Tweet

Miroslav Imbrisevic

5 Jan, 9 tweets, 2 min read

THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK:
Discourses like that of Kathleen Stock 'reinforce the patriarchal status quo'. Au contraire - transwomen who imitate the worst stereotypes of the social role 'woman' reinforce the patriarchy - they have imbibed too much of it.

sites.google.com/view/trans-phi…

"Conflating concern about the harms of Stock’s work with threats to academic freedom obfuscates important issues." No. Like many others, Ichikawa conflates disagreement about gender ideology with transphobia and with harm to trans people.

Disagreement doesn't cause harm. But employing a transwomen in a rape crisis centre will continue to traumatise victims of sexual violence. And why would anyone - employer or employee - with real concern for women think that this is a good idea? All in the name of inclusion.

How is Kathleen Stock's discourse restricting 'trans people’s access to life-saving medical treatments'?

Trans activists claim that being trans is not an illness. Why the treatment and why is it 'life-saving'? UK law permits a change of gender - KS is not standing in their way.

Apparently, the British government mistakes 'transphobic fearmongering for valuable scholarship'. It's the other way round, Ichikawa mistakes valuable scholarship for transphobic fearmongering.

Ichikawa claims that 'prominent members of our profession [are] using their academic status to further gender oppression.' More mis-representation, which is shocking when it is coming from philosophers, who are trained to recognise such fallacies.

KS is doing her academic work. The title 'Professor' comes from the Latin: to publicly declare your views. That is the job of a Professor (and public intellectual). Particularly when academia is firmly in the grip of transgender ideology - and any deviations lead to vilification.

@Docstockk

We, as philosopher should always be civil, but reading this letter, I will permit myself to deviate: the term 'pompous ass' comes to mind. And I claim Isaiah Berlin as my 'spiritus rector'.

@Docstockk

The letter now includes an erratum, admitting that they misrepresented Kathleen Stock’s position on the UK Gender Recognition Act. What does this tell us about those who wrote the letter and about those who signed the letter?
sites.google.com/view/trans-phi…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

More from @Miroandrej

Miroslav Imbrisevic

@Miroandrej

3 Jan

Rachel McKinnon/Veronica Ivy's latest: "In deciding whether trans and intersex women should be allowed to compete as women, who has the burden of proof in the debate? The answer is clear: those who seek to exclude." No. If you want to change the status quo, the burden of proof...

...is on you. Secondly, here is the usual attempt to muddy the waters by including intersex people (whose sex characteristics are atypical) in the debate. We know the sex of transwomen and transmen. They are unhappy with the sex they were born with.

docs.google.com/document/d/12Q…

"The International Olympic Committee (IOC), the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), and the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) all clearly state that there is a human right to participate in competitive sport." No. What the IOC and CAS say about human rights and sport has...

Read 14 tweets

Miroslav Imbrisevic

@Miroandrej

22 Aug 20

Feminism does not have to be trans-inclusive, and transwomen don’t have to be included in the class ‘women’ – provided that you look what’s under the label ‘transwoman’.

miroslavimbrisevic.wordpress.com/2020/08/22/tra…

Betcher writes that if you don't know trans communities then you are 'incapable of interpreting self-identifies'. But why should their self-ID within the trans community carry forward to the wider community? Why demand this when the standards in the wider community differ?

Bettcher draws the wrong conclusions. She might be right that within trans communities a transwoman may claim that she is a 'woman', but this does not hold within the wider community. There, she can only claim that she is a transwoman.

Read 5 tweets

Miroslav Imbrisevic

@Miroandrej

5 Mar 20

THREAD: 1/THE LANGUAGE OF LAW
Trans activists in the UK might get confused by the phrasing in the 2004 Gender Recognition Act, section 9 (1), particularly by the phrase ‘for all purposes’. This has a specific legal meaning and history...

2/It is short for ‘to/for all intents and purposes’, going back to English law in the 16th century. It means: ‘in every practical sense’ or ‘virtually’. It does not mean that a transwoman is a woman; it only means that the law will treat a transwoman...

3/...as if she were a (biological) woman, by issuing a new birth certificate. What we have here is a legal fiction, a helpful construct going back to ancient times. Roman law treated soldiers who were captured by the enemy (i.e. enslaved) as if they were free men.

Read 10 tweets

Miroslav Imbrisevic

@Miroandrej

27 Feb 20

TRANSGENDERISM IS THE ULTIMATE REJECTION OF THE FEMALE BODY.

1/Women have been told for centuries that their bodies are lacking (unclean, impure, weak, inferior – to men). Many of our major religions (unsurprisingly, dominated by men) promoted this view...

2/Recall that Eve was made from one of Adam’s ribs; she is a mere derivation. Perhaps, underneath it all, a woman is really ‘male’? The ultimate rejection of the female body is the claim that being a woman is a psychological state – completely detached from the female body...

3/This could lead to the absurd claim that trans women are the ‘real’ women. And this might explain why some trans women feel called upon to represent women, to become ‘women’s officers’, to accept accolades like ‘woman of the year’...

Read 4 tweets

Miroslav Imbrisevic

@Miroandrej

1 Feb 20

@SVPhillimore

@SVPhillimore THREAD ON SHARPE'S PAPER:

Sharpe writes (p. 4) that the sex-based exemptions, provided by the 2020 UK Equality Act, so far, have not been successfully challenged in court. The suggestion is that women don’t need to worry about losing any rights...

@SVPhillimore

@SVPhillimore ...resulting from a change in gender legislation, because these problems never arise (in courts). And why is that? Sharpe’s answer (p. 4, FN 20): ‘The reasons for this include the fact organisers of women-only spaces generally respect the rights of trans women...

@SVPhillimore

@SVPhillimore ... and because the exceptions set a high evidential bar. It may also be due, at least in part, to trans women self-excluding from women-only spaces because of the chilling effect of the exceptions and because of the toxic environment...

Read 9 tweets

Miroslav Imbrisevic

@Miroandrej

12 Jan 20

Trans myths (1): “Trans rights and women’s rights are in harmony”. Trans activists are pushing the idea that there cannot be a clash of rights because transwomen are female. So opening up sex-based safe spaces/protections to transwomen would not make any difference for women...

But this is false. The law in the UK allows biological males to change their gender – based on a legal fiction (see here: theelectricagora.com/2019/10/14/leg…)...

Trans rights do clash with women’s rights. For this reason the UK Equality Act 2010 makes provisions to exclude transwomen from female-only spaces, in order to promote (or protect) the wellbeing of women...

Read 9 tweets

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!