Urban v's the Commentariat

[frogwoman]

Did you read the piece? Terfs werent mentioned anywhere in the piece except here:

Anyone’s personal life is their business and in no way am I or any other trans person trying to talk terf lesbians into being into trans women but where it is completely open for critique is within women’s spaces and porn casting policy. If we are going to treat porn like a real multi-billion dollar industry we need to hold it up to the same standards as any other business.

Looks to me like shes using terf here to mean anyone who's a lesbian in its accepted meaning because wtf would an ideological terf, who hold to a set of beliefs that say porn is wrong be doing in the sex industry?

 

[frogwoman]

.

 

[frogwoman]

Judeinlondon going on about why so many donors to ukip are jewish,had a screen grab but cant upload it.

 

[butchersapron]

Judeinlondon going on about why so many donors to ukip are jewish,had a screen grab but cant upload it.

Via you:

 

[frogwoman]

Thanks,couldnt upload it.

 

[Idris2002]

 

[toggle]

Did you read the piece? Terfs werent mentioned anywhere in the piece except here:



Looks to me like shes using terf here to mean anyone who's a lesbian in its accepted meaning because wtf would an ideological terf, who hold to a set of beliefs that say porn is wrong be doing in the sex industry?

please miss, do I have to try and make sense of another nonsensical set of extreme ideaologies? I try to limit myself to one set per week. All i'd like to add is that i think ti's useful in seeking understanding that we're looking to try and present the arguments behind the screaming of the opposing ideaologies. and the bits where eithe side have a point. and see where those stand up to challenge and where they don't.

but i also wanted to add, there seems to be a divide between those transwomen who accept that the expereinces of those who were raised to be women can be different from those who were raised to be men and there's the side that don't. One side talks with women, listens and joins in discussion. They accept expereinces of those living as women can be different to those they had before transition and want to explore those differences and understand.

Then there's the side that carries over the privilage they learnt while being raised to be men. A need to dominate discussion, to make it about their needs, not the needs of all who identify as women. but there's also an entitlement to sex in some. a massive sulkathon that the one group that refused to have sex wth them while they presented as male to the world might include women who still don't want to have sex with them. A woman not wanting to have sex with them is about a massive conspracy among all lesbians (in the sense of women who are attracted to women, not the political bullshit) to deny transwomen's right to identify as women. i can recognise transwomen as women without wanting to have sex with them in the same way i dont want to have sex with a great many men and that dosent stop me recognising them as men. Nope, it really dosen't, despite the attitude some men have. it's that thing that is the issue, a refusal to fuck them being taken as a threat to their identity is something that many women precieve as male behavior. holding onto that attitude does not help the trans* cause to be accepted by women as women. brennan's lot don't help to reduce the amount of amunition or paranoia, but it is all about them and rights, not the choices of individual women to fuck or not fuck whomever they damn well want to.

Obviously that's a simplification (I hope not an offensive one) of a wide range of views, but ti's I think a realistic one of the more apparent voices. and understanding and listening to expeeinces has to be a two way street.

eta: feminism must include transwomen and listen to how we can help encourage acceptance of transpeople and transrights. but that must be as part of the fight for equality and rights of all women and cannot include anyone, of any gender, orientation or identity who cannot treat others with sexual respect.

 

[smokedout]

A woman not wanting to have sex with them is about a massive conspracy among all lesbians (in the sense of women who are attracted to women, not the political bullshit) to deny transwomen's right to identify as women. i can recognise transwomen as women without wanting to have sex with them in the same way i dont want to have sex with a great many men and that dosent stop me recognising them as men. Nope, it really dosen't, despite the attitude some men have. it's that thing that is the issue, a refusal to fuck them being taken as a threat to their identity is something that many women precieve as male behavior. holding onto that attitude does not help the trans* cause to be accepted by women as women. brennan's lot don't help to reduce the amount of amunition or paranoia, but it is all about them and rights, not the choices of individual women to fuck or not fuck whomever they damn well want to.

is that what they are saying, or is it more this:

If a small group wanted to talk about how ableism affected cultural notions of beauty and/or desirability, would feminist circles tolerate TERFs going on a yearlong campaign, claiming that those who aren’t able-bodied want to force lesbians to have sex with them?

In a culture that devalues and oppresses trans people, why is it not appropriate to discuss how these cisnormative beauty standards impact notions of desirability, how these biases relate to the fetishization of trans people and how all of this impacts the perception of trans people in queer spaces? Why is it not appropriate for transwomen to ask themselves how this affects the way we see ourselves and/or how this affects the way others view us?

 

[Fozzie Bear]

Grace Dent in farcical "me me me" moment:

If teenage girls want to join Isis in the face of all its atrocities, then they should leave and never return
[...]Of course, there’s a strong case to be made that fleeing abroad in search of Isis is simply a severe case of teen rebellion. Much, in fact, like the time, aged 15, when I pierced my nose and dyed my hair a sort of toxic cyan shade, imagining myself to look like a sexy mermaid, like Kate from The B52s, but instead resembling the Cookie Monster. I was a complete tit for almost all of the 1980s. The Nineties and Noughties were only marginally better. But still, I am lost for ideas on how we greet young teen rebels who hope to return here after mixing with Isis.[...]

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...y-should-leave-and-never-return-10065516.html

 

[el-ahrairah]

that's really terrible

 

[el-ahrairah]

that stavvers really is a vile person.



I don;t understand why her experience of sexual violence trumps everyone else's.

 

[el-ahrairah]

this is the article that provoked that outburst:

http://www.newstatesman.com/politic...d-it-was-female-only-spaces-helped-me-recover

 

[frogwoman]

Because its all about her.

You should be able to oppose terf bullshit and oppose what some - SOME - of the transactivists are coming out with. Its common sense surely? I dont why the existence of lesbian nationalists who think dildos are a conspiracy should mean you somehow ignore disgusting misogyny or threatening to kill someone because they signed a fucking letter you disagree with. Its like being opposed to anti semitism doesnt mean you tolerate scumbags waving israeli flags about.

 

[el-ahrairah]

it was just so amazingly hurtful. i'm almost in awe of it. i'm kind of a fan of being needlessly rude to liberals on the internet, but even i stopped and picked up my jaw.

 

[frogwoman]

Cathy brennan speaks for a small coterie of mostly american ultranationalists who among other things believe that:

All trans women are rapists
There is an anti lesbian conspiracy
All sex with a man is rape but straight and bi women enjoy this, so are brainwashed and lesbians nees to forget about them
Lesbians cannot rape other lesbians and no domestic violence ever takes place among women
Men cannot be raped
Dildos are an anti gay conspiracy because they are often penis shaped and are aimed at drawing lesbians back to shagging men again
Oh and: Valerie Solanas was a feminist hero

NOBODY takes these views seriously beyond a tiny, tiny minority of people. Yes, they should be opposed and id say theres a case based on no platforming cathy brennan if she came to speak at an event, based on the nature of some of her fans. Do these views have any chance of gaining any ground in the real world? Doea lesbian nationalism/terfism have any chance of implementing its agenda anywhere?

But someone like sarah brown (a lib dem politico btw) or some of the others who have got into influential positions and are far far more potentially damaging and dangerous than the terfs who are utterly marginal. I recommend people read that post hewitt wrote and some of the trans women on twitter who are speaking up to realise that it a widespread problem and not just a few people lashing out at brennan and her ilk.

Yes transphobes sometimes use elements of terf ideology as a justification for their views but the majority of anti trans violence is committed by men who have even less sympathy with terfs than anyone commenting here.

 

[ManchesterBeth]

'tone policing'?

There's also exclusionary policing in that academic language excludes non-white, disabled, non-cis male people. Nevermind the fact that I'm not white and disabled... Irony of ironies, I was called out by a white person. Insidious really, I shouldn't have to justify my experiences to anyone merely to prove 'how oppressed I am' or 'ZOMG I'm more oppressed than you.' I think there's quite a bit of racism in this liberal intersectional movement TBF.

Would have happily throttled that cunt if they tried pulling a similar manoeuvre on me irl.

 

[ManchesterBeth]

London Black Revolutionaries don't half come out with some rubbish on their Facebook page.

I got banned for arguing that black and brown people are capable of perpetuating racist *discourses*.

I sometimes want to create a group called intelligent London MENA revolutionaries and engage in sectarian squabbles and polemics with LBR. Infuriating people really. I genuinely don't want these lapdogs of imperialist and protestant metaphysical morality speaking up for me.

 

[ManchesterBeth]

J Ed SpineyNorman weepiper et al you know you were talking about the far right using this. Watching this itv doc now. Have a look at this - ex NF fash using the language ic intersectionality and identity politics to gain their organisation charitable status.

I recommend anyone with an interest in the far right, jihadism, anti fascism etc to watch this i only just started and its really good.
https://www.itv.com/itvplayer/exposure-charities-behaving-badly

Cheers Froggy, is it still available?

 

[frogwoman]

Cheers Froggy, is it still available?

Was last time i looked. Think its on youtube to

 

[toggle]

is that what they are saying, or is it more this:

no. that's an abstract discussion about how trans* bodies are either erased or fetishised and how that affects transpeople. it's primarily aimed at supporting transpeople. it isn't discussing who will or won't have sex with them, with associated entitlement and sulking. if they are being attacked for wanting to have a discussion of the former in a way that dosen't include the latter, then that is the kind of discussion that we all need to support and ask whether we are part of perpetuating the nasty. the latter does happen and needs to fuck right off.

 

[toggle]

I got banned for arguing that black and brown people are capable of perpetuating racist *discourses*.

oh gawds, oh my fucking gawds.


it's painful watching groups become a parody of themselves

 

[smokedout]

no. that's an abstract discussion about how trans* bodies are either erased or fetishised and how that affects transpeople. it's primarily aimed at supporting transpeople. it isn't discussing who will or won't have sex with them, with associated entitlement and sulking. if they are being attacked for wanting to have a discussion of the former in a way that dosen't include the latter, then that is the kind of discussion that we all need to support and ask whether we are part of perpetuating the nasty. the latter does happen and needs to fuck right off.

would you call it sulking or entitlement if it was disabled people or fat people moaning that people wouldnt have sex with them? I couldn't actually find much evidence of people doing this (not saying it isnt there), I don't think the piece by the porn actor froggy posted was actually doing that and I haven't really seen this as an organised demand by any trans-activists beyond trying to open up a discussion about how trans* bodies are either erased or fetishised. and having read some stuff today I can see why that is a big issue, the ability to form intimate and sexual relationships is a big part of what most people consider a normal and happy life, it seems that trans-people trying to have a discussion about this has led to an organised campaign by some radfems based on trying to prove that transwomen were trying to guilt trip lesbians into having sex with them. I cringe at some of the stuff on both sides of this row, but I do think the terf campaign has had some success in changing the discourse and inserting a lot of these ideas and they have seeped into mainstream thought, and that has been evidenced more than once on this thread.

 

[toggle]

yes. there is no right to sex, no right to undermine the body autonomy of other people.

 

[smokedout]

who is demanding that?

 

[smokedout]

big difference by the way between demanding people have sex with you or moaning about no-one wanting sex with you and questioning whether that is because of social dynamics and prejudices or whether trans-people people are just naturally undesirable

 

[smokedout]

dp

 

[ManchesterBeth]

oh gawds, oh my fucking gawds.


it's painful watching groups become a parody of themselves

They'd be at home on anti-imperialism.com

Grim really...

The thing is that they don't have a coherent line on much. You can't accuse them of following Lin Biao's farcical and outdated three worlds theory (like mtws do) because you don't see any sort of economic theory from them. Pressure group, more like. And one that is starting to become risible, at that...

 

[seventh bullet]

It wasn't his theory, it was Mao and Deng's (more the latter). I'm not up on the differences between groups in that internet milieu, (and well, who really gives a fuck?) but MTWs see the later Three Worlds as a reactionary nationalistic error.

They instead build on the mid-1960s Lin Biao-ised appraisal of the doctrine of PPW and its global significance (Long Live the Victory of People's War) at a time when China promoted an intensification and linking up of national liberation struggles as a response to Soviet revisionism (1965-71), and the prospects of a 'flying leap' in the economy and industrial development back home (and with it a coming cultural revolution to sweep the path for a further advance towards communism).

The above doesn't really matter anyway, and unlike Proletarian Democracy they're loonspuds with no real influence whatsoever.

 

[ManchesterBeth]

It wasn't his theory, it was Mao and Deng's (more the latter). I'm not up on the differences between groups in that internet milieu, (and well, who really gives a fuck?) but MTWs see the later Three Worlds as a reactionary nationalistic error.

They instead build on the mid-1960s Lin Biao-ised appraisal of the doctrine of PPW and its global significance (Long Live the Victory of People's War) at a time when China promoted an intensification and linking up of national liberation struggles as a response to Soviet revisionism (1965-71), and the prospects of a 'flying leap' in the economy and industrial development back home (and with it a coming cultural revolution to sweep the path for a further advance towards communism).

The above doesn't really matter anyway, and unlike Proletarian Democracy they're loonspuds with no real influence whatsoever.

Cheers mate, I was under the impression that it was the other way around, in that Maoists of the RIM variety (1993 long live Marxism-Leninism-Maoism) rejected the later three worlds theory. I can swear that I read a Maoist from the PC-RCP (I think?) harping on about how three worlds was a Lin Biao aberration etc etc etc.

Then again MLMs of the 1993 variety aren't that far removed from the MTW understanding of the labour aristocracy, notwithstanding their significant disagreements.

 

[seventh bullet]

The labour aristocracy stuff is there with the global People's War concept put forward by Lin Biao (they're both central to MTWs politics, or at least one part of them). From what I understand of it, they did reject the Three Worlds Theory, those that became the MTW loons of today. It was never Lin Biao's (he was dead and the tendency he represented was defeated as 'ultra-left' by then). A Maoist doesn't know his/her 'Maoism,' lol.

To make it easy peasy without getting into the sectarian minutiae of crackpot American Maoism I have only a limited knowledge of anyway, here's one of their older videos (before forming LLCO) I posted here ages ago. It's basically their version of Lin Biao's work (which reflected the Chinese alternative for world revolution in the mid-1960s via national liberation struggles, pressuring a revisionist Soviet Union to come back to the cause of socialism and fighting the western imperialists) but adapted to include their 'global class analysis' of no longer proletarian/first-world labour aristocrat shite. From about three minutes in it appears with 'exploiter populations.'



The 'flying leap' talk (reviving a Great Leap politics of sorts in rural areas which the GPCR had opened up for the true believers) lasted briefly from the late 1960s but ended with Lin's death. It wasn't that popular with other military leaders anyway.

All of this is just middle class weirdos with expensive educations and too much time on their hands. Like I said, PD is our best hope for a better world.