The Scary Gender Critical PinkNews Warned You About!

MY JOURNEY TO THE CENTRE OF THE TERF

I am a TERF. 

Or, a terf - It's not an acronym anymore, it's a cursed denouncement that renders the accused a social leper, and it's all our fault. We deserve no understanding - we oppress people; we cause deaths, we dog-whistle with hateful messages, coded in polite sounding conversations.  We are infectious and insidious. 

I think many of those on the side of the popular trans rights movement are unaware or in denial of the persistent abuse, threats and misogyny feminists face. Most people don't have a clue what's going on.

I cheered along once. I believed trans people were the most vulnerable, and under persistent attack. I hate reactionary discrimination. I hate bullying.

But over time, watching women being dog-piled, abused over entirely rational and compassionate statements.

I saw the sneering contempt of men, staking their political window display on being accepting while lecturing on feminism, insulated from the sharp end.

I discovered it was literally impossible to discuss the impact on women in any detail, the answers sounding painfully scripted and shockingly callous.

I had enough. And when I insisted I would talk about my fears, my experiences, I was met with fury, spite and disingenuous, laughably weak arguments that were apparently  set in stone.

I was ghosted. I was shut down and ostracized, I saw true misogyny, dismissing cases of rape and sexual abuse, which is imperative to support Self ID.

The plain facts are, the rights of women as a distinct class have been under relentless assault; women have been egregiously slurred, harmed and harassed. Our voices have been silenced and parodied. Publications we once trusted depicted us as mad harridans; serious abuses were hushed up, met with laughter and more ostracism. 

They- trans activists - will not talk to us. 'No Debate' has been a long held policy while backstage a political and ideological movement has had incredible implications on government and organisational policies; police; the courts; education and media.

"To anyone who spits the word TERF at a woman, there's no redemption, no hint of nuance or good faith can be applied to her. And if I say something that sounds reasonable, that's a serious, deep red flag - a trick"

I know this is pissing in the wind, for people who spit the word TERF at a woman, there's no redemption, no hint of nuance or good faith can be applied to her.

If I say something that sounds reasonable, that's a serious, deep red flag - a trick - and you should run screaming 'TERF!' into your every online account. 

In my journey from being a supporter of trans activism to where I am now, I've got to know many more trans people than I ever did before. I know at least a dozen transwomen I can have deep, vulnerable conversations with, while activists arrogantly demand I meet a trans person. 

My problem is not trans people. My problem is not people wanting to be treated as the opposite sex. I'll address you as you wish, but I won't tie myself in knots trying to navigate an ever expanding world of neo-pronouns, or prostrate for every slip. That really is too much of a petit bourgeois, hand-wringing, sphinctre-gazing, precious waste of time - especially for identities separated from physical reality which purely reaffirm stereotypes - e.g. 'I'm non-binary as I don't identify with femininity'. I mean, you're serious, aren't you? Fuck off with that astrological-woo shite. I have no ill-will towards you, and I imagine I might have identified that way too as a frightened, body-dysphoric kid who hated having breasts. But this is so regressive, and you are being played. Please stop expecting everyone to validate you - it only ever ends in tears.

Although they seem oblivious to it, there's a new role model for today's liberal feminist's - a pious and all-sacrificing ouch-kisser for the world's scraped knees, albeit stylised as some kind of freedom fighter with a few choice swears and a contrived, edgy profile pic. 

Being 'kind' is what you are meant to be - it isn't activism or good work, it's simply knowing your place

You're required to shout loud and proud, 'Feminism is for everyone! Fuck the fash! Trans women are women!' and dismiss or laugh at the times 'inclusivity' ended in rape. It's not so tempting to me. In fact, for those liberal feminists reading this, I want to tell you now - no amount of martyrdom will gain you respect, you will always be secondary in your movement, stories and life, and it will never be used as mitigation if you put a foot wrong one day. Being 'kind' is what you are meant to be - it isn't activism or good work, it's simply knowing your place.

Try telling your bloke mates something they dont like, tell them they have no right to lecture you on feminism, call out some misogyny, don't apologise for it. See how that goes.

I'll be kind and considerate as much as I can, and if you call me out on something without trying to break and shame me, I will listen. But I cannot promise to agree. And, you should care enough for your own self respect to not want to make me.

I know the trope - TERFs are spiteful, malevolent liars; hateful, frigid and yet weirdly sex obsessed. We're white and highly privileged. We value ourselves as mothers, for our biology which we never even worked for. We code our 'talking points' and detect each other's by a cackle hidden in the words gender critical, biological, natural. 

A bit like witches then. But actually, no... exactly like witches - hideous and old, muttering incantations under our fetid breath, shagging the devil in disgusting ritualistic displays. We selfishly grasp onto too much land, we harbour unexplainable power and wealth, we dont worship the right deity, we're unnatural (or too familiar with the supernatural) and unnerving.

To the fervent activist, isn't it a pity that your venture for whatever it is you want has had to dredge up 17th century misogyny? Do you ever wonder why that is? Why do you have to lie about us? Why do you frame us as the existential threat facing society? 

Why do you constantly, wildly misrepresent our arguments and aims? 

How free and empowered do you think you will become by trashing the category so many of you covet? Why do you want to join a category you think should have so little dignity and privacy and right to self defence? It's not the way transsexuals before you behaved. Why do you demand to be recognised as part of a group you so clearly despise unless they conform to your authoritarian ideology? You, the non-conformity champions? 

The answer is in there, isn't it? The answer is because you don't consider trans women literally women, as you claim to. You say trans women are women when demanding the same sex rights and spaces, and you'll leave out the trans as much as possible - 'all women' etc. But you'll make damn sure that prefix is there in bold if it's in defence. When a trans woman is abused that's a hate crime, but actual women don't have those legal protections and err, well, who cares? The abuse directed at women you laughingly dismiss, you are incensed by if directed at a trans woman. Call a woman an ugly, mannish cunt - she deserved it. Say that to a trans woman and you should never work again, cunt. Women are fine; that's what you mean, you just can't say that without embellishment. But trans women - the murder rate! The oppression! The exclusion!* The struggle, hurdles, the hate! Or - Feminists and the lies they tell.

Phil here with some glorious bullshit. Whether Phil will consort with the lady dick is unknown at date of publication.

To you, women are all too often hysterical about rape and assault, but it's trans women who could never survive being in a confined space with males.

But yeah, you're all feminists now anyway. Except for TERFs. You're just real feminists who don't obsess over the oppression based on our biology. Feminism is intersectional! Isn't it? Isn't that what we say these days?

What does intersectional mean? I guess it involves not being a selfish bitch, not griping over the really statistically insignificant number of rapists in sheep's clothing. But, even if it is statistically significant, even if it's overwhelming, that's not the point. 

I guess that as a school of thought designed to study the oppression of black women who face layers of discrimination, it's a massive win to swing it round to situate males, normally white males, at the epicentre of feminism. Brilliant.

Excellent work by Jameela here, studiously avoiding the point and breezily suggesting it doesn't matter how many women are raped in her brave new world, as long as Karen is included
*This principle does not apply to police*

Let me speak to you giving you the benefit of the doubt, picturing you with entirely good faith. That obviously sounds derisively patronising, but it isn't meant to be. I was there once, too. I assumed that 'TERFs' must present a real threat to trans people. I pictured crazed, section 28-supporting right wingers, and I was too overwhelmed by the rules of engagement to have conversations, or to ponder on why it is women who are presented as the dark force.

That 'deep need for protection' is the only honest thing here. But for the highly educated, middle class, white and well-paid Alison, that in and of itself is a damnable thing

The idea is women hold incredible power over men. False rape allegations is the nasty woman's nuclear weapon. Think of the horrific case of Emmet Till, see how Carolyn Bryant invoked heinous violence, torture, murder, enabled her men to be insane persecutors. That is where you are meant to be; picturing the innocent trans person, ignorant of the regressive norms and etiquette in their new environment, being wickedly lied about, set up, and punished for some fictional crime by the vicious guard dogs those women call sweetie. Women, standing behind men, prodding and whispering in their ears til the brutes lose all control. Women, standing behind those men, weaponising their jealousy, mobilising their brutish bodies against another; inciting, provoking and relishing the depravity with their hands and pinnies left unblemished.

See a story of a trans woman beaten up on the other side of the globe, just for using the toilet, and witness the new theories coming thick and fast. The stupid women who saw her and judged, they got scared, they thought they had a right to question and exclude. Yes, the violence was dealt by a man but why? Because women.

That's the idea. We might not get our hands dirty but my God we make sure someone does. It's the 'TERF rhetoric'. And really, the avid trans activist is just trying to stop this unhinged hatred. That's all. Because trans women are women, distinguished by vulnerability alone.

So it may come to you as a surprise, but you don't get much further from the Carolyn Bryants of the world than radical feminists. Male violence is never invoked as justice or protection by radical feminists, radical feminists normally are gender non-conforming, and a high number are lesbians. Male violence is exactly what they have always countered. You might find it difficult to believe you've been perpetuating these lies, but maybe think on it a while. I reckon you'll realise it's in there.

'emmisions'

It got there, it became, unwittingly, the supporting hypothesis because you're trying to do the right thing, and you're bombarded by the instructions.

Gradually, the propaganda slips in under the cognitive radar, because of the weight of the rest of the batshit, ridiculous ideas shoved down your throat, foie gras style. 

This is conducted in a relatively clever way, by giving you glimmers of reward à la emoji love-bombing and some really tricky homework that boosts the morale but overloads you with fluffy, pseudo-esoteric bullshit. All under the guise of essential human rights.

It's a 'Dear allies, memorise these genders, acronyms and neo-pronouns or you too will be crushed, nazi scum' series of tasks set by infomercials (badly disguised as journalism in Pinknews, Autostraddle, Diva, LGBTQ Nation etc). It's a torrent, and you either learn the lines, or explain you're clueless. If clueless, you'll use copious caveats, display intense sympathy and deference, be armed with apologies and promises to read up, listen harder. If not, you are consigned to the black book of treasonous heathens, subject to a public flogging and rejected by your peers.

I thought I didn't understand what was meant by it all. I held on, I repeated the urban myth-mantras of the vulnerability, death rate and oppression. I was told to educate myself, and I did. And that's, as far as you are concerned, where I went wrong.

So, I began to ask questions and read. What I found was some really murky, nebulous theory dictated as if irrefutable, empirical fact. And not only that - to question in any detail, to note the contradictions or obvious fallacies was a serious offence. WATCH YOUR STEP they glowered, this is human dignity we're speaking of.

Aside from the theoretical certainty and immovable conviction was a brittle and rigid conceit. This edifice of condescension and grandiosity started to look not purposefully angry and focused, but shaky, fragile. It's not that these questions are a distraction - it's that you need a hell of a lot invested to accept the bullshit answers. 

I saw an inability to answer anything from ideology to claims about statistics and events. The paddling, hidden under a facade of stoic evangelism was becoming clearer. 

I slowly started waking up to the insanity. Despite being known by my friends as a bit of a bleeding heart, easily upset for people, I realised I was slowly being more and more limited in discussion, monitored, questioned on 'what exactly do you mean by..?' and given way less benefit of the doubt. Slowly I, as a woman who has experienced sexual abuse in childhood and adulthood, who developed a trauma response addiction and had a trans woman aggressively and intrusively claim their [my] rights, realised I was being censored. The trans woman, pre-treatment, who intimidated and unnerved many of us with no choice but to share our spaces and tiptoe around them, was not acceptable to discuss. I now had less right to dignity than a well loved, living-at-home-in-her-20s, middle class student. Why? Because she identified as queer, and felt she had the moral high ground to put me in my place, again and again. Which she did with zero logic, consistency or care.

As a genderqueer person, she was apparently unable to use the women's toilets, and unsafe to use the men's. So she used the disabled, and was angry at the lack of facilities. If disabled people complained about her using their spaces, she dismissed them (with less hostility than she showed me, though). But as a woman who knows I am a woman, and has suffered multiple traumas at the hands of men, having been triggered daily by a trans woman when I was already traumatised, I was 'inflammatory' 'reactionary' and 'weaponising [my] trauma' by saying some women's spaces should be for women alone. 

Had my former friend ever been in jail? No. A refuge? No. Had she ever been raped? No. But her gender tokens elevated her need for suitable spaces, free of triggers, far above mine and her lexicon of mantras and phrases somehow convinced many she was right. She could be uncomfortable by members of her own sex, while popping in to a public toilet. I could not be uncomfortable with a male living alongside me all day and night.

As she dictated theory as fact, reacted with histrionic rage and scrutinised my every comment for evidence of transphobia, she rallied a gang of others, several being mutual, though not close, friends. What she spoke about, her arguments with other people, her posts on social media all centred on proving me a bigot while never mentioning my name. She got increasingly strident, and some men joined in, invigorated by her enabling and a sense of self righteousness. I was misrepresented, it was made clear my thoughts would be constantly challenged, and I was shut out.

It never did devolve to a row. I wish it had, but I was so carefully choosing my words, so consciously aware of what I perceived to be her hurt, so cautious of seeming abrupt or selfish I allowed her to set sail on her journey of supreme justice, nailing my torn clothes to her mast.

Of course, not everyone agreed with her. People asked me if I was ok a lot. A couple of people directly challenged her and the little gang that had formed around her. That did end in rows, which I normally only heard of much later. Generally though people steered clear. They'd tell me they don't know enough about it to comment, they didn't understand. They told me she didn't actually mean that, and this had never been said. In the time since this, I've had these rows on Facebook, and even though the words are there, as they were typed, the same thing happens - denial, obfuscation, apparently I misrepresent the other person with their own words, while wild distortions of my words 'probably held some truth' as 'but that is what you were getting at, isn't it?'

Always missing context, never listening with my heart, I'm not taking their view onboard. Every time, it isn't that bad, no one is actually arguing that. It's just trans women are women, and I am just being difficult now.

It's strange, I struggle to believe how sucked into her aggression performed as vulnerability I was. I'm a smarter, more articulate and naturally more aggressive (at least in terms of direct aggression, rather than passive) woman, with much more life experience, but I let myself be mistreated, insulted and bullied by a poncey, spoilt ideologue. And to top it off, a spineless one who insinuated her strength was not being female like me, while performing every Carolyn Bryant trick in the helpless maiden handbook. 

My amazing good fortune in being born to a body that I identify with is a privilege. The fact it's taken me years to come to terms with who and what I am is irrelevant. I'm clearly so happy being a woman, I would reject it otherwise. That must be it. All that cisprivilege I owned, using it to harm those like her. People with so few problems in life they can sit in their familial home, call it their home, in adulthood and spent hours every day wondering how they should dress, which of their many clothes they should choose to express their inner being. Not so easy for us without family, those who've been through the care system and were all alone at almost half the age she was now. It's the twilight zone on iron(y) tablets. It's inexplicable. Or it seemed so, until I understood how I'd been gaslit by a persecutor in disguise. It slipped right under my radar. 

I knew I was female from my first memory. I was scolded for acts my brothers were not. My anger was ridiculed. I was dismissed as crying just like the way we are depicted as Carolyn Bryant, a woman who laughed when the court was hearing of Emmet's horrific injuries, in front of his mother. I was loaded with tedious tasks, sexually abused, raped, hounded, and never safe.

The trans activist lives in an artificial landscape. It requires forced perspective, simulated dangers, astro-turfed campaigning and sound effects. It relies on keeping trans people a spectre of imperiled but dignified bravery. It's about supremacy, whether that's the great white defender or the under-dog survivor. What they want is what is yours, and they'll dress it up as an emergency but it was all very well planned.

The implied threat of eternal damnation is definitely real, they will ruthlessly exploit any slip, they'll go after all they can, they'll endlessly play the victim and rescuer. They'll have you fired for fun. But once you're out, if you don't have so much to lose, if you're employer isn't a coward, it might be liberating. The sting loses potency in staggering time. Don't look down and imagine the drop is real, there's too many distortions up where you are now. And it's better to jump prepared, than have your strings cut.

Queering Marxism - The Wokest Pantomime

 Package Deal Ideology! Instant Wraparound Identities - No Questions Asked

So, I think it's safe to say we've all seen the profiles - a BLM frame, a bio which lists antifascism and anarcho communism. A  rainbow flag, with that uncompromising fist in pink, blue and grey. "Anticapitalist!" they squeal. "Eat the rich!" "Punch Nazis!" "Fuck your binary!"

Oh yes indeedy. It's a raw, rare fury fired in the furnaces of authenticity, fuck you very much. No pissing around here - these are the Che Guevaras of the digital age, the rainbow taliban, the cynical, seen-too-much revolutionary guards of 'I got so much political outrage!' Like kittens they slumber on meme groups and Twitter, before rising like lion- well, you get the idea...

These are the defenders of the vulnerable, the oppressed. They got all the compassion in the world. Except, not the uppity, not the entitled. Not those already catered for.

Ok, what I mean is women. Not the fucking women. There's a deep resentment of real-life feminism, that which deals in fact and material analysis, that which centres women. They think they might be Marxist, but believe that someone's self-identified gender outweighs that of material reality, i.e. sex.

A few years ago, when the slapped-arse face of Jordan Peterson hovered on the new horizon, he called these people 'postmodernist Marxists'. He rightly got called out for trying to merge two inherently incompatible philosophies. It is impossible to bat for queer theory (entirely conceived within the realms of post-structuralism and postmodernism) and Marxism simultaneously, at least without considerable and constant contradiction and a fascinating 'logic'. 

Marxism is based on this thing called materialism, looking at the manifestation of exploitation within the economic realm which we are all subject to, sorting us into classes of empowered and exploited. Whereas, postmodernist theory tells us there is no objective truth, no rightful boundaries or categorical fact. Power is everywhere - open your eyes!

Quite seriously, for the queer theorist there are no acts which are objectively right or wrong, the enemy is oppression, and sexual transgression is a liberating response to oppression. 

No, rape is not an act of violence of itself; that comes from the cultural norms which tell us that sex can happen only within certain parameters and between two partners of opposite sex in the marital bed; that children cannot enjoy sexual encounters with adults, an offence against children and those who love them. 

We build it up with our tales and moralising judgements, stripping all agency from the 'victim' who is bound by self-fulfilling profesy of damage and shame, along with the 'perpetrator', who's humanity is revoked.

It is, the queer theorist contends, never considered that the victim has been made ex post fasto. Nor the 'criminal' is in fact the victim of a savage heteronormative punishment that demands its arbitrary rules be adhered to. This damned system...

It troubles me pretty deeply to now understand that Peterson was correct. It's not that it is actually possible to fuse the two, they understand the praxis of neither, but it's a sort of pick 'n mix bag of edgy-sounding slogans, pre-scripted responses and statements. They constantly use queer theory without even knowing it and they make sure to dress that window up with some marxist credentials.

It's a package deal ideology, made from inconsistent, clashing narratives but that's ok, cos conversation doesn't go far enough to discover these. 

Slogans over analysis! 

Chants 👏 are 👏 better 👏 than 👏 individual 👏 thought 👏

Dress up liberalist, corporate supported ideology, but stick an anarchy A and a few references to the bourgeois on it. 

Take antifa, a movement formed of the working class as they directly combatted fascism on Cable Street, the incredibly brave Antifaschistiche Aktion of the Weimar republic and those courageous souls who fought Franco and Mussolini, adopt their language, aesthetic and banners to go and scream abuse at left wing, feminist women who object to having males with exposed cocks in women only spaces. Threaten them into secrecy, fear-paralysis, doublethink. All the while evading real threats, demanding victim status as a shield, using the police to file hate incidents but swearing ACAB, becoming the drones of esoteric academia who would turn on them as soon as their ideas represent the norm.

The contradictions are never unearthed, because they have never needed to go deeper into it. Starting with an education that is geared towards knowing the answer but not truly understanding and a strict, rarely articulated university policy of no-cat-shall-meet-pigeon, it's become very shallow out there. 

Think James Caspian and his censored attempt to study detransition, and the published and applauded grievance studies. These are people who are primed for presentation over content, conformity and peace over confrontation and praxis, and their social media profiles are their own little shop windows, perfectly situated logos and labels for the current zeitgeist. As such, the display is fragile and highly contrived: the billowing scarves stuck as if in motion are actually formed with mangled coat hangers, the central focus can change smoothly and with no interference from external forces. Any external force - questions, a breeze, could flatten it all. Carefully shielded, it is limited by imagination alone. An ever-telling story of political aesthetic.

DO NOT TOUCH THE DISPLAY

So maybe a crap, superficial and swift compare / contrast with Marxist theorem and queer theory is in keeping here: 

Keeping the proletariat on their knees with assumed moral and intellectual superiority, and violent, paternalist control of the means of production and profits the workers create might well be the most successful policy in social control - if you're desperate through hunger, fear, addiction, your ability to plan ahead, withhold gratification, is almost entirely stolen from your muddy prole hands: you are ALWAYS looking for the scraps, the get-me-through-today perks, scanning the floor for dropped change. What you can't really do is look at your oppressors eye to eye and confront the boot on your neck. Not without straying thoughts and shame-filled stomach rumbling. This is a heirachy and people are endowed with power by nepotism. You are at the bottom, as ordained. It will ultimately unravel, but until that time you're where you are due to a system of privilege, ownership, exploitation.

Above: Dead Smarmy Fuck laments the lack of solidarity for certain males to be women. This is unrelated to a passion for misogyny or flaccid oestro-junk.

Styled by; US imperialist luxury values. Gun; Republican-donating multinational. Beard; model's own

From the perspective of queer theory, nothing is manifest or true. Is that boot really on your neck, or is this a performance? Is it really you with the power, holding back the safeword? The narratives we live by can be deconstructed much in the way society has constructed them. Boundaries are illusion that force social norms upon us which tend to be the real axes of power, and the queer, by definition the un-usual, the transgressive and underdog are the truly crushed under foot.

And this makes some sense, it's often the minorities who bear the brunt of outrages against humanity. It's just about where we draw the line between the odd, the unfairly discriminated against, and the downright abusive and obscene.

Here is another incompatible philosophy to subscribe to alongside queer theory; feminism. Well, feminism that centres on females, which is what feminism does. Queer theory serves the powerful in their whims and fetishes. It is not on the side of women who seek boundaries.

Are we to side with the largely unwitting statements in line with queer theory that an internal feeling of gender dysphoria trumps biological sex, that women can in fact have penises and prostates and some people are born into the wrong body? Or perhaps that the violence experienced by women and children is consequential to their being maintained as an other, a different, weaker brand of human requiring segregation which exoticises their bodies from the gaze of those who might 'attack' them; or do we start in material reality with some hard foundations, of categorical class and a materialist analysis? 

Is it not integral to our existence that we examine our roles from our physical, economic and social standing, that the subjective interpretation of others will never be reliable, never be objective or provably true? Can we as observers make the judgement on what is or is not an unequal power dynamic? 

Are our categories meaningful or is it these which oppress us? Do you have any goal in sight or is this a struggle of constantly identifying the un-usual to champion 

via queer theory?

Who knows, the delicious control of submitting (or being seen to submit) could be the ultimate liberation. Maybe it is your exertion of power that keeps you morally upstanding in your own little clique, your opponent indisputably the devil to all. Maybe it's you who maintains this whole charade. 

Freedom from decision and midlife crises, in fact it is the ultimate joy; to be held in the gaze of another; no existential doom headed your way, you can cheer at your survival thus far, possibly even while knowing it's not quite as it seems.

So are women really oppressed, or has it long been a dance, an act of release from the pressures of responsibility? You, in your illogically defined category of sex get the constant flux of privilege and sacrifice among your peers, knowing really you could overturn the powers-that-be if you just restructure your perceptions, language and interplay? Did you ever realise how archaic and regressive those parameters you draw around yourself really are? You have demarcated these borders and huddle together in safety and exclusivity with the consent of society, like first class passengers, as you inadvertently betray the real privilege  - your celebrated victimhood.

Aren't you lucky, with your power to invoke obsession and jealousy, your identifying class and privilege, your ability to manipulate those with money and status? Where you have sorority and the power to destroy a man on words alone, drive him insane and walk away without a mark to your basic, unremarkable name?

And what for the petit bourgeois: the liberal feminist with no real-life experience of manifest oppression, who is feted as smart, pretty and intersectionally woke? Or even the white, middle class, adult male who is actually the most marginalised if we look at internal self perception alone?

Above our petty squabbles of finite resources and rigid thinking, they hope to change the world with language, for the words we use directly affects the world we live in. To deconstruct and reassemble a reality, you begin with discourse. It's a little like unrepentant child sex offender R Kelly, 'if I can see it, then I can be it', or Noel Edmonds and his game-show of Shrodingers' cat; to ask the universe, think positively and believe. So you look at the discourse of these interactions and you examine where the breach has been committed.

But let's get real here. I'm no Marxist, I couldn't claim enough knowledge to take that as a stance. What I am interested in is the constant appropriation of edgy sounding politics that are used so completely dishonestly.

Being anti fascist would require some real awareness of what fascism is, for a start. Note: authoritarian attempts to control speech because some words may be difficult to stomach is not it. To demand your orthodoxy reign supreme when you point blank refuse to engage in any conversation, literally trying to crush any sentiment you disapprove of based on fallacious ideas of your intense vulnerability is not it. Choosing the moment in which you reject other ideas as fascist, dangerous, murderous, that's something which requires consideration. Mindlessly chanting along with slogans you don't understand, demanding others fall into line, is pretty scary stuff. Keep your head. It may be important at some point. 

Fascism begins with women. A protection racket of chivalry. If these women are now with penises, it's an interesting twist but it doesn't change the game. The death marches are still gonna come, and yeah, who cares when it's your enemy? Especially enemies with such tedious, crypto-fash ideas like there are material, profound distinctions between the sexes? Definitely they should get the wall, that's the right thing, yeah?

From what I can deduce, we have a highly sensitive, confused and fearful population which is being very successfully funnelled into online genres, in a way which resembles music affiliations, youth movements before. The need to find an indentifying group is natural: we do it in adolescence and young adulthood as a way to break away from our parents, to shock and repulse them, to assert our individuality without irony of all our proud allegiances.

But let's keep our heads, and prize the ability to think with individuality. Being radical was never an anthem of the drones. Don't be so willing to spout the mantras you're instructed to - it won't keep you safe forever, it really is visibly inauthentic and without a safeword, that boot might be deep-throating you soon. 

May the Farce be with You, You Spoilt, Trembling Cowards.

Links, because obviously, to the paedo-advocacy of Queer Theorists

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/307660876_The_Age_of_Consent_and_the_Ending_of_Queer_Theory

https://spectator.us/topic/academics-defending-pedophilia/

https://www.feministcurrent.com/2019/10/05/its-time-for-us-all-to-stand-up-against-big-sister/

https://youtu.be/n-NseFg2kno

https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/mother-of-transgender-ideology-judith-butler-and-her-connection-to-pedophilia.3939985/

Vendors of the Faith

Ok, it's got to the stage I think you deserve to know - that shiny, shit and flimsy facade of valid human rights campaigning has cracked. It’s been fucked for ages, and I know you still get the flashy headlines and that, but it’s a consensus made of platitudes, fearful repetition and zombie autopilot. Cling on if you want, but I'd be keeping an eye on the looming shit storm you are inciting. You might lord it over the hallways of power now but we are the ones who collect and file evidence, we expose the lies. Not with the grand libraries and ceremonial flourish you do, and with far fewer assassinations. Still, it will stand alone without lies, forced perspective, compelled speech.

Let's tap into that famous imagination of yours; close your eyes and picture;

Prince Andrew struts around his palace, boasting he set the record straight in that TV interview, and people know just how firmly he stands against sex trafficking, and the awe which they have for the incredible bravery he displayed during his decorated military career. How he proved all allegations fallacious; we believed him entirely. How he regaled us with the story of how his sweat glands took the hit as a tactical decision in battle, leaving him with dry hands and brow to save our boys! "I know one is considered to be a hero viciously slandered by the gutter press, guilty of only association in my attempts to strengthen British enterprise" he says to his staff, chest puffed out and dripping in medals earned via nepotism and heredity. "The British public have never loved nor needed me more, and they see I am the victim of a scurrilous crusade". The servants are a little rigid with awkward disquiet, but they hold it together, only exchanging glances when he has left the room, and only gathering the courage to talk to each other after hearing the Queen, Prince Philip and the rest increasingly bluntly refer to him as arrogant, imbecilic, delusional, a liar, a cretin. A few ex courtiers may speak out in the press, but no one knows their names and the palace dismiss them with stone-faced dignity. But once enough do so they will gain a name all of their own, they will become a force, momentum will gather. The integrity of the royal family is creaking. Bits fall off, cracks appear. What was once a treasonous heresy only uttered in secrecy is now being shouted in the street. The crown has slipped.

That, guys, is you. You've an air of the unassailable about you, but only because the charade, the social status you gained through propaganda, assassinations and insidious force. We have for years been stunned at your power and influence; how on earth you are deemed worthy of such celebration and power; how, why, anyone would take you so seriously as a moral arbiter or guardian of truth? 

But you can only hold court for a limited time when those emporers' clothes are seen day after day, when the sweat begins to trickle off and reek. Even the most obsequious, sycophantic, pageantry obsessed royalist will one day realise they're being treated like clueless, simpleton plebs. Even they will lose the script (and the plot) when their children return with missing parts, broken with shell shock and denounced as traitors. It's an unsustainable path when the grandiosity is so clear, the atmosphere so contemptuous and dishonest and authoritarian. 

The critical mass of those who refuse to play the game becomes overwhelming. All the neutral figures finally sidle up and take a position they've long held in their sights. In all the years of bullshit, aggression, violence and authoritarian decree those knives get sharp, closer at hand and, my goodness, hasn't it got dark?

Under all of those gaudy mottos, your misogyny is flapping in the wind. Opportunist pigeons roost in the formerly impenetrable edifice, and make close inspection a risky affair. No one enjoys being shat on by cooing illiterates who knock all the pieces over and fly back to their flock, boasting of their delusional success. All the hangers-on seeking shelter under your name, the ones you invited, or, with complicit laziness, allowed in, they eventually catch wide attention. You can claim no association if you want, but when they return night after night your word is meaningless. 

Which is why you shout, from loudhailers mounted up high, from radio stations, TV studios and headlines, with a flourish of trumpets.

The words you use mean nothing and you cannot logically defend any of it. It requires faith, and faith requires more comfort than you can provide. No one actually understands the language you use, and the seal of approval and endorsements held back criticism for a while, but eventually people realise meaningless phrases written in the most artful calligraphy are still meaningless. 

So you make those demands louder, hammer that anthem into their heads and don't leave pause for questions. Incorporate military regalia and teach them by rote. 

Better still, all that noise, all the undesirables you foster, keeps everyone but the ordained back, it looks imposing and unimpeachable. 

Like the tower of London, we all know what it looks like but few ever go inside without a guide to steer us or areas roped off. It means the shite facade is never examined, never exposed to the public or the harsh light of normal scepticism. 

Those pigeons are overshadowed by ravens, wings clipped and dependent. Never gaining autonomy or the beauty of a full, adult ability. You can't let the public up too close, not without hazing them first, but the photo opportunities are fantastic. 

You claim the Olympian gold in victimhood, when the dirty secret is you're as safe as it gets, when your witch trials torture women and every mishap is some bitches' fault. 

The brave warrior history is long gone, swapped for seats in the Lords and pomp. You were surrounded in protection every day of your service, by nameless subjects of no importance. Wearing your fatigues and posing for the camera, out of shot were the people who really do the work.

Your only hope to maintain it is with relentless propaganda, more spectacles and fear. Making sure the devil is named, how you are hated for protecting your noble subjects, the enemies plot your demise, laugh at your tragedies and can muster evil of all kinds. 

Scheming and invading the souls of innocents, you can never be safe and if you fall so do we all. They are watched and reported on by neighbours. The paranoid plots run out of control, you hear their whistling everywhere, soon you won't stop washing those hands. The ceremonial executions warn and entertain the public, the charges are fantastical, and you make certain the children know the mantras and pledges in school.

Attack, dehumanise the enemy via any means possible. The logical fallacies of strawmanning, ad hominem attacks, appeals to authority (your authority), false dichotomy, circular arguments - you excell at every one. All because you have no argument that fulfils your desires, because your role as monarch and custodian of the fortress is a sham. 

You curse the media, but your press office has all the right numbers on speed dial. You fill our world with headlines on exclusion and erasure, the hatred and agony, the victimhood and annihilation - you keep us rapt with fear and pity. Even battered women, desperate of one, solitary, same sex space to heal, are monsters, bigots, bitches, dangerous, dried up whores. 

They manipulate the nation with their woes, spinning lies and everything is a coded attack. Meanwhile you, protected by laws against heresy and a corporate endorsed, social media speech-restriction and vilification campaigns sit on your throne of accrued wealth and fire off missives. 

Two women a week in the UK, 137 a day worldwide are murdered by family. Seven to eight thousand women and girls are murdered annually in Indian dowry disputes alone. But you, with a global three hundred and thirty-one martyrs, get thousands of headlines, days and weeks of recognition and have the veto on every public debate. 

You will not dignify the other side with a response, with argument. Let them bleat rape; One owns the spaces. All while spending millions of hours harassing, censoring and defaming the very same people. You incite violence and sit on your pedestal, winking with complicity and duplicitously issuing statements calling for decency and respect.

You claim spectacular moral supremacy, even when you kill more than you are killed, when even you mercilessly punish the faintest wrongthink and scour the land for wrong-thinkers.

You claim every hurt feeling as a treasonable act - an enticement to suicide, genocide, homicide. You misappropriate feminism, centre males in it, then make real feminists an evil, regressive subset of their own movement like the colonial invaders you are. 

You take the folklore of your colonies and have them spun into the best examples to tell the children; celebrate the diversity of more labels and subdivisions, get them all picketed into your hierarchy; they always have such big wide smiles and sing so happily, don't they? You send rape threats, death threats, sexually degrading harassment daily, form armed groups ready to terrorise the crones, and you call us dangerous to society. The snide, corporate-sponsored duplicity as you masturbate to your own image, flying flags and spit at women burning on pyres. You are to the vulnerable what Carter Pewtershmidt is to the working class.

Using taboo like an abusive priest, you try to censor discussion you'll never hear and blame the natives for savagery. How could anyone want to hear such blasphemy? You're frightened of everything you can't control, any conversations that go off-script. You must dominate all acceptable discourse and forbid anything outside of it. Everything must be yours and you, the wife-beater, singing 'I Will Survive' in the spotlight, requiring North Korean-standard applause, goose stepping minions in their own weird uniform. 

It’s the apex of toxic masculinity and your celebrated martrydom tells us something critical about you; you know no victimhood. Victims do not see their vulnerability as a battering ram, it is not the most special, powerful thing they have, it gives them no protection or status. 

As the people, as feminists, built women's spaces, hostels, rape crisis and networks of support, what have you built? Nothing. You build nothing. You take the land and the names and set the rules and you put your fucking flag on top. 

You make children into soldiers to terrorise their own. You greedily appropriate everything you see. Like ancient art in the British museum, you know it best, you are the one to preserve and honour it. You are the guardian. You are the curator and arbiter of culture. You appear to a desperate press under orders, held back by velvet ropes, they're all you special correspondents. 

Shaking some hands and singing your hymns, your charity work is done. You can slink away with the aid of former soldiers and spies, their lifelong service is yours.

Enjoy it while it lasts, I see you've had a ball. It's an untenable luxury, however. While you gorge on the stolen riches, are massaged by pretty young slaves, the clock will keep ticking and the old guard are angry. The peasants are revolting and those natives know the landscape more than you ever could.

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.