Thread by @BlueJayGliding

Chronic TERFery: a timeline.
70s-80s: Second wave feminists get shirty about trans women being g present at a feminist festival designated as women only spaces.
90s: Second wave feminists start to adopt third wave/intersectional feminism. Quiet remnant writes resentful essays.

00s: Visibility of trans people and social acceptability of being visibly (as opposed to secretly) trans improves. 2nd wavers dig their heels in more. Some trans people join forces with them quoting Blanchard ontology and promoting the idea that "transsexuals > transgender".

00s (cont): Transgender people start developing a more inside and consultative discourse that embraces intersectionality and promotes personal autonomy.
Early 10s: Trans discourse becomes increasingly unifying and affirmative, supported by results from longitudinal studies.

Mid 10s to present: Longitudinal research starts providing concrete evidence of positive outcomes for gender identity affirmation, whether it be familial, social or medical. TERFs and RW Christians panic, especially when RW Christian mothers start affirming their trans kids.

Current: Realising that they have lost control over the narrative re: trans rights, TERFs organise media stunts, concerted media campaign against trans activism and talking points, accusing peer reviewed clinical evidence as "transcult" and affirming trans kids as "mutilation".

Current: Despite persistent bad faith arguments and promoting studies/essays (e.g. Littman's ROGD paper, Blanchard/Bailey/Zucker/McHugh) that paint trans people in a less flattering light, despite the clear and rational debunking of those studies by respectable academics.

And here we are now with the easily led reactionary right wing of the mass media buying into their bullshit, because it's a useful lever to attack the solidarity of the LGBTIQ+ movement, and because cheap sensationalism (as Jerry Spinger discovered) sells.

But the most important realisation here is that modern TERFery is a throwback to second wave feminism being proven repeatedly to be an incomplete philosophy which has failed to get traction, while more inside feminist theories have succeeded. This is about ego & self-importance.

And this is why the usual suspects (Bindel, Greer and their acolytes) are so butt-hurt. They have been told that their theories were unhelpful and destructive, and they resent the hell out of being told that they're wrong. That's why the trans argument matters to them.

It's all about restoring their credibility and prestige, and the privilege attached to those things. Have they said these things in words? Not quite. But they have certainly proven my point with their actions and persistent mendacity in the light of more enlightened theories.

Next time you start criticising Trans people about not wanting to engage in debate about our existence, remember that we are not really the target for their ire. We are simply a convenient straw-man for their desire to be restored to pre-eminence in the feminist movement.

If you think you can prove me wrong, feel free. But the minute you start quoting year 8 biology, know that I'm going to block you, since advanced post-doctoral work in several biological disciplines has already proven you wrong. Quoting second-wave dogma will get you blocked too.