Eddie Izzard interview with Salon

[ArabellaScott]

I've not watched the whole thing, but just landed on:

'we know that, that, in the fetus, everyone's a girl in the fetus'

If you define female as "absence of penis", it's about as offensive as calling us "non-men".

Sexist prat. I used to enjoy his comedy, and like PPs admired the "not women's clothes, they're my clothes" stance.

I used the think it was a sad and huge ego trip but he seems to have gone far beyond that. Previous PP mentioned grandiosity. If he were my relative I would be worried about his mental state.

Used to think, should start

So who assigns the foetus's sex, given that it's not observable by the human eye at that point?

We all know what really happens is Mother Nature casts a die at the moment of conception, then sheds a small tear when it lands pink side up, knowing what women have to put up with.

The earth is basically mostly water because of her anguish over all her daughters. This may as well be true, because who gives a shit about science any more?

At least your ideology hangs together as a coherent narrative @MassiveWordSalad, which is more than can said for the magic gender fairy version of foetal development.

I’m just a bit sick of hearing men telling me what women are.

It's literally one of the Rules of Misogyny.

8th rule of misogyny: Men are whatever men say they are and women are whatever men say they are.

Izzard’s gaudy Bet Lynch-style outfit sticks out like sore thumb.

I.e. like a pantomime dame. Where we all know that the Ugly sisters are really blokes in frocks with make-up plastered on and the Principal boy is a young woman. That's why pantomime works.

I'm just so disappointed with him, honestly. I remember first watching him over 20 years ago and thinking he was hilarious, handsome and charming. Loved all the "action transvestite" stuff etc. He seemed to have a firm grip on reality then and it was all just part of the act. But maybe not.

My friend who first introduced him to me has since sadly passed away, and all I can think now when I look at him is how deeply sad she'd be to see him now.

did anyone watch the interview they did with Sandy Toksvig?
I thought that was one of the most lovely warm and inclusive chats I’d seen on the subject!
I genuinely don’t think Eddie Izzard is seeking to be divisive at all, they’ve said that people can use whatever name they are comfortable with, and whatever pronouns they are comfortable with, they just said they get a “happiness hit” with Suzie and She

ive never seen or read an interview where they haven’t tried to make it easier for people or taken pains to say people shouldn’t feel bad about getting it “wrong”

there are some angry trans people and activists out there, but I really don’t think Eddie Izzard is one of them?? I don’t get the hate at all?

Not rtft, but Izzard compromises women's safety by openly usung female-only spaces, thus advertising to every other man that they can also use female-only spaces. Because, realistically, no one is going to challenge them in this climate, a climate that Izzard actively contributes to with his words and his behaviour. That's why I'm angry with Izzard (although I don't hate him).

I supported him as a gender non-conforming man. But to claim that your gender non-conformity - your adoption of feminine stereotypes - is what makes you a woman is a wildly regressive position that equates womanhood with the strictures of feminity.

Izzard uses women's spaces. He's boasted openly about a "confrontation" with young teenage girls in a female space. He says shit like he is in "girl mode" or "boy mode" insinuating that womanhood is a costume you can just don whenever you feel like it, reducing women to clothes and makeup.
He has said he has "girls and boy genetics", that "all foetuses are female" and other absolute bollocks that serves to confuse people, especially people who feel insecure about their bodies.
He's tried to re-write history by claiming that he came out as trans over 30 years ago, which is total pish.
He is, as I said in a previous post, a twat.

As for saying he's happy to be referred to as a man or as Eddie, let's see how long that lasts. Ask any woman on here who has lost their partner to the trans ideology.

There are a lot of men now re-writing their cross dressing history and proclivities; you see them about frequently. If you look at the history of The Beaumont Society you will see the range of men involved with this - from all walks of life including clergy.

FPE = Free Personal Expression

https://www.beaumontsociety.org.uk/documents/Beaumont_History.pdf

"This is why it was felt that, although we were never anti-gay, we had to exclude any hint of being a homosexual society by stating and insisting as the membership application form demanded and sponsorship insisted that no hint of overt gayness would be tolerated. It was also to provide some comfort for wives and girlfriends who were often as confused about the whole thing as the general public"

"At the Dinner we found by a show of hands that about 30% of members were engineers and most of these were into steam trains.
One member was Colonel of a Guards Regiment; he arrived with an Elastoplast over his moustache and looked very odd in a frock, which must have once belonged to Queen Alexandra with a diamond choker over his Adam's apple"

So what you are saying Rebellious is that there is a history of deliberate trying to repress any hint of homosexuality with internalised homophobia. In 1971 these men were all engineers and in particularly male dominated environments and they liked steam trains and weren't particularly nice to their wives who were props to their life rather than equal humans.

In 2023 we have a bunch of computer and software engineers or work in other particularly male dominated environments, who like anime and aren't particularly nice to women who are regarded as essential to their validation rather than equal humans.

An observer might regard this as sexism and hint at it being a particular issue with neurodiversity and gender stereotypes.

But he'll as long as the like of Eddie have a euphoric high at being 'treated like a woman' who cares that actually women are distressed, traumatised and put at physical risk to facilitate this.

Off topic, but just thought I'd mention that The Beaumont Society are currently displayed on the wall of UCLH children's outpatients waiting room (where GIDS kids go to see endocrinologist) as one of the 'support and signposting' organisations.

Because these men have been cross dressing since childhood they now want to suggest that they were always 'trans', even as children.

https://www.roanyer.com/blog/crossdressing-fetish/

there are some angry trans people and activists out there, but I really don’t think Eddie Izzard is one of them?? I don’t get the hate at all?

I think what you are witnessing is a wave of intense frustration at the profound change in the narrative. Eddie used to be entirely rational about being a man in women’s clothes. Now he is claiming womanhood and openly using women’s spaces.

It also became apparent when he wrote his autobiography, that despite his previous clarity about his transvestism, he had overstepped boundaries many years earlier, when he invaded a women’s toilet to change out of his women’s clothing back into men’s clothing. That he was afraid to go into the men’s, but didn’t remotely consider how his presence might affect the women whose space he was invading, tells us that he was never really considerate of women and their feelings and rights in the first place.

He may not be an angry activist, but he has a massive platform and is sending a clear message to other transvestites that they now have the unequivocal right to use women’s spaces.

This has a very clear impact on women and their right to have such spaces. Spaces Eddie uses are no longer women’s spaces. It’s easy to see why women are angry with him.

When I was young I found him annoying always going on about being a transvestite, I was like who cares , so what. Now he's just a complete BS spouting nonsense

I think you're downplaying things. He did t overstep boundaries. He was abusive to teenage girls.

He wasn't just abusive to them. He vilified the teenage girls.

For his wrong doing.

He was the one doing something not ok. He blamed them for his actions.

Not cool.

As for saying he's happy to be referred to as a man or as Eddie, let's see how long that lasts.

As long as he keeps being offered lucrative male acting roles, I'd imagine.