Singer Ethel Cain exposes genitals on Instagram

[testmatchspecial]

According to a post I saw on X the picture was only censored at least 12 hours after being posted. Now if you haven’t heard of EC, I’ll give you 3 guesses as to whether they’re a woman or a man.

If in my family, we can use male language for a singer called Ethel Cain and know and understand that everything that Ethel does is done as a man and not as a woman, I think that is an important thing for a child to see and understand.

Even better if it broadens the definition of how man can behave and the understanding of who is and who isn't a man.

But if everyone had called him, and all the other trans "women", him, we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place.

Because again, the only link between trans women's "womanhood" and female bodied people is that trans women labelled themselves "woman" and "she" and then told other people that using their preferred words was the right thing to do.

That's it.

There's nothing underneath the words. There is no common factor that these words are naming. There's just the words.

Take those labels away and they are no closer to us than any other male-bodied person. Without the words, no one would ever have even considered they need to be in female spaces at all.

But if you think he is male, and that it won't make any difference, why would you choose to call him 'she/her'?

I dont mean to badger, I am genuinely interested in the reasoning. Part of that is because I find I tend to defer to 'what someone wants' for the desire for a quiet life, to avoid conflict, or to avoid hurting someone's feeleings, but that's not an issue here.

So what makes it 'the right thing' to do?

I think we are socialised and habituated to going along with what people ask, especially if we are women, and that's okay for the most part, but it can have impacts.

Cumulatively, constantly acceding to the demands of others that carries over even into a space where we acknowledge it doesnt matter means we are expending mental energy to appease people at the cost of our own ability to speak freely, state our own boundaries, state the truth.

I find it interesting to what extent we are willing to follow instructions even when they are not necessary. Not directed at you or anyone in particular, just musing.

'He posed on Instagram with his penis exposed'

'She posed on Instagram with her penis exposed'

Interesting how those statements impact differently.

I think the second one baffles, jars and confuses so much that it means we end up in a mental tailspin. Constantly flipping back and forth between imagining a woman and a man.

The first one is quite clear.

Language is powerful.

Yep.

And my teen also will know what is and isn’t appropriate behaviour on social media through knowing that just because a person believes they are not male, exposing his penis is a very male thing to do and no falsely dismissing it as ‘non-sexual’ while the man is wearing sexualise clothing makes it non-sexual.

It is a good lesson in accuracy around language in many ways. But it would be better that it was not on a mainstream social media service but that is a different discussion.

We can agree to disagree - and this is why it’s complex as there’s not a single view.

It's not complex or nuanced, it's wrong, and it's not helping those who are caught up in this maelstrom of malevolence, so don't kid yourself.

It mightn't make a difference in the world but at least you'd have some self respect and dignity. Doesn't that mean anything to you?

As women do not ever get our genitals out in public.

Well, we do if we are really desperate to pee, but even then we try to hide behind a shrub.

I had a face palm moment this morning when I saw the article about boys wearing dresses in Victorian times. I suppose all those people who wore togas in Roman times were also trans! Julius Caesar was really Julia, Claudius was actually Claudia etc. 🤦

It's almost as though gendered fashion is a completely artificial construct...

To be even more pedantic, they bought a surgical operation. In British English a surgery is a room or building used by doctors.

I saw the headline, haven't read yet but assumed the headline was clickbsit and the exhinition would be s more educated and considered exloration of historic gender than "look! They wore dresses!"

Is it really that trite?

Cumulatively, constantly acceding to the demands of others that carries over even into a space where we acknowledge it doesnt matter means we are expending mental energy to appease people at the cost of our own ability to speak freely, state our own boundaries, state the truth.

I’ve had this with the DC who tell me off for referring to Mae Martin as ‘her’. They tell me it’s only polite to use preferred pronouns. My response is that MM has absolutely no idea I’m talking about her so she cannot care less. But they find it upsetting. If I try to talk about compelled speech, they don’t get it. Yet.

I'm pretty tough when it comes to operations, but the step-by-step illustrations of orchidectomy and vaginoplasty made me feel really ill. I've seen a lot of operations on animals (including castrations) and held animals large and small while they were euthanised (all in the animal's best interest, but very sad all the same).

I think it is because they are starting with a (physically) healthy patient. It's just not the same as reconstructive plastic surgery, where the operation is repairing an injury (sometimes extremely severe injuries) or a congenital malformation.

The phalloplasty operations are the same. It is hard to see a body that is perfectly fine, within the physical norms and injury-free, operated on like that.

do not give them ideas!!

It's on an an alphabet people article, saying that there have aways been non binary people and giving examples of how people showed they were non binary. They seem to be determined that non binary isn't a new thing and makes wearing 'dresses' or robes were expressing their true, non binary selves. It's a nice try to suit present day thinking.

Even if there were “trans people a thousand years ago”, so what?
It’s not news that there were people with mental delusions 1000 years.

Calling him by his chosen name is not the same as using wrong sex pronouns when talking about him to someone else. It just makes the person doing it sound utterly captured.

Sorry, also meant to say it drives me mental because they are supposed to be historians and, to borrow a phrase, the past is a different country they do things differently there. But historians seem to have forgotten that.

To be fair, that is practically a clitoris.
Which is good because im sure that helps with their gender dysphoria.

Well sure ... if people are claiming that 'non binary' = sex stereotype non-conforming. There have always been non-conforming people.

It is beyond fucking offensive to categorise historic people into such a category. Because for a start, 'non binary' doesn't = sex stereotype non-conforming as a population. Because there are a fcuking huge % of the population who are not non-binary at all but are sex stereotype non-conforming.

It is not even logical.

yes

Exactly, they're not progressive, or edgy, or even new, they're just a tired old cliché that been repeated over and over through out human history.
Spoiler alert, it's never end well before, it won't end well this time either.

The article linked says “However you feel about Cain’s music or her controversial history, posting these nude photos was a bold choice that stops anyone viewing them from ignoring her trans identity.”

Ummm or from igoring his male sex?