Glinner Bullseye comment on X

[Thatcatsaflippingnightmare]

Always trying to explain Glinner to DH, today he showed me on X JD Vance defending murder of the woman by ICE. Glinner had replied something like 'bullseye', as in agreement. I tried to comprehend with "satire?" but he said no he's on Liz truss show these days. I said well he's always been about protecting women and children, he's not suddenly supporting femicide, but the post convinced DH otherwise. Any insights? I'm not on social media

That's entirely the point, it's not just a few hundred mumsnet posters. It's the whole GC movement alongside the right wing political class be they tory form or blue new Labour ghouls. Its a sympathetic media who launder the GC image, because their backers tell them to as like immigrants trans people are a useful wedge issue to distract the population from the real problem which is we're getting shafted by the 1% on a dying planet. Again, sorry if GC people don't like being told they're aligned with the right wing but it speaks for itself.

What defines left and right in your book? What have the “the left “ done for women recently ? Feck all ! Shafted women by not bringing in the EHRC laws, abandoned the Waspi women, and now attempting to disfigure and sterilize mentally ill children

Far right , far left , two cheeks of the same arse

Sorry that you don't like the dogs you find yourself lying with but I'm afraid just saying "no YOURE right wing" isn't realllly an argument

Right back at ya!

You seem curiously unwilling to explain why you think gender critical beliefs, which are basically bog standard feminism, are right wing.

Unfortunately, your inability to engage with actual gender critical feminist arguments leaves me no option but to assume that you think that the enforcement of sexist stereotypes and men's wishes are more important than women's sex based rights.

"Again, sorry if GC people don't like being told they're aligned with the right wing but it speaks for itself."

I don't agree with this at all. It was Theresa May's very right wing government that first touted a change in the law to gender self ID. It was the ultra right wing Maria Miller, Women & Equalities Minister who was pressurised into a public consultation on self ID in 2017 (she was just going to introduce it, rather like Ireland did, with no thought to the impact on women & girls.
It was pressure from (mainly) left wing feminists that raised the alarm, and started the fightback.
Oh, and never forget the v v posh and right wing Penny Morduant getting "TWAW and TMAM" into Hansard after her failed bid to remove the word "mother" from Maternity legislation.

Just because a few US right-winger commentator types have now picked up the mantle - years after left wingers like Julie Bindel, Rosie Duffield & JK Rowling became involved - doesn't mean you get to retrospectively make out it's a "right wing" viewpoint.

This is an issue that goes way beyond left and right - the "aligned with the right" is just a shaming tactic to try to get left wing feminists to shut up.
BTW - I know of several TRAs who are actually self-proclaimed right wingers.

I don't think GC beliefs are inherently right wing at all however I do think most online GC spaces are right wing or right wing leaning. I mainly lurk on FWR nowadays as it doesn't feel like the feminist space it used to. I still see posters claim the majority of users are left wing and/ or women but it's increasingly clear that for a space apparently frequented by a lot of left wingers any critique or concern about the right wing aren't engaged with in any sort of good faith on here. The response to any feminist concern about the right wing (which does intersect with GC concerns for women) seem to be:

• this isn't relevant, why is this being posted here
• what even is right wing now
• accusing anyone posting about right wingers in GC spaces or prominent GC voices rubbing shoulders with the far right must be a TRA trying to smear GC views
• GC feminists need to "use" the right wingers who are amplifying GC views and drop them when we've achieved progress (the most bizarre one)
• or many posters just fully parroting right wing conservative views that aren't compatible with feminism and any critique of this is against weaponised as troll or TRA behaviour
• Any concerns about right wing or conservative men using the GC cause with I'll intent is treated as completely posted in bad faith as seen earlier in this thread

I also think from the tone and devil's advocate type responses that are increasing in these anonymous forums I'm not actually convinced that I'm mostly talking to women let alone feminists anymore, which can't be proven before but there's a lot of tone and lines of argument that you mostly see from men or MRAs, and even posters who have declared themselves as men doing as Glinner does which is better misogynistic to women who don't agree with them or aren't GC,.which still isn't excusable to be misogynistic.

This is an issue that goes way beyond left and right - the "aligned with the right" is just a shaming tactic to try to get left wing feminists to shut up.

And it is only aimed at GC feminists because we are left-wing, often lesbian, and often the kind of left-wingers who predate identity politics and actually care about the redistribution of wealth and protection of actually disadvantaged groups (as opposed to a bunch of men pretending to be something they're not and being pandered to for it). If we were right-wing, why would we mind being called right-wing?

If we examine the little "common ground" to be found between the traditional right and the GC feminist movement on this issue, one aspect is the understanding that a hefty proportion of male "transwomen" are autogynephiles, i.e., traditional transvestites with a sexually-fuelled cross-dressing fetish, most of whom are heterosexual.

On that basis, feminists and right-wing conservatives are both concerned with the safety of women and children in supposedly protected spaces (although it should be stressed that many prominent men supposedly on the conservative right, like Trump and his ilk, are actually libertines who don't mind male perverts at all, as long as they are suitably discreet and effusively hypocritical).

The other shared concern would be the influence of the TRAs amongst vulnerable and impressionable children, particularly in regard to so-called "medical intervention" (drugging and mutilation of victims).

But the right has no real sympathy with the feminist perspective, or any grasp of how the TRAs seek to destroy feminism and entirely cancel the category of women, replacing it with a male-inclusive and male-controlled category in which actual women are only tolerated if they surrender all basic rights.

I think 'Gender Critical' is often used inaccurately to include people who aren't gender critical.

There seems to be a current spat on X between feminists and Konstantin Kisin who (paraphrasing - too lazy to find the tweet) I think has suggested that feminists claim they can opt out of being a woman and that this contributed to trans ideology.

Without wanting to jump in on either side of the argument, I wouldn't call him 'gender critical' just because he believes that sex is a meaningful category.

I also don't think KJK is 'gender critical'.

As it is just observably true that sex exists, it's not surprising that people with a variety of perspectives agree with that reality. Also, there is no need for a woman to have a view on feminism to want to use a single sex changing room. But being 'gender critical' means more than just knowing that sex exists.

I seem to remember a few years ago a few of us taking a political spectrum type test and finding ourselves routinely in the bottom right-hand quadrant (Left/Libertarian). I've just taken the test again, and yep still firmly in that quadrant. I think what has happened is that the Left has moved so far left it has become Right itself - leaving many behind in the process. Here's the link if anyone's interested https://www.politicalcompass.org/a

I think the problem is that for many people 'left' and 'right' are now vibes based options and have nothing to do with political analysis.

I think they call GC people 'Right' so they then can demonise them and by extent the very idea that sex is real.

I agree I think it's used as an umbrella term which encompasses people with some overlapping beliefs with completely different intentions but discussion of this is rarely indulged and if it is posters are often accused of talking about in bad faith. Do you think of FWR anymore as a feminist GC space?

And I should have written left, bottom quadrant. Duh!

Do you think of FWR anymore as a feminist GC space?

Interesting question. Yes, although I’m willing to accept that I might pay more attention to posters with whom I agree?

I don’t think KJK is gender critical (and I don’t think she would claim to be) and I assume that people who support her also post on MN. That doesn’t change my (gender critical) beliefs.

It doesn't change my beliefs either but although I still read here sometimes I see it less and less as a feminist space just based on how feminist (and especially left wing feminist) concerns seem to be responded to on here even when raised by posters with long standing posting histories, which I find quite sad for a space which claims to still be frequented by many other left wing feminists that any discussion of the right wing is shut down. I mean even just above here apparently anyone bringing up the right wing are trying to demonise GC beliefs even if they hold them themselves...As well as the increasing male posters using misogyny when it suits them ☹️

so are you saying it’s the left wing who are trying to destroy women’s single sex based rights? All the left wing have to do is stop destroying women’s rights and then that’ll solve the problem won’t it?

As someone who believes that sex is real and matters and prefers not to eat meat I feel that I am basically somewhere between Trump and Adolf Hitler politically. I used to think I was a half-decent person, but now I know I am basically a disgusting fascist.

The fact that I try to support women and LGB people and am to the left of labour in economic terms changes nothing.

Is the NHS worth destroying to own the trans? is a question that the libs dems, labour, greens, plaid and SNP need to answer. Not Farage and not me.

Perhaps this is partly caused by the fact that posters aren't supposed to post on this subject elsewhere?

Again, so what?

This is not my problem.

And I am certainly not being used by anyone.

The left has left a gift to the 'right' as others have pointed out by failing to address the valid concerns of women and of parents regarding the harms of so called 'trans healthcare'.

You should address your concerns with the left. Until then the right will continue to expose the failings of the left on this, why shouldn't they!

Difficult to offer any kind of healthcare, NHS or otherwise, if the policy is to abandon evidence based science.

If reform get a landslide because they know what a woman is, maybe this one issue will look pretty small beer compared to what do in government. Is the NHS worth destroying to own the trans? Is it worth having barely educated grandchildren in terrible schools taught jingoistic drivel as long as GC views are part of that indoctrination?
If its anything like Trumps america which nigel obviously wants to emulate, how will women be treated? I don't hold much hope for our rights being the same and I'm not throwing trans people under the bus to get there either. Just who are the right wingers coming for AFTER trans people?

Completely agree, and which I think it's so naive and dangerous to agree and support a party aimed on just one issue.
Whether it be voting for them because they apparently "know what a woman is" doesn't mean they'll treat us well though even if they do
Or because they'll "sort out the boats" and "send em back" or whatever.
They're not interested in women's rights at all, I think we'd be a lot worse off under them.
I'd never risk the NHS and our healthcare either.

The evidence is there about the danger of puberty blockers, the children who were given them previously must be followed up, not using further children to experiment on , it’s child abuse, simple as that