Tendance Coatesy

Left Socialist Blog

“Cancelled” (Channel Four), “Sacked, blacklisted, ostracised, no-platformed…”

with 41 comments

“Cancel culture from all sides.”

Last night outside all was darkness, wet and cold. Inside on television, Richard Bacon presented a programme on Channel Four, Cancelled, which promised to warm up the viewing public.  “Sacked, blacklisted, ostracised, no-platformed: from comedy stand-up to trans rights, and race and academia, a look at cancel culture from all sides and how it’s affecting our lives”.

There was a stab at an uproarious spoof. What could be called A Woke Proposal for Correcting, Improving and Ascertaining the English Language at a business exhibition stand offered a feast of preferred gender pronouns and an ingenious system for toilet facilities to cater for an abundant number of sexual identities. How we laughed.

Bacon,  whose pronouns are ‘he’ and ‘him’, spent time, if not more, talking about his misadventures with Charlie. Something of a right Charlie, he/him reminded those who had long forgotten that “I was publicly shamed after Blue Peter,” and  forced to hand in his Blue Peter badge. Yet pre-Twitter (1998) he had no pile-on, no “cancellation” …and, you’ve already lost interest.

This is a shame. For those who watched it the programme was not a platform for a Laurence Fox given free rein to talk about “extreme political correctness”. Nor was there too much time on a comedian we learn is called Dave Chappelle or gleeman Jimmy Carr. For a moment I thought art historian Andrew Graham-Dixon was part of that troupe.

There were some serious issues raised, though we did not get more a glimpse of what the attacks on J.K. Rowling have meant.

As in:

There was also a transgender activist who plausibly explained why people can feel angry enough about gender critical feminists to protest against them.

At the end we had a swift look at the campaign to get rid of the Blackboy Clock in Stroud, statue removing, and the renaming of university buildings. Which we’ve all heard before.

The Culture War looks like it’s not taking place:

Sadly not:

Written by Andrew Coates

December 3, 2021 at 12:29 pm

41 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Today’s le Monde (a long article)

    : In the United Kingdom, professors and intellectuals are alarmed at threats to freedom of expression, in particular with regard to questions of sex and gender, sources of sharp tensions between some feminists and trans activists .

    Kathleen Stock looks tired. Dressed in a plaid shirt over a T-shirt, dishevelled hair, she apologises for being late.
    …….
    ……

    Still, it seems the tide is starting to turn. Following the publication of Stephen Nolan’s investigation, the BBC withdrew from Stonewall’s Diversity Champions programme, following the path of OFCOM (the British media regulator) and the Department of Justice.

    Arif Ahmed, a supporter from the beginning of Kathleen Stock, won an amendment to a new campus regulation. The university wanted to change its policy, explains the academic. Under these new rules, it would now have been necessary to show “respect” to the identity and opinions of others. “It was a term far too vague, and the door open to more dismissals of professors and researchers,” said the philosopher, who proposed to substitute the word “tolerance” for the word “respect”. He fought to mobilise his colleagues, won a secret ballot and ended up winning by a comfortable majority. ” People seem more ready to mobilise. Last year it took me two months to collect twenty-five signatures [to amend the free speech regulations] ; last spring, on the same subject, it took me less than 24 hours, ” says Arif Ahmed. Has the counter-offensive been launched?

    Andrew+Coates

    December 3, 2021 at 5:45 pm

  2. Transphobia is irrational fear and hatred of trans people. Transphobia is Silence Of The Lambs. Transphobia is referring to transgender surgery as self-mutilation. Transphobia is believing that trans people habitually “trick” or “fool” others into having sex with us. Transphobia is believing that we are out to rob you of your hetero-or-homosexuality. Transphobia is trans people being stared at, insulted, harassed, attacked, beaten, raped, and murdered for simply existing.

    If you want to be a good ally, you need to start taking cissexism and transphobia seriously right now. That means getting our goddamn pronouns right and not expecting a cookie for it. That means learning our names. That means not asking invasive questions or telling us how well we “pass.” (Passing generally means “looking cis.” Not all of us want to look like you, thank you very much.) That means deleting the words “tranny” and “shemale” from your vocabulary. That means understanding the immense privilege you have in your legally recognized, socially approved, medically assigned gender.

    That means realizing that this is just the beginning. and that you have a lot to learn. That means realizing that it would be intrusive and importunate to ask the nearest trans person to explain it all to you, as if they didn’t have better things to do. That means hitting the internet and doing all that you can to educate yourself. And once you’ve done all that, maybe you can call yourself an ally, that is, if you’re still genuinely willing to join us in the hard work of making the world a less shitty place to be trans.

    http://libcom.org/library/not-your-mom’s-trans-101-asher

    Not Your Mom’s Trans 101 – Asher

    Social media theatrics do not advance the struggle but neither do reactionary attitudes. Supporting queer people in their struggle for liberation just as one should support people of color, women and/or others fighting institutional oppression would be a good place to very begin, whilst maintaining critical consciousness about the limitations, blind spots and internal contradictions of Privilege Politics.

    American Dream

    December 3, 2021 at 6:12 pm

  3. Looking for a Right-Left Convergence?:

    DENISE BURKE: We’re not looking at regulation. We are actually looking to enact abortion bans. We are working with allies in a number of states to do that. Our first ban that we are looking at is a 15-week limitation. I’m sure you guys have heard about 21 states have enacted 20-week limitations to this point. The majority of those limitations were never challenged in court. I can speculate as to why the abortion industry did that but I think they didn’t want to get a bad decision. They were concerned that the courts would go along with the 20-week ban. Well, I can guarantee you they’re not going to be able to ignore a 15-week limitation, which is in essence limiting abortion to the first trimester. We are kind of basically baiting them. “Come on! Fight us on turf that we have already set up and established.” I’m happy to say the first 15-week limitation based on our model language was just introduced in the state of Mississippi this week.
    AMY GOODMAN: Amy Littlefield, respond to Denise Burke?

    AMY LITTLEFIELD: Right. She is very clearly saying, “Hey, guys, this is the plan. We are going to introduce a 15-week ban.” More than a third of states have implemented a 20-week ban. They said, “That wasn’t enough to get the challenge that we wanted and so we are going to go ahead and move the line up to 15 weeks and then once we get that 15-week ban, we will go even further.” So this was part of a carefully orchestrated effort to strike right at the heart of Roe V. Wade.

    Mississippi is getting a lot of attention right now. Everyone is talking about Mississippi as if this was a bill that grew organically out of the soil of Mississippi. That is not the case. It was written by the Alliance Defending Freedom, which is an organization with a $50 million annual budget that is out there to drive the Christian Right agenda. They write model bills. They work with state lawmakers who are aligned with them to introduce those model bills. Then when the bills get challenged, which in many cases they want them to, they defend those bills in court. They fund the legal cases that they don’t defend themselves.

    What I most wanted to get across in this piece is the crucial connection that this organization that wrote the Mississippi law that is before the Supreme Court now is also the same organization that is driving the record number of anti-transgender bills that we’re seeing in state legislatures across the country. This year shattered records for both anti-trans legislation and anti-abortion legislation. We are talking about those issues as if they are two separate things, and really what I wanted to point out is this is the same organization that is driving these efforts as part of their Christian Right agenda, and we have to understand those connections.

    AMY GOODMAN: I want to go to Imara Jones. On Thursday, Democracy Now! spoke to the investigative journalist and host of The Anti-Trans Hate Machine podcast about the Alliance Defending Freedom and about how these attacks on reproductive rights, as you’re saying, are connected to the attacks on transgender rights.

    IMARA JONES: A key way in which these two movements are linked is, in one way, very simple to explain. It is the same groups and the same groups of people. We know that groups such as the Family Research Council, the Heritage Foundation and Alliance Defending Freedom have all been on the cutting edge of the anti-abortion movement for decades now. They have just simply taken the tactics that they have learned from the anti-abortion movement and are now applying them to the anti-trans movement. For example, we are seeing doctors who provide gender-affirming care now being targeted by the right with demonstrations outside, with posters, with videos online, being doxxed online, for example.
    It is also the case that we have to remember that for them, this is one fight. There is not a separation between the anti-abortion fight and the fight over trans rights. For them, they are essential in the vision of gender that for them is motivated and deeply rooted by the Bible. They feel that the United States is a white Christian nation, that it was ordained that way both by God and by the Constitution, although the founding fathers disagree with them, but facts don’t matter. What they believe is that women having abortion, people being able to express whom they love through sexual orientation and the ability to be able to live your true gender identity are all key elements in undermining white Christian America. So for them, again, this is one fight. This is not the way that progressives view this. They view trans rights as kind of ancillary, as sort of on the margins, as not being an essential fight, as something that may be good or may not be good. But for the right, this is an essential fight.

    https://www.democracynow.org/2021/12/3/thinking_beyond_roe_amy_littlefield_abortion

    American Dream

    December 3, 2021 at 6:58 pm

    • Andrew+Coates

      December 3, 2021 at 9:04 pm

      • If this were the former Yugoslavia and we were trading nationalist atrocities, where would that get us?

        American Dream

        December 3, 2021 at 9:12 pm

        • Well, I hesitated to make the obvious point that groups such as Woman’s Place are pro-choice on the Abortion issue since it is too obvious. And I can’t see much of a tendency amongst gender critical feminists. or anybody else for the matter, in the UK, to defend an analogue to the religious ideas of those who “feel that the United States is a white Christian nation,”.

          Andrew Coates

          December 3, 2021 at 9:23 pm

          • WOLF and other such TERF sector players, as marginal as they may be in North America, try hard to avoid addressing their own contradictions…

            American Dream

            December 3, 2021 at 9:31 pm

            • The number of sexual orientation hate crimes recorded by police during 2020 increased in both Suffolk and Essex, latest figures have revealed.

              The statistics, which were obtained through Freedom of Information requests by the Press Association, revealed Suffolk police recorded 146 sexual orientation hate crimes in 2019 and 175 in 2020.

              In Essex, the figure rose from 448 in 2019 to 498 in 2020.

              However, transphobic hate crimes in both Suffolk and Essex fell in 2020 compared with 2019.

              In Suffolk, the number dropped from 37 in 2019 to 22 in 2020, while in Essex the figure fell from 102 to 90.

              Violent transphobic hate crime also dropped in both counties in 2020 compared with 2019 – from 24 to 10 in Suffolk and 56 to 45 in Essex.

              LGBT hate crime increased during 2020, figures show

              Michael Steward

              Published: 6:00 AM December 4, 2021

              https://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/crime/sexual-orientation-hate-crime-rise-in-suffolk-8538392

              Andrew+Coates

              December 4, 2021 at 8:58 am

              • Trans Rights is a Class Issue

                On Trans Day of Remembrance (20th November 2021), we remember and honour the lives of trans and gender-diverse people reported murdered in the last 12 months. Trans people around the world face structural, institutional, societal, and direct violence. The violence that trans people face has roots in the policies, laws, and institutional practices of capitalist society.

                We have long known the function of gender roles and gender inequality in capitalism, not just in dividing the working class, but also in ensuring the cultural norms that secure the provision of unpaid domestic and care work. Following from this analysis, we add trans people’s struggle against oppression to a structural understanding of oppression in modern society. Indeed, gender nonconformity poses a threat to those patriarchal structures of gender oppression, whereby capitalism benefits from unpaid work in the home that is still, to varying degrees, divided according to traditionalist gender roles.

                It is clear that transgender and non-binary people’s experience of inequality, discrimination and violence cannot just be explained with reference to individual prejudice. Structural observation shows that we must also pay attention to the role of capitalist exploitation.

                One in three UK employers said in a 2018 survey that they would be less likely to hire a trans person. The retail sector came out even worse, with 47 per cent of employers saying they were unlikely to employ a trans person.

                Research in the US has shown that trans people are twice as likely to be living in poverty as the general population , and that work place discrimination affects more than three quarters of transgender people, who disproportionately face such issues as loss of employment due to discrimination, refusal to hire, privacy violations, and extreme levels of unemployment. Of the reported killings of trans and gender-diverse people whose profession was known, worldwide, 58 per cent were sex workers.

                From this we can see that transgender people are more likely to be working class, and therefore we must conclude that trans rights is a class issue. And the violence that trans people face is a class issue.

                We in the ACG are against all oppressions and inequality both because of the hardship and suffering it causes and because we need to unite as a class if we are to be effective in our struggles. The working class is composed of people of varying sexuality, people with disabilities, those who struggle against the straitjacket of gender categories, people from many ethnic backgrounds.

                Divide and rule has long been used as a tool to subjugate us. We in the ACG seek to unite the working class, because our struggles are worth fighting for together, in an integrated fight to seek revolutionary social change and to create a society in which exploitation is abolished and all resources are held in common.

                http://www.transrespect.org/en/tmm-update-tdor-2021/

                From: https://www.anarchistcommunism.org/2021/11/19/trans-rights-is-a-class-issue/

                American Dream

                December 4, 2021 at 9:35 am

          • All sorts of people know and understand that people cannot change sex. Some of them are right wing, some of them are Christians, some of them are not. Some want to restrict abortion rights, some do not. And so on. If a proposition is true, it makes no difference who agrees with it. It remains true regardless.

            Francis

            December 4, 2021 at 11:22 am

            • All sorts of people are bigots. Some of them are right wing, some of them are Christians, some of them are not. Some want to restrict abortion rights, some do not. And so on. Such is the essence of a Right-Left Convergence.

              American Dream

              December 4, 2021 at 2:15 pm

            • The far right makes explicit that simultaneous attacks on reproductive justice, immigrant rights, transgender lives, voting rights, jobs, and education are not disjointed spasms of hatred but jigsaws composing a coherent vision. Walling borders and policing gender interlocks with the fact that working-class people face declining living standards by attempting to assert everyone’s well-defined place in society and shared identification with America’s billionaires.

              Hours after the anti-choicers’ demonstration, a vibrant abortion rights rally raised the voices of union leaders, health care activists, and veteran fighters for gender justice. Gay Liberation Network leader Andy Thayer urged us not to give up before the battle has been fought and underscored the added urgency of defending abortion lest the right become even more emboldened in their many-sided assault.

              Don’t Give Up on Roe

              Now is not the time to despair, but to fight like our lives depend on it.

              https://rampantmag.com/2021/12/dont-give-up-on-roe/

              American Dream

              December 6, 2021 at 2:28 pm

  4. But, Francis, you’re forgetting the narrative. American Troll is merely speaking his truth and who are we to disagree,?

    Sue r

    December 4, 2021 at 1:45 pm

    • I don’t expect to influence our American friend. But this is a public forum, so I hope to help some people whose brains have not already been eaten by the zombie ideology of gender identity to see how devoid of logic and divorced from reality that ideology is.

      Francis

      December 4, 2021 at 6:22 pm

      • The acceptable genders in this society are man or boy and woman or girl. For most of us a medical professional determines our sex the moment we’re born. If our genitals are ambiguous, they might further determine who we are and alter our bodies to fit the male or female box without our permission. Then most of us have to wear pink or blue and of course many of us know how we’re treated differently as we’re growing up depending on if it’s been determined that we’re male or female. It’s often determined for us what we wear, what we can play, what toys are fit for us, what we should be interested in, what skills we’re encouraged to have, etc. Not only are these things pushed on us, but we might be punished in one way or another if we don’t fit accurately and acceptably into the male or female box. If it’s determined that we’re male, but we’re not masculine enough, we’re called sissies, fags, pussy-whipped, etc. If it’s determined that we’re female, but we’re not feminine enough, we are called bitches, whores, or dykes, or we will never get a boyfriend/married (and therefore have no value). All around us we’re coerced into fitting into the male or female box and we’re taught how we have to fit; we need to fulfill certain requirements starting with our bodies and including our sexuality, how we act, how we look, and what we value. We are made to think there is such a thing as a real man and a real woman, and that we’re supposed to be one or the other. We are virtually imprisoned by gender, though we may have some freedom, if we don’t behave appropriately, there are plenty of prison guards to attempt to put us in our place. To what extent do we choose this arrangement or our place in it? What would gender look like if we had gender self-determination?

        If we’ve agreed that we are socialized to fit into one of the gender boxes, even coerced into it, then perhaps we can agree that we are still without choice in many ways.

        Is this the natural order of things or does power play a role in the division between genders? Think about why white supremacy/racism exists and how the division between white people and other races is reinforced in different ways. Not to imply that white supremacy and patriarchy affect people or function the same way, but comparing the two can offer us some insights into how they are based on power and how they interconnect.

        Gender and Power

        I argue that power has a lot to do with why these social divisions exist and are maintained. In the case of gender, men in general benefit from this social division. Men are given more access, more privilege, and more value. A man must be masculine to climb up the hierarchy. A primary masculine trait that upholds patriarchy is domination. Masculinity does not necessarily involve domination, but domination is a highly valued masculine trait. Patriarchy allows and encourages men in general to control things that are deemed weaker or lower in the hierarchy. Some men even use the model of patriarchal masculinity against others by accusing them of being less than a man (i.e. insults implying homosexuality or womanliness), which is another example of how the gender dichotomy is based on power.

        Being the breadwinner of the family has been seen as man’s proper role, but economic hardship due to racism and capitalism has caused situations in many families of color and poor families where men can’t make adequate money. Patriarchy (and white men colluding with it) has compelled many black men and women alike to defend black men’s manhood in the context of patriarchal racism, which reinforces the divide between men and women. In Killing Rage, bell hooks wrote, “Since most black men (along with women and children) are socialized to equate manhood with justice, the first issue on our agenda has to be individual and collective acknowledgement that justice and the integrity of the race must be defined by the extent to which black males and females have the freedom to be self-determining… [Justice] can emerge only as black males refuse to play the game — refuse patriarchal definitions of manhood.” Some black female authors have said that due to men’s need to defend their masculinity, fighting for the liberation of their race or class is a priority over the fight for women’s liberation (which, being detrimental to a struggle against racism and upholding patriarchy, benefits white men twofold).

        Having to already deal with the patriarchal standards within their own ethnic groups, women of color also experience to different degrees being exoticized, sexualized, and otherwise dehumanized and treated as property by white people as well. It is the experience of many women that we are taught that the ideal womanhood is white economically privileged womanhood. Think about images of women in the media and who is favored and who is not. Think about how having money and time affects a woman’s ability to appropriately perform her femininity.

        Patriarchy basically means rule by men. This works in abstract and systematic ways as well as tangibly between individuals. It is about discrimination and especially about control and devaluation. It manifests as abuse, violence against women, disrespect, control of sexuality and women’s bodies, objectification and beauty standards, and the devaluation of women’s contributions, views and opinions, etc. Many feminists have argued simply that women are the oppressed and men are the oppressors.

        It’s obviously more complex than that. It is certainly (white straight able rich) men that are in control, but some women, queer people, people of color and other minorities are gaining access to some of the privilege in a bigger way than they had before. Do they have to buy into the system to get in? Do they have to dominate others to gain and maintain that position? Certainly, the system that they are privileging from is based on exploitation, greed, competition, imperialism, and hierarchy of social divisions. This system can succeed better by allowing a small number to access some of the wealth and power of the elite (and more people to lesser degrees). This is because the (often false) promise/possibility of wealth and power, or at least more comfortable living (as well as, on the other side of the coin, the reality of working constantly and struggling just to survive) keeps people from resisting or fighting the systems of power and that which hold them up. In addition, scarcity of wealth and power makes people with any privilege feel threatened, causing them to hold onto any power they can, keeping those social hierarchies in place. Capitalism, white supremacy, and patriarchy, with domination as their base, work in interlocking ways.

        Because of the complexity of which patriarchy must be viewed, we must consider patriarchy as not only the rule of men but also the rule of those that are colluding in and practicing what is a value of patriarchal masculinity; domination. Or perhaps we should only use the term patriarchy when we’re talking about the rule of men, and we should use the term gender oppression in other cases (when related to gender). Men aren’t the only ones benefiting from gender oppression. Heterosexual men and women privilege from the oppression of queer people. People who fit into their appropriate gender boxes better than others privilege from the oppression of people who cannot fit into those boxes.

        I argue that gender divisions are, for the most part, created within the context of power and that the border drawn between men and women is a deception. I’m not arguing that there is no difference between men and women, but that gender is more of a spectrum than a dichotomy.

        Perhaps the metaphor of a border is quite useful. In thinking about the U.S./Mexico border, from which I live about 200 miles, we see that this, like many other national borders, is manmade, only to preserve a conceptual difference between places and peoples. There are geographical differences, different people and cultures, but the borders suggest that there is some absolute difference between that which is on either side. This also makes invisible those native and other peoples who live along the border. In the interest of those in power, borders create an “us vs. them” mentality, while the reality of our differences outside of power relationships is trivial.

        Even if you believe that there is some biological or essential difference between men and women that is the cause for how different the ideas of “real woman” and “real man” are, it must be acknowledged that there is a wide variety of ways of being a woman or a man, and that there are people who identify as neither.

        The idea that there is some essential aspect of a woman that makes her different from a man can be argued against to some extent by the huge variety of experience of being a woman. Womanhood varies by race, class, age, sexuality, ability, size, and more. Can you name one thing that all women (and no one else) share in common? If so, does that erase the experience of anyone (anyone who is intersexed or transgender for example)? Essentialism, the idea that there are essential differences between two groups, is a problematic concept. It has been used against some non-white races for the purposes of eugenicist ideas — that people of color had criminal tendencies or less intelligence and so they deserved to be forcibly sterilized. And of course it was the women and not the men who tended to be sterilized. Different people have critiqued gender essentialism and models of womanhood as based on race or class privilege, like in the case of white feminism. “…the hierarchical pattern of race and sex relationships already established in American society merely took a different form under “feminism”: …the form of white women writing books that purport to be about the experience of American women when in fact they concentrate solely on the experience of white women…” wrote bell hooks in Ain’t I a Woman.

        I do not wish to argue over human nature, but rather to put ideas of difference into the context of power, and to bring to the forefront the realities of lives that are marginalized or made invisible.

        Generalizing is easy and it is also easier to think in terms of simple categories. It’s easier to justify social divisions and oppression with simplicity, but humans are far too complex. Why is it that those who transcend gender categories are such a threat (and therefore a target of violence and harassment)? Is it because the act of not conforming enough to patriarchal standards of gender throws a monkey wrench into the systems of control and domination? Gender is socially constructed based on the idea that gender can be split simply into two categories and to expose it as otherwise is to undermine what gender oppression is based on.

        Gender is a Weapon: Coercion, domination and self-determination (2004)
        by sallydarity

        http://anarchalibrary.blogspot.com/2010/09/gender-is-weapon-coercion-domination.html

        American Dream

        December 4, 2021 at 8:01 pm

        • Another example of the muddled thinking which characterises genderwoo. As always, it confuses and conflates sex with gender: maleness with masculinity and femaleness with femininity. People should of course be free to disregard gender stereotypes. Nobody here is disputing that. But whether you are a man or a woman has nothing to do with whether or how far you perform masculinity or femininity. It’s solely about the anatomy and physiology of your reproductive system – i.e., your sex.

          Francis

          December 4, 2021 at 9:13 pm

          • This is a particular ghost that haunts the gender essentialists. My neighborhood is full of queer people and I am proud to say- many of my friends and associates among them- and they come in an ever-changing assortment of gender presentations, too. Never, ever do I hear a one of them going on about I’m a MAN or I’m a WOMAN- that I think is a particular nightmare of the TERF’s and of the reactionary Christians more than anything. Mostly, they are just trying to be themselves in a way that doesn’t fit into the relentless and monotonous script of binary gender that we hear again and again…

            American Dream

            December 4, 2021 at 9:58 pm

          • Francis, I think you are shoehorning the text to fit your particular obsessions. Sallydarity is explicitly talking about gender, differentiating that from sex, although defining neither as quite as pat and absolute as you might like. Did you really read the text?

            American Dream

            December 4, 2021 at 10:21 pm

            • If you read it attentively the writer does conflate the two in places. Confusion is the rule among anarchists, just as it is as among gender identity ideologists. You confuse sex and gender all the time. Who here is arguing for ‘binary gender’?

              Francis

              December 5, 2021 at 1:10 am

              • I wouldn’t say you being very clear or specific at all. In fact it’s hard to tell what exactly you’re arguing for here…

                American Dream

                December 5, 2021 at 6:41 am

                • Recognition of biological realities.

                  Francis

                  December 5, 2021 at 3:35 pm

                  • So there’s no good evidence for these carceral claims?

                    American Dream

                    December 5, 2021 at 3:47 pm

  5. Sex is performative, not a material reality, is that your point? Actually, it does have real world consequences when a male intact sexual offender self declares as a female and is placed in a womens’ prison. Freud managed to define a woman, she is a being without a phallus and is envious of males who possess such an object. I think a lot of this magical thinking reflects the weakness of the Labour movement in America. I don’t recognise the description of socialization given in the passage, even among middle-class people in Britain today it does not hold true. I think part of the reason is the greater stranglehold of pentacostal/evangelical Christianity in America, a negligible influence in this country.

    Sue r

    December 4, 2021 at 10:44 pm

    • Nope, not MY point. I think putting transwomen in women’s prisons is mostly Capital’s solution ‘cos it’s more cost effective, more than anything else. It’s just a low budget solution to the massive rape, sexploitation and et cetera that goes on for gender non-conforming people in the men’s prisons.

      Same principle holds true for many things including locker rooms and toilets more generally- the rulers just don’t want to spend any extra money. For this reason they might rather like the transphobes, as blaming the victim comes in quite handy sometimes…

      American Dream

      December 4, 2021 at 11:25 pm

  6. The point is that these individuals are not women, only self declares women, in all anatomical respects they are still men,. By all means put castrated men in women’s prisons, if they have had their penis removed, they can’t have penetrative sex and that would demonstrate a committment to being a woman. Some forms of castration (the type practised by the Ottomans for example) involve removing the scrotum but leaving the penis. I believe sex is still possible with this type. I’ve been looking into the roots of all this nonsense NSE. Turns out that Scientology played a role, with it’s reprogramming philosophy. Also, the leading prophets, Peggy MacIntosh and Erica Sherover-Marcuse were daughters of two of the richest industrialists of their time in America. As a vulgar Marxist I always apply Occam’s Razor and look at what class interests are served.

    Sue r

    December 5, 2021 at 11:47 am

    • So what is the actual evidence (if any) for a supposed scourge of rape in women’s prisons, presumably much worse than when these folks are in men’s prisons and in what way is their detention even justified if it is for sex work and/or drug crimes etc.?

      American Dream

      December 5, 2021 at 12:04 pm

  7. Can you please rephrase your howl of pain in an understandable form.

    Sue r

    December 5, 2021 at 12:26 pm

    • You know- evidence?- is there much of any to support claims of trans rape perpetrators in women’s prison?

      American Dream

      December 5, 2021 at 12:32 pm

      • Don’t be giving people “homework”

        Boleyn Ali

        December 6, 2021 at 5:08 pm

        • If people make claims, it shouldn’t be too much on a marxist board to ask if they have any substantive evidence to support those claims. If they have little or no evidence, okay, there is a rational and materialist way to critically evaluate their claims.

          American Dream

          December 6, 2021 at 5:15 pm

          • In this particular case, they evaded answering for a while and eventually conceded I think two incidents in Britain, which is not much of a trend and by most accounts a failed implementation of the stated policy. Oh well, so much for that great claim- they didn’t even respond to the part about rape in men’s prisons, which I think is rather telling…

            American Dream

            December 6, 2021 at 8:28 pm

  8. There are a couple of cases in Britain, the most known one involves a transwomen called Karen White, who is a sex offender is assaulted a women in her guise as a man and then pleaded she was really a woman. There are several sexual offence cases is exhibitionism and rape where the perpetrator is a transwomen. These cases lead to the ludicrous statements in court along the line of ‘her penis’. Grahame Lineham, who penned the immortal ‘Father Ted’ and ‘The IT Crowd’ has a substack where he tracks all this nonsense. He has been cancelled for being anti-trans, he tweeted in support of JK Rowling. This led to the breakup of his marriage, so there are consequences. Incidentally, you ask for evidential support on the fact of prison assaults, and yet say gender declarations is does not need to be empirically verified. Why is there a distinction between these two types of knowledge?

    Sue r

    December 5, 2021 at 10:53 pm

    • Okay, so a couple of notorious cases in Britain- how does that compare to sexual assaults in men’s prisons? Do you think the rape of queer people in men’s prisons is somehow more acceptable?

      Also you’re very much misconstruing my position on gender- is that deliberate? If you maintain that I “say gender declarations is does not need to be empirically verified” that would be something in a completely different context and understanding- nothing to with prisons or sexual assaults per se.

      American Dream

      December 5, 2021 at 11:27 pm

  9. Act In Haste, Repent At Leisure

    The toing and froing in this topic proves as a society we are not ready to discuss let alone make a move on a matter that requires so much more understanding.
    We know by scientific observation that life follows two set patterns when built around reproduction. Sadly however science at the time didn’t precede to observe why we see gay, bi or trans traits among species.

    I could surmise a whole lot of ideas but i couldn’t put my finger on one more than the other. All i can say with certainty is they exist, they were naturally created unlike people who subject themselves to cosmetic surgery say.
    Generally the census is if we dont see ourselves fully functioning then it must be an abnormality but how can we say this with a clear heart when we ourselves cant reproduce the building blocks to life and let it run.

    In nature when we say see an animal that cant run that needs to run in order to contribute to the whole that they are often weeded out and banished. This however is a completely different concept if we argue its an abnormality when its a state whereby the individual isn’t impacted physically and not so mentally impaired such as to reduce its contribution.
    Now when we remove irrational behavior such as witchcraft, curses and gods wraith as a few examples, there is no reason from what i can see to why they should be treated differently even with our obvious lack of understanding at this time.

    Sadly and i believe this is solely the cause of the internet to bridge gaps like never before, people have learnt just how a small a fish we really are individually so have set about clambering the net to garnish like minds. As such we have all once again made ourselves tribal and fight to be labelled a recognized brand.
    The problem with branding however is its all pushy advertising and reinforcement there after which is squarely where we all find ourselves.
    Its note worthy to point out im not just talking about the subject we started under.

    The problem isnt sex and gender, the problem is branding and the tribal behavior it causes which ultimately leads to traits such as censorship, deplatforming, cancelled, sacked, blacklisted, ostracize and lets forget imprisonment.

    Doug

    December 6, 2021 at 11:38 am

    • Nature is…complicated- this could be a good holiday gift for the transphobic and/or homophobic:

      BIOLOGICAL EXUBERANCE
      ANIMAL HOMOSEXUALITY AND NATURAL DIVERSITY
      BY BRUCE BAGEMIHL

      A scholarly, exhaustive, and utterly convincing refutation of the notion that human homosexuality is an aberration in nature. Biologist Bagemihl, who formerly taught cognitive science at the University of British Columbia, argues persuasively that our current understanding of biology and evolution is tainted by a heterosexually biased interpretation of animal behavior. He intends as his audience both a scientific and a general readership; he reaches both with his clear and straightforward presentation. Focusing primarily on mammals and birds, and citing only strictly documented case studies, he firmly establishes in part one of this work that homosexual and transgendered behaviors occur widely in the animal world. Bagemihl’s definition of homosexuality includes a diverse range of activities organized under five headings: courtship, affection, sex, pair-bonding, and parenting. He views the challenge before us now as the need to abandon a traditional point of view, whereby “same-sex activity is routinely described as being ‘forced’ on other animals” or is viewed as a substitute for heterosexual coupling that occurs only when no other (i.e., no heterosexual) mate can be found as the first choice of those concerned. A new understanding of animal relationships should therefore also recognize that not all animal sexual activity is aimed at reproduction—we must reconsider traditional explanations of the links between reproduction, evolution, and natural selection. Part two is organized as a thorough reference guide to homosexual behaviors in individual animals and birds, complete with extensive examples and rigorous footnotes. Bagemihl does realize that some among us will never be convinced that homosexuality occurs freely and frequently in nature. But his meticulously gathered, cogently delivered evidence will quash any arguments to the contrary.

      https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/bruce-bagemihl/biological-exuberance/

      American Dream

      December 6, 2021 at 12:33 pm

  10. You’ve shifted the goalposts. No-one (here) is arguing against homosexuality, it is up to the individual. What I, and a lot of other people take exception at is that one can change sex. Infact, sex changes militate against homosexuality which is why a lot of gay people are not particularly supportative. The fact of the matter is, you can do what you like with your secondary sexual characteristics, but you have to be a bone fide woman to have a baby. Eppur se mouve. There is also the small matter of freedom of speech and conscience, which are treated very lightly by the trans crowd.

    Sue r

    December 6, 2021 at 2:56 pm

    • Oh, I get the shape of your particular form of transphobia but I also get the contextual role of Right-Left convergences where anti-Queer sentiment is not so carefully parsed, nor is the effort necessarily made to define it as “feminist”. Both sides of the Atlantic, Trans-exclusionary Feminism seems rather abstracted from a Class Struggle praxis to me. Certainly in North America, there is no credible transphobic working class front that is not incredibly reactionary.

      American Dream

      December 6, 2021 at 3:09 pm

  11. If the comments re not providing evidential support for my accusations of sexual assault in women’s prisons refers to me, I’d like to point out that my pronouns are ‘she/her’. Although on the large side, I am not a plural entity and thus ‘thet’ is not applicable.

    Sue r

    December 7, 2021 at 8:58 am

    • Sure. No offense intended- I often use they/them as a default but I can understand and respect your preference for she/her.

      American Dream

      December 7, 2021 at 9:01 am

  12. ‘they’

    Sue r

    December 7, 2021 at 8:59 am


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: