Goldsmiths University Diversity officer facing sack

[co-op]

So your grounds for being trans exclusionary consist of the view that once upon a time you saw trans women being too confident?

Why answer a post with a straw man argument? Just a waste of time.

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Why answer a post with a straw man argument? Just a waste of time.

An argument that trans women are socialised like men because you were at a meeting once where trans women put up their hands to speak too quickly isn't worth engaging with further.

 

[likesfish]

Intersectionalty suprisingly isnt a stupid concept who knew
Its a horrible horrible word though
First hear about how via a us based sci fi website so scandal travels across world these days

 

[ViolentPanda]

I can imagine in terms of "ism = prejudice + power" there may be quite a few individuals trying to add up the power relations of Eastern European men ... deduct some for racism when in the UK, they still have some for patriarchy both in UK and also country of origin... on balance is it still ok to say. NO IT'S NOT

There'll always be people who believe that they can quantify some sort of hierarchy of oppression. Often people who'd derive benefit from doing so.

 

[seventh bullet]

Who is Harry Akram? Am I shallow for wanting to hit him several times?

He's the trainee doctor dropout anarchist who got into a strop and denounced me as middle class (lol) edit: removed.

 

[Wilf]

harry akram is xxxxxxxxxx?

 

[Citizen66]

Similar posting style from way back tbh.

 

[Blagsta]

Whoever he is, he has a distinct lack of politics and a distinct liking of throwing abuse around. Poisonous as fuck.

 

[TopCat]

My

I was put off university because an apprenticeship meant I could afford to buy drugs.

apprenticeship

An argument that trans women are socialised like men because you were at a meeting once where trans women put up their hands to too quickly isn't worth engaging with further.

I was put off university because an apprenticeship meant I could afford to buy drugs.

i earned £45 a week as an apprentice toolmaker and had £25 rent on my bedsit. No room for drugs..

 

[Citizen66]

My

apprenticeship


i earned £45 a week as an apprentice toolmaker and had £25 rent on my bedsit. No room for drugs..

Fair dos. I lived with my folks until aged 22 when I moved to London because my sister needed a room mate and I needed work; it being predictably scarce in the NE. So I was never skint proper.

 

[TopCat]

I moved out at sixteen. Thought I knew it all. I learned quick.

 

[cesare]

This thread's turned into urban redwatch.

 

[cesare]

******* doesn't have the right of reply on here of course - he was chased off a couple of years back by racism.

 

[Blagsta]

Bad form to out him publicly, yes.

I barely remember him tbh. What happened with him leaving here cos of racism?

 

[cesare]

Bad form to out him publicly, yes.

I barely remember him tbh. What happened with him leaving here cos of racism?

I wasn't posting on here at the time. ****** told me about it in the pub so I came back to have a look for myself. It was missed by a lot of the regular posters at the time because it happened in the football forum. Once people became aware they made a huge fuss, led iirc by Citizen66 but he'd gone by then. It was a comment about his Pakistani heritage.

 

[Blagsta]

That's not good.

 

[Citizen66]

I can't mention that instance any more because I enjoy doing so. Outing is bad, I guess. But the proper left is tiny. Joining the dots is simple

 

[cesare]

I can't mention that instance any more because I enjoy doing so. Outing is bad, I guess. But the proper left is tiny. Joining the dots is simple

But you appreciate that in the circumstances it's not likely that he'd come back to defend himself?

 

[DotCommunist]

Ethnic pakistani tosser was the insult thrown at him, on a thread for the football. You know the 'end of season' ones the football fans do on a club by club basis. It came to the attention of everyone non-footie loving sometime later and recieved its due revulsion. Too late by that point of course, Refused had left because he didn't want to be somewhere where he'd be given casual racist shit.

 

[cesare]

What new depths can this thread plumb now? We've had hate speech, concern trolling, treating people like biological specimens, and now publically outing a known comrade that we'd previously subjected to racism. It's fucking disgusting.

 

[cesare]

*

 

[Nigel Irritable]

Jesus, I hadn't heard why he stopped posting before. That's grim.

 

[Vintage Paw]

Why can't everyone, male, female or otherwise, dress and behave however they want? We should be moving away from these strict gender roles of man/woman - especially with them defined entirely on how you look and behave! Women have struggled for years against this.

You say this, but you're vehemently defending your right to be a 'real' woman, saying there is something inherent and essential about it. At the same time as saying transwomen shouldn't want to be women because it's essentialist.

This tactic is old and transparent and very frustrating.

 

[co-op]

An argument that trans women are socialised like men because you were at a meeting once where trans women put up their hands to speak too quickly isn't worth engaging with further.

The original question posed by you (too far back in this thread for me to find) was along the lines of "is there any difference in the gender socialisation of a cis man and a trans woman?". So I gave an example of trans women acting in accordance with male socialised behaviour, trans men with female. We're all intelligent people, we understand that one anecdote on it's own doesn't make a case but I used to question the idea that we would expect people socialised as men (or women) to suddenly, spontaneously abandon that socialisation when they transition to the "opposite" sex - or to have somehow resisted that socialisation when it was happening, on the grounds of internal psychological/emotional factors.

If you don't think that (eg) mtftp's were socialised as men, what do you think was happening to them before they became aware that they were a trans person?


FWIW I don't think I'm "trans-exclusionary", there's absolutely no reason why I need/want/would prefer any environment I exist in to exclude any trans person on the grounds of their gender/sex (and I'm pretty sure I'll have spent a lot more time socially in the company of trans people than the vast majority of the population). But I think non-trans women are entitled to have opinions about this question that are not dictated by people socialised as men.

If there is ever a need for "women only spaces" (and maybe you disagree with that?) then defining who is allowed into those spaces is pretty important to women don't you think?

 

[co-op]

You say this, but you're vehemently defending your right to be a 'real' woman, saying there is something inherent and essential about it. At the same time as saying transwomen shouldn't want to be women because it's essentialist.

This tactic is old and transparent and very frustrating.

There's an essentialist version of both sides of this argument - on the trans side "a woman born in a man's body", on the other stuff about chromosones etc. There's been so many posts on this thread I can't keep up but if you think Thora has been saying she is a "real" woman, it would be very helpful if you quoted where she has done this, otherwise it looks like the kind of lazy assumption that (imo) Nigel Irritable made when he described me as "trans-exclusionary"

 

[Vintage Paw]

The other way of looking at that is that allowing and even encouraging people to reject their assigned gender or even to declare themselves "non-binary" in fact undermines strict assumptions about how natural, intrinsic and immutable gender is. While forbidding them to do so has essentialist consequences. And this is so even where the person rejecting their assigned role uses essentialist arguments to justify that decision and those who seek to limit their ability to reject those roles do so in the name of gender abolition.

Much of the attraction of essentialist arguments for many trans people by the way comes from a need to justify themselves in the face of hostility and rejection. And much of the reason why some trans people tend to adopt very traditional versions of masculinity and femininity stems from medical and political institutions forcing them to do so if they wish to be taken seriously or assisted in any way.

I wanted to take the opportunity to applaud this post. It explains a very complex concept really well.

 

[Vintage Paw]

I'm with cesare - this thread is the saddest I've read for a long time. It's opened my eyes to the things some people can believe while simultaneously being 'progressive' (thank you pickman's for teaching me fwoabt). I suppose that shouldn't be a surprise, considering for example the way some left-wing men can be when it comes to feminism. Why should it be any different for anything else?

I repeat my praise for Nigel's post. Any and all arguments around subversion/reinforcement of gender and gender roles (actually 2 different things) should end with a good read and understanding of that.

And I suppose all I can say is I'm sure all the trans* people who might potentially read this are really happy that a bunch of cis people have got together - yet again - to argue the toss about what existence they are allowed to live.

Bravo. One of your darkest moments, urban.

 

[Blagsta]

What new depths can this thread plumb now? We've had hate speech, concern trolling, treating people like biological specimens, and now publically outing a known comrade that we'd previously subjected to racism. It's fucking disgusting.

Hardly a comrade, given his behaviour on the Facebook thread.

 

[likesfish]

If you have a problem with trans people and your special snowflake women's only space congratulations your now less progressive than the British Army that's got to be some sort of record
their are serving trans soldiers friday was sir Monday now addressed as M'am carry on.

 

[Red Cat]

I'm with cesare - this thread is the saddest I've read for a long time. It's opened my eyes to the things some people can believe while simultaneously being 'progressive' (thank you pickman's for teaching me fwoabt). I suppose that shouldn't be a surprise, considering for example the way some left-wing men can be when it comes to feminism. Why should it be any different for anything else?

I repeat my praise for Nigel's post. Any and all arguments around subversion/reinforcement of gender and gender roles (actually 2 different things) should end with a good read and understanding of that.

And I suppose all I can say is I'm sure all the trans* people who might potentially read this are really happy that a bunch of cis people have got together - yet again - to argue the toss about what existence they are allowed to live.

Bravo. One of your darkest moments, urban.

Our arguments should end with one final argument? I agree that Nigel's post is a good one, but it should also be ok to grapple with the subject by disagreeing and arguing out loud, surely that's how movement in thinking occurs.

Who is this bunch of cis people who have got together?