Words Mean Things: You’ve Been Transgendered!
May 24, 2007
Same Ole “Ball and Crain” Dreams
June 2, 2007

shesus

Until someone puts actual empirical data along side radical feminist doctrine, I refuse to call it a theory. It  isn’t a theory, it’s a religion. And it’s about as believable as there being a man named Jesus Christ that rose from the dead after three days.

If your wondering, THIS is the genesis of my reason to post.

Now, let us pray.

  • Hahahaha! Okay, I’ll play nice!

    *kicks rock and sulks off*

    🙂

  • Hahahaha! Okay, I’ll play nice!

    *kicks rock and sulks off*

    🙂

  • …dude, i dunno. i think everyone wants the last word, though, so i’ll have a go:

    “Do I have to pull over?”

  • …dude, i dunno. i think everyone wants the last word, though, so i’ll have a go:

    “Do I have to pull over?”

  • thanks, SFA, glad to have you.

    ((hugs BA))

  • thanks, SFA, glad to have you.

    ((hugs BA))

  • Belle,

    since I lub you so much, I’ll let you decide whether you think that SFA’s further posting shows that 1. she’s not really attempting to back down (in which case, I’m more than happy to continue pointing out how idiotic her arguments actually are) or 2. she isn’t even sure what the hell she’s doing (which might very well be the case given the fact that she has yet to figure out what she actually believes about anything she’s said on this thread).

  • Belle,

    since I lub you so much, I’ll let you decide whether you think that SFA’s further posting shows that 1. she’s not really attempting to back down (in which case, I’m more than happy to continue pointing out how idiotic her arguments actually are) or 2. she isn’t even sure what the hell she’s doing (which might very well be the case given the fact that she has yet to figure out what she actually believes about anything she’s said on this thread).

  • SFA

    “It is kind of hilarious though that some one would actually sit there and count how many words I wrote.”

    It is kind of hilarious that someone hasn’t heard of Microsoft Word which includes a handy-dandy “word count” feature. 😉

    BD, love your blog. I have bookmarked it for daily reading. You cover all the issues in feminism that I have missed. That Vancouver shelter thing is amazing! Thanks for the links and info.

  • SFA

    “It is kind of hilarious though that some one would actually sit there and count how many words I wrote.”

    It is kind of hilarious that someone hasn’t heard of Microsoft Word which includes a handy-dandy “word count” feature. 😉

    BD, love your blog. I have bookmarked it for daily reading. You cover all the issues in feminism that I have missed. That Vancouver shelter thing is amazing! Thanks for the links and info.

  • Belle,

    you know me. Backing off ain’t what I’m best known fore but I’ll do it just because I like you and Marti. It is kind of hilarious though that some one would actually sit there and count how many words I wrote. I guess COMPREHENSION isn’t some folks specialty.

    (((hugs)))

  • Belle,

    you know me. Backing off ain’t what I’m best known fore but I’ll do it just because I like you and Marti. It is kind of hilarious though that some one would actually sit there and count how many words I wrote. I guess COMPREHENSION isn’t some folks specialty.

    (((hugs)))

  • SFA

    All I can say is, I find it pretty funny when someone types 411 sputtering words, and calls ME a drama queen. 😀

    Oh, and one of my posts was lost yesterday. (?)

    Yall have a nice day!

  • SFA

    All I can say is, I find it pretty funny when someone types 411 sputtering words, and calls ME a drama queen. 😀

    Oh, and one of my posts was lost yesterday. (?)

    Yall have a nice day!

  • Hey, Bint? Ultimately it’s Marti’s party, but y’know, from here, I hear SFA saying: she’s backed off and would like others to do the same. I’m just not entirely sure what you’re trying to get from her at this point, or whether this is a likely avenue for it to happen.

  • Hey, Bint? Ultimately it’s Marti’s party, but y’know, from here, I hear SFA saying: she’s backed off and would like others to do the same. I’m just not entirely sure what you’re trying to get from her at this point, or whether this is a likely avenue for it to happen.

  • Oh yeah, SFA,

    can we please get beyond your drama queen antics? If you’re capable of understanding that the reason why you commented was because you “felt like it”, then did it really never dawn on you that the reason why I commented on what you said was because I “felt like it”?

    Hate your guts? I don’t even know you enough to feel compelled to take you seriously enough to work up a strong dislike.

    If you can understand the fact that I can choose not to read anything that I don’t want to put up with here, then what prevented your wheels and grinds from figuring out that you never needed to read what Marti wrote if it annoyed you or offended you as much as you (repeatedly) claimed?

    While you’re busy complaining about being offended and misunderstood over something you chose to look at, other people are facing REAL reasons for being offended (e.g. transpeople).

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.”
    -Benjamin Franklin

  • Oh yeah, SFA,

    can we please get beyond your drama queen antics? If you’re capable of understanding that the reason why you commented was because you “felt like it”, then did it really never dawn on you that the reason why I commented on what you said was because I “felt like it”?

    Hate your guts? I don’t even know you enough to feel compelled to take you seriously enough to work up a strong dislike.

    If you can understand the fact that I can choose not to read anything that I don’t want to put up with here, then what prevented your wheels and grinds from figuring out that you never needed to read what Marti wrote if it annoyed you or offended you as much as you (repeatedly) claimed?

    While you’re busy complaining about being offended and misunderstood over something you chose to look at, other people are facing REAL reasons for being offended (e.g. transpeople).

    “We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.”
    -Benjamin Franklin

  • 1.Here you claim that you are the one who is offended:
    “And transadvocates who make fun of my religion are just as offensive to me, as those people on that thread.”

    Then here you claim that you were only talking about someone else’s reaction to this post:
    I was talking only abouthis reaction to the graphic, which I am still hearing about.

    2.Here you claim that this involves the offended feelings of “believing Christians” other than yourself:
    “…the proper response to being offended (by Twisty’s thread) is NOT to gratuitously offend MORE people who might otherwise have been sympathetic.”

    And here is where you claim that you weren’t attempting to make any claims about what other Christians would feel about Marti’s graphic:
    “I only represent myself, and no one else.”

    3.Here you claim that you’re making a logical point:
    I AM SAYING LOGICALLY, that the proper response to being offended (by Twisty’s thread) is NOT to gratuitously offend MORE people who might otherwise have been sympathetic.

    And here is where you claimed that logic doesn’t really matter to you:
    “I never cared much for logic, so you’re probably right.”

    Perhaps you might want to take a break and get your story straight. Evidently, YOU are the one you’re fighting with, not me. You can’t even decide what you want to claim here.

    “He who will not reason is a bigot,
    He who cannot is a fool.”
    -William Drummond

  • 1.Here you claim that you are the one who is offended:
    “And transadvocates who make fun of my religion are just as offensive to me, as those people on that thread.”

    Then here you claim that you were only talking about someone else’s reaction to this post:
    I was talking only abouthis reaction to the graphic, which I am still hearing about.

    2.Here you claim that this involves the offended feelings of “believing Christians” other than yourself:
    “…the proper response to being offended (by Twisty’s thread) is NOT to gratuitously offend MORE people who might otherwise have been sympathetic.”

    And here is where you claim that you weren’t attempting to make any claims about what other Christians would feel about Marti’s graphic:
    “I only represent myself, and no one else.”

    3.Here you claim that you’re making a logical point:
    I AM SAYING LOGICALLY, that the proper response to being offended (by Twisty’s thread) is NOT to gratuitously offend MORE people who might otherwise have been sympathetic.

    And here is where you claimed that logic doesn’t really matter to you:
    “I never cared much for logic, so you’re probably right.”

    Perhaps you might want to take a break and get your story straight. Evidently, YOU are the one you’re fighting with, not me. You can’t even decide what you want to claim here.

    “He who will not reason is a bigot,
    He who cannot is a fool.”
    -William Drummond

  • SFA

    1) I am no longer offended, now that I have read some of Marti’s blog.

    2) I only represent myself, and no one else.

    3) I commented because I felt like it. If Marti dislikes my comments, I have no objection to their removal.

    4) If you do not understand or like what I have already written, sorry about that. You are free to hate my guts all you like. If I annoy you so much, stop reading.

    5) “That’s just illogical.”

    I never cared much for logic, so you’re probably right.

    Logic is little tweeting bird chirping in meadow. Logic is wreath of pretty flowers… which smell bad!–Mr. Spock in the Harry Mudd episode.

  • SFA

    1) I am no longer offended, now that I have read some of Marti’s blog.

    2) I only represent myself, and no one else.

    3) I commented because I felt like it. If Marti dislikes my comments, I have no objection to their removal.

    4) If you do not understand or like what I have already written, sorry about that. You are free to hate my guts all you like. If I annoy you so much, stop reading.

    5) “That’s just illogical.”

    I never cared much for logic, so you’re probably right.

    Logic is little tweeting bird chirping in meadow. Logic is wreath of pretty flowers… which smell bad!–Mr. Spock in the Harry Mudd episode.

  • SFA,

    perhaps you might want to stick to responding to what’s written before you instead of assuming what I would classify you as. So you got e-mails about Marti’s graphic. So what! Why not simply tell them to take it up with Marti?

    The issue is not whether Marti intended any “ill will”. My issue was with the REACTION you had to it. It was all about how *gasp* offended you were and how you didn’t need to deal with this. Well, no one is forcing you. You bring up all of this stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with Marti’s thread and then you blame the people here for your emotions. That’s just illogical.

    Pointing out what’s problematic about your statements isn’t having a fight. It’s addressing what you said. If you didn’t want anyone to address it, then why in heaven’s name did you comment on this post in the first place?

    Look, you don’t represent all “believing Christians”. You don’t represent all people in the Bible Belt. You don’t represent anyone but yourself. So coming here with all of this nonsense about where you live and how poor, poor you has had to voluntarily endure SIX WHOLE E-MAILS about it, is just silly (at best). It isn’t like you’re actually up there on the cross with Jesus, are you? Good grief!

    Some people are just so dern determined to try and make other people responsible for their choices. If you don’t like people e-mailing you about Marti’s post, then just BLOCK THEM. It’s that simple. You could have done that in the first place and skipped the whine-and-cheese-fest you came here with. It had nothing to do with the topic of this post. Is that really difficult for you to comprehend?

  • SFA,

    perhaps you might want to stick to responding to what’s written before you instead of assuming what I would classify you as. So you got e-mails about Marti’s graphic. So what! Why not simply tell them to take it up with Marti?

    The issue is not whether Marti intended any “ill will”. My issue was with the REACTION you had to it. It was all about how *gasp* offended you were and how you didn’t need to deal with this. Well, no one is forcing you. You bring up all of this stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with Marti’s thread and then you blame the people here for your emotions. That’s just illogical.

    Pointing out what’s problematic about your statements isn’t having a fight. It’s addressing what you said. If you didn’t want anyone to address it, then why in heaven’s name did you comment on this post in the first place?

    Look, you don’t represent all “believing Christians”. You don’t represent all people in the Bible Belt. You don’t represent anyone but yourself. So coming here with all of this nonsense about where you live and how poor, poor you has had to voluntarily endure SIX WHOLE E-MAILS about it, is just silly (at best). It isn’t like you’re actually up there on the cross with Jesus, are you? Good grief!

    Some people are just so dern determined to try and make other people responsible for their choices. If you don’t like people e-mailing you about Marti’s post, then just BLOCK THEM. It’s that simple. You could have done that in the first place and skipped the whine-and-cheese-fest you came here with. It had nothing to do with the topic of this post. Is that really difficult for you to comprehend?

  • SFA

    Believe it or not, I am old enough to remember when trans-women were thought to be the feminist vanguard of a sort, women who had consciously renounced male privilege. Sort of like the White Panther Party and John Sinclair renounced white privilege, or tried to.

    It’s like this history has been buried or forgotten. Does anyone else remember?

    The only place I have seen this acknowledged (satirically, not respectfully) was in the novel The World According to Garp, and the character of Roberta.

  • SFA

    Believe it or not, I am old enough to remember when trans-women were thought to be the feminist vanguard of a sort, women who had consciously renounced male privilege. Sort of like the White Panther Party and John Sinclair renounced white privilege, or tried to.

    It’s like this history has been buried or forgotten. Does anyone else remember?

    The only place I have seen this acknowledged (satirically, not respectfully) was in the novel The World According to Garp, and the character of Roberta.

  • SFA

    Thanks so much to everyone for the links. These are great! According to what I am reading here, I was always more “socialist feminist” than “radical” feminist. In the areas I have lived, though, “radical” was always taken to mean that you were basically what is now called “socialist feminist.”

    Maybe my basic understanding was always “off” or there is some revisionism happening here?

    Marti, I do see your point then, in that the most dogmatic individuals compete to define the “real” Christians, and now the “real” feminists. Dogmatism everywhere! 🙁

  • SFA

    Thanks so much to everyone for the links. These are great! According to what I am reading here, I was always more “socialist feminist” than “radical” feminist. In the areas I have lived, though, “radical” was always taken to mean that you were basically what is now called “socialist feminist.”

    Maybe my basic understanding was always “off” or there is some revisionism happening here?

    Marti, I do see your point then, in that the most dogmatic individuals compete to define the “real” Christians, and now the “real” feminists. Dogmatism everywhere! 🙁

  • There’s a new book called Trans/Forming Femininisms that came out relatively recently edited by Krista Scott Dixon.

    I did a podcast with her and one of the contributors.

  • There’s a new book called Trans/Forming Femininisms that came out relatively recently edited by Krista Scott Dixon.

    I did a podcast with her and one of the contributors.

  • >yet Heart keeps saying “this is radical feminism”. It is?>

    Well–on the one hand, there’s equally noxious and spuriously-rationalized crap (by my lights) in the works of more well-known radical feminists. Janice Raymond and Sheila Jeffreys come to mind, among others.

    on the other hand–you know, just because Fox keeps saying it’s “fair and balanced” doesn’t make it so, either.

    There are a few subsets w/in radical feminism, and places where it dovetails off into other stuff. Heart is more of a “cultural feminist” than anything else. The early radical feminists, some of ’em at least, were closer to what now tends to go by “socialist feminism.” And radical women of color tend to diverge from white radical feminism in a number of ways.

    there’s also a way in which to buy most of the stuff about “patriarchy” as the uber-System and still not be anti-trans or anti-kink or even anti-sex work (the classic bugaboos); at any rate I know at least one TG professional sub who considers herself a radical feminist. she tends to stay the hell out of venues where people like Heart or Twisty dominate, though, i.e. pretty much anywhere where self-ID’d radical feminists tend to congregate, so she’s probably more of a renegade than anything else. still, if you buy the idea of a “matriarchal” system that includes y’know bonobo-like polymorphous sexuality, temple prostitutes (that’s her bag), and transgendered goddesses and/or consorts/worshippers (Cybele, say), then well there you are. still very anti-patriarchy in the Yahweh sense.

  • >yet Heart keeps saying “this is radical feminism”. It is?>

    Well–on the one hand, there’s equally noxious and spuriously-rationalized crap (by my lights) in the works of more well-known radical feminists. Janice Raymond and Sheila Jeffreys come to mind, among others.

    on the other hand–you know, just because Fox keeps saying it’s “fair and balanced” doesn’t make it so, either.

    There are a few subsets w/in radical feminism, and places where it dovetails off into other stuff. Heart is more of a “cultural feminist” than anything else. The early radical feminists, some of ’em at least, were closer to what now tends to go by “socialist feminism.” And radical women of color tend to diverge from white radical feminism in a number of ways.

    there’s also a way in which to buy most of the stuff about “patriarchy” as the uber-System and still not be anti-trans or anti-kink or even anti-sex work (the classic bugaboos); at any rate I know at least one TG professional sub who considers herself a radical feminist. she tends to stay the hell out of venues where people like Heart or Twisty dominate, though, i.e. pretty much anywhere where self-ID’d radical feminists tend to congregate, so she’s probably more of a renegade than anything else. still, if you buy the idea of a “matriarchal” system that includes y’know bonobo-like polymorphous sexuality, temple prostitutes (that’s her bag), and transgendered goddesses and/or consorts/worshippers (Cybele, say), then well there you are. still very anti-patriarchy in the Yahweh sense.

  • CG: yeah, it’s quasi-mystical bullshit, and no, I can’t imagine Twisty has much truck with -that-, whatever else about her; she’s far more Shulamith Firestone than Z Budapest. (and yes, I dig womens’ spirituality/paganism/spirituality too, but not when it starts sounding suspiciously like the sort of 19th century “science” that was later used to justify all sorts of terrible things)

    but yeah, and, that’s totally feminist. “Biology IS destiny!” uh huh.

  • CG: yeah, it’s quasi-mystical bullshit, and no, I can’t imagine Twisty has much truck with -that-, whatever else about her; she’s far more Shulamith Firestone than Z Budapest. (and yes, I dig womens’ spirituality/paganism/spirituality too, but not when it starts sounding suspiciously like the sort of 19th century “science” that was later used to justify all sorts of terrible things)

    but yeah, and, that’s totally feminist. “Biology IS destiny!” uh huh.

  • oh, per transfeminism qua transfeminism: try

    http://www.humboldt.edu/~mpw1/Feminism/

  • oh, per transfeminism qua transfeminism: try

    http://www.humboldt.edu/~mpw1/Feminism/

  • Well, I actually just posted a little Cliff Notes as-I-see-’em over to my spot…

    http://fetchmemyaxe.blogspot.com/2007/06/sister-mary-cisgender-explains-it-all.html

    what else is going on with Heart in particular, I suspect, is that her experience with actual transpeople has been colord by encounters with some seriously deranged and hostile individuals. one of whose dramas I actually got briefly sucked into, so I can sort of understand at least feeling burned by -that person.-

    but, really not much sympathy: she’s smarter than that, or should be, that’s bigot 101,
    would that be excusable hasty generalization for any other group?

    besides which: hello, what kind of people do you -think- are gonna be trying to crash MichFest? who’s desperate to belong to a club that won’t have them as a member, for fuck’s sake? not healthy people. the -real- question is why the gated community in the damn first place?

  • Well, I actually just posted a little Cliff Notes as-I-see-’em over to my spot…

    http://fetchmemyaxe.blogspot.com/2007/06/sister-mary-cisgender-explains-it-all.html

    what else is going on with Heart in particular, I suspect, is that her experience with actual transpeople has been colord by encounters with some seriously deranged and hostile individuals. one of whose dramas I actually got briefly sucked into, so I can sort of understand at least feeling burned by -that person.-

    but, really not much sympathy: she’s smarter than that, or should be, that’s bigot 101,
    would that be excusable hasty generalization for any other group?

    besides which: hello, what kind of people do you -think- are gonna be trying to crash MichFest? who’s desperate to belong to a club that won’t have them as a member, for fuck’s sake? not healthy people. the -real- question is why the gated community in the damn first place?

  • curiousgyrl

    Yes,(from what I can tell) Heart is saying trans people cant be feminists, but only allies, though I am not sure that even argument is in good faith.

    “IS there a trans/feminist tutorial?”

    I think we’re still inventing trans/feminism, but Kate Bornstien’s My Gender Workbook is a good start, and then we should all read Angela Davis and the old Bell Hooks–black feminists in general make great relevant arguments about difference within feminism and about how feminism has to change to understand oppression in ways that are relevant to people who are multiply oppressed and oppressed in different ways–which is, end the end, all of us.

  • curiousgyrl

    Yes,(from what I can tell) Heart is saying trans people cant be feminists, but only allies, though I am not sure that even argument is in good faith.

    “IS there a trans/feminist tutorial?”

    I think we’re still inventing trans/feminism, but Kate Bornstien’s My Gender Workbook is a good start, and then we should all read Angela Davis and the old Bell Hooks–black feminists in general make great relevant arguments about difference within feminism and about how feminism has to change to understand oppression in ways that are relevant to people who are multiply oppressed and oppressed in different ways–which is, end the end, all of us.

  • SFA

    Typo: I can live WITH that.

    And I can. It has taken many years, but now I can.

    Heart was a fundie? Interesting! It’s hard to break away totally from the fundie mindset, and I don’t think she has. It’s an APPROACH to everything, like you say, that everything is either/or. Very difficult to overcome, and I don’t think she has checked her motives in this discussion. Why does she care what the transpeople do, if they are as deluded as she seems to think? See, there’s the fundie talking.

    Is she saying transpeople can’t be feminist?
    This discussion is confusing. Is there a trans/feminist tutorial?

  • SFA

    Typo: I can live WITH that.

    And I can. It has taken many years, but now I can.

    Heart was a fundie? Interesting! It’s hard to break away totally from the fundie mindset, and I don’t think she has. It’s an APPROACH to everything, like you say, that everything is either/or. Very difficult to overcome, and I don’t think she has checked her motives in this discussion. Why does she care what the transpeople do, if they are as deluded as she seems to think? See, there’s the fundie talking.

    Is she saying transpeople can’t be feminist?
    This discussion is confusing. Is there a trans/feminist tutorial?

  • SFA

    “If you think that talking about what the Bible says and what Christianity teaches is just “getting all theoretical” then why did you think it was even relevent to mention that you are a “believing Christian”?”

    My reference to Christianity was about my discussion with another person. THAT PERSON would not classify ME as a “believing Christian”–as apparently you would not, either. (Whatever. I can live that.) I was talking only abouthis reaction to the graphic, which I am still hearing about. In fact, I got no less than 6 emails about it. I expect more.

    Marti has clarified that no ill will was intended, and I am satisfied with that. Why are you determined to fight?

    Windbag is right. Good God! And pardon expression! 😛

    Sex is in the cells? I can’t really understand why these views are considered feminist, yet Heart keeps saying “this is radical feminism”. It is? If so, I’m in trouble, because I didn’t know any of that.

  • SFA

    “If you think that talking about what the Bible says and what Christianity teaches is just “getting all theoretical” then why did you think it was even relevent to mention that you are a “believing Christian”?”

    My reference to Christianity was about my discussion with another person. THAT PERSON would not classify ME as a “believing Christian”–as apparently you would not, either. (Whatever. I can live that.) I was talking only abouthis reaction to the graphic, which I am still hearing about. In fact, I got no less than 6 emails about it. I expect more.

    Marti has clarified that no ill will was intended, and I am satisfied with that. Why are you determined to fight?

    Windbag is right. Good God! And pardon expression! 😛

    Sex is in the cells? I can’t really understand why these views are considered feminist, yet Heart keeps saying “this is radical feminism”. It is? If so, I’m in trouble, because I didn’t know any of that.

  • curiousgyrl

    I need to stay away from that stupid thread: apparently “Sex is in the cells”:

    Imagine–a young, idealistic radical feminist seeks donor sperm to start a family with her radical feminist lover. She is unable to conceive. In the process of determining why, her doctors discover that her chromosome is xy or xxy or someother thing, and that is why she is infertile.

    I suppose the story would have to end with our heroine realizing that she had been unintentionally colonizing and oppressing her local women’s circle, bow out and join the oppressor team.

  • curiousgyrl

    I need to stay away from that stupid thread: apparently “Sex is in the cells”:

    Imagine–a young, idealistic radical feminist seeks donor sperm to start a family with her radical feminist lover. She is unable to conceive. In the process of determining why, her doctors discover that her chromosome is xy or xxy or someother thing, and that is why she is infertile.

    I suppose the story would have to end with our heroine realizing that she had been unintentionally colonizing and oppressing her local women’s circle, bow out and join the oppressor team.

  • BA: specifically she’s in Greenville. Bob Jones University.

    beyond that, not being a Christian, I bow out of that thread semi-gracefully.

  • BA: specifically she’s in Greenville. Bob Jones University.

    beyond that, not being a Christian, I bow out of that thread semi-gracefully.

  • >I think her take is a pretty dark and nihilistic one. Which is why its a fun as criticism and internet reading, but not so good as politics. which gets back to your “real lives” element.>

    I agree, except I stopped having fun a long time ago. I get why people enjoy reading her–she’s funny, she talks about food and bugs, she’s great for withering someone or something she -doesn’t- like; if that coincides with your own pet hates you’re in good company. Some people are apparently able to just sort of gloss over the nastier and just plain crazy shit. I can accept that now, I guess. I do think that the combination of that nihilism and the “radical” politics it’s cloaked in (actually I think she’s deeply reactionary) combined with her laissez faire (at best) moderating policy and her (yeah I do think so) tendency to troll for the sake of it makes for a bad atmosphere. and I particularly didn’t/don’t like it when I felt it was spilling over into the rest of the blogosphere.

    and/or, I suppose, people chalk the nihilism, among other things, up to her cancer, and cut slack accordingly.

    I’m not so sure that basic worldview doesn’t predate the cancer, though, although i’m sure it’s colored it considerably. She’s…something doesn’t connect. It comes through both in the philosophy and the way she interacts, or rather doesn’t. I think it’s antithetical to what she supposedly stands for in many ways, actually. That’s true for a lot of people I suppose. Bottom line, I don’t think you can be a “revolutionary” and an elitist misanthrope at the same time. At least, not to any good end. Just as well it’s all a cutesy game I suppose, but…ech.

  • >I think her take is a pretty dark and nihilistic one. Which is why its a fun as criticism and internet reading, but not so good as politics. which gets back to your “real lives” element.>

    I agree, except I stopped having fun a long time ago. I get why people enjoy reading her–she’s funny, she talks about food and bugs, she’s great for withering someone or something she -doesn’t- like; if that coincides with your own pet hates you’re in good company. Some people are apparently able to just sort of gloss over the nastier and just plain crazy shit. I can accept that now, I guess. I do think that the combination of that nihilism and the “radical” politics it’s cloaked in (actually I think she’s deeply reactionary) combined with her laissez faire (at best) moderating policy and her (yeah I do think so) tendency to troll for the sake of it makes for a bad atmosphere. and I particularly didn’t/don’t like it when I felt it was spilling over into the rest of the blogosphere.

    and/or, I suppose, people chalk the nihilism, among other things, up to her cancer, and cut slack accordingly.

    I’m not so sure that basic worldview doesn’t predate the cancer, though, although i’m sure it’s colored it considerably. She’s…something doesn’t connect. It comes through both in the philosophy and the way she interacts, or rather doesn’t. I think it’s antithetical to what she supposedly stands for in many ways, actually. That’s true for a lot of people I suppose. Bottom line, I don’t think you can be a “revolutionary” and an elitist misanthrope at the same time. At least, not to any good end. Just as well it’s all a cutesy game I suppose, but…ech.

  • SFA,

    You’re in the Bible Belt. So what? I’m down here in Louisiana and it gets no more religious than here. South Carolina doesn’t even compare. As a matter of fact, Louisiana ranks number one when it comes to the percentage of people who attend worship services on a weekly basis. Where does your state rank?

    We are ALL trying to deal, my dear. This is serious for all of us. If you think that talking about what the Bible says and what Christianity teaches is just “getting all theoretical” then why did you think it was even relevent to mention that you are a “believing Christian”?

    If you feel like others are out of touch, perhaps it’s because you aren’t focusing on your own shortcomings…but then again, one would actually have to BELIEVE in Christianity to see any reason why removing the rafter from your own eye is far more important than pointing out other people’s splinters.

  • SFA,

    You’re in the Bible Belt. So what? I’m down here in Louisiana and it gets no more religious than here. South Carolina doesn’t even compare. As a matter of fact, Louisiana ranks number one when it comes to the percentage of people who attend worship services on a weekly basis. Where does your state rank?

    We are ALL trying to deal, my dear. This is serious for all of us. If you think that talking about what the Bible says and what Christianity teaches is just “getting all theoretical” then why did you think it was even relevent to mention that you are a “believing Christian”?

    If you feel like others are out of touch, perhaps it’s because you aren’t focusing on your own shortcomings…but then again, one would actually have to BELIEVE in Christianity to see any reason why removing the rafter from your own eye is far more important than pointing out other people’s splinters.

  • …and, I gotta say it, the way she and some of ’em talk about transfolk reminds me -very much- of the way certain “compassionate” evangelicals talk about Teh Gay.

    “you can change your sexual desires and/or gender expression if you really wanted to–and you -should-”

    “there are men, and there are women, and ne’er the twain shall…”

    “-We’re- not the ones who are discriminating, -they- are, with their -agenda-, they’re -pushy-, they -frighten- us, they’re just -ruining everything-, and things used to be so much better before those other people who should know better started letting -them- into the Sacred Treehouse…”

  • …and, I gotta say it, the way she and some of ’em talk about transfolk reminds me -very much- of the way certain “compassionate” evangelicals talk about Teh Gay.

    “you can change your sexual desires and/or gender expression if you really wanted to–and you -should-”

    “there are men, and there are women, and ne’er the twain shall…”

    “-We’re- not the ones who are discriminating, -they- are, with their -agenda-, they’re -pushy-, they -frighten- us, they’re just -ruining everything-, and things used to be so much better before those other people who should know better started letting -them- into the Sacred Treehouse…”

  • oh yeah, speaking of fundamentalists: she used to be one. a rather prominent one, as these things go, in the homeschooling movement. I keep getting the impression that’s true for a number of that bunch tbh. (i mean the fundamentalist background, not the former rising star in homeschooling thing). the black and white worldview as well as the insistence on dogma uber alles and even certain specifics wrt the worldview all feel pretty familiar anyway…

  • oh yeah, speaking of fundamentalists: she used to be one. a rather prominent one, as these things go, in the homeschooling movement. I keep getting the impression that’s true for a number of that bunch tbh. (i mean the fundamentalist background, not the former rising star in homeschooling thing). the black and white worldview as well as the insistence on dogma uber alles and even certain specifics wrt the worldview all feel pretty familiar anyway…

  • eh, just check the back of your nearest cereal box, it should do just as well.

    Heart is one of the biggest windbags I have ever, ever seen.

  • eh, just check the back of your nearest cereal box, it should do just as well.

    Heart is one of the biggest windbags I have ever, ever seen.

  • eh, just check the back of your nearest cereal box, it should do just as well.

    Heart is one of the biggest windbags I have ever, ever seen.

  • SFA

    Belledame, well, that’s a good question. I don’t know.

    That thread continues to amaze. I think I need to study–I don’t understand half of what they’re saying about (radical) feminism!

  • SFA

    Belledame, well, that’s a good question. I don’t know.

    That thread continues to amaze. I think I need to study–I don’t understand half of what they’re saying about (radical) feminism!

  • I mean, I’d like to see the person who sent the example of “Godless transpeople;” was this -really- someone who you think you had a chance of getting through to, were it not for this? You really think this person couldn’t find other evidence to bolster their position? You think they weren’t -looking?-

  • I mean, I’d like to see the person who sent the example of “Godless transpeople;” was this -really- someone who you think you had a chance of getting through to, were it not for this? You really think this person couldn’t find other evidence to bolster their position? You think they weren’t -looking?-

  • and, my condolences for sharing space with the legendary BoJo.

    honestly, I’m not sure -what- it would take to make headway with some of those people. I mean, Mel White did his best with Falwell, but…

  • and, my condolences for sharing space with the legendary BoJo.

    honestly, I’m not sure -what- it would take to make headway with some of those people. I mean, Mel White did his best with Falwell, but…

  • and, R.I.P Sean Kennedy. bastards.

  • and, R.I.P Sean Kennedy. bastards.

  • and anyway, who’s calling who counter-revolutionary, now? personally i prefer “imperialist pig-dog lackeys,” it has more style.

  • and anyway, who’s calling who counter-revolutionary, now? personally i prefer “imperialist pig-dog lackeys,” it has more style.

  • Well, I agree that hate speech contributes to such horrors; but, I tend to think that it’s the constant gay-bashing from churches more than the occasional snark at churches from gays that’s the root of the problem.

    I don’t particularly love religion bashing for the sake of it; but as Marti and also Bint have noted, I don’t know that this qualifies as such. It’s somewhat irreverent for an orthodox believer, sure; but frankly…

    shrug. you know, I don’t see the equivalent of telling someone who’s acting martyred “get down off that cross, someone needs the wood” as the same as, say, “Piss Christ.” I mean, if someone’s offended, they’re offended, and I get that it’s tough sledding trying to talk to some of these people (the extreme right wingers); but I’m sorry, I can’t believe something like this is gonna make or break the difference between someone extending basic human, basic -Christian- compassion for another person’s right to frickin’ -exist-, or not.

    “You made fun of my beliefs, so now I’m not going to speak up for you even if you get legally discriminated, raped or killed” is not something i feel particularly inclined to cater to. Maybe it’s the only way toward realpolitik in some places; but, I don’t think -someone’s personal blog- is one of those places. I don’t.

  • Well, I agree that hate speech contributes to such horrors; but, I tend to think that it’s the constant gay-bashing from churches more than the occasional snark at churches from gays that’s the root of the problem.

    I don’t particularly love religion bashing for the sake of it; but as Marti and also Bint have noted, I don’t know that this qualifies as such. It’s somewhat irreverent for an orthodox believer, sure; but frankly…

    shrug. you know, I don’t see the equivalent of telling someone who’s acting martyred “get down off that cross, someone needs the wood” as the same as, say, “Piss Christ.” I mean, if someone’s offended, they’re offended, and I get that it’s tough sledding trying to talk to some of these people (the extreme right wingers); but I’m sorry, I can’t believe something like this is gonna make or break the difference between someone extending basic human, basic -Christian- compassion for another person’s right to frickin’ -exist-, or not.

    “You made fun of my beliefs, so now I’m not going to speak up for you even if you get legally discriminated, raped or killed” is not something i feel particularly inclined to cater to. Maybe it’s the only way toward realpolitik in some places; but, I don’t think -someone’s personal blog- is one of those places. I don’t.

  • SFA

    Belledame222, I like what you say.

    The name of the young man is Sean Kennedy, murdered here in Greenville, SC on May 16th. He was only 20 years old.

    I find myself wondering how much the general atmosphere of hate speech people engage in around here contributed to this. Just like the speech of people like Mar Iguana. Words are weapons and ideas really do have consequences.

    You can’t just declare a group of people “counter-revolutionary” (or sinful, or whatever it is this week) without some very unpleasant fallout.

  • SFA

    Belledame222, I like what you say.

    The name of the young man is Sean Kennedy, murdered here in Greenville, SC on May 16th. He was only 20 years old.

    I find myself wondering how much the general atmosphere of hate speech people engage in around here contributed to this. Just like the speech of people like Mar Iguana. Words are weapons and ideas really do have consequences.

    You can’t just declare a group of people “counter-revolutionary” (or sinful, or whatever it is this week) without some very unpleasant fallout.

  • Really? You should tell that to Aaron Hall. No, wait, he’s dead.

    Obviously you don’t know much about Indiana.

  • Really? You should tell that to Aaron Hall. No, wait, he’s dead.

    Obviously you don’t know much about Indiana.

  • SFA

    Indiana ain’t South Carolina, or Bob Jones University, by a very long shot.

    But I won’t argue with you further.

  • SFA

    Indiana ain’t South Carolina, or Bob Jones University, by a very long shot.

    But I won’t argue with you further.

  • “I would say the second, personally. I don’t like the jokey jokey aspect. Martyrdom isn’t funny.”

    There’s nothing funny about it. It wasn’t meant to be funny, it was meant to be a link between Christianity and feminism.

    “This graphic was then held up to me as an example of Godless transpeople, which pissed me off in context of the discussion. I didn’t need that, y’know?”

    So everyone should post to your invisible agenda? If you’ve read my post that was written today, you’d see I’m far from a pissed off atheist. I’d venture to say I know more about Christianity that 80 percent of the Christian laity.

    “Many of us are in the Bible Belt, trying to deal.”

    Hmmm, maybe because I live in Indiana, I’m out of touch. *smirk*

    “This is serious for me; this is about people’s lives, and getting all theoretical about the graphic shows me that many of you are out of touch with what is at stake. Or at least it feels that way to me.”

    If you follow my blog at all, you’ll know I’m a board member of NTAC, I’m an activist, and a blogger.

    This isn’t theoretical for me, it’s my life. My son is gay, my step-son is bisexual, and I’m bisexual and trans. You obviously don’t get the point of my post at all. It has to do WITH radfem not being theory at all.

  • “I would say the second, personally. I don’t like the jokey jokey aspect. Martyrdom isn’t funny.”

    There’s nothing funny about it. It wasn’t meant to be funny, it was meant to be a link between Christianity and feminism.

    “This graphic was then held up to me as an example of Godless transpeople, which pissed me off in context of the discussion. I didn’t need that, y’know?”

    So everyone should post to your invisible agenda? If you’ve read my post that was written today, you’d see I’m far from a pissed off atheist. I’d venture to say I know more about Christianity that 80 percent of the Christian laity.

    “Many of us are in the Bible Belt, trying to deal.”

    Hmmm, maybe because I live in Indiana, I’m out of touch. *smirk*

    “This is serious for me; this is about people’s lives, and getting all theoretical about the graphic shows me that many of you are out of touch with what is at stake. Or at least it feels that way to me.”

    If you follow my blog at all, you’ll know I’m a board member of NTAC, I’m an activist, and a blogger.

    This isn’t theoretical for me, it’s my life. My son is gay, my step-son is bisexual, and I’m bisexual and trans. You obviously don’t get the point of my post at all. It has to do WITH radfem not being theory at all.

  • SFA

    “Is it because it shows a woman crucified or is it because she is showing a saint out of context?”

    I would say the second, personally. I don’t like the jokey jokey aspect. Martyrdom isn’t funny.

    Bint, I am involved presently in a very LOOOOONG discussion (not unlike that weird thread) with someone about “the trans question”–we are now involved in that phase wherein we send links back and forth to each other. Twisty’s was one of these, and then the link to this blog was from there. This graphic was then held up to me as an example of Godless transpeople, which pissed me off in context of the discussion. I didn’t need that, y’know?

    Many of us are in the Bible Belt, trying to deal. Two weeks ago, we had a gay-bashing murder incident locally. This is serious for me; this is about people’s lives, and getting all theoretical about the graphic shows me that many of you are out of touch with what is at stake. Or at least it feels that way to me.

  • SFA

    “Is it because it shows a woman crucified or is it because she is showing a saint out of context?”

    I would say the second, personally. I don’t like the jokey jokey aspect. Martyrdom isn’t funny.

    Bint, I am involved presently in a very LOOOOONG discussion (not unlike that weird thread) with someone about “the trans question”–we are now involved in that phase wherein we send links back and forth to each other. Twisty’s was one of these, and then the link to this blog was from there. This graphic was then held up to me as an example of Godless transpeople, which pissed me off in context of the discussion. I didn’t need that, y’know?

    Many of us are in the Bible Belt, trying to deal. Two weeks ago, we had a gay-bashing murder incident locally. This is serious for me; this is about people’s lives, and getting all theoretical about the graphic shows me that many of you are out of touch with what is at stake. Or at least it feels that way to me.

  • curiousgyrl

    that was in response to “smart to what end?”

  • curiousgyrl

    >

    Basically I think to no end. I think her take is a pretty dark and nihilistic one. Which is why its a fun as criticism and internet reading, but not so good as politics. which gets back to your “real lives” element.

    I don’t think Twisty is trying to do politics but that being so popular puts her in the position of having to do it anyway. So, the end result is that I love the blog, though I get why the approach can be really infuriating.

  • curiousgyrl

    >

    Basically I think to no end. I think her take is a pretty dark and nihilistic one. Which is why its a fun as criticism and internet reading, but not so good as politics. which gets back to your “real lives” element.

    I don’t think Twisty is trying to do politics but that being so popular puts her in the position of having to do it anyway. So, the end result is that I love the blog, though I get why the approach can be really infuriating.

  • curiousgyrl

    that was in response to “smart to what end?”

  • So your right, Twisty is no trans ally, but I still object to lumping the heart brigade in with Twisty as Twisty is smart and they are dumb.

    In which case, though, doesn’t she actually have more responsibility? Yes, she’s smart, but to what end? And no, I don’t think she -does- share Heart or frigging Mar Iguana’s sentiments viz transfolk, much less their weird sexual essentialism, but even putting my on-the-record previous rancor toward her aside, I’m not particularly inclined to give her (or anyone) a cookie for that alone.

    yeah, now she’s saying she never meant to play hostess, so fine, but that doesn’t really address the basic problem here.

    and, tangentially, I thought Mar Iguana and lucky were banned, anyway.

  • So your right, Twisty is no trans ally, but I still object to lumping the heart brigade in with Twisty as Twisty is smart and they are dumb.

    In which case, though, doesn’t she actually have more responsibility? Yes, she’s smart, but to what end? And no, I don’t think she -does- share Heart or frigging Mar Iguana’s sentiments viz transfolk, much less their weird sexual essentialism, but even putting my on-the-record previous rancor toward her aside, I’m not particularly inclined to give her (or anyone) a cookie for that alone.

    yeah, now she’s saying she never meant to play hostess, so fine, but that doesn’t really address the basic problem here.

    and, tangentially, I thought Mar Iguana and lucky were banned, anyway.

  • But i think there’s a lot to be said about womens’ space being ultimately more useful as a coalition space rather than a safe space.

    Coalition, coming together, embracing diversity and difference

    agreed.

    and I think, you know, for some people “safe” means “uniformity,” for some reason.

    There is such a thing as a “safe(r) space,” and I think it is a good thing to maintain in certain contexts, but it really doesn’t blend well with political -activism,- that’s quite right.

    If you want group therapy, then, you know, that’s a different transaction, and there are different rules. There are also different goals.

  • But i think there’s a lot to be said about womens’ space being ultimately more useful as a coalition space rather than a safe space.

    Coalition, coming together, embracing diversity and difference

    agreed.

    and I think, you know, for some people “safe” means “uniformity,” for some reason.

    There is such a thing as a “safe(r) space,” and I think it is a good thing to maintain in certain contexts, but it really doesn’t blend well with political -activism,- that’s quite right.

    If you want group therapy, then, you know, that’s a different transaction, and there are different rules. There are also different goals.

  • “not subversive of the patriarchy”

    It’s not an -abstraction,- okay, and it’s not a -political gesture.- It’s peoples’ LIVES. There’s nothing more infuriating than having someone treat your very -real and present- life situation as something that can be dismissed with cutesy games like “After the Revolution…”

    yes that’s lovely. We will all eat strawberries and cream, and we will -like- strawberries and cream.

    what the fuck ever.

    I’m sure “gay” and “straight” won’t matter either in the afterlife I mean post-“Revolution” world, or “black and white” for that matter, hell, “rich or poor;” but until then, we’ve all got a goddam life to live, and there are people -actively- and -specifically- trying to make some of our lives more miserable than others, and you’re -not much of an ally- if you dismiss it all with a flip of your fingers and “play nice, kids, oh on second thought I can’t be bothered.”

    It’s really not that difficult, really it’s not.

  • “not subversive of the patriarchy”

    It’s not an -abstraction,- okay, and it’s not a -political gesture.- It’s peoples’ LIVES. There’s nothing more infuriating than having someone treat your very -real and present- life situation as something that can be dismissed with cutesy games like “After the Revolution…”

    yes that’s lovely. We will all eat strawberries and cream, and we will -like- strawberries and cream.

    what the fuck ever.

    I’m sure “gay” and “straight” won’t matter either in the afterlife I mean post-“Revolution” world, or “black and white” for that matter, hell, “rich or poor;” but until then, we’ve all got a goddam life to live, and there are people -actively- and -specifically- trying to make some of our lives more miserable than others, and you’re -not much of an ally- if you dismiss it all with a flip of your fingers and “play nice, kids, oh on second thought I can’t be bothered.”

    It’s really not that difficult, really it’s not.

  • I agree that womens’ space is a survival strategy, one that i support for those who find it useful. But i think there’s a lot to be said about womens’ space being ultimately more useful as a coalition space rather than a safe space.

    Coalition, coming together, embracing diversity and difference — these are things which are undermining of patriarchy, which sets us against one another until we are isolated and mistrustful.

  • I agree that womens’ space is a survival strategy, one that i support for those who find it useful. But i think there’s a lot to be said about womens’ space being ultimately more useful as a coalition space rather than a safe space.

    Coalition, coming together, embracing diversity and difference — these are things which are undermining of patriarchy, which sets us against one another until we are isolated and mistrustful.

  • curiousgyrl

    I hear this said again and again, but there is absolutely nothing in my experience, or even that i have ever heard of, which indicates that the patriarchy rewards people for being trans. There is absolutely no privilege in our society that one can acquire by being trans.

    I agree that being trans is not rewarded over being cisgendered. Passing, in the sense of conforming to stereotypical gender presentation and rolse is rewarded for cis and transfolk. Masterful femininity has rewards, and is also a state of being oppressed. For example; people never call me a dyke or sir or kick me out of the bathroom. One could argue that this is in part because I do girly things, like wear high heels. High heels also literally break my feet, apparently.

    So i have to ask, what does “undermining the patriarchy” look like?

    This is a good question. I have a sneaking suspicion that for Twisty, the answer is “who knows?” My answer is that collective action against repressive structures is a damn good start.

    I dont think the rad fem requirement for individuals work that well either, nor do I think that building womens’ space is anything but a survival strategy, the same category I would put “passing” as feminine into (for trans and non-transfolk alike).

  • curiousgyrl

    I hear this said again and again, but there is absolutely nothing in my experience, or even that i have ever heard of, which indicates that the patriarchy rewards people for being trans. There is absolutely no privilege in our society that one can acquire by being trans.

    I agree that being trans is not rewarded over being cisgendered. Passing, in the sense of conforming to stereotypical gender presentation and rolse is rewarded for cis and transfolk. Masterful femininity has rewards, and is also a state of being oppressed. For example; people never call me a dyke or sir or kick me out of the bathroom. One could argue that this is in part because I do girly things, like wear high heels. High heels also literally break my feet, apparently.

    So i have to ask, what does “undermining the patriarchy” look like?

    This is a good question. I have a sneaking suspicion that for Twisty, the answer is “who knows?” My answer is that collective action against repressive structures is a damn good start.

    I dont think the rad fem requirement for individuals work that well either, nor do I think that building womens’ space is anything but a survival strategy, the same category I would put “passing” as feminine into (for trans and non-transfolk alike).

  • Well, i was more interested really in pointing out Twisty’s unexamined privilege WRT the trans question, but your points are good too.

    I read Twisty’s point as saying that transgender identity is not subversive of the patriarchy.

    I hear this said again and again, but there is absolutely nothing in my experience, or even that i have ever heard of, which indicates that the patriarchy rewards people for being trans. There is absolutely no privilege in our society that one can acquire by being trans.

    So i have to ask, what does “undermining the patriarchy” look like? Because i like a lot of the things radical feminists have to say about how much better off we would all be if we weren’t saddled down by social gender roles, but how do we get from here to there?

    And, how do we account for the fact that many if not most people do experience gender as a part of their identity?

    To quote Heart:

    Radical feminism theorizes gender as all about subordination, about hierarchy, with the view that gender will not survive the destruction of patriarchy. Theories of gender which posit that gender is something that is in the head, in the spirit, in the genetics, that it is unavoidable, that it is just something people “know” that they are or “feel” that they have, radical feminists believe are theories which ultimately harm all people, both men and women, because they do not move us *beyond* gender as the subordinating mechanism it really is.

    I think this is the point that is really killing radical feminism, because most people can’t relate to what radical feminists insist they have to do in order to unravel patriarchy.

  • Well, i was more interested really in pointing out Twisty’s unexamined privilege WRT the trans question, but your points are good too.

    I read Twisty’s point as saying that transgender identity is not subversive of the patriarchy.

    I hear this said again and again, but there is absolutely nothing in my experience, or even that i have ever heard of, which indicates that the patriarchy rewards people for being trans. There is absolutely no privilege in our society that one can acquire by being trans.

    So i have to ask, what does “undermining the patriarchy” look like? Because i like a lot of the things radical feminists have to say about how much better off we would all be if we weren’t saddled down by social gender roles, but how do we get from here to there?

    And, how do we account for the fact that many if not most people do experience gender as a part of their identity?

    To quote Heart:

    Radical feminism theorizes gender as all about subordination, about hierarchy, with the view that gender will not survive the destruction of patriarchy. Theories of gender which posit that gender is something that is in the head, in the spirit, in the genetics, that it is unavoidable, that it is just something people “know” that they are or “feel” that they have, radical feminists believe are theories which ultimately harm all people, both men and women, because they do not move us *beyond* gender as the subordinating mechanism it really is.

    I think this is the point that is really killing radical feminism, because most people can’t relate to what radical feminists insist they have to do in order to unravel patriarchy.

  • curiousgyrl

    I see your point, and that is probably the most relevant thing–that Twisty is not much of an ally. I think that is probably not even open to dispute. I mean, poking this point is pretty much asking for hateful shit from the radfems.

    But I think her stance is pretty clear if obliquely stated, and I think its a smart argument, personally. I read Twisty’s point as saying that transgender identity is not subversive of the patriarchy.

    But the beauty of that stance is that in Twisty world NOTHING is all that subversive of the patriarchy, or at least, lots of things count as capitulation and losing the fight as an individual is inevitable, it doesnt make women sell-outs or morons. We might like heels, but we should recognize that as a consequence of our oppression and BTP.

    I pretty much agree with this, especially since I broke my foot over a cute pair of wedge heels a few days ago. Blame, blame, blame.

    And Twisty is no sex/gender essentialist. She is probably the smartest feminist I’ve read on this point who writes using intelligible vocabulary.

    So your right, Twisty is no trans ally, but I still object to lumping the heart brigade in with Twisty as Twisty is smart and they are dumb.

  • curiousgyrl

    I see your point, and that is probably the most relevant thing–that Twisty is not much of an ally. I think that is probably not even open to dispute. I mean, poking this point is pretty much asking for hateful shit from the radfems.

    But I think her stance is pretty clear if obliquely stated, and I think its a smart argument, personally. I read Twisty’s point as saying that transgender identity is not subversive of the patriarchy.

    But the beauty of that stance is that in Twisty world NOTHING is all that subversive of the patriarchy, or at least, lots of things count as capitulation and losing the fight as an individual is inevitable, it doesnt make women sell-outs or morons. We might like heels, but we should recognize that as a consequence of our oppression and BTP.

    I pretty much agree with this, especially since I broke my foot over a cute pair of wedge heels a few days ago. Blame, blame, blame.

    And Twisty is no sex/gender essentialist. She is probably the smartest feminist I’ve read on this point who writes using intelligible vocabulary.

    So your right, Twisty is no trans ally, but I still object to lumping the heart brigade in with Twisty as Twisty is smart and they are dumb.

  • Twisty has said just enough for people to know that she doesn’t hate transpeople, but she hasn’t taken a firm position on this dispute either. And who can blame her, really; she has the privilege of not having to state an opinion on the matter, why risk alienating any of her readers by doing so?

    And really, in itself, that’s enough for transfolk to know that if things got tight, she wouldn’t have our back.

  • Twisty has said just enough for people to know that she doesn’t hate transpeople, but she hasn’t taken a firm position on this dispute either. And who can blame her, really; she has the privilege of not having to state an opinion on the matter, why risk alienating any of her readers by doing so?

    And really, in itself, that’s enough for transfolk to know that if things got tight, she wouldn’t have our back.

  • Samantha

    I find it odd that a bunch of people who are self-proclaiming to be dedicated to destroying gender distinctions are so intent on enforcing them when it comes to trans people.

  • Samantha

    I find it odd that a bunch of people who are self-proclaiming to be dedicated to destroying gender distinctions are so intent on enforcing them when it comes to trans people.

  • curiousgyrl

    My off topic intervention is that I don’t think Twisty should be blamed for The Margins crowd. I don’t think Twisty’s politics are anti-trans.

    Though she does like to stir stuff up.

  • curiousgyrl

    My off topic intervention is that I don’t think Twisty should be blamed for The Margins crowd. I don’t think Twisty’s politics are anti-trans.

    Though she does like to stir stuff up.

  • St. Julia of Corsica was herself crucified (which is part of the reason she was made a saint). A few medieval artists have painted pictures of her crucifixion. That is the source of Marti’s picture. I’m curious as to why your offended as well. Is it because it shows a woman crucified or is it because she is showing a saint out of context?

  • St. Julia of Corsica was herself crucified (which is part of the reason she was made a saint). A few medieval artists have painted pictures of her crucifixion. That is the source of Marti’s picture. I’m curious as to why your offended as well. Is it because it shows a woman crucified or is it because she is showing a saint out of context?

  • SFA,

    It’s a very reasonable question given the fact that plenty of other “believing Christians” would not and are not offended by graphics like this. As a matter of fact, I would say that this is a very pro-Christian graphic but of course that is based on the fact that the person–Jesus, Christ, Messiah–who is most associated with that particular symbol we now call the cross supposedly represented ALL OF US. That includes women, just in case you didn’t realize it. In other words, when Jesus got on that cross, in his father’s eyes, it was not just him that God saw. It was you, me, Twisty, Marti, transmen, transwomen, and any other person that one could depict up there.

    Now, you may not want to see things the way that the God of the Bible does. This is your right. However, if you’re going to come here and claim to be a “believing Christian”, you might want to familiarize yourself with the meaning of this symbol depicted in the graphic that has got your panties all in a bunch.

    Furthermore, if you are REALLY a “believing Christian” would it be appropriate for you to come here complaining about what Marti’s graphic? Does your comment reflect the message written in Luke 6:41,42? I’d be more than happy to quote it here for you in case you’re not familiar with it.

  • SFA,

    It’s a very reasonable question given the fact that plenty of other “believing Christians” would not and are not offended by graphics like this. As a matter of fact, I would say that this is a very pro-Christian graphic but of course that is based on the fact that the person–Jesus, Christ, Messiah–who is most associated with that particular symbol we now call the cross supposedly represented ALL OF US. That includes women, just in case you didn’t realize it. In other words, when Jesus got on that cross, in his father’s eyes, it was not just him that God saw. It was you, me, Twisty, Marti, transmen, transwomen, and any other person that one could depict up there.

    Now, you may not want to see things the way that the God of the Bible does. This is your right. However, if you’re going to come here and claim to be a “believing Christian”, you might want to familiarize yourself with the meaning of this symbol depicted in the graphic that has got your panties all in a bunch.

    Furthermore, if you are REALLY a “believing Christian” would it be appropriate for you to come here complaining about what Marti’s graphic? Does your comment reflect the message written in Luke 6:41,42? I’d be more than happy to quote it here for you in case you’re not familiar with it.

  • “Are you really asking me why a graphic titled “Shesus Christ” might offend believing Christians?”

    That is EXACTLY what I’m asking. What EXACTLY offends you about the graphic. I think the metaphorical aspect of the graphic speaks for itself and has NOTHING to do with Jesus, or his ministry.

  • “Are you really asking me why a graphic titled “Shesus Christ” might offend believing Christians?”

    That is EXACTLY what I’m asking. What EXACTLY offends you about the graphic. I think the metaphorical aspect of the graphic speaks for itself and has NOTHING to do with Jesus, or his ministry.

  • SFA

    Are you really asking me why a graphic titled “Shesus Christ” might offend believing Christians?

  • SFA

    Are you really asking me why a graphic titled “Shesus Christ” might offend believing Christians?

  • What put down? As far as the graphic goes, what’s offensive about it?

    “No logic? You understand how offensive the graphic is, right? Wasn’t that the purpose of it? To offend Christians? (If not, why not use Mohammed, Krishna or the Torah as your graphic?)”

    🙂 Talk to the pope. That’s from a painting of St. Julia of Corsica.

    I used the graphic because because it best illustrates my point that radical feminism is a religion, not a theory.

    “I am given to understand that Christians are not welcome here, and I will stay away, accordingly. But offending religious transfolk and/or allies is not cool, in my admittedly biased opinion.”

    I might understand your point, if you had something to be offended by. Please explain how the graphic is offensive.

  • What put down? As far as the graphic goes, what’s offensive about it?

    “No logic? You understand how offensive the graphic is, right? Wasn’t that the purpose of it? To offend Christians? (If not, why not use Mohammed, Krishna or the Torah as your graphic?)”

    🙂 Talk to the pope. That’s from a painting of St. Julia of Corsica.

    I used the graphic because because it best illustrates my point that radical feminism is a religion, not a theory.

    “I am given to understand that Christians are not welcome here, and I will stay away, accordingly. But offending religious transfolk and/or allies is not cool, in my admittedly biased opinion.”

    I might understand your point, if you had something to be offended by. Please explain how the graphic is offensive.

  • SFA

    No, I don’t care about any “creation museum”–I was offended by your graphic, and your needless and out-of-context putdown of Christianity. Just as you are offended by the crappola over on Twisty’s thread, as I am.

    No logic? You understand how offensive the graphic is, right? Wasn’t that the purpose of it? To offend Christians? (If not, why not use Mohammed, Krishna or the Torah as your graphic?)

    I AM SAYING LOGICALLY, that the proper response to being offended (by Twisty’s thread) is NOT to gratuitously offend MORE people who might otherwise have been sympathetic. That is not constructive. I am given to understand that Christians are not welcome here, and I will stay away, accordingly. But offending religious transfolk and/or allies is not cool, in my admittedly biased opinion.

  • SFA

    No, I don’t care about any “creation museum”–I was offended by your graphic, and your needless and out-of-context putdown of Christianity. Just as you are offended by the crappola over on Twisty’s thread, as I am.

    No logic? You understand how offensive the graphic is, right? Wasn’t that the purpose of it? To offend Christians? (If not, why not use Mohammed, Krishna or the Torah as your graphic?)

    I AM SAYING LOGICALLY, that the proper response to being offended (by Twisty’s thread) is NOT to gratuitously offend MORE people who might otherwise have been sympathetic. That is not constructive. I am given to understand that Christians are not welcome here, and I will stay away, accordingly. But offending religious transfolk and/or allies is not cool, in my admittedly biased opinion.

  • “And transadvocates who make fun of my religion are just as offensive to me, as those people on that thread.”

    I find no logic in this statement. My entire post was pointing out how radical feminism and Christianity are alike as they are both based on belief, not empirical data.

    If you’re referencing to nexy’s comment about a creation museum, that is based on a supposed SCIENCE, not Christianity…right?

  • “And transadvocates who make fun of my religion are just as offensive to me, as those people on that thread.”

    I find no logic in this statement. My entire post was pointing out how radical feminism and Christianity are alike as they are both based on belief, not empirical data.

    If you’re referencing to nexy’s comment about a creation museum, that is based on a supposed SCIENCE, not Christianity…right?

  • SFA

    And transadvocates who make fun of my religion are just as offensive to me, as those people on that thread.

    Can’t tell the bigotry apart, actually.

    If your intent is to exclude, you are certainly just as effective as Twisty’s crowd.

  • SFA

    And transadvocates who make fun of my religion are just as offensive to me, as those people on that thread.

    Can’t tell the bigotry apart, actually.

    If your intent is to exclude, you are certainly just as effective as Twisty’s crowd.

  • and you know, it’s always comforting when -radical feminists- sound eerily like Phyllis Schlafly.

  • and you know, it’s always comforting when -radical feminists- sound eerily like Phyllis Schlafly.

  • oh well, christ knows i get most of -my- Radical Feminist Lesbian validation in the can.

    but not, i hasten to add, in any way that Sheila Jeffreys would disapprove of. I am not a -man-, after all. No orgasms of oppression for me! especially not in filthy, dirty toilets! Even if they -are- completely unpolluted by Y chromosomes!

  • oh well, christ knows i get most of -my- Radical Feminist Lesbian validation in the can.

    but not, i hasten to add, in any way that Sheila Jeffreys would disapprove of. I am not a -man-, after all. No orgasms of oppression for me! especially not in filthy, dirty toilets! Even if they -are- completely unpolluted by Y chromosomes!

  • Michfest? I’m still cracking up over the notion that public restrooms need to be declared a Sacred Cisgendered-Woman-Only Yoni-Magic Womb-Honoring Safe Space.

  • Veronica

    Michfest? I’m still cracking up over the notion that public restrooms need to be declared a Sacred Cisgendered-Woman-Only Yoni-Magic Womb-Honoring Safe Space.

  • there is no answer to that question that hasn’t made me want to spit.

    i do find it noteworthy that one of the most virulently transphobic women out there is co-running one of the larger and more influential anti-prostitution/trafficking organizations (Janice Raymond/CATW, respectively).

  • there is no answer to that question that hasn’t made me want to spit.

    i do find it noteworthy that one of the most virulently transphobic women out there is co-running one of the larger and more influential anti-prostitution/trafficking organizations (Janice Raymond/CATW, respectively).

  • curiousgyrl

    also, nobody ever answered my pornstitution question about why, if that is the central feature of women’s oppression (I am agnostic on that question) transwomen, who are often left with few other options, are not included in the community of the oppressed? I kind of did think someone would have an answer to that, other than “thats diversionary. next point please!”

  • curiousgyrl

    also, nobody ever answered my pornstitution question about why, if that is the central feature of women’s oppression (I am agnostic on that question) transwomen, who are often left with few other options, are not included in the community of the oppressed? I kind of did think someone would have an answer to that, other than “thats diversionary. next point please!”

  • “my favorite is when the implication is that people have major genital surgeries to try to sneak into to Michfest. That cracks me up every single time.”

    heh. That’s why I’m having it, I want white vaginal privilege!

  • did you read about the recent opening of the creation museum in petersburg, ky? they don’t like to be confused with the facts either.

  • “my favorite is when the implication is that people have major genital surgeries to try to sneak into to Michfest. That cracks me up every single time.”

    heh. That’s why I’m having it, I want white vaginal privilege!

  • did you read about the recent opening of the creation museum in petersburg, ky? they don’t like to be confused with the facts either.

  • Oh I know. I mean, who -doesn’t- want to pay money to sleep on a pad in a bag on a rock, listen to the wimmins’ music equivalent of Branson’s finest, and get et by mosquitos?

    My favorite was when someone or other was all, well if you don’t want to be a part of radical feminist culture then why do you -care- if anyone calls you a woman? uh.

    “See this? This is what is known as ‘the planet Earth.’ Take a look around. You may find that it’s rather largish.”

  • Oh I know. I mean, who -doesn’t- want to pay money to sleep on a pad in a bag on a rock, listen to the wimmins’ music equivalent of Branson’s finest, and get et by mosquitos?

    My favorite was when someone or other was all, well if you don’t want to be a part of radical feminist culture then why do you -care- if anyone calls you a woman? uh.

    “See this? This is what is known as ‘the planet Earth.’ Take a look around. You may find that it’s rather largish.”

  • curiousgyrl

    my favorite is when the implication is that people have major genital surgeries to try to sneak into to Michfest. That cracks me up every single time.

  • curiousgyrl

    my favorite is when the implication is that people have major genital surgeries to try to sneak into to Michfest. That cracks me up every single time.

  • Jesus Christina on rollerblades. I just finished reading that thread (i hate my friends sometimes, the enabling fuckers). my eyeballs are still rolling around on the floor so i’m a bit distracted, but:

    1) actually up till a certain point that seemed like an improvement on the last go-round (not that that would be saying much) since a fair number of posts by several people made me want to stand up and cheer, even though they were wasted on the troglodytes they were directed at

    2) all the same, it’s -really- not good when you start having physical feelings of wanting to throttle someone. unbelievable, some people, and OH MY GOD. I’m so glad some people finally called out some of the more obvious bullshit (um, hello, is this not essentialism? how -are- you defining sex then? why d’you need the “women-only space?” isn’t this like racism? it is if -i- say it is, goddamit, etc.), including some people i didn’t expect to hear that from–delphyne does have a way of calling out the opposite response from what she probably intended, bless her calcified little heart–but OH. MY. GOD. men are men and women are women! what we want to get rid of is GENDER. Which is DIFFERENT from SEX, it’s axiomatic, and Reproduction!! *boggle* yes, let’s refer to the inevitability of PHYSICAL SEXUAL DIFFERENCE, that’s VERY RADICAL FEMINIST, especially on a blog where the host has has most of her secondary bits including the oft-alluded to UTERUS, REMOVED.

    and let’s make sure we keep the pronouns and and…

    Heart’s so full of shit she squeaks going into a turn. Mar Iguana is a gigantic idiot and a racist as well, and who the flying fuck are “Raven” and “Louisa May Alcott?”

    I felt bad for Mireille, as I often do for people caught in that particular milieu; again, I saw stronger voices challenging the bullshit than usual, at least for a while, but still that shit very disheartening; why do people feel the need to apologize for other peoples’ assholery? she was so damn polite, so self-effacing.

    curiousgyrl kicked some ass, though.

  • Jesus Christina on rollerblades. I just finished reading that thread (i hate my friends sometimes, the enabling fuckers). my eyeballs are still rolling around on the floor so i’m a bit distracted, but:

    1) actually up till a certain point that seemed like an improvement on the last go-round (not that that would be saying much) since a fair number of posts by several people made me want to stand up and cheer, even though they were wasted on the troglodytes they were directed at

    2) all the same, it’s -really- not good when you start having physical feelings of wanting to throttle someone. unbelievable, some people, and OH MY GOD. I’m so glad some people finally called out some of the more obvious bullshit (um, hello, is this not essentialism? how -are- you defining sex then? why d’you need the “women-only space?” isn’t this like racism? it is if -i- say it is, goddamit, etc.), including some people i didn’t expect to hear that from–delphyne does have a way of calling out the opposite response from what she probably intended, bless her calcified little heart–but OH. MY. GOD. men are men and women are women! what we want to get rid of is GENDER. Which is DIFFERENT from SEX, it’s axiomatic, and Reproduction!! *boggle* yes, let’s refer to the inevitability of PHYSICAL SEXUAL DIFFERENCE, that’s VERY RADICAL FEMINIST, especially on a blog where the host has has most of her secondary bits including the oft-alluded to UTERUS, REMOVED.

    and let’s make sure we keep the pronouns and and…

    Heart’s so full of shit she squeaks going into a turn. Mar Iguana is a gigantic idiot and a racist as well, and who the flying fuck are “Raven” and “Louisa May Alcott?”

    I felt bad for Mireille, as I often do for people caught in that particular milieu; again, I saw stronger voices challenging the bullshit than usual, at least for a while, but still that shit very disheartening; why do people feel the need to apologize for other peoples’ assholery? she was so damn polite, so self-effacing.

    curiousgyrl kicked some ass, though.

  • I totally understand why you would be upset. I read the article and while it wasn’t exactly the greatest thing ever, it’s as good as I’ve seen so far. And not all the transfolk photographed were white!

    It’s stuff like this that makes me wonder if it’s possible to be a radical feminist AND trans. But I see that the 70’s crazed binary-enforcers are here again. Ugh.

  • I totally understand why you would be upset. I read the article and while it wasn’t exactly the greatest thing ever, it’s as good as I’ve seen so far. And not all the transfolk photographed were white!

    It’s stuff like this that makes me wonder if it’s possible to be a radical feminist AND trans. But I see that the 70’s crazed binary-enforcers are here again. Ugh.