Trans+ History Week

[zanahoria]

It is that time of year again, time to make stuff up and call it trans history!

Stonewall are starting us with the absurd fact that Joan of Arc lived and died over three thousands years ago

1479 - 1458 BCE: Joan of Arc was willing to die at the stake rather than stop wearing men’s clothing.

https://www.stonewall.org.uk/about-us/blog/why-do-we-need-trans-history-week

Feel free to pass it on or make up whatever rubbish you like!

What happened to the Joan of Arc post above??

If Stonewall's bonkers contribution linked above is anything to go by, this is going to be #OperationLetThemSpeak in glorious technicolour. 😂

Seems that pointing out appropriating the sexual abuse and hideous death of a 19 year old to prop up an ideology based on stereotypes is effing disrespectful hasn’t gone down well with the monitors

Yep Joan of Arc died a horrendous death. But it was all for the right to wear men's clothes. What a utterly disgraceful rewriting of history. Just stop with the shit transwashing Stonewall.

No, even with that their dates of 1479 - 1458 are still half a century out

She was born in 1412 and died in 1431

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_of_Arc

They simply stupid and too lazy to check

Fact checking is cisheteronormative oppression of transfolx, the only way to queer the curriculum is to make stuff up

Maybe It's a different Joan of Arc. That we've not heard of? <sarcasm>

You would have thought they would have changed it by now but they probably think the QueerAF workbook is bound to be accurate and everybody else is bound to wrong.

Maybe Joan (I won’t refer to Joan as “she”, we don’t know what pronouns Joanself preferred) just identified as having been born in 1479 BC?

Stonewall are owning Joan’s truth and respecting Joan’s true identity after all these millennia centuries.

Or something

That's also a beautiful transrabbit standing next to Charles.

Aside from the grossly misogynistic and gynophobic assumptions that any strong, brave woman in history must really have been a man, do they genuinely not see that randomly picking obviously ridiculous dates for their 'facts' is really not going to help their cause in trying to browbeat people into accepting their 'new truth'?

Funnily enough, I was discussing this exact same subject with Dame Isaac Newton only last Tuesday.

Yes, she did. She wore it ( as she explained herself at her trial) because God told her that it would mark out her mission as a military adviser and commander, appointed to save France during the Hundred Years War with England. Armour over breeches is also a lot more practical when you are scaling enemy ramparts in a siege ladder as she did.

Maybe Joan (I won’t refer to Joan as “she”, we don’t know what pronouns Joanself preferred)

I have it on good authority that Joan preferred to be addressed as 'you' - well, more accurately, 'tu' or 'vous' or any common equivalents in her day.

I can't find any record whatsoever of her desire to police other people's language when talking about her when she was not present.

‘Gentil Dauphine, je suis Jehanne La Pucelle…..’

’Noble Prince, I am the young maiden Jeanne, and I am sent by God to aid you and France’.

Pucelle was the Middle French noun describing a young unmarried girl. Hence one of the titles she was known by in later centuries ‘ Maid of Orleans’.

I expect Stonewall would have been at the forefront of her show trial for heresy, shouting ‘Burn the Witch’. Plus ça change….

Ah Stonewall: why bother stating actual facts when made up shit involves less work for the interns.

And swallow a massive turd while our bums go numb.

I’m still raging about this. Do these numbskulls seriously think she chose to be sexually assaulted & burned alive for the right to wear trousers?

have they any idea how utterly appalling they sound?

Self awareness and self obsession aren't the same though.

Educate yourselves! Just walk through any art gallery or open a few books and you'll realise there were an enormous amount of Assigned Male At Birth people in the 17th and 18th centuries who became their authentic selves through the use of massive curly wigs, clingy stockings, glittery shoe buckles and giant frilly blouses. Then, in the early 19th century, they all disappear. There was obviously a trans genocide the scale of which the world has never seen, a mass extermination so terrible that to this day historians still conspire to cover up the shame. The very fact that none of us have ever heard of this event just proves that they are hiding it from us!

"massive curly wigs, clingy stockings, glittery shoe buckles and giant frilly blouses."😂😂😂
You've just ruined historical portraiture for me for ever, EsmaCannonball, but hey I forgive you 😂

In every single image on the Wiki page posted above Joan is depicted very clearly as female, armour or no.

She didn't dress as a man, she dressed as a soldier. She was no more trans than the thousands of women serving in the armed forces today are trans.

Does it ever occur to these cretins that the reason women in the past may have worn male attire or attempted to pass as a man is
a) Women were forbidden to follow certain professions e.g. James Barry.
b) It was a whole lot bloody safer.