It was always going to be the case that the women who built the resistance to trans ideology would have to push 100 times as hard to be heard, and that when we were finally heard, powerful men would turn up and either ignore or even
blame the women who worked so hard to push this into the mainstream.
In one sense it doesn’t matter, because what matters is that it is stopped.
In another way it really matters, because if people has been able to hear, it could have been stopped so much sooner.
And it matters, because once again, women’s work, and the feminist analysis that built so much of this early movement, will be washed out of history, again, and with it, a lot of the lessons that could be learned.
It is good that those men are turning up. We live in a structurally sexist society, and therefore, we need them to push the dial.
But women have every right to note what it reveals, and what it will conceal.
Both things can be true.
@Gnothi_S to filter through, and it will require sustained pressure and advocacy.
@IanSMcNee @EStreachailt you’re right. I’m thinking about things we can organise to cement the left materialist and feminist insights that have come out of all of this. More soonly…
@grace_hawthorn @TheArbourist There is an amazing interview he did with JP where they sat around blithering on about how all analyses of oppression are a Marxist gnostic heresy and motivated by resentment like that of Cain and something something Luciferian while oblivious to the fact that the whole time they
@grace_hawthorn @TheArbourist we’re basically complaint about how oppressed they are by wokeists.
@tradrmum @RosesPaintedRed @TheArbourist @NormyWolf If we want to understand what has done wrong with contemporary social justice activism, we won’t get that from ‘it’s an analysis of structural oppression.’ Lyndsay wants to use the current overreach/distortions of modern SJW to discredit all analysis of structural oppression,
@tradrmum @RosesPaintedRed @TheArbourist @NormyWolf including feminism of all types, and civil rights era ant racism. Nothing in his analysis allows us to distinguish those from the current toxic form. And it doesn’t tell us why the current form is toxic.
@tradrmum @RosesPaintedRed @TheArbourist @NormyWolf in their box. He’s playing to a very conservative market.
@tradrmum @RosesPaintedRed @TheArbourist @NormyWolf doesn’t explain the problem.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
form and the way it has been used by contemporary social justice activism?
4. How do you account for the fact that women did not exist as separate legal persons, or couldn’t own their own property, or couldn’t open bank accounts?
5. Why do women traditionally take their husband’s name and children traditionally take their father’s name?
6. Why is there a rape kit backlog in most US states?
7. Why did marital rape not become a crime in the UK until 1991?
Human cultural activity changes all kinds of natural things. We can chisel faces on the side of mountains, cut down forests, burn land to create growth. We can divert the course of rivers. That doesn't mean rivers are 'culture.'
Pretty much everything in existence arises out of the dialectical *interaction* and *intertwining* between (at least) two things.
Both/And.
That doesn't mean the 'two things' dissolve completely into each other.
This whole battle is not a confected mess made up by a bunch of bored women who were sitting around one day and then decided, "I know what will be a laugh, let's pretend a bunch of people are trying to erase sex in law and replace us with gender wibble wobble."
Srsly, how would we have ever come up with this bonkersness???
Was there LSD in the tea???
Don't you think we have better things to do than spend our time repeating that sex is real and matters politically while being screamed at and having our jobs threatened???
Is the problem feminists opposing trans people's existence as trans, or claiming that trans women are not women?
This distinction might matter.
This is the first indication she doesn't understand the original gender critical feminist critique.
We're not sliding from female sex through feminine gender to woman. We are specifically claiming that feminine gender should have nothing to do with the legal definition of woman.
This longread from the Guardian is a really detailed and useful account of how the current Culture Wars are playing out and impacting the work of academic knowledge making.
The kind of historical accounting that is being done by some of our public institutions into how their past finances were tied up with the profits from slavery is *exactly* the kind of *materialist* work into the mechanisms of exploitation and oppression that we should welcome.
And it's a long way from the kind of identitarian privilege-as-sin self-flagellation and virtue-signalling that has been encouraged by some of the excesses of the current form of social justice warriorship.
As a doctorate carrying scientist you should realise we had this argument 5 years ago and you lost because you are talking absolute copper bottomed nonsense