Watching more and more people draw explicit connections and comparisons from the "GC" movement to fascism and constantly remembering people who insisted for years that the GC movement is itself not inherently fascist
The cool stuff here is it's all stuff that's been pointed out over and over again by multiple people, even with direct comparisons to various definitions of fascism but it's somehow more important to acknowledge Julie Bindel's done good work than that she wants trans people gone.
There's no common ground. There's no compromise. Nothing will be good enough for them but ending our ability to exist as trans people. They openly fantasize about sending us to concentration camps, compare us to groups like Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and the Stasi, constantly promote
fear-mongering lies about us claiming that trans women and trans feminine people are covert predators trying to use femininity as a disguise to gain access to cis women and girls, or transitioning to dominate women's sports. And trans men and trans masculine people infantilized
as prey of the former group, falsely described as having been "groomed" into being trans, and the subject of a literal great replacement/white genocide type theory in which the existence of trans men and trans mascs is positioned as lesbian extermination.
And the thing is, every single transphobic organization and person is using the very same arguments. Whether they call themselves feminists, philosophers, or white supremacists, they all say *exactly the same things*.
So fuck decorum, fuck respectability: the anti-trans movement is a fascist movement. They don't have to fucking call themselves fascists to be espousing fascist values. Refer to this if you have any questions. openculture.com/2016/11/umbert…
I'm just tired. Right now the zeitgeist is moving on to acknowledging this entire movement is fascist, and I hope the people who continued to resist that characterization will at last see it for what it is.
It's not hysteria, it's not "I don't like them therefore they're fascists," it's not trying to call them the worst thing possible to try to get people to take them seriously. It's a factual observation.
Beth Elliott pointed it out in the early 70s in response to Robin Morgan's antifeminist and anti-woman rant about Beth specifically and trans women in general after Beth left the 1973 West Coast Lesbian conference under threat of potentially lethal violence.
Janice Raymond's hate screeds in the mid-70s got Olivia Records boycotted and some so-called "feminist" groups threatened to literally shoot up their shows if Sandy Stone showed up. Raymond herself contended that
On her webpage she clarifies she never meant to say she wanted all trans people exterminated, she just wants them tortured into being cis. Totally different guys, and not even slightly similar to any genocides ever committed <s>
Incidentally I understand that the UN definition of genocide codified in 1948 specifies certain types of groups and not others. It should be noted that while this happened in direct response to the Holocaust, queer victims of the concentration camps were left in prison and the
crimes *against* them were not at the time considered to be crimes. And that in a lot of the western world, queerness was considered a pathology and often illegal. So I hope people will forgive me if I don't take a definition that excludes queer people coined during a time when
homophobia and transphobia were considered normal and heavily backed by law at all levels of society to be the ideal definition.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Every so often someone has an enlightenment about the nature of gender in trans people and tries to tell everyone the "right" way to process their gender (usually that it's not innate) and I feel as I often do that calling it "gender identity" has caused people to just push all
the correct discourse about how *gender* is a social construct onto gender identity without significant analysis as to what gender identity may be, how it might come about, etc. And I do not think that it's really accurate or necessary to simply say "gender identity" is itself
identical to or drawn entirely from the social construct of gender. I don't mean to say that gender is innate or whatever, but that does NOT mean people aren't ~really~ their gender, given that social constructs are real, just often arbitrary and can change all the time.
So I'm critical of psychiatry and psychology as fields, especially as they often stigmatize and pathologize normal human behaviors. But I'm also dubious of people claiming to fight ableism and then spreading misinformation about, say, ADHD.
Misinformation about diagnosis, treatment, and etiology, leading people to think ADHD is something it isn't, or is possibly an entirely "bogus" diagnosis, or that stimulants don't show particular efficacy, or that it's caused by parents not disciplining their children.
Like sure advocate for neurodiversity and be critical of psychology and psychiatry but don't be Thomas Szasz. Don't misrepresent screening tools as diagnostic. Don't tell people that effective treatments are really ineffective.
It's pretty invasive how cis people take it upon themselves to lecture trans people on what they believe isn't transphobia, to the point that they'll say "sure, this person wants you and everyone like you to die, but they said they support a few critical rights for trans people"
"Sure, he defends a well known conversion therapist, and argues that trans kids can't really be sure they're really trans, but he never *said* he supported conversion therapy, so you can't say he does."
"Sure she said trans women are a threat to cis women and girls but she also said she'd march in a trans rights parade so how can you say she's transphobic?"
People keep arguing that Singal isn't transphobic. Not only is Singal transphobic but he thinks most progressives agree with him on transphobia. A story in image form. At least two tweets' worth.
Original tweet by a mutual but I don't want creeps to find it.
Conclusion of that story about Jesse insisting that the Womanhood Redefined article in American Conservative is something most progressives agree with. Also, Free Republic's response to that article. Singal agrees with terf rhetoric and said so
Isn't it weird that someone who is so sympathetic toward trans people and not transphobic at all would agree with an article that explicitly sets out to frame trans women as evil unreasonable monsters who demand too much when they want human decency and respect?
Wondering if I should go through the Zucker and Atlantic articles line by line and show that a reasonable person can in fact conclude that Jesse "Slime Weasel" Singal supports conversion therapy for trans kids. The people in Jude Doyle's mentions right now are relying on a
shallow reading of the article where he never actually says the words "I support conversion therapy" while ignoring all insinuations and outside context.
Do people remember how he got information for the Atlantic article from at least one ROGD-promiting website?
The gee cees were hecking mad he didn't credit them for information he received from them. Anyway, if I did do this it would be because virtue singal threatens legal action against people who speak of him in any terms not reserved for the highest of angels. And it'd be an article