleeders, uterus havers, birthers, etc (language which, by the way, I find extremely upsetting but no one seems to care about women's feelings), but males have free rein to be called whatever they like without any criticism.

Here's the crux of why he's so cross:

'This week, when a trans woman appeared in an ITV report on the cost of living crisis, Duffield tweeted that she wasn’t a “mother”. When Duffield’s public intervention resulted in an online firestorm against this trans mother, her employer – the Trades Union Congress – took the unprecedented step of issuing a statement, declaring that its staff member “is being subjected to anti-trans abuse online, because she is a mother. This is unacceptable. Everyone should be safe and respected at work”. And yet Labour has so far not taken action.'

What action is he expecting Labour to take? Is Rosie responsible for any '*abuse'? Of course, 'women are responsible for men's violence', is a common, deeply held and misogynist view. Or is he suggesting Labour discipline Rosie for saying that a man isn't a mother? That's fairly uncontroversial fact.

Either way, this is great sunshine, Owen. It's really helpful. Keep on keeping on.

I've archived the article.

*Owen and the TUC's definition of 'abuse' may vary and likely does not cover any abuse Rosie has been subject to.

So apparently Duffield's tweet was anti trans abuse.

I think Owen's argument is that Rosie is directly responsible for any abuse people may have directed towards the person.

This is her full statement:

'I am sure this is a lovely, intelligent and decent human being. This was an important piece. This is not however a struggling 'mother',' says Rosie Duffield.

Well that was painful to read.

A man who defends Peter Tatchell and attempts to smear Rosie Duffield as a homophobe in the same article is not a man who I am inclined to take seriously.

I did note that he states trans mother not mother though, which is different from the claims of both the man larping and the TUC who were defending him if I'm not mistaken.

Load of anti woman drivel with a bit of pro map for good measure.

I did note that he states trans mother not mother though, which is different from the claims of both the man larping and the TUC who were defending him if I'm not mistaken.

'Trans Mother' is the new bullshit we're going to be pushed to accept? Echoes of the virgin birth.

Exactly this. Predictable, one-trick pony.

I won’t read it because it will make my blood boil. Shutting the real concerns of women down with ‘transphobia/homophobia’ is getting real old, real quick, LOJ.

'Trans Mother' is the new bullshit we're going to be pushed to accept? Echoes of the virgin birth.

That almost made me spit my coffee out.

I think that the end game will be that only men can be mothers whilst mothers will be redefined as birthing parents.

At the end of the day it's just a bunch of misogynistic men attempting to put women in our place.

FGS. That article is so offensive I don’t know where to begin.

Those of us who are awake and have fought this have been excluded from the 'community'. LGBT+Whatever now means 'TQ+ compliant political lobby'. We are chased out of Pride for openly being homosexual, we are not permitted to have groups without T supervision and control, inevitably male, unless we operate underground.

You may be interested in seeing this first hand on another current thread where a male self identified lesbian is being the voice of lesbianism and harassing homosexual women into compliance that 'lesbian' is a mixed sex term that anyone of any sex and inclination can use (insert don't police how other people define themselves weasel here) and that you can in theory tell the large six foot angry male in front of you that you're sure they're lovely but you won't be having sex with them on an individual basis but you may not for example have and celebrate a sexuality that excludes all male people.

Because that would be gatekeeping your vagina and upsetting male people that your inner life, identity and sexual orientation is more important to you than their inner self and right to use you for validation.

If you have the answers to this, I and many other homosexuals are bloody desperate to hear them.

Jones' writing runs on manufacturing outrage about something-or-other. That's his entire 'angle' - incredulous outrage. In this article, it sounds like even he is tired of trying to work himself up to righteous fury.

Article 4,365, In which our hero attempts to write a laboured (forgive me) history of homophobia within Labour which doesn't quite take, brings us to the not-very-earth-shattering revelation that Rosie Duffield thinks men aren't women, and ends with a quite spectacular anti climax of 'Rosie Duffield done a TWEET'.

Odious little twerp.

Also note that this extremely silly individual reacted with indignation and shouts of homophobia when it was suggested that as a gay man he should be welcoming of a potential sexual relationship with a man with a vagina.

However in the same bloody conversation he asserted the belief that homosexual women had no right to hold such boundaries against women with a penis.

OJ is such a waste of space, I don't give his misogynist outrage the clicks.

I think the reader's editor is aware of Owen Jones's misogyny but the guardian has long since stopped caring about women. Another columnist, Frances Ryan, said Duffield's tweet was cruel. They have a party line and they're sticking to it.

'Duffield's tweet was cruel'

Because it's 'cruel' to say that men appropriating motherhood is utterly offensive to the majority of women?

Collective insanity is what this is.

Woman is cruel for not agreeing that a man can be a mother even though the word mother has a very specific legal meaning which excludes men.

Yes, CRUEL. Think of those poor men, pretending to be mothers 🤦‍♀️

Little twat.

I think that the end game will be that only men can be mothers whilst mothers will be redefined as birthing parents

Seemingly men, NAMALT but enough in powerful positions, cannot stand women to have anything that they can’t and must appropriate anything and everything female related. True cuckoo’s in the nest.

Not participating in someone else's immersive fiction to your own detriment is cruel.

Yeah, no.

Apparently so 🤷🏼‍♀️

"Tories targeting the trans community as they did gay people in the 1980s"

They're not though are they? It's very telling that he chose not to evidence this. Trans people can marry at the same age as anyone else. They have protections in the equality act. Where does he see the similarity?

I disagree with him about Rosie Duffield's comment re: queer appropriation. According to Stonewall, both my DH and I are trans because neither of us have a gender identity. He looks like every other bloke, I look like every other woman. It would be insulting if we pretended that we were queer and had in any way faced any barriers or stigma in society. We are actually the privileged 'norm'/ majority.

A TW can never be a mother and, as above, for the privileged to appropriate the identity and experiences of the oppressed group is recognised as completely inappropriate in every other walk of life and should be recognised as such here. If the TW had said 'as a dad' and done exactly the same interview, it would have been a much more progressive interview - imagine showing a dad doing the washing and carrying the mental load for a family. That's where real change can happen.