Trans Fam Part 1 - I, sometimes, blame the parents

Please see also TransParents - Theybies

Laurie Frankel in the New York Times, “From He to She in First Grade,” reviews transgender promotional material in Publisher’s Weekly, "The Transgender Child: A Handbook for Families and Professionals”:

“It is a very exciting time to be raising gender-variant and transgender children. . . . Congratulations. You are helping to change the world.”

This is a delicate subject, but I don't know if older notions of respect and not being seen to be intrusive is a great response in the long term.

The notion of the trans kid, that they know who they are, is pretty well constructed in our media. What specifically I'm interested in here is the parents who choose to be 'ambassadors' and invite the world's media into the lives of their children, during what is already an extremely sensitive time. If you read some of parent's accounts where they discovered that their child 'needed' to transition, you may notice some common themes, and I think there are some things we should look out for and question, instead of instantly falling into line, regurgitating the omnipresent narrative that these are the best parents, the bravest and proudest of their kids. Someone needs to acknowledge the potentially corrupting factors of money and fame.

The narrative of the courageous parent, putting their grief aside as they battle for their child is powerful - to many, it's appealing, a love-against-all-odds story. Finally, parents are open to their child's needs.

Considering how difficult it is to challenge anything with a rainbow-stamped approval, this is the ultimate tricky subject. You see these stories on allegedly progressive, humanitarian-left (i.e. chant miming) media, and any reticence is noted and condemned. Who are you to suggest you know their child better than they, these mamma-bears?

Because it normally is mothers. You'll see both parents as they perform the archetypal, perfectly-unusual family. In videos there'll be lots of scenes where wholesome meals are served and books are pored over at bedtime. The self-sacrifice is front and centre. We are directed to picture it as if they are defending their gay child as the neighbours tut and disapprove. And we need a bit of that, after millennia of homophobic estrangement and stories of conversion 'therapy'.

Here's an example; Mimi Lemay, who decided her daughter, on approaching her 5th birthday, was not only a boy, who then needed to be unveiled as such in school, to family and friends, but she needed to make this previously obscure and average family open to the world.

It is 'A Letter to my Son Jacob on his Fifth Birthday published in Boston.com, a subsidiary of The Boston Globe, with a readership of 130,000.

In her letter, which her child would likely not have been able to read, Mimi describes her excitement at finding out she was to have a girl; how she had filled the nursery with pink and frilly clothes, florals, matching bonnets and swimsuits for the impending baby and her elder sister. After delivery, Mimi and husband Joe were struck at the loud cry the little girl made -


"Your hearty, solid body, your pumping fists and legs and the surprised thought, “This one is a different model,’’ comparing you to your dainty sister"

As life went on, Jacob (then with a girl's name) was nicknamed the honey badger, such was her boisterousness. Jacob started to change her clothes multiple times a day - an early warning sign, Mimi reflects. Definitely not frustration at bonnets and restrictive dresses and hair adornments. At 3, Jacob declared herself a boy, and Mimi apparently acquiesced her clothing ideals, discussing how gender roles were unhelpful. In the next sentence, Mimi says she allowed the boy's clothes, telling Jacob "that gray was a perfectly acceptable favorite color for a 3-year-old girl".

Jacob continued to be bolshy and rebel, and one day, as she was nearing 4, a teacher suggested that Jacob might really believe she was a boy. "I stumbled through the next days in a painful haze. We were a few weeks shy of winter break, and I reached out to a friend of ours, a therapist who had worked with at-risk LGBTQ youth. As we stood doling out cheddar cheese bunnies and pretzels to our raucous offspring on a playdate, she confirmed my fears — we should consider that you might be transgender."

Immediately following this extremely wholesome image of an all-American playdate with doting mothers, advice was sought from gender specialists.

This is about a year before Mimi wrote her open letter. The link above directs to the second publishing, a year later. The story had been picked up by several news stations already.

But is this what it takes to evaluate a child? Chatting to the parent(s) and observing the child's behaviour on a playdate? We know how chaotic playdates can be, with the constant cries for mum's attention, interruptions and conversation broken to spare the children overhearing any unnecessary, concerning conversation? When Mimi asked her friend what the implications might be for a transgender child, we hear the attempted suicide of 40% of trans youth. It's not true, but has an air of self-fulfilling profesy to it. Suicide is contagious, especially with young people and people who are desperate to be taken seriously as really devoted to or needing of something. Suicide threats and attempts after teens are stopped from seeing a love interest, or from anorexics, are not used in this way.

It had been decided, Jacob was a boy. The letter went viral, a proliferation of media were welcomed into the private life of a tiny child, photos of the whole family accompanying them. During 2019 run up to the 2020 election, Jacob appeared in the CNN's presidential candidate town hall on LGBTQ rights. Asking what Elizabeth Warren would do for trans kids, 9 yr old Jacob was told s/he would have a say on who the Education Secretary would be if Warren won. Heart-warming.

I don't think it's difficult to see the intense gender roles here. The expectation of a mini-me in matching clothes for her sister. The shock at her loud, demanding cries and 'pumping' fists and legs. While Mimi has talks about the out-dated-ness of gendered clothes, she immediately reassures Jacob (herself?) that grey is fine for a little girl. Mimi is the one we hear from, husband Joe is in the background, apparently happy. Mimi is a very attractive

, well groomed woman who looks like the classic mother hen, enjoying the young years of three young children thoroughly, apparently not stressed. Even on the assessment/playdate, she describes herself in the kitchen, handing out snacks. When describing the clothes and nursery decor in preparation for her arrival, her joy is not veiled. It seems like while in theory gender non-conformity was tolerated, really it may be that it was in some way easier to see Jacob as a child who required support in a condition, and reap the attention and status as perfect mamma that our culture rewards this with.

Clearly Jacob is a strongwilled and atypical child. I wonder how much the dye is cast now. A year or so after Jacob barked and mimicked a dog, she is now he. And it wasn't just the family's only option, it was imperative this be shared with the world.

This family decided to go public with the truly amazing news that both of their children were trans: the elder, 11, female to male, the younger, 8, male to female. It's obviously impossible to make much of a judgement based on such a short video, but it seems extremely unlikely that two children would both feel such visceral unhappiness with their sex they need to transition to manage it unless something externally was also at play. And again, why the publicity? Why exactly is the need for society to know about these families a personal duty to fulfil? Do these kids benefit? Personally I can't imagine allowing this level of media intrusion into the life of a child, not unless it was vital for survival like in the case of fundraising for cancer treatment or bone marrow donation.

Janeen is the mother of Luna, 8. Here she tells her story of finally accepting her little boy was in fact a girl, at the age of three. Again, she has invited the world into the private life of a child who is unable to make that decision themselves. She had allowed Luna (the child's name has been changed by deed poll) to dress up outside of school - an understandable choice, but surely reinforcing the gender expectations and association with 'girl' clothes being about fun, freedom and expression? Was the deed poll change really necessary?

Jeneen also fell back on the classic suicide prevention line: “I can either have a dead son or a happy, confident daughter.”

It shouldn't be a huge surprise to hear that the group she reached out to for advice and support was Mermaids. Janeen is now comforted that Luna can live and ultimately find love as a girl, which may be an overly optimistic prognosis. I'm sure trans women can, of course have full and happy lives - we know they do - but it seems to gloss a feel-good narrative over the stark reality there will often be problems. Janeen is already talking about puberty blockers "if Luna decides". But this is far from plain sailing. Jazz Jennings took puberty blockers followed by cross sex hormones, meaning the gender
confirmation surgery, at 17, failed due to insufficient penile skin and an additional skin graft from the abdomen was needed, which first went very wrong and needed two follow up surgeries to correct. https://twitter.com/4th_WaveNow/status/925347924002988032?s=19. Jazz also, as is no surprise, feels no erotic sensation at all. So the hopeful reassurance about love for these children may be hampered by a lack of sexuality. Never mind the infertility, which is less easy to overlook the older one gets. It's obviously not a deal breaker - people may not want children, or already have their own to bring to a relationship, or maybe they want to foster and adopt. It's of course possible to live a happy, healthy life and never have kids, but knowing categorically it is off the table is quite an unusual and heavy burden on a teenager, least of all for a pre-teen to make that decision.

Here's one young man, detransitioning at 18 and in a state of fear and horror he still has the penis of a pre-pubertal boy

It is absolutely jaw-dropping this literal de-sexing of children is dismissed by the weight of a suicide trope which is both incorrect and unspeakably dangerous. I can't highly enough recommend the excellent analysis of Transgender Trend here - https://www.transgendertrend.com/the-suicide-myth/

I'm not suggesting I would know what to do, or that these parents hold a desire for their children to be trans. But I am concerned about the ad nauseam repetition of the suicide trope. Not only are the claims of Mermaids ridiculous, they are dangerous (see Sex, Lies, and an Invidious Landscape). There's never a parellel counter narrative that we may read in papers in which the child is photographed smiling and beautifully bonded with their parent. We know from these stories that the turmoil is terrible, these children are often inconsolable and absolutely insistent. However the answer sometimes is to allow the clothes, the hair (why not? If we can't protect kids from the subsequent bullying as they are, how are we protecting them when they do the same but also change name and pronouns?) but stick to the brutal, incontrovertible truth - they are the sex they are. They will probably grow out of it, and as adults full sexual function is a beautiful and precious aspect of life.

Therapy may be the answer. If it concerns older children a good place to start is to look at any visceral feeling of homophobia. These children often do not see transition as the answer after puberty. They are often gay or lesbian, too.

This may also uncover more devastating truths, namely that sexual abuse or exposure to violent and degrading porn, only a couple of clicks away, can create a desperate child wanting to run from any and all association with an adult body, and thus sex itself.

The Daily Mail tells the story of Jamie and her child Dempsey, eight. Put forth in a headline that, like Janeen's, uses defiant prose - "mum ACCUSED OF CHILD ABUSE for letting her child transition". Janeen and Jamie both describe an early orientation towards dolls, dresses and long hair. In fact, Jamie goes so far as to say 'She would become hysterical and visibly traumatized when we cut her hair"

I'm yet to understand why anyone would be so fervently invested in conforming to gender roles they would insist their little boy had to have short hair even if it meant they were hysterical and left traumatised. Quite frankly, what the fuck? If it was bullying they were concerned about, what makes them think the teasing of a primary age child is more significant than having their parents overrule their bodily autonomy? Is 'you look like a girl' more damaging than being left traumatised by the unnecessary cutting of hair and consequent loss of trust in a parent? How could the parent do that? And why is it such a non-negotiable that no boy can have long hair because of bullying, but simultaneously liberating to reintroduce a child to school as a different sex?

Surely, the trick to managing bullying is to give the child inner resilience? For the child to make the choice to have longer hair, to know other kids might take the piss but that it's weak, it's regressive, and they have been taught it. Maybe a little like how kids are taught transphobia is harmful, learnt and untolerable?

This inner resilience is in desperately short supply in trans literature. The suicide lines, the self harm, the risk of parental alienation if the parentbdoes not acquiesce to their child's demands. All of it teaches society and trans people themselves that they are fragile as spun glass; the act of 'deadnaming' or 'misgendering' can be deadly; not being accepted, or being 'outed' is too; that women who care about their sex based rights are TERFs and TERFs want to deny humanity, erase identity, exclude and harm trans people; that everything not explicitly affirmative is a dog whistle and of course, trans people are murdered in a growing epidemic of transphobic hate.

Clinicians at the Tavistock had claimed that children went through terrible homophobic bullying until coming out as trans, and then being more popular than ever. We have to give some thought as to the love-bombing these kids can experience; the outside support which may include their parents being cautioned and reprimanded by the school, therapists, even the courts. If the parents still drag their feet, they have a whole 'rainbow family' waiting with open arms, pep talks and scornful words for mum and dad. If only children experiencing homophobic bullying at school or home got this level of institutional handholding. Add to this the parents have at times been reported as finding a trans child easier to stomach as a gay one, I think there's some dangerous thinking going on here.

Jamie says Dempsey would return home from preschool crying, saying that playing with 'girls' toys had resulted in name calling. That's a very strict environment. I wonder what could be reinforcing this gender binary? It's startling this is at preschool. What did they do to address this?

Well, Jamie and husband Dennis went and spoke to the preschool about Dempsey's "toy preferences and gender non-conforming expression"

'They told us that they accepted Dempsey as she was but couldn't stop the bullying by other children if she chose to wear feminine accessories"

In preschool? The heavy teacher / student ratio can't prevent everything, maybe, but why not demand they address this? Why not insist that they get in early with anti-bullying lessons and conversation over the cruelty and inexcusable nature of it? Jamie goes on "at this time, Dempsey was still insistent on using he/him pronouns, which made the situation difficult at that time." I'm sorry, I can't believe this. It really seems it was a simpler and easier to categorise, and possibly, evade the judgement we feel as parents. "My child isn't strange, my child has a medical condition which is today's cause célèb".

Dempsey was four when she was diagnosed with gender dysphoria by a paediatric mental health professional. I'm pretty sure that's impossibly early. While there may have been many signs, this is a child barely able to articulate basic emotions. Why does it need labelling at four? Interestingly, the article mentions how one former paediatrician said Dempsey was going through a phase, and 'transgenderism isn't real'. Jamie claims this paediatrician then spoke about the family behind her back and referred to them as freaks - that'san extremely serious breach of professional conduct. How this was discovered is not divulged, and what happened after is not, either. But, we know one paediatrician dismissed the idea this child is trans, and that's one they dumped

The misinformed comments from other adults began. This apparently inspired them to start an Instagram account to follow Dempsey's journey and to educate others on what it means to be trans.

Somehow this was a better option than going into the school to insist some much needed anti-bullying and gender demolition be considered. Or even a meeting with other parents, maybe beginning with the more sympathetic ones, to form a core support around this kid. No, everything specifically centred on this child and their special requirements. Remove all boundaries and privacy in the world of a struggling, confused and targeted child...

Once, Dempsey was in the trolley at a supermarket, still with short hair but in a dress and holding a dolly. While sat, trapped in this trolley a man apparently thought it was his prerogative to question Dempsey and asked if the dress and doll belonged to a sister. We're told that Dempsey replied, "No, these are my things" which is a great answer. The man replied that "This is disgusting, you're a boy." He then turned to look at Dad, "telling him that we were bad parents and should be reported for child abuse" so dad, Dennis, issued a mind your own business instruction along with a couple of curse words. This sounds like a heavily gender stereotyped culture. It's amazing to me a random guy would see fit to challenge such a small child when being pushed around in a supermarket by their dad. It's extremely sad, and infuriating. Now Dempsey has long hair is as such less clockable as a boy, why invite more intrusion?
So, this is the narrative: loving family against the world. There's a hundred or more others we could look at with the same threads; the attraction to the 'wrong' toys and clothes, the tears, the fights, the struggle to accept and to gain acceptance from others. These stories do not obscure the face of these kids, they lay bare their internal struggles while never delving into anything more personal, because they can't. But, like with Susie Green's TedTalk, early rows based on the response of a homophobic parent seem common in the adult's stories. The fear of bullying and inability to have it addressed are common, but, as obviously it is unethical, sexual abuse is also never spoken of. It's impossible to dig deeper with an innocent child's face beamed at you. We can't discuss what we might otherwise. It's a rainbow wrapper around a completed, indisputable story.
Our better instincts tell us not to mess with this; not to criticise other parents and not to drag out further details of the life of a child, placed front and centre in the happy tale of how to flourish in adversity. How these children may struggle later on, especially if they begin to desist, is anyone's guess - and I hope it's all unicorns, triumph-through-adversity too. I do. Just, forgive my reticence in calling this now.

Autogynephilia is a transphobic trope

I'm gonna start this article with a dare.

Go on Twitter or Facebook and mention autogynephilia on a public post. Await, with true suspense, for the response.

If you did this an hour ago and haven't been bombarded with abuse, a load of tag groups  or received some unsolicited PMs etc please contact me and let me know what world you live in. I want to join you.

If you don't include Jami in your feminism, you're apparently not a feminist

The conflating of what we once called transexuals with transvestites has not, contrary to popular belief, been the fault of us bigoted TERFs. It has actually come from places like Stonewall and all number of other advocacy groups

Here's Stonewall on Twitter 

The Scottish Trans Alliance

There's actually few Gender Critical Feminists (GC) who don't distinguish between the two, although it is always how it's presented - 'you TERFs think girls should wear pink dresses and bake cakes and boys should wear blue and never cry'. It's been a huge part of the incessant campaigning to remove all boundaries and categories. This is a central thesis to Queer Theory, for which I'd recommend you read Jane Clare Jones, Kathleen Stock, Heather Brunskell-Evans or Dr Em.

Erasing categories is integral here. The idea that gender dysphoria is the critical basis for being trans is now anathema. How dare you police bodies? You only recognise a trans woman as a woman if she's had her penis inverted? Shame on you, fascist.

In essence, this is the problem. If a woman has fears over sexual violence she's now a TERF and should be excluded, ridiculed and if she's beaten up, oh well, what-a-pity-nevermind.

She will be misrepresented by an extent she is a parody of a creepy, frigid hysteric who wants to inspect pants and is obsessed with genitalia. In the (similar) words of the Republican right; penises dont rape people, people do.

So, back to autogynephilia, or AGP for the frequent flyer. 

I take issue with the ridiculing of the condition by some GCs. I'm far from convinced it's helpful, and, as we know, some of our trans allies have openly admitted to having AGP as the driving factor behind their transition; this includes those who surgically transition, i.e. lose their penises. There's got to be a very powerful drive to compell someone to make such radical and brutal changes to their body.

 

That said, with the notion of self ID, the expansion of the trans umbrella and the fact we know well over 80% of trans women retain their penises, it's more a crucial conversation than ever.

It's just extremely difficult to speak about without being condemned, abused and dismissed as the parody feminist who chants that all sex is rape.

Ray Blanchard, a sexologist, first created the term. It was in response to his treatment and study of patients with a trans identity. It wasnt an unheard of term then - the old style transvestic disorder could cover it. Other people have followed, with Ann Laurence, an autogynephilic trans woman who wrote Men Trapped in Men's Bodies. Michael Bailey, who wrote The Man who would be Queen has, along with all those with the temerity to defend the taxonomy, been unfairly dismissed. Here's a typical take down of Blanchard, with some digs at Laurence for good measure.

So, apparently it's a trope, a dog whistle. What this means is it is forbidden; taboo.

The most open displays you'll ever seen are the AGPs themselves, however.

Genuine apologies for the imagery. It's an infinitesimal fraction of the tip of a very large iceberg. If you have stomach for it, look at the hashtags #girlslikeus and #sissy, a whole world of degradation that hinges on cock-hungry submission.

Andrea Long Chu is a transwoman who wrote a book called ‘Females’ with the quote “distilling the femaleness to its barest essentials- an open mouth, an expectant asshole, blank blank eyes”. When describing how porn made Andrea trans...

Autogynephilia has seen a rise in popularity on porn sites. Sissy porn, too, has boomed. It's all about the subjugation, the worthless-fuck-puppetry of BDSM, and it's easily found online. 

Blanchard theorised that male-to-female trans people come in two types; the homosexual transexual, who feels a deep unease with their sexed body at a very young age. These are the people who mainly comprised the transexuals of old - naturally effeminate, often passing pretty well, attracted to men. Then there are the autogynephiles, or what we might have just known as transvestites. Autogynephilia, meaning love of oneself as a woman in Greek, is clearly evidenced in the multiple groups, tags, displays and porn genres which litter the internet. According to Blanchard's typology, AGPs are those who tend to be heterosexual. They transition later in life and often after long relationships with women, often having had children too. The end result is not that one group deserves more sympathy than another, but that the demands and expectations of the two are different.

Autogynephilia may begin with some excitement in cross-dressing. This will normally be private and shameful. All of this feeds into the fetishism - the forbidden.  It's often described as a drug-like hit, which in a similar path as addiction, becomes required more frequently, with more exposure to the world and the risk that brings. Ultimately this leaves us where we are now - middle aged, normally white males with a growing need for validationas women. While homosexual transexualism is an internal need normally sated by physical transition, the autogynephile will be caught in a cycle of growing fixation. Among the most prized achievement is that of pushing it to the point they become synonymous with other women around them. Autogynephiles boast online of entering women's spaces to masturbate, sometimes of leaving spunk on the hooks of changing rooms etc. It is not necessarilyas nefarious as this; but it happens far more than anyone would like to admit.

The crucial point here is breaching boundaries. It is not, as the 'classic' homosexual transexual, to merge seamlessly, but to encroach. Those AGP transexuals who have spoken out about this are pretty brave, and it's important to note that many of them are respectful of our spaces, and campaign for third spaces to accommodate them rather than demand they be allowed access.

Demanding validation, joining lesbian dating sites and reporting the women who turn them down on account of their 'lady-dicks'. Does this make sense yet?

Still, if you were lucky and experienced no deafening pushback earlier with that AGP comment, it might be worth checking it now. Have you been called a transphobe? A TERF? Have you finally been exposed as a notorious human rights abuser, erasing trans people and their rights? Are YOU the Christian right, climate denialism and Sargon of Akkad?

There's many places you can find decent and honest descriptions of autogynephilia;  Miranda Yardley writes about it; and here is the story of one man who has been deeply caught in it; Maya Kaye, a sensitive, sympathetic and wise transwomen talks here and here is Debbie Hayton, also being empathetic and honest.

You can also find the testimony of one wife here, advice to the wives of sufferers from a transexual ally, and their clinicians and more.

Trans activism fails to provide on-the-ground resources and outreach for homeless or domestic violence-fleeing trans people. Instead it demands those built by and belonging to women. It doesn't help struggling trans people who need a safe space, one that could actually fulfill their needs and not force them to either come out in an alien, potentially hostile environment, or to live stealth among women and their children, who will ask blunter questions.

No. It demands everyone, from drag queens to fetishists and men who choose their gender differently on any given day are seen as credible, committed and sympathetic as those who will pay to have their genitals reconfigured beyond any resemblance and removed.  It isn't helping trans people, it wont accept the realities behind the numerous causes of trans-ism, and it ruthlessly vilifies any dissent, especially from women.

So, what is really going on?

*Edited in response to Kay's comment. Occasionally worth reading his blog

https://sillyolme.wordpress.com/advice-for-wivesgirlfriends-of-autogynephiles/

A letter to my daughters, now you are fodder for the wolves

So, I've been trying to work out when exactly did we begin to celebrate throwing you, dear daughters to the wolves?

It can't have been so long ago, as women have for many years been gaining ground. Our legal rights have been up until recently consistently strengthening; our representation has improved; we have faster, louder, harsher backlash to overt misogyny.

Sometimes.

While I imagine today countdowns in tabloids whereby a girl about to turn 16 is slowly exposed, an item of clothing a day, til she can legally occupy page 3 with her tits out would provoke fury, and rape within marriage wasn't even a crime until 1992, I'm not convinced a popular 'civil rights' movement would get away with sexual degradation to a wall of silence as they do now, with every critic decried as a TERF.

When JK Rowling is subject to an unhinged and gleefully repulsive, misogynistic backlash for month upon month for critiquing the current doctrine and the erasure of women, you know which side you're demanded to stand with. When women wishing to discuss proposed changes to the law which will directly impact them and their rights are both libelled and harassed without anyone giving an example of their supposed hate, every other woman is made aware that self-defence is indefensible. Everyone knows to be TERF or a SWERF is the worst thing that you can be. But it's definitely not a slur.

So, what makes a TERF? 

Lots of things! Being traumatised by rape and / or child sexual abuse and, as a consequence of that, not liking penises. Not having sex with those penis-persons because you are a lesbian. You think everyone has a right to full sexual autonomy and that this necessarily includes discrimination, in the purest sense of the word? Genital preferences and penis aversion are TERF dog whistles. They are exclusionary, colonial constructs. Penises can be female; it's all about the mouth-feel. 

Jana Cornell is one of the bravest women on earth. See here for a catalogue of some of the abuse she has suffered from trans rights activists 

Maybe it's doubting that crushing the ingrained response to males in sensitive female only spaces is an acceptable thing and not wildly dangerous. Or not believing you can actually change sex; caring for women in prison and their rights to safety, privacy and dignity 

Not pretending that FGM is based on gender, rather than sex could do it, too. Let's keep it intersectional and relevant - in the first world, thanks. Maybe you dared show knowledge of the crime patterns that distinguishes males and females, although that won't be a problem for long, not with modern crime recording.

Believing a male MMA fighter who, age 31, transitions to 'female' probably shouldn't be fighting actual females makes you a violent TERF. Calling a sex offender out for using trans rights definitely does, too.

TERF vacancies are also available for belief in biology, 'misgendering'. An absence of praise and hyperbole when confronted with a balding male asserting his womanhood. General wrongthink. The symptoms might be varied, subjective even - but the prognosis is always the same - unworthy of representation; fascist; scum; filth; beneath contempt and certainly undeserving of human rights.

And a SWERF?

Not believing that prostitution is just normal work like any other. Or, maybe you think lap dancing clubs are damaging to women, or the degrading and gross-out acts  which dominate the porn industry are often harmful to the actors, viewers, and society. Congratulations, you are now scum.

If I wasn't so afraid of assuming gender, I'd say this is a man's chest in this teeshirt. How nice of him to 'support' those oppressed workers, eh?

We used to have fiery, outspoken women in feminist media that, although niche, took no shit. They didn't pander to men or to gender stereotypes, and sometimes they were so fucking wild they didn't even remove body hair!

Despite multiple attempts, this rag refuses to allow women to comment. Brave and stunning

Feminism is now mainstream, but with an important caveat - it is not about women, but for everyone! Today university magazine feminism which should be brave, enlightening, empowering and at least not outright patriarchy-wanking instruction comes out with preposterous bullshit like "SWERFs engender hatred, fear, and oppression of individuals in the sex work industry...(their)...SWERF ideology is not, in fact, focused on ending violence against sex workers, but rather on policing women’s bodies and sexuality." "SWERFs also make sex workers the target of bullying and abuse through doxxing .... protesting and picketing against safe sex work"

What the fuck has happened? How dare they publish such massive fucking lies and general old-bitch-shaming cautionary tales? We should be angry that you, our daughters, are being groomed by an edifice of smug, highly styled conspiritors with booming voices mansplaining women's experiences, orchestrating chants of 'burn the witch' and spinning entitled, male demands as essential civil rights.

It has infected our schools, universities and workplaces, our charities and popular culture, creating a surround sound of instruction that must be adhered to and while you are free to go about your life as long as you're not harming others, your every comment, like, connection and associate will be assessed and may be used against you in the court of public opinion.
Some things will be kept for prosperity, to be reeled off without context. Most things will be delivered immediately to the memory hole.
Be nice, they tell you. Be kind, repeat by rote these mantras and lies, deny your own most primal senses, your eyes and ears . You do not know male from female, you do not count for anything unless you centre the identity of males. 

Once at uni, any remnants of basic self protection learnt in childhood must be obliterated. Ladies, do not trust your gut instinct. Protect males in women's toilets.

Getting back to that article, where are the texts of these 'SWERFS'? What is the praxis? Where has a radical feminist doxxed a sex worker? What is 'safe' sex work? Why are they pushing abject bullshit with a tone designed for a primary school age group? Well, I wouldn't suggest asking this in real life. Think bible class under a theocracy and shut your fucking mouth.

breathe in love, radiate hatred

Intersectionality was a system by which black women could examine their own oppression. It was never for centreing males in feminism and giving them endless back up with analogies of segregation and the civil rights movement. It's the greatest imaginable gift to white, middle class males. Black women are paraded as props to compare with men, black men mean nothing unless 'queer' or killed by cop. But still, it's kindly gifted to them by a weary, porn-drenched generation who think that calling for their female sex class to have the legal protections other generations spilled blood over is akin to English nationalism or a Trump rally in MAGA hats.

As long as you forgo your intellectual honesty, privacy and dignity these you can continue in ditching your more vulnerable sisters and live in peace. You have to, because your whole media is colluding in this grand trick. To be female is nothing without being worthy, compassionate and self-sacrificing. You must know which fights to pick (when there are 'allies' and an audience) and which to sneer at. Sneer well, with good teeth and lipstick and you too can be the pseudo-punk caricature that men claim to be just a little bit scared of while slapping one out to your image.

The abject betrayal of this generation of women is hard to quantify. Where do you have to turn? Being in any way gender critical is social suicide, and any evidence at all of 'hostility' 'erasing the identity' 'denying the existence' of trans people (i.e. not joyfully reciting the slogans, admitting to a concern for same sex spaces, misgendering a penis etc) could easily result in social justice champions smirking heroically as they email your employers to demand your dismissal, lest they desire a hashtag campaign and gender defenders camping outside like very angry happy-clappy twats. If you're a lesbian, you have a rough time ahead. Apart from a couple of highly contentious lesbian magazines that would require some sort of justification if found, every one has come out as 'trans inclusive'. There's Autostraddle - How to have lesbian sex with a trans woman, along with DIVA magazine, Lez Spread the Word, Curve, LOTL and more who graciously include male-bodied 'lesbians' in their editorials, campaigns and readerships. If you read LGBTQ Nation, GayStar News, PinkNews etc etc you are constantly reminded to toe the line or be excommunicated as a bigot, bitch, cunt. A TERF.

Charlotte Clymer, the ex armed forces hunchback of not-sir-but-ma'am berates 'TERFs' from an ivory tower before slinging on heels to blush at compelled compliments. Clymer, we are told, is a feminist. And the cheat goes on, with Teen Vogue telling girls how to enjoy anal and dissociate themselves further from their manifest selves, while vice tells lesbians how to 'eat out' a woman with a cock and balls and the dreary, shallow lib fem magazines drone on "The argument behind SWERF ideology tends to be that sex workers, particularly those in the prostitution and pornography industries, become the victims of regular sexual objectification, exploitation, and violence" - well no shit. How delusional are these frigid bitches, huh? Continually banging on about how 'so many women happily choose sex work' is really going to free those trafficked into it, those groomed and coerced into it, those left with no other means to survive than by it, hey? How about the fact that in areas where prostitution is legalised there is a subsequent increase in illegal trafficking? And when the JobCentre orders you to down to that 'gentleman's club' and suck it or your benefits will be stopped? Does that honestly never occur to them, such is their insulation from relative poverty? Those who like to mention, but never critique, late stage capitalism have a problem. They can't see the problem.

ahh, of course - short-haired older women are the fly in the ointment, condemning these two young, attractive people for using their bodies! Intersectional feminism; centreing the image of smiley, white, photogenic  prostitutes from ad campaigns 

For those of us who do give a flying fuck about the people in sex work, apparently we argue that by "participating in this kind of industry, sex workers become co-perpetrators of these crimes...SWERFs take it upon themselves to tell other people what to do and what not to do with their bodies." Yeah, for fucks sake mum! It's, like, my body you know? Who are you to say that woman who desperately needs to fund her habit isn't really a nymphomaniac who finds me very attractive? It's supply and demand, no ethical choicrs in end stage capitalism, bitches.

Most 'SWERFs' have had some dealing with the reality of prostitution, and the problem here is really that men legitimise fucking someone who actually doesn't want to fuck them. It's a peculiarly male thing, an ambivalence to turn-on to sadistic kick, and I would argue the sexual conqueror attitudes among some men has a lot to do with their vast over-representation (97%) among sex offenders. And what is 'SWERF ideology'? You'll occasionally find women refer to themselves with heavy irony as TERFs, but never have I seen SWERF used as an auto-descriptor. Women who have concerns about the sex industries are very often victims of it. The idea male sexuality is such an ungovernable force that we would have a tide of rape in the event prostitutes were not up for business is the most insidious patriarchal lie I can think of.

So it goes that males need the outlet - everyone watches porn (which is increasingly engaged in violent, degrading and painful acts) and many women are empowered by it, we are told. The highly atypical woman with every benefit of capitalism is our muse here. Lets not think about the abused and broken, drug addicted and desperate, the trafficked, raped multiple times a day.

No glamorisation or romanticism here! This is 'shit in the way work is shit' non-judgemental realism! Look at her with her twirling feet, held up leisurely, flirtatiously as she poses like a teen girl in an American rom-com while negotiating her price

Victims are irrelevant, apparently. What is essential is to create a self fulfilling prophesy of empowerment, that's how it works. And it's okay - we'll deal with all the racial inequality issues with some hashtags and BLM logos. 

Sophie Wilson, a 23 year old, fully-comprehensive package deal ideologue and Labour councillor for Rotherham in Yorkshire, joined protesters campaigning against the council's decision to close Spearmint Rhino, a lap dance club which had over 200 breaches for code of conduct regulations, mostly relating to sexual touching. Of Wilson's critics was Sammy Woodhouse, a victim of Rotherham grooming gangs. While Wilson was planning her homework timetable and school trips, Woodhouse was being systematically raped by a never-ending series of men. She went on to fall pregnant by one of her pimps, but at some point she actually worked at the club. Rather than checking her privilege, listening to the oppressed, so she could gain insight, or at least balance, Wilson reached for labels. Slurs, used against women, that seek to delegitimise and shame the target. To Wilson, objection to Spearmint Rhino made these women 'Trashy SWERFs' with 'twisted morality' and an 'arrogance of old age'. In a move I'm sure Tommy Robinson embraced, she also accused MP Sarah Champion of using 'dog whistle racism' when she took up the issue of grooming gangs which had trafficked thousands of girls in the town over a couple of decades. So there we are - a role model for today's class warfare. Well, class war's top brass. A middle class, English Literature graduate who gives not a fuck about upsetting and publicly dismissing a well known constituent who was raped and controlled by a series of men from her early teens, because somehow it feels too close to punching down. Debate, notes this bright young thing, should be conducted in a 'comradely and respectful manner'. Which is just great, isn't it?

Katelyn Burns, a journalist and transwoman who claims to understand feminism, wrote for Vox "They (TERFs) now prefer to call themselves “gender critical,” a euphemism akin to white supremacists calling themselves “race realists.” 

Canadian politician Morgane Oger, who successfully defunded a rape crisis centre for their 'fascist' exclusion of penis-persons 

Yes, I suppose that's the feminazi bit explained. Perhaps all the Murdoch empire publications were correct all along. Acknowledging a manifest difference between male and female is Klu Klux Klan-adjacent. It's of course the best way to frame feminism - as a female supremacy. 

Burns goes on "In the early ’70s, groups of what would now be called “gender critical” feminists threatened violence against many trans women who dared exist in women’s and lesbian spaces" Burns' examples for this? "Beth Elliott, who was at the 1973 West Coast Lesbian Feminist Conference to perform with her lesbian band, was ridiculed onstage and had her existence protested"

How does one have their existence protested? Is ridicule violence? Burns then goes on to give a highly edited account of Mitchfest, a female only event, and how "pro-trans festival attendees organized “Camp Trans,” a space specifically welcoming to trans women who were otherwise banned from attending the event. The two groups clashed for a number of years, until more artists and organizations boycotted MichFest and organizers chose to end the event in 2015"
What Burns fails to mention is the organiser of camp trans, well known trans activist David Warfield / Dana Rivers had been driven to such fury over their woman-only policy, he went on to beat, stab, shoot and murder two attendees and their child.      Lesbian couple Patricia Wright and Charlotte Reed, and their adopted son, Benny were found dead and dying while Dana Rivers tried to set their home alight. This unspeakable level of hatred (in only 2016 - possibly why 2015 was the final event, eh, Katelyn?) clearly has some way to go for Burns before eclipsing the horror of a transwoman being sniggered at on stage nearly half a century ago.

Your only options are to laugh or ignore. Women - know your place 

But it's important not to get caught up in this. Consistency is the enemy. Men's sexual urges may be untameable and only managed by the subjugation of women who aren't you or your loved ones, but they're absolutely fine in women's same sex spaces. I mean, just look where exclusion can lead you! Trust them; they know better than you.

"TERFs, (who) promote(s) mistreatment and oppression of trans women and transgender people" continues the uni rag dressed up as a feminist publication. How so, we are not told. Just believe it, repeat ad nauseam, dear. "Both SWERF and TERF constitute anti-feminist hate groups." I really would like to evidence of this, over a refusal to refer to cocks and balls as she/her/hers.

Social media is awash with TERF and SWERF-damning. The gift that keeps on giving is the linguistic proximity to surf and turf, thereby allowing a slew of tags and groups and pages referencing 'excuse me, waiter, I didn't order the SWERF and TERF' imbuing the user of said phrase as the adult professional calmly correcting a mistaken table service, and definitely not the child of some hated, useless mother, rejecting her food and opinions with a smug pretence of sophistication.

Emilia Decaudin is a member of New York  State Democratic Committee. Decaudin's bio states "In October of 2019, she spearheaded a successful effort to amend the rules of the committee to remove unnecessary references to the gender binary and to accommodate the election of gender non-binary members". In wrongspeak, this means the rule 'one woman for one man' first introduced by suffragettes to ensure fair representation was gleefully destroyed, in the name of progress. Here's Emilia.

Doesn't this cheer your stony old heart? We have everything here - shaved side, kinky choker, dorky glasses, feminism, a tiny cock and all that rebellion! You could almost forget this is an average but sub-par white male. Until that is, those old of us to recognise base misogyny see this.

The audacity required to stand there, micro-penis slightly cresting the expance of a dour, shrunken dress, sparrow-legs in 10 denier, and claim to be a woman is astonishing to me. To then offer up his pitiful cornichon as a weapon of defiance is the most pathetically offensive act I can think of. The entitlement and delusions of adequacy are staggering 

How in fuck this is not a parody I cannot understand. Some budgy-smuggling, bandy-legged cretin in undersized clothes, a worthy expression almost concealing his smirking face, is on a stage, desperately fighting for any additional privilege he can wangle with a self entitlement rarely seen outside of the male sex of the ruling class. He demands his self-claimed identity makes him a literal women, and his prerogative to take their opportunities and spaces, too. Suffragettes, woman-centred campaigning is an anachronism, and this young white male represents one of our most marginalised minorities.

Then he tweets classic male sexual aggression as an attempt to to assert himself, unaware what it actually does is portray the pathetic incel he secretly so admires. And you better accept it, ladies.

What can you do? You have no right to examine nuance here, the only option for the modern, populist left-wing woman that leaves you socially intact is to denounce the canaries in the mine, kick sand in the faces of the real feminists, excommunicate heretics, scour your historic social media for anything dodgy and get ready to 'apologise unreservedly' for the hurt feelings of vainglorious cry-bullies. 

If you're fast enough off the blocks you don't need to incite violence. Tell the heretic in your mentions they are worthless, call them a TERF, post a snappy meme, deluge them in laughing emojis. Block them. Once this has been screen shot and immortalised, to be shown like certificate of vaccination, you are free to go for a while longer.  Or, you can refuse to play. You can avoid immersing yourself in, declaring allegiance to a 'left' that doesn't give a flying fuck about any rapes you suffer if it requires them to examine their politics. A 'left' that is not left, but poses as.