Transgender feminist @papierhache reacted to yesterday’s notice exactly as predicted, by claiming victimhood, denouncing me as a bully “with sycophant minions” (that would be you, dear readers), and generally lecturing that I am the pluperfect example of how “people … use social media to orchestrate abusive behavior.”
Remember: @papierhache jumped into my timeline in response to incitement by a troll trying to stir up trouble because I’d used the common slang “shemale” in promoting a post about conflicts between transgender activists and radical lesbian feminists. And after sending me multiple messages condemning me as a terrible hater — because slang is the New Fascism — @papierhache evidently thought she would evade further criticism for her moralistic posturing.
Think again, sweetheart.
Criticism is “abuse,” disagreement is “harassment,” and contradictory facts are “hate” in the Orwellian lexicon of the Left.
Should we ignore these phony victimhood claims or laugh them off as trivial? No, because the Left is attempting to silence their critics by categorizing dissent as hate speech — exactly the point that originally called my attention to this bizarre conflict:
RadFem 2013 was a conference in London, which resulted in a gigantic controversy because radical feminists insisted on excluding the “transgendered” from their female-only event, and one of the featured speakers, Australian lesbian feminist Professor Sheila Jeffreys, was about to publish a new book, Gender Hurts: A Feminist Analysis of the Politics of Transgenderism, that was deeply offensive to the “T” people represented in the LGBT acronym. . . .
At one point in April, the venue tried to cancel the event after discovering that “certain language was used and some statements were made about transgender people that would go against our equalities and diversity policy.”
That was a blue-on-blue conflict between two competing tribes of far-left fringe extremists, but as such it was a classic example of the tactics of thought control the Left finds acceptable. Strange as it is to say, in this example, I agree with the radical feminists. If they wish to restrict their gathering to “cis females” (genetic women), the “trans women” have no right to demand inclusion.
For transgender activists to seek to shut down a radical feminist conference because it violates a “diversity policy” is a profound irony. The Competitive Victimhood Derby, as I have called it, is ultimately a zero-sum game, and you can scarcely blame lesbian feminists for complaining when they find people who were born male trying to co-opt the feminist brand. But this is what transgender feminism is, and one of Kat Hache’s transcomrades has a column at Feministing that includes this:
When I wrote a rebuttal to the flagrant transmisogyny evinced by Julie Burchill in her now-infamous Observer editorial, I was careful to keep the focus on what she said while also ensuring that her fundamental humanity remained in the frame of my criticism. I spared her no critique, but I targeted what was fair game: the written record of her words and ideas, the very things she had submitted to a public forum. To tell her to kill herself or worse, as some did, was unaccountably out of bounds.
“Flagrant transmisogyny”? Julie Burchill? That rang a bell:
Transsexual Bullies Successfully Censor
Feminist Writers Who Criticized Them
Have you forgotten? Suzanne Moore, a columnist for the British New Statesman, complained about beauty standards which present “the ideal body shape” for women as “that of a Brazilian transsexual.” Moore was inundated with criticism, and one of her feminist allies, Julie Burchill, derided Moore’s antagonists as “a bunch of dicks in chicks’ clothing” and “bed-wetters in bad wigs.”
Strange as it may seem, the feminists were completely routed by the transgender community in that conflict, demonstrating who now possesses the superior claim of victimhood, so that feminists are now riding in the back of their own bus, so to speak.
The transgender activists who silenced their feminist critics — the Guardian actually unpublished one of Burchill’s columns — nevertheless claim they are the ones at risk of being silenced:
I shall continue to write in spite of having been threatened with rape, in spite of having been told that I’m a “shemale feminazi with too much sand in her fake vagina,” in spite of having been called every misogynist, transmisogynist, and transphobic slur in the book many times over, and in spite of having been accused of “man-hating, race-baiting, white-hating,” and the utterly unreal crime of “misandry.” In spite of being called too loud, too shrill, too whiny, too sexist (against men, of course), and “heterophobic.” In spite of being told I should avoid graduate school unless I had a “rich boyfriend.” In spite of all that, I speak.
Katherine Cross, formerly a man, is now a better feminist than you, Julie Burchill, and she expects to be celebrated for her courage. Meanwhile, “bullying the marginalized” . . .
Yes, of course! The courageous Kat Heche, barely 12 hours after taunting me as “emasculated” (!) now decides that her critics are engaged in “textbook psychological projection.”
Oh, what delicious layers and layers of irony . . .
*You’re welcome.
We despise you also, you self righteous little twit.
No, this post and the majority of the accompanying responses are self loathing on parade. he could have saved a few thousand words by just writing, “I hate fags”, because that’s all this boils down to.
Sickophant Minion reporting for duty!!!
1. If one is biologically a man, and attracted to women, and doesn’t undergo gender reassignment, that makes him a heterosexual him.
2. If one is biologically a man, and attracted to women, and merely has to say he is a woman (gender reassigment optional, legally), that makes him a lesbian her.
3. If one is biologically a man, and attracted to men, and doesn’t call himself a her, he is a homosexual him.
4. If one is biologically a man, an attracted to men, and calls himself a her, that makes him a heterosexual her.
5. Exchange the mans and womans and hims and hers for rules applying to biological women.
I need a libretto to keep this version of Madam Butterfly straight, if you’ll pardon the pun.
Awesome. Glad to hear it!
Too bad “Ballad of a Thin Man” was written about people like you.
Actually it was written about the clueless like a politically correct idiot savant like yourself. You know all about the nuts and bolts of depravity but your clueless about living a meaningful, productive psychologically and morally healthy life.
I though Smitty was a Lieutenant Commander.
It’s a reference to the old Evil Overlord List.
http://www.eviloverlord.com/lists/overlord.html
Thinking they’re crazy is not despising them.
OUCH!
I recently promoted my minion from “apprentice evil henchperson” to “evil henchperson”.
Translation: men will do anything To get some action.
Now you’ve got to do it as “Like a Rolling Stone.”
Oh, dear. You so need everything to be reduced to “hate”. That is not what is happening in either the article or the comments.
Do try to keep up.
This is probably the time to delicately enquire regarding the long history of transvestive dress and behavior, just to see what happens.
there is textbook projection, all right.
You don’t know the song, do you? It’s about shallow, fashion obsessed conformists. Who think that they are iconoclasts.
I suggest you examine a mirror.
Another latecomer with a poor command of English. Bye now.
When you have a smoothly working, highly informal team such as ours, rigid definitions of roles and titles are actually counterproductive. 🙂
How dare you demote the Admiral of the Afghan Seas! Next, you’ll be depriving the WYB of his hereditary title, Colonial Governor & Toll Collector of the Panjshir Tunnel!
It almost makes we want to turn off AdBlocker.
This is the same Kat that has serious issues with free speech at thoughtcatalog.com. Free speech so long as she agrees with you.
No mater how much lipstick you slather onto a pig, it is still just a pig. And no matter how much you chop up a male and inject female hormones into him, at the end of the day, it’s still just a chopped-up, hormonally-confused male.
One thing it is NOT and never will be, and that is a woman.
To try and say anything other than that is a lie. You can engage in your own lies and your own self-deception, but don’t you dare expect me to play along.
I will NEVER call something that was born with a prostate and not a uterus a woman, she, her or anything other than what it is.
That’s where I draw the line.
I cannot and will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. Here I stand, I can do no other, so help me God. Amen.
— Martin Luther
Yeah, but isn’t that what Kat Heche says about sexual identities?
I was thinking “Neopolitan” but they would have to be tri-colored for that.
Someone please explain to me how a transgender man (ie a biological male with some female hormones and a few sacks of silicone in his chest) would win a war with feminists over what is really best for women. I mean, did it never cross the transgendered person’s mind that maybe he’s not really a woman, does not really understand what women go through, and therefore, shouldn’t be telling women how to behave and what to feel?
The fact that they are having this fight seems to underscore the absurdity of the transgender rights movement.
I only hate communists.
But I enjoy making fun of drama queens (irrespective of their preferences or testicular status).
My understanding is that Kat hasn’t had the surgery, he “identifies” as female and expects to be treated like one anyway.
Of course the only way to be sure is like with regular cats, to lift up the tail – and we don’t seem to have any volunteers.
Now that right there was funny. I don’t care who you are.
Ah, didn’t do so well the last evaluation cycle, huh?
No kidding? I was a LCDR. Not trusted by any means, though.
For that matter, one may be a dick without having one.
And then there are the assholes…
LGBT. What a collection of sexual sad sacks. We give them far too much attention for their numbers.
Brilliant riposte, Mary.
GBLT-eieio
I think it’s what would politely be referred to as “honorary plural.”
The funny part is that most conservative blog owners are easily identified by all the arrows in their backs.
Sycophantism is simply not a character trait of the right.
I used to think she was overdubbed by Captain Beefheart or maybe Wolfman Jack.
Amazing what straight liquor and cigarettes for breakfast will do to your voice.
Yeah, okay… so are we supposed to drop into a fetal position and whine because your dropped the Big Truth Bomb on us?
Not gonna happen, Sparky. Thanks for playing.
The first time I heard of GLBT I thought it was maybe a new sandwich.
Well, okay, it could be, but not the kind I was hoping for.
As much as I really do not like modern feminists, I can understand their resentment, and it has buck-all to do with “bigotry”.
Feminists see this as an “appropriation”, an otherwise privileged male trying to edge in on their victim territory. Regardless of other issues he faced in childhood, none of them were the issues that biological females face, and he essentially “cut in line” up the victimhood hierarchy.
It’s basically like being an illegal alien in the Oppression Olympics.
Or Italian at the very least …
Heh. Ever the consummate professional Wombat!
Now they just exploit themselves …
That’s why every good position description has “other tasks as assigned” at the end. That allows a proper operation to have that proper table of organization.
Almost…
These types all swim in the same sea of indoctrination. Much is paleo, and neo-Marxist, but there is more.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/57332640/Purifying-the-World-What-the-New-Radical-Ideology-Stands-For
Which would make sense in a world where victimhood didn’t trump all else. But on the left victimhood is the sin qua non of political legitimacy. Those most ‘oppressed’ are those most deserving of power and respect. Absent greater victimhood (s)he most certainly loses.
Hence, the necessity for McCain. If it wasn’t him in particular it would be someone else.