Another Week in the Cabal
Feb. 21st, 2015 08:30 amThe iron grip of the trans lobby over the public discourse may be tight, but since last Saturday a few desperate voices of resistance to our tyranny have manage to smuggle out some messages.
First there was the letter to the Observer, signed by 131 of our most influential public figures, academics and journalists, protesting against our Stalinesque power to quash criticism.
Then came an article in The New Statesman from "Terry MacDonald", the terrified TERF who dare not speak their name for fear of a visit from the trans Thought Police, although that didn't deter them from repeating several verifiable untruths, and inventing a few more. (My favourite was their straightfaced assertion that "Feminists across the political spectrum support the right of trans people not to be discriminated against at work, harassed or subjected to physical and sexual assault." Uncle Joe would have been proud of that one.)
At the other end of the political spectrum Brendan O'Neill in The Spectator also stood up bravely to brand trans activists as berserk, illiberal censors.
And, coming out of left field, the Pope found time to declare the campaign for trans rights as dangerous to the world as nuclear weapons.
So, yes, altogether we dropped the ball multiple times this week. But surely this was all drowned out by the voices of trans people themselves, who as we know exercise such a monopoly on the outlets of free expression? As I scanned the national media, however, confident that the Press would be true to the journalistic standards about which they are so vocal and try to find out whether there might just possibly be another side to the story, I found... er, no trans voices at all. Nor did I see any attempt to represent their point of view by non-trans journalists, with the exception of one supportive and very welcome column from Owen Jones in The Guardian. And that's it.
True, there were some excellent analyses in various blogs, and if you're still interested I particularly recommend this longish but fascinating essay for its discussion both of the details of this case and its history, and of the underlying principles. (I don't agree with every word, but 90% is excellent - a high strike rate.) But such blogs get a few dozen or a few hundred readers at most.
There were also no doubt some Tweets; but Tweets, as we know, are bullying.
First there was the letter to the Observer, signed by 131 of our most influential public figures, academics and journalists, protesting against our Stalinesque power to quash criticism.
Then came an article in The New Statesman from "Terry MacDonald", the terrified TERF who dare not speak their name for fear of a visit from the trans Thought Police, although that didn't deter them from repeating several verifiable untruths, and inventing a few more. (My favourite was their straightfaced assertion that "Feminists across the political spectrum support the right of trans people not to be discriminated against at work, harassed or subjected to physical and sexual assault." Uncle Joe would have been proud of that one.)
At the other end of the political spectrum Brendan O'Neill in The Spectator also stood up bravely to brand trans activists as berserk, illiberal censors.
And, coming out of left field, the Pope found time to declare the campaign for trans rights as dangerous to the world as nuclear weapons.
So, yes, altogether we dropped the ball multiple times this week. But surely this was all drowned out by the voices of trans people themselves, who as we know exercise such a monopoly on the outlets of free expression? As I scanned the national media, however, confident that the Press would be true to the journalistic standards about which they are so vocal and try to find out whether there might just possibly be another side to the story, I found... er, no trans voices at all. Nor did I see any attempt to represent their point of view by non-trans journalists, with the exception of one supportive and very welcome column from Owen Jones in The Guardian. And that's it.
True, there were some excellent analyses in various blogs, and if you're still interested I particularly recommend this longish but fascinating essay for its discussion both of the details of this case and its history, and of the underlying principles. (I don't agree with every word, but 90% is excellent - a high strike rate.) But such blogs get a few dozen or a few hundred readers at most.
There were also no doubt some Tweets; but Tweets, as we know, are bullying.
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-21 04:01 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-21 05:15 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-22 04:42 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-21 09:53 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-21 01:44 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-21 01:48 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-21 12:27 pm (UTC)Jones says he's not interested in the scientific research but only in human rights. I consider that a wobbly platform to fix your fundamental stand on. I'm very interested in the scientific research, because it gives the grounding to what I consider the fundamental fact that transphobes don't get: that human sex or gender is not a purely binary function.
Anybody who says that XX = female and XY = male and that's the end of it is, like someone in my own field who claims that Mozart wrote exactly 41 symphonies, so completely ignorant of the subject on which they pontificate that there's no point in listening to them on it.
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-21 01:42 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-21 03:02 pm (UTC)The specific humane stand that Jones seems to be taking is to take other people's self-image at face value. I think that's an unwise position to hold as a general principle. What if the person's self-image is clearly delusional?
The thing to do, then, is to educate people that transsexuality is not a delusion, and that's where the scientific evidence comes in. A smattering of molecular biology in college is what taught me that chromosomes are not blueprints mechanically constructed upon.
Many people have gotten to that point of understanding with homosexuality, and I think the world would be better off with a similar understanding of transsexuality than if they still privately think you're delusional but have agreed to humor you, which is the road Jones seems to prefer. (Not that I think he'd be happy if it ended there, but it's where he'd seem to be taking us first.)
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-21 05:07 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-21 08:28 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-23 04:41 pm (UTC)INTERSEX HULK SMASH IGNORANT PUNY HUMANS
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-21 01:55 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-21 05:12 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-21 02:08 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-21 05:13 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-21 10:46 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-21 10:51 pm (UTC)thanks
Date: 2015-02-22 05:30 am (UTC)I thought your Twitter Mobs/Letter Mobs piece (http://steepholm.livejournal.com/415745.html) was simply a fantastic summation of the major issues (I mean the who's-silencing-whom issues) and I'd like to see it get more airing. I've tweeted and posted it on FB but am happy to send it around more, especially if you can think of particular targets.
Re: thanks
Date: 2015-02-22 09:42 am (UTC)Thanks for the kind words about "Letter Mobs", too. I'll certainly have a think about who else I'd like to read it - beyond the signatories of the Observer letter, of course!
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-22 06:55 am (UTC)I do believe that transmisogyny disqualifies people from claiming to be feminists. It's a basic failure of definition.
And, coming out of left field, the Pope found time to declare the campaign for trans rights as dangerous to the world as nuclear weapons.
Dammit, Pope Francis! You are so surprisingly liberal in so many other arenas! Don't make me withdraw the tentative respect I gained for you after you criticized the Church for Christmas! Eh, too late.
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-22 08:19 am (UTC)I agree, of course; TERF is an acronym that needs scare quotes around the final letter. But I think we can take it that "Terry MacDonald" (whose article after all purported to be a defence of TERF beliefs) would include them.
Yes, I too was disappointed in Pope Francis, whom I'd seen nothing but good things about until recently. His weird crack after Charlie Hebdo about hitting someone who insulted his mother was the first hint that we might not see eye to eye on all matters, but this latest jibe occasioned a precipitate fall in my estimation.
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-22 09:48 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-22 10:10 am (UTC)No. They're not. Progress seems to be going into reverse and I've been around long enough to know what it was like before.
Until the mammoth screw up which was the so called 'equality' act is corrected, this stuff is going to continue and some of these hatemongers are privileged people with privileged access to the media and friends in very high places.
Sigh :o(
(no subject)
Date: 2015-02-22 06:21 pm (UTC)