Rabbit Holes #2 - In The Class Known As Humans, I Include Men

In The Class Known As 'Humans', I Include Men

 

[This is a follow-up to Beyond The Terf, where I dunk the idiot's chant that terf is a self referential into the toilet and flush, several times]

When were you last silenced? Reply to Katy Montgomery

By Anna:

A quick (no, sorry, it's not) response to Katy Montgomery -

So, Katy responded to Sonia Sodha's tweet about no-platforming feminists thusly: https://twitter.com/KatyMontgomerie/status/1407768025936412672?s=19









Replying to the 'remember when Paris Lees was on Woman's Hour '





Now, I have a lot of criticisms of Katy, because I don't feel she is honest in how she presents arguments. I do, however, appreciate she does at least remain civil, which is rare among trans rights activists these days. At least to me, or from what I've seen (although I know there's a lot of allegations of inciting dog piles etc). But that civiility matters, and I wanted to reply properly.

I am fucking terrible at keeping replies short and succinct, especially because this whole issue is a viper's pit of logical fallacies and lies... I'm trying my bestest to keep it short here, but in all likelihood I'll fail.

First things first: When Katy clarifies she means 'GC people' I guess this is part of broadening criticism of 'TERFs', who are, by definition, women, to include men.

This is in the gender activist's best interest - the targeting of women as the enemy, and use of misogynistic abuse is increasingly being called out and showing the movement up as aggressively male supremacist and sexist. There's never been so much incentive to point out and condemn gender critical men. Not, of course, that I'm accusing Katy of behaving so cynically, but it's all part of defending a more agreeable version of trans activism.

I also take it to mean gender critique as a view. That is, believing gender is not innate and that it is routed in regressive stereotypes. This isn't necessarily feminism, or an ideology over and above critiquing gender - it doesn't tell you the roots of misogyny or sexism.

What Katy means with reference to this and 'gamete potential' is radical feminism, I reckon. Which holds that sexism/misogyny is rooted in seeking to control our reproductive bodies by a capitalist patriarchy.

For example: animals are in this way treated in farming - from which breeds are most economically rewarding to which cow to put on the 'rape rack' for insemination; which calf to kill because he wont produce milk; which chick to shove into a blender cos he won't produce eggs. It (patriarchy) sees women as bodies, as a resource and as such it needs to control and manage us, based on the potential of our reproductive bodies.

This is the origin, the basis of our oppression. Young men have their bodies exploited in labour, dangerous work and war, and young women have theirs exploited in different forms of labour and as objects of desire and reproductive potential. It’s not possible to challenge objectification without acknowledging the objectification, or its targets. We can't get very far with gender ideology (which, I imagine, Katy will deny as a concept) because it ties our bodies to temperament and behavioural expectations, which in turn are created and enforced by socialisation.

As a feminist, I see the fundamental difference between me and males is our bodies. From that, and society's perception of it, everything else follows. The gendered demands and social norms woven around us are just a shitty, claustrophobic set of rules and roles I want kept a very long way away from my body, which will always be my body.

Gender is a useful tool for a patriarchy which wishes to categorise and control. It's yoked to biological sex, and used as an additional set of limitations which does all of us, including those with dysphoria, a lot of harm. Hysteria and hysterectomy share the same roots, too - but are referent to very different things. It's a bit like that.

And, apart from radical feminists, I'd hazard a guess most people use a real-world taxonomic version of sex, placing self-described identity below physical reality. Being thoughtful and considerate to the upset trans people feel over 'misgendering' doesn't change this.

Typecast 'feminine' traits being hitched to a female body oppresses us. The caricatures of 'feminine' are predicated on women as weak, prone to neurosis (hysteria), needing guidance, being submissive and unable to think deeply and rationally. Our lesser needs are met by frivolous, trivial fixations with gossip and looking pretty; our real fulfilment comes from caring and bearing (maybe baring, too).

The fact 'TERFs' are so despised, though none have ever perpetrated a murder or notable act of violence (are there any?) is proof of the hatred of women defying gender expectations, as well as, on some level, fitting the ancient derogatory, malevolent definitions of women past their biological utility - witches; nags; prudes. Past it yet weirdly obsessed with sex and genitals.





Being male and feminine, female and masculine, or just conforming or not, is something we need to accept and, in the case of children, not be medicating or pathologising - ever. We can challenge the socialisation which enforces them, and not be bigots to those who have a connection to gender.

Suggesting, though, that a boy being drawn to long hair, sparkles, pink and dollies therefore is a girl is not progressive. It reinforces these assumptions, and we see this time and again as the foundation of the evidence that a child is somehow trans. It may be that it's important for a person's self care, to cope with dysphoria, to transition, but a transwoman is the ultimate manifestation of a socially constructed identity and being. 

This construct makes growing demands that everyone adhere to, endorse and defend it as meaning something synonymous with, indistinguishable from, woman. Raging against those who make a distinction, genderists are genuinely authoritarian and censorious, appealing constantly to cultural stereotypes. Therefore it continues to bind gender stereotypes to sex, and it categorises adult human females who may live their lives without resort to gender, or who express it in terms culturally coded masculine, as 'cis'.

And, when we state our case against this, we are abused.

The term 'cis', to me, is as helpful to feminism as climbing a mountain, only to have your kit swapped on the last day with that of an ice skater and being asked to appreciate the pretty spandex and blades. It's just another burden, a luxury obstacle and it looks and feels stupid. A trivial, distracting hindrance that might be fun for someone with nothing to climb and endless leisure time, but for me it's an anti-tool. A handicap. 

It fundamentally contradicts my understanding and many other's of our lives and trials. It's sunglasses when you need a microscope. 

Sexism and misogyny comes from that commodification of bodies which sorts the milk-producing cow from the bullock. Mammals come in only two sexes, and the fact there's variation and not all bodies function in the way necessarily assumed changes nothing. This was the origin of our subjugation and has been built upon for millenia. The roots are all in the assumption a female has these biological functions and should behave in a prescribed way.

So, when we are told that 'transwomen are women' - and when we are punished for dissent - we are being told our analysis of our own condition is not only worthless but offensive and harmful. How is it, we are damned for holding a different view, while simultaneously accused of being abusive for disagreeing with theirs?

How, if a transwoman doesn't pass, are they affected by misogyny?

Misogyny is hatred of women. Unless I'm mistaken for a transwoman or transman, I won't suffer transphobia and I certainly wouldn't try to tell Katy what it feels like. I may suffer prejudice for being gender nonconforming, which is a large part of transphobia, but, again, has different routes, meanings and consequences.

These things have different origins & definitions. Why deny this? Why try to reduce complex ideas and concepts and analysis to a simple, democratised, pick-yer-own protected group?

I don't suffer racism. Not today. As a kid though, growing up to constant chants of 'g*po' and 'p*key', I did. My whiteness, the banal ubiquity of my surname, separation from family and the way I live now is such I escaped it. I still feel it when I read headlines, overhear conversation on the bus, see vile comments online, but it isn't happening to me. Because my race has no biological features that are distinct from the archetype, I can move on freely.

That has a large part to do with the difference within forms of prejudice. Black and Asian people won't escape like that. Therein lies the spiteful nuances, fixations and characteristic stereotypes that lie at the heart of racism, as it conflicts with the white, English archetype - from antisemitism to xenophobia and colourism. There's differences here and they matter. Prejudice based on any divergence from the male archetype affects both of us, Katy, but in different ways. And as our bodies are only superficially changeable, we will never escape.

Back to Katy's initial point that it is transwomen who are being impacted by gender criticals who are 'going out their way to prevent transwomen talking about their[s]' oppression - where on earth is the evidence?

I've thought of a few things which trans activists have done to us in the UK:

* 1) Feminists have been routinely de-platformed, often with erroneous advice from Stonewall, a national charity which had their feet well under the table of the queer theory banquet. 

* 2) Maria McLaughlin was assaulted for filming counter demonstrators, as she and others were harassed at Speaker's Corner while waiting to find out the venue of a feminist meeting. Trans activists rejoiced.

Who criticised that? Here's a selection of responses, some from relatively big accounts;
















* 3) Women meet to discuss the Labour Campaign for Trans Rights' statement, which claims A Woman's Place and LGB Alliance is transphobic and members should be expelled from the party, favours self ID - which directly undermines women's rights to self segregate, and claims pointing that out is itself transphobia (AWP's response here) and are bombarded by abuse, a smoke grenade (near the Grenfell tower memorial) loud hailers and a young man with a prosthetic penis sewn to his crotch

* 4) A Woman's Place try to meet to discuss their oppression in Leeds, the council cancel it after threats; https://www.leeds-live.co.uk/news/leeds-news/womans-place-uk-leeds-debate-15434988

* 5) Resisters organise a protest in Manchester and are met by Sisters Uncut who release this beforehand:

 

(Let's not forget Sisters Uncut hijacking Sarah Everard's vigil - all detailed in the link above on their name)

* 6) Julie Bindel is abused by 'Cathy Brennan' (who changed their name to that of the American feminist Cathy Brennan, who has been abused for years) after speaking at the event "Women's Sex-Based Rights: what does (and what should) the future hold?"

* 7) A Woman's Place try to meet to discuss their oppression in Brighton and are harassed

One woman's experience of attending the event;



* 8) Anti rape culture flash mob held by Make More Noise is counter protested by activists (Sisters Uncut, again..)

* 9) Abused at Reclaim These Streets in Portsmouth - a protest against male violence. Because feminists joined and dared to have teeshirts and a banner bearing the dictionary definition of woman, they were attacked.

Here is a member of FiLiA recounting her experience, this is Glinners' coverage. Here's a selection of comments from a local Facebook page following;

 

Another witness:

And another:



One man doesn't understand how men chanting abuse at women, throwing their book in a bin and being deliberately intimidatory as well as bundling them off stage is ok -






So, that's nice. Not like we are hitting a bit of a nerve when stating the origins of sexism and misogyny, is it?


Here, one man denies he binned a feminist's book, is defended by a woman who also says it is a lie, before admitting he did in fact bin it:




more denial...












Claire Udy (under the pseudonym Clair Bear), an independent councillor for Portsmouth (after her antisemitic 'jokes' had her ejected from the Labour party) enters the fray, having been accused of exacerbating and participating in the abuse;







It is clear from the video the women 'flipped the bird' - after being jeered at, abused and, allegedly, assaulted. They did so as they left. It's also a pretty shocking state of affairs that women unfurling a banner, which gives definition to what a woman is and thus the basis of our oppression, results in a councillor joining in on chants and telling women to fuck off, upping the tension to a stage a man feels the need to step in and be security. Not sounding very feminist to me...


Here's Claire Udy again:


So there we have it - the dictionary definition of woman is transphobic, out of place at a protest against male violence in the wake of Sarah Everard's murder, and is justly countered by, even if we believe these people's limited account, telling these women to fuck off and chant TERF.


Claire Udy is again accused of chanting 'scum' at these women, and claims to have video footage absolving herself and others, but won't share it.





(The woman writing here swiftly clarifies she means 'trans person', but her anxiety is screwing with her ability to type her thoughts with clarity)






In summary: another man thinks abusing and silencing feminists is fine






In fact, if you really want to get an understanding of just how much women are prevented from speaking about their own oppression, just have a read of Maria McLaughlin's excellent blog where she lists the silencing attempts Trying to stop us meeting. Some more hatred and misogynistic oppression can be seen here.

Katy, it's not looking convincing. Maybe you have a load of counter examples which haven't reached me as I'm in some sort of echo chamber. But, some angry comments about Lees (who has a murky history at best) don't really cut it.

Feminists, gender critical feminists, are harassed; their talks are cancelled; their invitations rescinded; they are mobbed by chanting gangs of activists; they are not only attacked but then vilified further, lied about and see their assaults glorified. This is all down to our understanding of our oppression, and an understanding of what it is to be a woman that's actually shared by most people.

When did gender critical people do similar? When did any try to stop you speaking about your oppression?

Simply, we are saying they are different, with different origins. That isn't oppressing you, or anything like it.

This is DARVO.

Anna (Told you I'm not great at brevity)

Liberal Femicide

Liberal 

Feminismcide

Feminism has, in name at least, been claimed by pop culture. It's been bleached, starched and caged. A toothless, obese guard dog on a very short and heavy chain. 

Like an evening at the neighbours as they force you to peruse their holiday snaps, expressing wonder and envy; where in every picture they stand by the Eiffel tower with matching 'I ❤ Paris' hats, boasting of staying off the tourist track and seeing the 'real' country. 

It's a fragile shop display that mustn't be touched. Easy answers with easy mantras for everything from the serious to innane. It's the breathless, vapid 'here comes the science bit' of Loreal ads (or whoever it was).

It's been stripped down to nothing. It's the cast off exoskeleton of a spider hanging in a web, looking real from a distance - but - your breath, from the other side of the room, sends it spiralling off into the air. It has no integrity, function or bite. 

It's a crap pop tune, a chanting mob of nothing; "How are you?" followed immediately with "Ok, good". 

It has been so infiltrated and destroyed, so utterly usurped it is little more than a Red Tractor logo on your factory farmed chicken, assuring you that this bird had a good life - all 42 days between conveyor belts from hatchery to abattoir, that is.

There's no room for disagreement, for analysis or difficult questions or, especially, doubt. It's hyper-capitalism; you need everything they sell and, if you can't afford it, you should have worked harder.

It centres everyone except for women, and still uses 'exclusionary' as an othering slur.

It sees almost nothing as sexual exploitation. Sexual exploitation is liberation. 'We're all whores now!' they cry, claiming their entirely straight, monogamous relationships are 'open' and queer.

 It is the incel calling the woman who wouldn't shag him a whore. It is 'not all men' at another murdered woman's vigil; it dresses itself, identifies as anti-racist while abusing survivors of FGM as backwards and worse. 

It claims to be anti-colonialist, while insisting campaigns to stop women and girls being forced into period huts in Nepal use gender neutral language. God forbid one identifies as a man and is unwittingly excluded from the conversation, while bleeding in a freezing, insecure, lonely lean-to.

It's the humanitarian aid worker who pays the desperate local for sex and rationalises he's helping her, that she probably likes it, too.

It's the kid in McDonald's with the Che Guevara tee shirt, tweeting about anti-capitalism on their iPhone.

It got where it is through the old boy's network, and has a strong belief in the power of hard work alone.

It's the middle-class trustafarian, barely emerging from full parental control and still highly subsidised, dictating how women in hostels and prisons should deal with their trauma when faced with male inmates.

And it is those same coddled ideologues, with anarchy-A profile pictures and a Kropotkin logo on their jacket, as they abuse Helen Steel as a neo-lib TERF.

They threaten and assault women at anti-male violence demos and trade stories on it after.

It's them as they raid the Fairshare shelves, filling their rucksacks with food they'll never touch, just to exhibit their urban survivalism and hard knocks life back at home.

It's the nonbinary who cites there being only single sex changing rooms, 'forcing' them to pick, as a serious an insult as the woman forced to refer to her rapist with she/her.

It goes to the press to complain of harassment after hurling abuse at minimum wage check-out staff who greeted them with gendered terms. 

It's the woman who always has the money for a cab home, blaming the woman who does not, and was assaulted when returning from her night shift.

It's banging on about 'white feminists' acknowledging biology while comparing trans identifying males to black women.

It's the debating team who play white noise at opponents and leave, bragging of their 'win'.

It's the Bullingdon boys - sexually assaulting lap dancers, burning £50 notes in front of the homeless, smashing up bars and getting mum and dad to pay it off - finalising their career plans to be barristers and politicians.

It's the twat with an ACAB banner who calls the police to report stickers for hate crimes: Who thinks abolishing prisons is a grand idea while claiming a contrary opinion on twitter makes them unsafe.

It's the rabidly pro-Muslim white kid who denies women have the right to spaces to be without males and sees no contradiction.

It's the environmentalist who takes several holiday flights a year.

It's the young man with an adoring family and trust fund, who preaches like Jacob Rees Mogg at dinner, abusing women for insisting on single sex refuges. Him, as he's smugly stating he'll donate hundreds of pounds to campaigns which harm them, since they are TERFs. He'll leave the donation in their name. And he calls himself left-wing.

And his friend, the shiny, simpering 'pick me!' girl who has never once had nowhere to run to, lecturing women on trans inclusion in those same spaces. It bombards any comment or question with a laugh react, a meme and a block, screenshotting it to publicly mock later.

It takes the feminist framework of black women to analyse their layered oppression and shoves the white dude into the fore. 'Be kind' it squeals as it searches for your employer and sends threats on messenger.

It's the awkward jokes that break the ice after you saw her husband hit her and heard him call her a bitch. It's telling her that she really needs to understand him better, and a bit of make up wouldn't hurt.

It's an elitist game. A round of contrived compliments followed by spiteful whispers during the obligatory continental kiss. It's a privilege system of in-group consensus, in-jokes and standing on the backs of other's to get in camera shot.

It invokes the suffragettes and woke-washes their values before damning the whole movement as white supremacist. It dresses up in Vivian Westwood vintage punk and crosses the road to avoid the Big Issue vendor.

And one day it will crumble, and all of them will be revising their histories and brainstorming excuses and fishing out those photos which they posed for as they handed some clothes to the charity shop.

And I will never forget. But, as a feminist, I'll still defend their rights.

Gender ideology - What's up with cis, sis?

Gender ideology - What's up with cis, sis? 

There's an underhand strategy being pushed under a 'pro-trans' banner in the media, in public discourse, equality and diversity training and increasingly into our private conversations.

Liberal Femicide & the theatric J'accuse

This week I had a friend do a very public, performative call out on my apparent bigotry. The seriousness of the allegations made against me with vagueness and blustering are an interesting tactic I've seen before.

WITH EVERYONE I ARGUE WITH ABOUT THIS, THERE'S A DESPERATE BID TO SILENCE ME. YOU NEED ME TO SHUT UP, IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW MANY FALLACIES YOU'RE SHOWN TO RELY ON WHILE TRYING TO 'WIN', YOU MUST BE RIGHT AND I MUST BE WRONG. "JUST STOP!" YOU SCREAM WHILE CALLING YOURSELF THE RATIONAL AND KIND ONE.

We were friends. You, I thought, had a good idea of who I am, what I care about and how I treat people. But then you saw another, strawman me, and you had to condemn it. Strangest of all was, somehow it was inevitable this would happen.

I wasnt using slurs, I never have. I didn't target anyone, I wasn't displaying apathy or contempt for other people's lives and dignity. It's inexplicable, to me, this can skew your opinion of me 180°, turning your every estimation of me on its head.

This isn't an aberration on my part, though, is it? You are the changed person here. It's like you lost all recourse to critical thought.

You developed blocks to deflect my words, with prefabricated, pre-emptive strikes at the ready, as if bulldozing over points I'd made before would leave me with nothing but surrender. You ranted in abstract with fury, supposedly directed at no one, while clearly intended for me. The furious words you spat came out screaming, and then at the last-minute they swerved, turning into oblique hits or even a form of threat.  

Until I asked you, where then you began claiming I had it wrong. I was paranoid. I felt pretty resigned to what was coming.

Ultimately, like others before, you hermetically sealed yourself off to everything I said, determined to view it as something it is not.

For someone who burst into my comments months ago, unleashing polemics that were built of total misconceptions and myths, which were proven wrong - I guess it's obvious you couldn't challenge what I was actually saying.

I never met you with the anger you directed at me - I told you I was happy to talk now or later, online or in private. I wasn't accusatory. I wasn't smug once you eventually conceded you'd been unfair or got stuff wrong. I never brought the argument to your posts, which often covered the same issue.

There was so much venom, so many cumbersome tropes, all weilded like battering rams to smash these bad, bad thoughts of mine into smithereens. 

I explained they were wrong. I gave you reliable sources. No, trans people are not murdered at a disproportionate rate, and no I'm not saying GRS should be banned. Puberty blockers are not 'entirely reversible', they do have serious side effects. Yes, men absolutely have abused trans inclusivity to victimise women and girls, and that is a fucking problem. Or isn't it?

I said I was glad you were sticking around, even though, if this had happened in any other context I can think of, I'd have fully, angrily defended myself. I did this hoping you might see where I was coming from, because I know this shit is everywhere, because I know it takes time and courage to question the 'un-debatable'. And you knew enough about me to know I'm not a rabid, hate-powered fanatic. Surely, you knew that? 

Maybe you believed this was a huge flaw in my otherwise agreeable politics, that I'd fallen victim to online misinformation. I don't understand how we remained friends if that isn't the case.

On that post all those months ago, two trans people stepped in to defend me - but that wasn't good enough - it still must be hate. These are the trans people you can ignore. These people are brainwashed, and, obviously as my friends they must be handpicked as the atypical self-haters they are. Victims of Stockholm syndrome, manipulated chumps. And it's completely unproblematic for you to say so - although if I'm ever heard questioning affirmation and pubertal suppression for a 10 yr old somewhere, that is deeply offensive. How dare I suggest I know them better than they do? 

No amount of care on anyone's part to calmly articulate the problems of any trashy trope, shit argument, lie - none was ever going to meet that gold standard of 'acceptance' which you demand but never extend. 

Everything I and anyone else defending me has to say must be framed as a consequence of hate or misinformation, regardless of how every source, every tactic you have of dismissing me is shown to be one-sided, unsubstantiated, full of holes, wrong. It's like arguing that a turd on the pavement is shit and not chocolate, only to realise the people claiming chocolate are copraphagiac and have ingested all the evidence.

It's revolting, and maybe malicious to make them acknowledge their mistake. Call them some help, but don't humiliate them. Leave whatever pride they have intact.

I tried to leave your pride intact. 

You went quiet for a while, you didn't raise it again, or at least not directly. We spoke on other things and you recently saw me challenge someone who was genuinely bigoted and making wild generalisations about the actions and beliefs of you and people like you. I didn't go nuts at them, I countered what they said - like adults are supposed to. The reticence you displayed in putting those little like and love emojis on my comments should have given me warning you were drifting away. It was definitely out of character.

Over the last few months I've been involved in multiple spats online that have escalated to the point I've been very upset. In one I had told a man that he was in fact wrong, and unisex facilities were more dangerous for women and girls than single sex ones. Afterwards I received an unhinged series of private messages from a trans woman who threatened to smash my face 'into the kerb until it's nothing' and rape me (despite finding me physically repulsive, apparently).

I'd never spoken to this person and, after finding out they had previously stalked a woman (and posted hundreds of rants on social media about her, naming her, obsessing on what they percieved as flirting) I made a police report. It was deranged, detailed and totally unsolicited.

You saw these messages, and you saw what had started it, but didn't respond. You just ignored it entirely. 

After another argument I posted screenshots of the typical behaviour that you yourself have just displayed. A long conversation with a group of men and their support females had been marked with relentless strawmanning and insults. Men, and sadly some women, who's idea of feminism is comprised in entirety by 'my body, my choice' and some bastardised, shallow chant about 'equality', delighting in the freedom they had to unleash harassment on women.

It was a post about the inclusion of trans women in sensitive, same-sex spaces like prisons and refuges - something I objectively know more about than you do, being I have lived it. As much as you claim solidarity with the vulnerable, and you have minority status that undoubtedly negatively effects your life, you were well brought up by loving family, accessed higher education, have never been homeless or left without any family support. You don't understand how life works in these places, and it shows. It jumps out in flashing neon lights.

At the start I had spoken to a trans woman who was scared of male spaces and I had sympathised and agreed she shouldn't be in a men's prison if convicted tomorrow, and of course trans people need refuges. We actually achieved that rare thing of finding some common ground and amity. I was grateful to be reminded of her feelings, and the reality of, her vulnerability, she seemed more thoughtful too. After this, the swivel-eyed mob launched an attack, and myself and two other women were called bitches, bigots, told we were hysterical and twisted, right-wing, fascist and vile. 

After the abuse, the sexist jibes and deliberate distortion, I was told my comments had been threatening and transphobic. I knew that wasn't true, of course, so I asked the man accusing me to show me an example of my abusive behaviour. He called me a 'dumb bitch' and suggested I'd make better use of my time by beating up black kids*.

I kept asking, he got more offensive. He spent hundreds of words telling me how I was bitter and angry because I'm a jealous harridan and no one will fuck me. He seemed to have limitless time and fury to vent about how he had found me out and exposed my disgusting ethics - but no example of my supposedly cruel, insulting comments emerged. That's because it didn't exist. I might be combative and gobby, but I'm careful and I'm not transphobic. 

But there's no trick a TERF won't pull, and it was nothing more than an indictment on my manipulative tactics, my attempts to veil my genocidal hate and wish to segregate others as reasoned argument and concern.

*Of course, the 'beating up black kids' was completely unremarkable to you, despite you knowing me pretty well. Despite you very recently having witnessed me challenge racism (which I had no reason to think you would ever see). Because there can be no explanation for my views except for hatred. That's it, isn't it? And that is why you don't want to hear an explanation, because why would you want to see it isn't, that it's founded in reality? Why would you - trademarked as a strong, outspoken feminist and irrepressible 'nasty woman' - choose to understand what I'm saying and run the risk of opening those brave, wide eyes to what is everywhere? When you yourself are abusing me now, fully aware of the power of the term TERF and how it enables unrelenting pile-ons, misogyny and threats.

This was clearly getting at you for a while, and I wish you'd taken me up on that offer to talk, though I understand why you didn't. You and every other friend who has denounced me as a TERF has exited via the exact same door: by public call out, waiting for the prime moment for theatrical support from onlookers, or slinking off in the aftermath of someone else's spectacle. None of you ever engage with any specific point; just make hackneyed, condemnatory accusations and assert your moral superiority.

I think this is why we have TERF block lists, a 'no debate' culture. Cut us off like a cancer - never, ever take up the chance to speak privately - repeat the hail Mary of 'trans people exist' as if it rids my views from every cell of your better being. You're the Thatcher government of negotiation, but without even the backstage arbitration. Just an impermeable sphere of closed ranks and hostility.

You chose to call me a bigot and renounce me with dramatic timing, in a foot-long screed, on a public post on Facebook. I'd said something pretty anodyne; that medical ethics had been sleeping through the surge in unscrupulous surgeons who advertise mastectomy as a miracle fix on Instagram to teenagers, using teenage clients as props, in a way we would deplore if they were breast implants. The conversation evolved with other people, we discussed this glowing, sanitised front page depiction of brave trans kids. I was concerned about the massive increase in kids coming out as trans and that puberty blockers were still being portrayed as a sensible, reversible treatment without major side effect.

You saw a trans woman launch into a tirade against me, and then screenshot my profile picture to compare to theirs, saying I was ugly and mannish and they hope I too can pass one day. Then you struck.

"I'm done with you now. After all the times I have tried to show you how harmful this is, you, nonetheless, continue to use damaging misinformation, lies and prejudice against one of the most marginalised groups in our society. I see you repeat the same bigoted, transphobic lines, your refrain is as repetitive as it is telling - you are being abused by sexists, people irrationally accuse you of hate. But still, here you are, furthering the oppression of trans and gender non-conforming folk with constant gaslighting, dangerous tropes and harmful talking points. You are toxic and unforgivably cruel. And let's be clear, you are no victim, you are the perpetrator. If people respond with anger you have anyone to blame but yourself'. 

Then you went about putting those little love emojis on every comment of the trans woman calling me ugly and blokey compared to their better woman-ing - which was delusional - but I don't want to get into this anti-feminist idiocy or show my profile picture here, so believe it or don't.

I didn't see it at first, as several other people had joined in on the thread and you had written my name in full on another subthread, without tagging me. I suspect some of the others joining in were your friends - sure I'd spoken to one before.

When I did see it, maybe 12 hours had passed. I thought back to the threats of rape and kerb-stomping, the misogyny and 'bitch'es and a pang of hurt, anxiety and anger shot through my chest. I felt like I'd been winded, my hands shook. I guess I then slipped into my necessary, protective creation - my character mode: unemotional and focused. Wanting to get to the point. I always think about what made me, pre-peaking, feel empowered to think outside of the prescribed lines and feel ok with my opinion and beliefs, and it was seeing these rows; the barrage of shit and bad faith arguments thrown at women who were being rational. Seeing them ridiculed by sexist idiots who missed every point and entered into a frenzy of 10 minute hate. I always think back to that because I remember how gutting, scary and alienating it was to realise the popular side I'd automatically stood with was talking shit, and the 'bad guys' in fact had won the argument and not shown any of the hate they'd been accused of.                                      Also, I just wanted to know what exactly I had done.

I said I was sad you'd chosen this place to air your grievances - but whatever - where had I been abusive, toxic, transphobic? Who had I gaslit? Had you seen the shit that had just been levelled at me? Where had I got close to anything resembling what you were accusing me of?

It was the best part of a day before you responded. In that time you'd had access to my profile, as neither of us had un-friended the other. 

"I'm not even the target of your nasty campaign and yet you're hurting me. Are you even listening to what I am telling you? Does any of this penetrate your skull? Why are you doing this? You just can't let trans people be, always chipping away at their validity and dignity'

I asked you, again, where had I been abusive or transphobic or hateful? You didn't respond, and a few hours later I removed you from my friends list but I didn't block you. The trans woman and the new pack of dog-pilers put their little hearts on your comments, joined in on yet another subthread about how my behaviour must have been so hard for you and well done on being an amazing ally. 

Of fucking course you want your bubble of harmonious camaraderie with its synchronised outrage and mutual preening. It must feel great, but I guess the troubling spectre of cognitive dissonance is an ever-looming, existential threat to your group survival. It's kind of irrelevant how weak the defence is, it's like having a fake CCTV camera with a solar powered LED light - it might not work, but it's still better than nothing and should scare people off. None of these arguments are arguments, you haven't read the literature you post instead of responding with your own words. It's not a difference of opinion, it's a defensive mechanism that only becomes more desperate and angry the more it's tested. There's no integrity to any of it.

I am always careful with my words, especially online. I never 'misgender', although I might awkwardly skip around pronouns sometimes. And I think I take up prejudicial comments pretty even-handedly. If anyone ever uses a slur like 'tranny' I call them out. If anyone makes derogatory jokes or cruel remarks I call them out. I'm sure you're convinced this is entirely a game but it genuinely does bother me. I guess the part that is a game is I don't want it made easier to depict my opinion as based on prejudice and revulsion, I want that very clear. I am careful to make actual arguments and not use ad homs or strawmen because there's so much stuff I need to talk about. I know in the past I've been unnecessarily abrasive and bellicose and I've grown up a bit. I actually care, for other people as well as for myself and mine. I do not want bigoted bastards to be aligned with me. I don't want to harm anyone.

I also know I'm not perfect - of course. When I'm defending myself against allegations of bigotry and feeling attacked, that is the exact time those seeds of prejudice can begin to germinate. I don't want to be an arsehole. I still read things I disagree with, everyday, and I try to manage my internal defences. If I've said or done something that harms people - I want to know. How many times have I said so? But you won't get through to me with nebulous indictment that's then retracted or re-positioned if I ask if it's aimed at me. You won't get through to me by trying shame-inducing language when I'm begging you for the detail and example. It just makes me think you're chatting shit.

If I was you, I'd have given examples. If I knew someone who was perpetuating harmful rhetoric against vulnerable people, and that person was within reach - i.e. not reacting with censorious fury, but asking for me to illustrate how and where, I'd be absolutely fucking sure to provide it. I'd have them already in my head (certainly wouldn't go on the assault without them) and if I didn't, but I still could look through their profile and screenshot everything they'd said that demonstrated it, I'd do that. I'd spell it out and try to do so in a way which actually got through to them, not orchestrate a theatrical flounce to the applause of others. How do you change people's minds? How do you challenge someone who's views otherwise align with your own on racism, homophobia, environmental issues, most political arguments? Did you want to change my mind, and stop me from hurting people, or just dramatically disown me with the benefit of a studio audience and prompted cheers? 

It all seems very contrived to me. A desperate act trying to provoke my vitriol so you could walk away certain I was in the wrong, full of hatred. Truth is you couldn't find an example, and my asking for it made that cognitive dissonance even more urgent to quell.

So, this, I theorise, is why you are desperate to barricade my voice out of your synthetic feminism, activism and social justice. It's as welcome an interjection of realism as the ringing of an alarm after a sleepless night. Let's just get back in the group-isolation tank and reassure ourselves, eh?

If you really believe you are right, leaning on an argument which is then shown to be fallacious isn't going to change your mind. If I argued that conversion therapy is wrong and it turned out a 'fact' of its consequences I'd used was in fact bullshit, I wouldn't concede that actually, no, it must be ok. So I understand the futility of dismantling the myths because you're not meant to be arguing this based on fact and matter, you're supposed to be arguing this because it's an ethical imperative - your moral duty, expectations you must fulfil to be worthwhile. This is about faith. Which is why you mustn't be led astray or fraternise with heretics. You must stay a pure, evangelical and devout member of the flock.

But I wish you could see that when one defensive, learnt-by-rote statement is dismantled, and then the next, and it's shown there are huge holes here, terrible omissions there, it might be that actually the whole thing is a house of cards. 

The fact you've responded like every other person I've fallen out with on this - there's honestly no difference in the routine, the evasion and the angry dismissal. And you need total certainty on things, even if it's from a rented costume hire. You need your chanting 'comrades', you lean on a shallow, reactionary, package-deal ideology of what makes a 'leftist', even if sometimes you show real insight and knowledge in other areas. It's cowardice multipled by the implicit assumption you will never be hurt if you're 'kind'. Which is a big mistake. And it certainly isn't brave, or independent, and least of all feminist. I don't know how long this madness will last, but I sense it won't be long. And when it crashes, we really will need to talk.

To the Mother of a Transwoman, Who Thinks I Hate

Guest Letter - Aoife Orr 

For the woman who I intensely hated, for a while.

We argued fiercely. You love your child, and are fearful of their predicament.

We crashed headlong into one another. Both angry, frightened and raw - me, with my trauma and rage; having been raped and my privacy and dignity potentially threatened. You and your friends, you all looked so self assured and dismissive. It cut all the way through me. It stung.

And you, with your fears and hurt that, now I'm calm enough to think about it, doesn't have an end point - your child is in pain, and afraid. And whatever trauma you and they carry, and how it's reflected in this row. 

We collided at full pelt and actually, now I think about it, if we'd met discussing any other conceivable subject, we'd have likely bonded.

You saw me as an insidious threat to your child's safety, no matter how much I tried to explain. You wouldn't hear me out, you thought you knew me, my mentality. I promise, you don't.

It felt like you projected onto me a generic mask created to dismiss me. It's what I suspected you project onto any woman who resists this - a political movement you see as there solely to protect your child, that I see crushing my last vestiges of humanity. 

I wish we could actually speak to each other. 

I'm pretty sure our feelings were mutual.

I often wonder how I'd feel if I was trans and had to read the headlines of media we think of as sincere, left-wing and often veritable.

From The Guardian to The Independent, Vice, Vox, pretty much any LGBTQ publication... They all tell trans people they are hated, that everything is a dog-whistle and women with concerns over their safety, ability to participate in society as set out by women-only short lists, same sex spaces, sports etc are actually evil bitches with a vendetta.

There's almost never a genuine, unbiased article which clearly sets out the situation and opinions of those involved. Shock tactics and sensationalist one-sidedness, along with unforgivable misinformation and omission, seem to be everywhere.

I know, having spoken to many (transwomen especially), that some are genuinely terrified about their risk of being beaten and murdered. 

There's an ever-present fear of being ridiculed, with some believing supposed allies when they claim laws have quietly been brought in that will mean they could be prosecuted for using a women's toilet without a GRC, or similar hyperbole and scare tactics.

I'm a mother, too. I am trying to imagine myself in your position; the pain you've seen your child go through, the struggle to find peace and acceptance. I know I won't be able to fully understand, but I do try. 

And now, I'm trying to imagine my child reading these things, now pertaining to them. That hurts. That induces in me a flinch, and makes me want to look away or fight.

You must be frightened. I would be, too. And I'd be every bit as angry as you are, and - depending on how much I'd read about it - I'd maybe be saying the same things that you just have to me.

What I see is a group of activists claiming the title of greatest saviour. They wander like missionaries into the posts, feeds, media most likely to get attention and throw themselves into furious rages at the treatment of trans 'folx'. 

They garner a lot of social capital from their advocacy, it's a vocation and adds meaning to their lives. I think some are heartfelt, but others appear as cynical and deceitful as possible to be. 

They stand on the periphery, shrieking alarm calls in a never-ending stream of stories, gaining kudos and a claim of righteousness by sending fear through huge swathes of people.

They lie about suicide rates and continually push on with language around suicide and self harm that breaches all media guidelines. 

They smugly create a logical fallacy, a straw man, so they can skewer it and elevate themselves yet again. They lie about the murder rate (please see Verilybitchie, a transwoman, debunk this here), or exaggerate it with forced perspective - placing trans people in high-resolution close up, with worse affected demographics in the background, looking small and blurred. 

They conflate hate crimes that involve nothing but a perceived slight, or a casual, even accidental misgendering, with violent attacks. They never mention women have no protection under hate crime law, so of course, you are supposed to think your child is under sustained attack unlike any other group.

And who wants to read about the other side? Who sees their potentially suffering, vulnerable child being marginalised and abused and thinks "I really should hear them out"? 

No one, of course. Not to mention you're told by the same people, that 'we', i.e. feminists, are devious, hate-filled transphobes who should never be entertained, allowed an audience to blast with dog-whistles or an excuse to weave our tangled web of propaganda.

Someone is terrorising your kid, but it isn't me, and it is not who I associate with. Have a good look at what these people are saying, ask for the sources, the numbers. Treat it with some scepticism while knowing this is not and can never be a sign of wavering in the love and support you have for your child.

Some sensible thoughts from John here:

I'm sure when you see these conversations online, or protests on the street, you think we're unnecessarily cruel. 

Perhaps we look hardened, gleefully spiteful, resistant to compassion - this is our typecast, it's been built and constructed in the tradition of all heretics. We are the witches, the nags, the bitter, spiteful bigots. We are shoehorned into it, with inconvenient parts obscured or excised. 

And the occasions we do show a triumphant, antagonistic smirk it's difficult to express how much is from a final resignation to being perceived as awful whatever we do. For however many times you try to articulate it's not hatred; that you're frightened because of PTSD resulting from rape, and you are laughed at; for the abuse and threats and relentless misrepresentation, finally it can be the obvious and joyful route to fuck with the social pressure to be earnest and adult and just relish the whole thing. 

It's not a natural state, it's almost survival. 

It's another reason to dismiss us though, because everything is, and confirmation bias from all those partial headlines holds it firmly in place.

I imagine that anti-abortionists think of pro-choicers as cruel, heartless, as mindlessly, destructively stupid. 

While you might always find a couple of individuals in any movement who really are nasty little fucks who delight in edgelord shock tactics and being as offensive as they can claim licence to be - the vast majority don't think transphobia is any funnier than abortion is. (That of course comes with the caveat that transphobia never has a utility, time or place, that there's never a reason to abuse someone based on their presentation, beliefs about themselves or gender non-conformity.)

Gender critical or radical feminist stances are positions we have come to by examining our lives. There's an idea that anti-intellectual, reactionary hate speech is everywhere in our conversations; but this isn't true. 

This is feminism and analysis based on our experience, from academic discussion, reading, the exchanging of personal stories and theories. The notion we are speaking our true beliefs in dog-whistles, pushing trojan horses of concern past the gates so a squad of genocidal maniacs can leap out, it is everywhere: while we say what we mean, and are depicted as trying to dress up bigotry, trying to use feminist sounding rhetoric to cover ourselves.

 Yet I don't know how much plainer I could make myself - I see biological sex as an extremely relevant category, and I want the ability to speak about it and it is not about causing anyone harm, because so much of the suffering I and others have sustained is integral to our sex.

These lenses of viewing the world and all of its dynamics are built on the many factors, dangers and balances we all have to take into consideration. It isn't hate of trans people any more than being pro-choice is hate of foetuses and babies. It's about recognising difficult situations and facing them. It's those often traumatic, upsetting, yet still inescapable facts of life.

Women are often taking considerable risk in speaking out. People are rounded on by supposed friends, dog-piled, sent abusive and disturbing messages. Activists celebrate their attempts to get us fired, abuse our loved ones. I know some women who have had to move after their homes and families or pets were targeted, for saying things which would have been unremarkable a decade ago: for saying they want single sex spaces, or they don't agree with self identification as a workable policy.

At least understand this is a sincerely held position, with reasoning and deep thought invested in it, which is difficult to talk openly about. I held my tongue for a long time, like many others are doing now.

Probably the worst bit of agitating is within public discourse and the journalists, public figures and social media accounts which relentlessly misrepresent us. The lies about what people say and mean, what they want, the facts and stories are truly jaw-dropping. 

For example; Paris Lees tells The Canary that the 'average life expectancy of a trans woman of colour in America is just 35'. It's not true - the average age of a trans murder victim in America is 35. Katelyn Burns rages about the women-only Mitchfest, decrying the alleged misgendering of a trans woman performer almost 50 yrs ago and lauding Camp Trans, the protest against them. Burns and others can celebrate the end of Mitchfest in 2015, and never mention it was that year the organiser of Camp Trans, Dana Rivers, murdered two women attendees and their son after tracking them down to their home. Susie Green has frequently lied about trans kids committing suicide.

Transwomen without even a GRC can rape someone with their intact male body and be reported as women. Maria McLaughlin can be assaulted and then mocked, slandered, subject to objective lies and still painted as the guilty party.

There's essentially a media blackout on these cases; the hanging of an effigy meant to be Carmen Calvo, Spain's deputy prime minister because of her criticism of new legislation; the assault by trans activists on survivors of the sex industry as they campaign against prostitution or when protesting self ID; the harassment of and distortion in cases of women like Rosa Freedman, Louise Moody, Kate Scottow, Maya Forstater, Allison Bailey, Jean Hatchet, JK Rowling etc is as breath-taking as it is unforgivable.

I do not hate your child, I do not imagine them as a threat or pretender. I do not hate anyone for living their lives as best they can. I have a lot of empathy for anyone who is suffering, and I know very well there's plenty of transwomen who stand with us. They have been erased, abused as truscum, even prosecuted for transphobia by 'cis' people, and it fucking stinks. I'm sick of the dishonesty, the mendacious fallacies and bad faith. This, I fear, will ultimately impact on trans people too, and I don't want to see that. We just need to be able to talk about our lives and our needs. No one is being represented well here, very few are prepared to listen.

Never before would I have challenged the assertion 'transwomen are women'. This is because it was a little show of kindness and compassion and one of the million tiny acts of etiquette we use to oil the wheels of society. These things matter, and the emotional vulnerability of those with gender dysphoria is very real and deserves genuine compassion and sensitivity. 

The reason we are making noise is because someone has to, because the activism that's underway is not helping trans people and it is seriously harming others.

I don't believe any of the rhetoric below (which is a tiny snapshot of what is an unrelenting torrent) is ok. I think it's abusive. It really would be good to talk.