Transsexuals Should Cut It Out

January 13, 2013


Transsexuals should cut it out

It’s never a good idea for those who feel oppressed to start bullying others in turn

Suzanne Moore.

Suzanne Moore, victim of the trans lobby. Photograph: Sarah Lee for the Guardian

From The Observer:

“The brilliant writer Suzanne Moore and I go back a long way. I first met her when she was a young single mother living in a council flat; she took me out to interview me about my novel Ambition (republished by Corvus Books this spring, since you ask) for dear dead City Limits magazine. “I’ve got an entertaining budget of £12.50!” she said proudly. “Sod that, we’re having lobster and champagne at Frederick’s and I’m paying,” I told her. Half a bottle of Bolly later, she looked at me with faraway eyes: “Ooo, I could get to like this…” And so she did.

I have observed her rise to the forefront of this country’s great polemicists with a whole lot of pride – and just a tiny bit of envy. I am godmother to her three brilliant, beautiful daughters. Though we differ on certain issues we will have each other’s backs until the sacred cows come home.

With this in mind, I was incredulous to read that my friend was being monstered on Twitter, to the extent that she had quit it, for supposedly picking on a minority – transsexuals. Though I imagine it to be something akin to being savaged by a dead sheep, as Denis Healey had it of Geoffrey Howe, I nevertheless felt indignant that a woman of such style and substance should be driven from her chosen mode of time-wasting by a bunch of dicks in chicks’ clothing.

To my mind – I have given cool-headed consideration to the matter – a gaggle of transsexuals telling Suzanne Moore how to write looks a lot like how I’d imagine the Black and White Minstrels telling Usain Bolt how to run would look. That rude and ridic.

Here’s what happened. In a book of essays called Red: The Waterstones Anthology, Suzanne contributed a piece about women’s anger. She wrote that, among other things, women were angry about “not having the ideal body shape – that of a Brazilian transsexual”. Rather than join her in decrying the idea that every broad should aim to look like an oven-ready porn star, the very vociferous transsexual lobby and their grim groupies picked on the messenger instead.

I must say that my only experience of the trans lobby thus far was hearing about the vile way they have persecuted another of my friends, the veteran women’s rights and anti-domestic violence activist Julie Bindel – picketing events where she is speaking about such minor issues as the rape of children and the trafficking of women just because she refuses to accept that their relationship with their phantom limb is the most pressing problem that women – real and imagined – are facing right now.

Similarly, Suzanne’s original piece was about the real horror of the bigger picture – how the savagery of a few old Etonians is having real, ruinous effects on the lives of the weakest members of our society, many of whom happen to be women. The reaction of the trans lobby reminded me very much of those wretched inner-city kids who shoot another inner-city kid dead in a fast-food shop for not showing them enough “respect”. Ignore the real enemy – they’re strong and will need real effort and organisation to fight. How much easier to lash out at those who are conveniently close to hand!

But they’d rather argue over semantics. To be fair, after having one’s nuts taken off (see what I did there?) by endless decades in academia, it’s all most of them are fit to do. Educated beyond all common sense and honesty, it was a hoot to see the screaming mimis accuse Suze of white feminist privilege; it may have been this that made her finally respond in the subsequent salty language she employed to answer her Twitter critics: “People can just fuck off really. Cut their dicks off and be more feminist than me. Good for them.”

She, the other JB and I are part of the minority of women of working-class origin to make it in what used to be called Fleet Street and I think this partly contributes to the stand-off with the trannies. (I know that’s a wrong word, but having recently discovered that their lot describe born women as ‘Cis’ – sounds like syph, cyst, cistern; all nasty stuff – they’re lucky I’m not calling them shemales. Or shims.) We know that everything we have we got for ourselves. We have no family money, no safety net. And we are damned if we are going to be accused of being privileged by a bunch of bed-wetters in bad wigs.

It’s been noted before that cyberspace, though supposedly all new and shiny, is plagued by the age-old boredom of men telling women not to talk and threatening them with all kinds of nastiness if they persist in saying what they feel.

The trans lobby is now saying that it wasn’t so much the initial piece as Suzanne’s refusal to apologise when told to that “made” them drive her from Twitter. Presumably she is meant to do this in the name of solidarity and the “struggle”, though I find it very hard to imagine this mob struggling with anything apart from the English language and the concept of free speech.

To have your cock cut off and then plead special privileges as women – above natural-born women, who don’t know the meaning of suffering, apparently – is a bit like the old definition of chutzpah: the boy who killed his parents and then asked the jury for clemency on the grounds he was an orphan.

Shims, shemales, whatever you’re calling yourselves these days – don’t threaten or bully us lowly natural-born women, I warn you. We may not have as many lovely big swinging Phds as you, but we’ve experienced a lifetime of PMT and sexual harassment and many of us are now staring HRT and the menopause straight in the face – and still not flinching. Trust me, you ain’t seen nothing yet. You really won’t like us when we’re angry.”


223 Responses to “Transsexuals Should Cut It Out”

  1. GallusMag Says:


    • liberalsareinsane Says:

      Reasoning with them was your first mistake.

    • “…I nevertheless felt indignant that a woman of such style and substance should be driven from her chosen mode of time-wasting by a bunch of DICKS IN CHICKS CLOTHING.”

      Hey, isn’t that kind of the transsexual equivalent of calling someone a “Cunt”?

      Why not next time, just use the expression “Tranny Nigger”? I mean, don’t just hint at your slurs.

      Really go for the gusto.


      -Chloe Z. DeLoach



      • Marie-France Lesage Says:

        “Zoe” is one sick dude.

        He should wear a label: “Appropriation R Us”.

        It’s not enough to appropriate the struggle of real women for liberation from patriarchal oppression, he also has to appropriate the struggle of racial minorities.

        He’s an “equal opportunity” appropriative opportunist.

    • Emi Says:

      I am a biological male that identifies as a female and i agree with you real women. It is one thing to say that people like me deserve to have our struggles and rights recognized. It is another to claim that your struggles are ours and that we represent each other, to take credit for your victories and claim sympathy for your defeats. And nothing to me is more appalling than this disgusting jealous hatred. I would like to apologize to all (actual biological, real, etc) women for this. Please don’t think we are all this way. Many of us simply want to peacefully coexist with the world and find our place in it. To all you transpeople out there, please spread kindness. It’s the only right way to go. We have few enough friends as it is.

    • d Says:

      i know a lot of transwomen like me who are alone wanting a man in our lives and we see many men rejecting us, because they dont want to accept us out of their own hatred and ignorance towards transpeople, and at the same time, seeing couples together, so of course we would feel jealous of women and can hate men at the same time! and feel that it is so unfair!

      • GallusMag Says:

        It’s not “transphobia” that men don’t want to be with another man romantically.

      • LC Says:

        Hey, d: Not every woman can get a “man in their lives” just because they really really want one. No one owes you love or validation for your selfish narcissism.

  2. GallusMag Says:

    Please comment OVER THERE when comments open. Feel free to Re-post your comments here.

  3. cherryblossomlife Says:

    I’ve posted me piece. Can I post it here now 🙂

    Thank you Julie Burchill for this excellent article!

    It’s about time someone stood up to the bullies, I was about to give up on the Guardian.

    Yes, they’ve got Phds coming out of their earholes haven’t they, all in the field of “gender” theory QUITE FORGETTING that it was women who first articulated the concept of gender and defined it as the basis of female oppression. But that’s all been brushed under the carpet in the academy while they’ve re-hashed what our foremothers fought for. They have coopted women’s studies and replaced it with “gender” studies. Re-writing history… they’re male to the core. Our grandmothers are turning in their graves.

    WELL DONE. In the name of free speech, once again WELL DONE on this article.

  4. cherryblossomlife Says:

    I’m on a bit of a roll over there.

    “Those people referring to this article “Hate Speech” have clearly not read what transwomen have got to say about women.

    Transwomen are not women. Men can never be women. Pointing out this scientific FACT is not hate speech.

    WHy on EARTH are they pretending to be? It’s insulting And WHY oh WHY is the medical establishment pretending a person can change sex?

    Are you trying to say NATURE is hateful?

    • Bannister Says:

      Thank you, thank you, thank you for this post.

      You are right, transsexual men are NOT women. They are MEN who had their genitals surgically altered to RESEMBLE women’s gentiles. But this does not make them women.

      I am sure that most feminists would agree that a woman should NOT be defined by her genitals alone. A woman is MANY things, not just a collection of body parts. There are physical, emotional, chemical and yes, even spiritual aspects of being a woman that cannot be recreated by simply changing the appearance of one’s sexual organs.

      For example, one defining characteristic of a woman is the presence of a WOMB – regardless of whether or not she chooses to have children. A transsexual man does not have a womb. He cannot have children. HE does not have to endure a monthly menstrual cycle and HE will never have to endure menopause.

      We INSULT women by claiming that surgically altered men are “women” and by referring to them with the pronoun “she.” We also insult our own intelligence when we adopt such scientifically inaccurate language.

      As THINKING people, let’s drop the politically correct nonsense and embrace science instead. Let’s simply call transsexuals what they are: Transsexuals. That is the scientifically accurate term, it is not offensive to anyone and we should return to it.

      • Brunhilda Says:

        I’ll add to this:
        for those women that are infertile, and unable to bear children (not referring to trans or intersexed people here) or have difficulty with bearing children, are spat on by the patriarchy, because they cannot have children. They are divorced by their husbands (or forced into nunneries, or killed in previous centuries) due to their infertility.

        This is something that will NEVER happen to a transwoman, because no one in their right mind would look at someone with a male body/chromosomes, and say ‘But, you’re a woman, you should be able to have kids.’

        In the past cultures, that’s precisely WHY (some) men liked to bed adolescent boys in the past (and in some cases/countries, created classes of prostitutes that were made of up castrated men dressed as women); without the possibility of pregnancy, there was no possibility of children, and thus of responsibility regarding sexual acts.

  5. moose Says:

    I did post over there, just saying that she seems to assume that all ‘transwomen’ have their genitals removed while we know that’s not true… But I feel her article’s tone will do far more damage than good to ‘our side.’

    • cherryblossomlife Says:

      That’s probably true, it’ll be quoted out of context forever and ever Amen, but, God, it did feel good to read.

  6. liberalsareinsane Says:

    Excellent article and bang on! Trans are mentally ill people being taken advantage of and enabled by the medical machine. Many of these guys are violent woman haters so it’s ironic that they are so desperate to have society accept them as women. You’re not women and never will be!

    As for the trans tribe in these comments you’re all so transparent. None of you are “natural born women” you’re deluded dudes with a fetish. See a mental health professional.

    • You are sick… I hope you know this. I AM A ‘BORN FEMALE’ and I completely support my trans brothers and sisters. Until you have lived their life, you nor no one else has the right to say how they should live. Just as no one has the right to tell you how to live. I am a nurse and a queer community member. I am an activist and an social justice fighter. I stand to fight against a$$holes like you who continue to sling hate. The ‘medical machine’ didn’t create being trans. Are you serious??? Get real! I don’t even know why I waste my time with you or any of the ‘so-called’ feminists. YOU CANNOT BE A FEMINIST UNLESS YOU STAND FOR THE RIGHTS OF ALL WOMEN.

      • GallusMag Says:

        Please don’t leave abusive comments.
        No one is telling men “how to live”. We are asserting our right as women and feminists to discuss sex-roles and the way they oppress women: without being threatened with rape, violence and murder, the way your male friends consistently do. There is nothing “hateful” about that.That is what this post is about. That is why it is titled “Transsexuals Should Cut It Out”. You ARE aware that you are telling women to be silent about receiving constant male threats of violence? That seems “sick” to me. It seems sick that you should defend the rights of males to be violent against women.


        And … you are the person who just posted on Dirt’s blog telling her that she is really a male, because she does not perform femininity as you feel all females must. THAT is the kind of egregiously sexist person you are.

        P.S. Sorry about your porn career.

      • Brunhilda Says:

        How can a so-called ‘transwomen’ know what a woman feels like?
        Their identities are formed by:
        1) Cultural stereotypes, which are oppressive to women (and men, but in a lesser form).
        2) Feelings, which are not quantifiable.

        Their identities are formed on things that are imaginary, and so logically their identities are imaginary, and they are delusional.

      • oopster74 Says:

        And unless you have psychic abilities that the rest of humanity are unaware of, no one knows how another human being feels, we can only empathise with each other.

  7. liberalsareinsane Says:

    “I am a “born woman”

    LOL. No you’re a dude playing with himself in delusions of grandeur. Here’s a tip: women don’t refer to themselves as “born women” only trannies do. When the real world wakes up to the fraud and appropriation of the loons in drags the shit is going to hit the fan. We need more articles like this!! The histrionics in the comments by the trans brigade only proves it. You’re running scared, dearies.

    • Tim Says:

      I’d never normally comment on a radfem blog as it’s best to just leave you all to it, but this made me laugh. JB refers to herself twice as a ‘natural-born woman’ in the very article you’re talking about. Did you even read it? If so, does that make her a ‘tranny’? 🙂

      • Marie-France Lesage Says:

        The “trans” cult has fucked with our use of language so much that it becomes difficult to communicate with one-another.

        Up until fairly recently the word WOMAN was clear to all: member of the species homo sapiens sapiens born with XX chromosomes and female sex organs.

        Now that we have MALES flouncing around, attacking and threatening people with death in a fire if we don’t agree that their penis, testicles, XY chromosomes, etc. are all features of their “womanliness” and “lesbianism”, how in the hell are we supposed to communicate?

        If you say “born woman” they insist that THEY were born women — penis, testicles, XY chromosomes and all — because of an (imaginary) “lady spot” in their (male) brain. As such, they believe that their penis is a female penis, their testicles are female testicles, their XY chromosomes are female chromosomes, etc. ad nauseum.

        I will sometimes go overboard to make my point: “natal, biological, real, female women”. But these crazy dudes will claim it all as their own.

        We should just be able to say “woman” — but what with the inmates running the asylum these days, we do our best.

        That you find this predicament so very funny just shines a bright light on how little compassion or empathy you have for half the human race — the half that is so utterly oppressed within patriarchy that our very biology is being defined out of existence by abusive, appropriative, mentally ill men — and almost no one cares enough to come to our defense in the matter.

      • doublevez Says:

        I thought she was “taking the piss.”

      • karmarad Says:

        Thanks, marie-France, well said.

  8. GallusMag Says:

    Seems your comments were censored.

    And Suzanne Moore’s photo has been removed and replaced with a photo of a computer keyboard.

    • cherryblossomlife Says:

      YES, my comments have been censored.
      Fuck. Piss. FUck.

    • KRS Says:

      This is definitely concerning, along with the calls branding this article as hate speech. Trans claim oppression but always act the role of the bully trying to silence people who rationally oppose their delusions of gender. I have never seen such vitriolic hatred from the lesbian and gay community or for that matter any other marginalised group which is espoused by the transgender community.

      • Marie-France Lesage Says:

        The entire “trans” mythology is a form of hate speech against women — promulgated for the most part by misogynist heterosexual males with a sexual fetish for wearing/appropriating/being their idea of “woman”.

        They know that they MUST silence truly feminist women in order for their hateful genderist agenda to take hold in wider society — our analysis cuts right through their sexist mythology like a warm knife through butter.

        That’s why they focus on the younger generation — the currently popular flavor of identity politics and magical thinking makes kids easy targets for “trans” insanity.

  9. Phorest Says:

    Quick tip – ‘reply’ to the first comment and your comment can appear on the first page! (assuming it won’t get deleted that is)

    Hurray for Julie Burchill!

    This rarely gets into the mainstream press because any dissent, any questioning, gets labelled as ‘transphobia’ and effectively censored. So we’re not allowed to talk about how transwomen are threatening natural born women with rape and murder every time they question trans ideology, how lesbians are being harassed for not wanting to have sex with male bodied persons (Google ‘Cotton Ceiling’), how sex offenders are using ‘gender identity’ to access women’s toilets and changing rooms, how younger and younger children are being targeted by ‘gender experts’ for ‘transitioning’ if they deviate from sexist social stereotypes.

    Women bloggers are now expected to put ‘trigger warnings’ on their posts if they mention menstruation (because transwomen can’t menstruate), transwomen are now trying to co-opt the concept of reproductive rights (women not dying or being left disabled because of a lack of access to contraception, abortion and pre-natal medical care) to be about transwomen getting a sex change.

    Transwomen are not the most oppressed people on the planet. A middle-class white man transitioning in middle age after establishing a career in a male dominated field (usually with a wife to support him), is not more oppressed than a girl child porn into poverty in China or Africa or India.

    And let’s just mention the idiocy of the term ‘cis’ briefly, because, under trans ideology, if you are not ‘trans’ you are ‘cis’, which means you are entirely happy with your own body (ignore rates of eating disorders and self-harm among young women), perform ‘gender’ perfectly (except none of us ever do, and not all of us want to), and are somehow ‘privileged’ for being ‘allowed’ to be feminine, when any worthwhile feminist analysis sees femininity and gender roles as a significant part of women’s oppression.

    PS: GM, I usually use a different name on this blog (you’ll be able to tell by the email address), but would like to keep IDs separate, I hope that’s ok?

    • Brunhilda Says:

      As a question… how would they frame things for anorexic or fat people?
      (I’m going to use the word ‘fat’ because then I get to invent the term ‘trans fat people’ for anorexic people).

      (This is an analogy to trans vs. reality)

      If an anorexic person thinks they are fat, we don’t give them liposuction. However, if we accept their identity as a ‘fat person’ and their obsession with being skinny, we should give them liposuction. Thus, they are ‘trans-fat people.’ (Compared to the normal ‘fat people’ who aren’t necessarily okay with their own bodies). Note also that anorexic people often dress in a way that is similar to how ‘cis fat people’ dress, hiding their bodies with clothes.

      We would thus also have ‘trans-skinny’ people, who are fat people (I’m going to lazily define this as a a BMI over 25, which is inaccurate, but it’s an analogy), who identify as skinny people, and insist on dressing as ‘skinny people should dress.’

      Then of course, this creates the ‘cis-skinny people’ who are physically thin, and like being thin, and identify as thin, and the ‘cis-fat people’ who identify as fat, and like being fat.

      This can be used an an analogy for why trans is largely insane.

      As is stands, there are ‘fat people’ who are like their bodies, and those who don’t. What we don’t have are fat people who identify as fat people (as far as I know anyway).
      I mean, who on earth would identify themselves like this: “Hi, I’m a size 16 girl.’

      No one, unless they are pointing out the ISSUES with larger-size clothing.

      Similarly, people rarely (if ever) identify themselves as a ‘size 2, girl.’

      Furthermore, there are no rules for how ‘fat people’ or ‘skinny people’ dress. People dress the way they want. I’ve got a BMI under 25 (skinny, for the purposes of this analogy), but I wear loose ‘fat people’ clothing. Does this mean I am a ‘trans fat’ person (anorexic)? No. It means I like wearing loose clothing (and that it’s cold here).

      Similarly, I have friends who have BMI’s over 25, who wear tight clothing ‘skinny people clothing,’ and who look AWESOME wearing it.

      The point is, an anorexic person is a person with a mental health disorder, not a ‘trans fat’ person (for those of you who haven’t gotten the joke, trans fats are often cited as being v. bad for people).
      Similarly, a fat person who wears tight clothes isn’t a ‘trans skinny’ person, they’re a person who likes wearing tight clothes.

      If a man (has a penis) wears a dress, or likes pink, or does any ‘stereotypically female activities’ then he is a man who likes those things. Period. He’s not (necessarily) gay, or trans, or anything else.

      Yes, he is a person who likes ‘female things’ but that doesn’t change his biological reality of being male, nor will it make his social experiences the same as a woman’s.

      If a man does ‘girly things’ then he will be mocked by some other men (and some women probably); a woman who wears a dress is rarely mocked for doing ‘girly things’ except as a giant social patriarchal thumb, telling her that she is lesser, because she is female, and because she does those things.

      What is an what is not ‘female’ has changed over time, depending on society; what has not changed is that it has been derided as a bad thing, because of how females are viewed under the patriarchy, as lesser objects for sex and production of other objects and male children.

      Those trans who identify as a female because they like doing ‘female things’ are re-enforcing the rule that females must do certain things, because they decide that if they (males) are doing such bad things, they must be somehow women, rather than men.

      This kind of thought is no doubt pushed by other patriarchal men as well, because if a man were allowed to do ‘women things’ without being shamed, then shaming women for doing ‘women things’ would end, and part of the patriarchy would collapse.

      This of course only looks at people who use stereotypical things to defines female vs. male, as well as their own trans-ness.

      There are those transwomen who state that they ‘do stereotypical male things’ and yet that they somehow identify as women based on ‘feelings.’ Some may cite brain-research into female and male brains.

      Unfortunately, this makes no sense. First of all, because of basic biology:

      Now, human beings brains and bodies are tied together; if you don’t eat enough food with iron in it, you will become anemic, and then less red blood cells will be produced, resulting in less blood flow to the brain, which can cause damage in the long term, fainting, etc. This is a fact.

      If I ‘feel’ that I have eaten things with iron in them, this will not stop me from fainting should I fail to eat something with iron in it.

      Similarly, if a person were able to have a ‘female brain’ and a male body, it would be MEASURABLE hormonally. It should be noted that hormones change over time (menopause anyone? The menstrual cycle? Puberty?), and it has been shown that people’s brains are largely plastic (look up Bach Y Rita’s work); if you remove half of a person’s brain, they may still function as before, because the brain will rewire. This indicates that the structure of the brain is largely unimportant.

      As it stands, the research done between the brains of trans women vs. women and men is fail for several reasons:

      1) Low test subjects; as it stands, you need at least 40 subjects to have a test be statistically significant.

      2) This is a PSYCHOLOGY test, which means that it is done on humans; we cannot breed humans for generations, raise them in controlled environments, standardize them for sex, race, age, gender, certain genes, or even what foods they eat for the months leading up the tests. This means that the tests are in and of themselves very flawed, due to a lack of control.

      3) Many of the tests use transwomen who have taken (or are on) estrogen supplements; estrogen supplements have been show to enlarge the hypothalamus, and HEY! Women generally have a larger hypothalamus than men (depending on what age you measure them at).

      There are many other issues, but these are some of the major ones.

      As such, you cannot tell anything from the tests one way or another. Not to mention the obvious ‘well if women’s brains are structured a certain way/have certain hormones, then they must be better equipped for certain tasks,’ which re-enforced the gender-identity concept, of being liking things because of their genitalia, which is very stupid. There are all sorts of women who don’t like being vaginally penetrated, and yet they still have vaginas and brains. Even if you operate something with your genitalia (as in, a genitalia-operated object for one sex, but not the other), that doesn’t mean that you WANT to.

      Now, we are left with ‘feelings.’ This is an issue as well, partly because no one can read another person’s brain, and know what they feel, and partly because feelings change over time; after all, you probably don’t ALWAYS feel the same way about your best friend ALL the time (we’re not Tinkerbell! We can feel more than one emotion at once!), or anyone, or anything else.

      This is also problematic because these ‘feelings’ are often supposedly supported by the concept of a female/male brain, (when really there are people with brains who use them, and people who don’t) and/or the concept of females liking certain things, and males liking different things.

      Obviously all women don’t feel the same (otherwise why would there be lesbians and straight women? Or bisexual women? Why would some women like toast and others not like toast?), and so claiming that you ‘feel like a woman’ is false. Women are not a homogenous group; some women are racist morons like Anne Cultier, some are smart, outspoken women like Oprah, others are all sorts of other things. To deny that women have different feelings is to deny women their own separate identities from each other, and to reduce them to interchangeable objects for men to use.

      The fact that some women support trans women and some women do not is clear proof that not all women feel the same. Lesbians, bisexuals, and straights are all more proof.

      As such, feelings are not enough to define being female.

      What is female? Female is being BORN female, with a body that is assumed to be female (which is what happens for the rare intersex person), who is then treated as lower, as lesser, because of her SEX.

      If she likes ‘girly things’ she is mocked for ‘being a girl’ and being weak. If she likes ‘male things’ she is mocked and told she cannot do them, or cannot do them as well as a male.

      If she menstruates, she is mocked for being a girl, and her voice is silenced because she is presumed to be ‘hysterical’ over her hormones. If she is infertile, she is mocked, shamed, and considered worthless, because she cannot perform the only function men value women for apart from sex. If she is pregnant, she is considered weak, and the value of her own life is considered less than that of the fetuses’ (in some places. In some cases, her life is considered lesser than the fetuses’ until the fetus has been proven female).

      The fact is, there is not simply a binary in society of female = bad, male = good, but there is a double-standard within the so-called female things; regardless of what we do, we are HATED for it, not because we do it, but because of our sex, and because that is the single unifying thing that men can use to force us back to the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant and pissed off.

  10. Well, I think it’s a dreadful article.

    The problem is that JB has managed to turn the the issue away from serious genderist-woo and the consequent harm of that, from the very real problem of threats, violence, lies, silencing towards women from the transactivists (which I would very much like to see properly addressed on the mainstream press), to sounding like the real and only issue is a bunch of mean old “out of touch” women calling the poor troubled trans folks really really mean names.

    With the very predictable response of course, that any half decent (but ignorant of the real problem) person will side massively with the trans and totally ignore whatever snippets of truth are buried underneath the rest of the polemic.

    The trans activists are probably laughing their heads off at this, it plays right into their lies that the only objection to their “identity” comes from bigots, and as such they make themselves untouchable in the public/liberal/progressive’s view for any genuine critique of either their philosphy or behaviour – however abusive and otherwise unacceptable that philosophy or behaviour is.

    • moose Says:

      Yes, that’s how I feel about it too.

    • cherryblossomlife Says:

      I disagree. Over 2000 comments and another article responding to hers tell us one thing: that the trans cult is taking her very very seriously.

      If they didn’T take her seriously, they would ignore her.

    • Beth Says:

      Same here. I didn’t like the slurs. It defeats the whole argument.

      When I argue IRL, I never swear or use insults. It makes you look weak having to resort to that. Especially if they’re calling you names.
      It’s not because I don’t think women should swear, because around friends I swear like a drunken sailor.

      • It’s not the bad language as such, it’s that the article plays right into the lie that there is no rational objection to be had to transgenderism. That there is no proper analysis to be made, and the only people complaining about trans are nasty bigots with an argument that basically consists of: “nya nya yr a shemale who cut of yr dick”. That’s NOT the radfem position but it suits transactivists (and hurts women) to put about the propoganda that it is.

      • GallusMag Says:

        She’s angry and she is speaking in shorthand. Like normal people. Women aren’t stupid. They don’t need the crib notes. They don’t need to be indoctrinated into the proper phraseology or theory. One doesn’t need to be a women’s studies major or a wealthy white western woman to understand common sense. Who gives a shit how educated liberals or those who consider themselves “radfem leaders” position their arguments? She is not writing for them.

        This is what Bev was getting at upthread. Feminism- “Radical” feminism is commonsense. Accessible. Leaderless. There is nothing complicated about this at all.

      • GallusMag Says:

        It’s as CherryBlossom said elsewhere in this thread. The everyday female reality is devastating to the genderist/transgenderist doctrine. As Marie France said- real women’s experience cuts through the celebration of gender “like a knife through butter”. This is why feminists and lesbians and women in general get the rape/murder/death threats. It’s why Suzanne Moore had the lives of her children threatened by transgender activists due to a perceived rhetorical misstep.

      • Beth Says:


        That was what I meant. Any time we could bring up the threats against us they will simply say “your side calls us shemales, look at the Burchill article! We have every right to feel threatened”. It just shuts down legitimate criticism.

      • karmarad Says:

        I agree with Gallus. We are talking about a common-sense woman’s reaction to all this. It may be a little crude, but the intuition is right on. And we need to have this tone entered into the discussion, this incredulity, this scoffing, this laughter, because these are appropriate reactions by any woman with common sense. To hear someone who is not part of the radfem conversation jump in and get real is so refreshing and real.

      • Quesadilla Says:

        I like to string together the saltiest, nastiest, creative-est putrefaction centered insults I can at MRAs on YT and my Facebutt op-eds. 🙂

  11. Phorest Says:

    Yup, removed already. The mainstream press now operates absolute censorship on this subject

  12. delphyne Says:

    The world’s going to have to wake up pretty quick. The commenters are organising to report her to the police, the PCC, and to get the Guardian to take the article down.

    Meanwhile a Guardian staffer has already shown up to point people in the right direction to complain about her.

    There’s going to come a point where we aren’t allowed to talk publicly about what we think of trans. We’re very nearly there.

  13. Beth Says:

    No idea if mine will get published or censored so if you wish for its entirety:


    I disagree with the language she used here. I don’t think it is particularly helpful to engage in name calling. It is incredibly hurtful, unproductive and it diminishes her argument.

    This is a topic I feel strongly about.

    I have never expressed any opinion that denies trans people their rights. I do not wish any harm or ill will towards trans people.
    First off, humans cannot change their sex. You can be male/female/intersex.

    Your chromosomes will always identify you as one or the other. Anyone with SRS has inverted a penis for a ‘vagina’, grown a clitoris for a ‘penis’ or had arm skin shaped into a phallus. Trans are not intersex. Intersex is ambiguous genitalia or abnormal chromosomes. Trans is a feeling of being the ‘other gender’.
    Also, for clarification, there is no such thing as brain sex.

    The science purporting ‘brain sex’ is flawed. The most likely cause of trans is societal pressure on certain behaviours, such as ideas that only women can do certain things and only men do certain others. This is a ridiculous notion. Liking hockey does not make maleness and liking baking does not make femaleness. Wearing dresses and getting your nails done doesn’t make you a female. Wearing a suit and shaving your face does not make you a male.
    Men should be free to wear dresses without being ‘female’ and women should be able to do whatever it is males stereotypically do without being ‘male’.

    In other words, sex does not equal gender and vice versa.
    A common theme in people with trans identity is a dissatisfaction with their genitals. Plenty of people have that. Women worried about depth and men worried about length. People have issues with their appearance all the time, things that can drive them to suicide. That is not to diminish the pain and suffering felt by transgendered individuals, I am merely stating that despair is a globally felt emotion.

    This is something that needs to be discussed. My main contention is that when one brings these things up, one is immediately branded as ‘transphobic’ or a ‘bigot’.

    When I try to engage in discussion talking about how current Gender Identity laws could be used to override sex-segregation protection, I get death threats and the accusation of transphobia. “Cis” women have a right to privacy and to feel safe away from male biology. Most sexual predation is committed by males against females. That does not make every male a rapist or every female a victim. When does a trans sense of femaleness override a female biology? Should people like Colleen Francis (Google it) be allowed to display ‘her’ penis in a female locker room despite the fact it make the other females deeply uncomfortable?

    These are things that need to be addressed.

    And to all those commenter’s that suggested these women looked like men, you just re-enforced Suzanne Moore’s original point.


    Most of it I have already suggested here or on other websites. It’s pretty long. No-one will read it. Haha. I should have just written. ‘Chicks don’t have dicks’ or something equally compact and stupid.

    • Beth Says:

      Posted it like…5 mins ago and I already got accused of denying trans their rights by stating that biology exists. *Le sigh*

      Also got told to get out of my medical text books…I’m a biologist dammnit! They are mis-specialising me! Time for death threats.

    • pikuthulu Says:

      Having been spoiled by reading blogs posts from the likes of yourself, Burchill’s article strikes me as poor stylistically and argumentatively. I wouldn’t mind the language and tone as much if there was actually some kind of meaty argument in there. We deserve better than this in the national press.

      I’ve been reading Burchill’s columns for years, and whilst she was a revelation for me at 14 (I’d never come across a woman so opinionated in print before), she has long since become boring.

      She is still much less evil than the online activists who have been relishing this opportunity to ‘burn the witch’ and impose censorship.

  14. Ashland Avenue Says:

    I left a comment about what lesbians are going through with regard to MtT people, nothing inflammatory or personal (I made sure of that), and it promptly got removed. I’d post it here, except I jumped over to the article before reading your instructions about copying our posts, and now it’s gone.

    So it seems The Observer has it in for their own writer: they’re deleting comments that support Burchill, no matter how benign. Way to have a dialogue, Observer.

  15. Ashland Avenue Says:

    Here’s a comment left by a person calling herself “Motherhood”. Let’s see how long it lasts before being deleted:

    “Thank you, Julie Burchill. Good thing you did not mention, menstruation that would have sent them to burn your house down. Pregnancy, they will burn you at the stake. They are thugs and abusers of women. The quicker that realization comes to light the better. They by their own admission have no business in a discussion about women or in a feminist discussion. All they can spew is misogyny and hate speech. Claiming oppressing is a manipulation contrived by a bunch of misogynistic that live to bully women because they can’t decide what they feel more hatred or jealousy. Women’s issues are not their issues, they can’t even related as evidenced in their trivial, spiteful and stupid obsession with the phrase: “Brazilian Transsexual” they could not comprehend the content of the article because they are not women do not share women’s concerns or bodied and certainly not feminist. Don’t worry your pretty little heads, these issues do not concern you and are over your heads—stick with you outrage at phrases Brazilin Transsexual, because the phrase is meaningless as are your concerns. It is just an attempt to hijack the discussion away from women.

    Motherly advice–Savor that erotic feeling of victimized, it is the nearest you will get to real emotions—because in a couple of decades you will sound as relevant as disco duck. I would venture to say you got suckered into a fad, hoisted on your own petard as it were. You can make up all the language you like, transphobia, ciss—does sound like pee, meaningless—and will sound like “groovy and daddyo” And the sad truth will hit you sooner or later– You’ve been duped, been had by carnival hucksters passing as medical professionals and unreadable academics. So enjoy the all feelings of mattering because. “Trans” is the sucker of the century and fortunes made. It will all look like the lobotomy and exorcism in the not so distant future. And if you believe your academic allies will preserve it—don’t they have a very short attention span. No they will reposition themselves again to something else in fashion and you will possible be footnoted alongside the frontal lobotomy and mass hysteria. The future, sad, bitter broken down with pee stains in your panties. So bully women while you can. But please stop the suicide threats already they are tiresome Grow up. It is your life, take it if you want. We have children to care for, wages to fight for and families to care for and celebrate.”

    In other news, a MtT person over there just reported this article to the police as a hate crime! HA! I would’ve LOVED to see the look on the cop’s face who had to endure that phone call!

  16. Ashland Avenue Says:

    O.K., Gallus, here’s the post I left,

    “I agree with Julie Burchill, and commend The Observer for publishing this.

    As a lesbian, I used to be way more sympathetic to trans people. WAY more. But then over the last few years, I witnessed their bullying, harassing behavior to born women, especially lesbians. (Most MtF trans people end up identifying as lesbian). If you don’t wish to sleep with a MtF person because they have a penis, you’re transphobic. If you aren’t interested in being with a MtF person because their life experience isn’t what you’re looking for in a partner, you’re transphobic. If you don’t agree that a MtF trans person’s life experience isn’t EXACTLY THE SAME as yours as a born woman, you’re transphobic. If you’re uncomfortable changing in a locker room next to a person with a penis (yes, this IS an issue, despite trans people trying to dismiss it as mere hysteria), you’re transphobic. Yeah, whatever.

    It seems most of the commenters here are straight people trying for the crown of The Best Liberal Ever! Well, here, straight people: I’ll pat you on the head as to show you what a good progressive you are, how very virtuous you are. Then come talk to me when you’re reborn as a lesbian, go to a lesbian bar, and are screamed at because you don’t want to go home with the 6’2″ MtF trans person who’s taken a shine to you. This is real life. Sorry it interrupts your fantasies of genteel and oh-so-oppressed trans people, but there it is.”

    That was taken down within minutes, despite already getting several thumbs-up. Comments by dirtywhiteboi were also removed; interestingly enough, they allow the replies to deleted comments to stand. So, what a fucking pathetic farce. What a joke. Meanwhile, comments calling Burchill everything under the sun are allowed to sail through. I need to find an email for Burchill so I can email her my support.

    One comment I loved: “I’m a Guardian reader, and I demand to be outraged!”

  17. born free & female Says:

    Trying to get comments through over there – I can’t help noticing how many people are attacking Burchill by saying “How dare you say these things – you don’t speak for all women!”

    Remember, women are only allowed to express an opinion if all women everywhere agree (especially the male women)!

    Wait, that’s not right, is it? After all, the trans handmaidens can demand that we accommodate the crossdressing pervs, even though some women disagree … hmmm …

    Here, I fixed it!”

    “How dare you say these things – there are men who don’t agree!”

  18. luckynkl Says:

    Here’s my comment. Think The Guardian will post it? That would be a first!

    The depravity of men knows no bounds. Men’s minds have gone completely gone around the bend, I guess they ran out of small countries to conquer? They now seek to re-conquer and re-colonize women demanding that women be more subservient, submissive, and masochistic than ever and participate in these men’s kinky fetishes, depraved porn fantasies, and sexist, misogynist stereotypes. The majority of these men have not been castrated and are entering women’s space with their rape-packing, pregnancy-making kits fully intact. Most claim they are lesbian (wish I had a nickel for every straight dude who claimed he was lesbian) and continue to demand PIV with women (Google The Cotton Ceiling). M2Ts perv on, rape, batter and murder women and children at the same rate as any other group of men, but these men demand access to their prey unhindered – by simply claiming they’re women. Any female resistance to these men’s aggression is met with cries of “transphobia” and “bigotry.” This would be like claiming the Jews were bigots for not going willingly to the concentration camps to be tortured and gassed. The majority of trans are in fact white, heterosexual males – the most privileged, imperialistic, colonizing, oppressive group on this planet. We’re supposed to believe if they throw on a frock, this somehow changes everything? Sorry, but I read Little Red Riding Hood. Wolves in grandma’s clothes is more like it. Transgenderism is nothing more than men’s continued war on women.

    It is time for women to take a stand and stop putting up with men’s crap. Bravo, Julie Burchill. for pushing back. Hat’s off to you.

  19. Marie-France Lesage Says:

    Well, heck, I slept right through it: “Comments are closed”.


  20. Marie-France Lesage Says:

    OK, I sent this to the Observer readers’ editor:

    I am writing in 100% support of Julie Burchill’s article “Transsexuals should cut it out”.

    She is writing exactly (and brilliantly) about what is now happening to her.

    Instead of arguing on points and principles, the “trans cult” or “trans lobby” or whatever you want to call the radicalized, on-line presence that cannot stand to hear ONE WORD of critique of their pets are attempting to have one more feminist, natal (biological, born) woman censored and silenced.

    They cannot bear to have a woman say “I am a feminist, I am a woman, I do not agree that a man can become a woman and I refuse to enable a mentally disturbed man by pretending that I do believe he is or can ever become a woman”.

    They call reality “hate speech”. They threaten women who dare to stand up to them with death. They tell women to “die in a fire” or to “go drink bleach”. They hound women at their workplace, trying to get them fired. They stalk women and glitter bomb them (e.g. Germain Greer, a feminist icon.)

    Many of these heterosexual male “trans women” claim to be lesbians now and threaten any REAL lesbian who disagrees. They try to force themselves on lesbians (e.g. at the Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival — and when true lesbians rejected their presence there, they started bringing weapons to a nearby “Camp Trans” and bragging about sneaking onto “women’s land” and sabotaging things.)

    Please stand firm for the principle of free speech. Please do not let the “trans lobby” silence another female voice.

    This debate belongs in the public square, not in private among censored women.

  21. girlsoftheinternet Says:

    In case you didn’t see, There is a response by Roz Kaveney posted:

  22. Ave Says:

    I have a ladystick and a Y-chromosome. I’m about 90% female, and will be even more so post-op. I’m more of a woman than you all. I buy my makeup at sephora while you only use walgreens makeup
    YOu all should just let me into your cotton panties.

  23. Guls Says:

    Too late to trawl thru all the comments but overwhelmingly condemning Burchill (mind you, if you’re an aficianado you’ll know she does controversy – shit-stirring, some might say – rather well.

    Tweeted/posted to fb the following comment

    ‘The point Suzanne makes relates to the surgery.

    There is increasing tendency and pressure on women to have surgery to be acceptable in some sense – breast surgery, facelifts, liposuction are talked about and advertised in mainstream publications.

    As a woman and a feminist, it is BAD for women to feel they need surgery, when they are in fact PERFECTLY FINE and HEALTHY naturally as they are.

    Hence Suzanne’s comment – it is NOT necessary to have so much surgery, you don’t need it to be a woman.

    Transsexuals should perhaps ask why they feel so uncomfortable being themselves as they are, when they are perfectly fine, healthy people. Why do they feel the need for major surgery? Why can they not encourage people to be fine and healthy naturally as they are, and do not need surgery to be themselves.’

    and added:

    Amid all the furore over Suzanne Moore’s and Julie Burchill’s ‘transphobic’ commentary, this is the original, pertinent point that got lost in the melee. Burchill may not be doing herself any favours – Jeremy Clarkson of the left, and all – but it’s not hard to see why many feminists feel aggrieved when their cause and language are appropriated. Where’s the public outrage about normalized violence against women in general – we could look to India for an example perhaps? (And don’t think for a moment that the Trans lobby is averse to employing misogynistic language and violence itself – Roz Kaveny is the polite face of a movement not shy of employing bigotry and spewing hate). In the meantime, many women are angry, and this is how angry people sound.

  24. Guls Says:

    Actually, given the apparent ‘editorial policy’ regarding comments,sharing comments via Twitter/FB and linking to the article might be a better way to get dissenting views out there? Just an idea…

  25. luckynkl Says:

    The Observer let my comment stand for awhile, but it looks like they have now deleted it.

    I noticed a pattern. If you just say, “I agree with Julie Burchill,” they let the comment stand. They will delete anything which doesn’t support the trans cult and their unbridled hatred of women. What else is new with British men? They’ve always been woman-hating to the core. They built an entire empire on it.

    Tomorrow morning comments open again (U.K. time, I presume). They’ve only been closed down for the night. Maybe we can just go in and say, “I agree with Julie Burchill?” So Julie can see that she has supporters?

    In the meanwhile, I advocate that women boycott the U.K., which is clearly one of the most misogynist places on this planet. Better yet, maybe it’s time women from around the world launched an all out invasion on the U.K. boys, as they have done to others for centuries? Poetic justice. 🙂

  26. fugginghell Says:


    Shitloads of people saying bigoted and talking about privilege as a argument against the article..

    So much derailment.

    And even they are using that old retarded derailment saying “my mother had a hysterectomy so if you need a womb to be a woman THEN SHE ISN’T ONE BY “YOUR” THEORY!!!1″

    This is ofcourse its the trans theory that if you cut off your dick your not a dude.

    • Ave Says:

      “And even they are using that old retarded derailment saying “my mother had a hysterectomy so if you need a womb to be a woman THEN SHE ISN’T ONE BY “YOUR” THEORY!!!1″”
      what’s a good way to counter that one? i see it said alot

      • born free and female Says:

        I’m a real, live woman who had a hysterectomy. I had to deal with sexist expectations growing up as a girl. I had to deal with sexual harassment as a teenager and as a woman. Before the hysterectomy, I had to have an abortion to end an accidental pregnancy.

        I have spent my life trying to find the best way to navigate through the second-class status society has assigned me because of my biological sex.

        And not one word of that is true about these middle-aged cross-dressers in their wigs and high heels.

      • Anon Male Says:

        Born Free: I knew a mtf who loved the hysterectomy argument but there wasn’t *any* medical condition he wouldn’t avail himself to for the sake of example. I remember he used polio once! I forget the context or the analogy, only that I saw red because I have family who suffered from the disease. The idea that kids used to be warehoused in iron lungs was completely alien to someone who should have been MORE THAN old enough to know how offensive his cooptation was, but everything was in fair game to prove his snowflake among snowflake status (HBS type philosophy).

      • born free & female Says:

        Ave, if you need an even shorter response:

        You agree that a woman who had a hysterectomy is still a woman, right?

        In other words, if she has a female anatomy, she doesn’t stop being a woman because you remove the uterus and maybe the ovaries?

        Well, in the same way, someone who has male anatomy doesn’t stop being a man when he has his penis and testicles removed.

  27. Bev Jo Says:

    No comments allowed now, it says. I was going to link to here!!!

    Good article, but same old crap. I wish we could get more non-feminist women involved who haven’t been conned by the trans cult because they just know those ridiculous but extremely dangerous men are not and can never be women.

    Keep bringing up the “trans-paraplegic” man who pretends he’s paraplegic as well as Lesbian. It’s all on a continuum, and if you can stand him going around in a wheelchair while he’s completely able-bodied, making his wheelchair fall over to get Lesbians’ attention at the Dyke March, using disabled services, asking people for help when he isn’t hiking, etc., then of course you will worship the other trannie narcissist men and not dare to think. But most people are absolutely revolted by him, and it really is a small step to see how it’s just a variation on the regular trans cult line.

    • Adrian Says:

      Sadly enough, hordes of people who are very upset with and revolted by that guy go after him because they think he’s “appropriating” transgender. Yeah. I kid you not.

      They want to draw the line in the sand to say that “transgender” is legitimate while “transabled” (never mind “transethnic”) is a horrible appropriative injustice, despite the fact that BOTH conditions involved stereotyping a group to which you do NOT belong and insisting that you think like that group and therefore must “really be one” “inside.” To recognize the “laydee brain” in yourself, you must have a conception of what the “laydee brain” is to think you have it, just as in order to think you “should be” paralyzed requires you to think you know what that “feels like.” It’s BS, both ways.

      But the transgender contingent has prenatal hormones they can cling to to claim it’s all physical (which doesn’t get them out of offending me, because they’re still claiming that either I think a certain way too because I got those hormones, OR that I’m trans*, which I most certainly AM NOT).

      Transabled contingent isn’t far behind though, they too know they need some physical reason so they go for nerve issues and body mapping, etc. Which is WHY the only research out there is about obsession with amputation, because at least there’s an allegory to missing limb syndrome, desperate as that might be. Unfortunately for them there’s no magical prenatal hormone that makes you “should” require a chair for mobility (or just be very averse to appearing “able-bodied” as many have stated) but be super athletic.

      Alas I came to this thread late and have no account at the Guardian, but it seems now the article has been removed entirely???

  28. Marie-France Lesage Says:

    I tried to read through the comments but it it obvious that the moderator is intentionally removing anything even remotely “anti-trans” and allowing the most vile, anti-women vitriol to stand.

    The whole “I’m reporting you to the police” thing was the last straw.

    What kind of mental FILTH allows people to think that reporting feminist women to the police for having a differing point of view on the issue of “trans” is a good idea?

    That’s the kind of mentality I would expect in Eastern Germany in the 1960’s, not the UK in 2013.

    Is this what it has come to for these crazies? They’re ready to sic the police on any woman who dares to say, “You are NOT a woman and you will NEVER BE a woman so go point that ‘lady stick’ at someone else, dude.”

    Really? Well call the U.S. police on me, dudes in dresses. I’d love to have this chat with them:

    Officer: “Hello, I understand that you wrote this on-line: ‘Despite what the ‘trans cult’ says, men are not and will never be women.’ Is this correct?”

    Me: “Why yes, officer, I did write that — and I meant every word of it.”

    Officer: “Hey, great, I just wanted to shake your hand.”

    Me: “Donut?”

    Officer: “Sure. I’ll take a chocolate glazed. Thanks!”

    Me: “Here, take one for later, too.”

  29. copse Says:

    Here’s mine, submission to their ‘Inquiry’ on whether to decapitate or merely defenestrate Julie…

    I hope the inquiry will also consider comments supportive to Julie Burchill’s piece.

    Her tone is provocative, but the fact remains there is a context to the anger: genuine issues with trans politics and some individuals, particularly males transitioning to living as women, which are deeply worrying.

    In the past several years. it has become taboo, particularly in the lesbian and gay community, to question any aspect of trans politics. But there are real concerns. Many in the women’s sector fear implications of recent European and US Gender Identity legislation which could enshrine the rights of those transitioning over women’s rights, framing biological reality as subordinate to the “protected attribute” of self defined gender identity. The legislation confers gender protection without any obligation of hormonal or surgical treatment, and without reference to females’ vulnerabilities in an unequal and violent society. It has created clashes between the ostensible rights of male transitioners and those disadvantaged on the grounds of biological sex. There have been in the US several legal challenges to segregated women’s spaces (eg changing rooms), women’s services and women’s prisons. In the UK, the Equalities Act (2010) criminalises gathering or assembly of women who have been raised as girls, and seen several recent attempted feminist gatherings banned.

    The gender identity legislation was drafted and enacted without consultation from women’s groups. In addition to erasing female spaces and banning female organisation the legislation has promoted gender stereotypes, relying on the (strongly contested) notion of fixed brain sex as gender determinant. There is huge concern about the extent to which the gender identity movement is founded on stereotypes and essentialist notions of femininity that are damaging to the interests of women and genuine equality.

    Gender dysphoria often manifests in middle aged males in demographically male occupations: military, engineering, police. The vociferousness of MtF voices, which demand that their needs must be accommodated on all levels and never questioned, have in recent years begun to form a fixed narrative, to wit:
    –Gender dysphoria/alienation is unique to those who have transitioned (and, we are told, never felt by people who choose to rebel against gender rather than transition).
    –Gender dysphoria is worse, more painful than any human experience, and trumps any experience of females raised as girls.
    –The term ‘woman’ must be appended with the adjectival ‘cis.’
    –Women’s reproductive services must be inclusive to anyone who identifies as a woman.

    Disagreement with any of this narrative is denounced as ‘transphobia’ and met with violent reprisals. Ongoing death threats to female bloggers who contest aspects of trans politics are legion (, I have trans friends happy to debate many of the above issues but remain amazed at the extent to which much debate is silenced. It is shouted down and censored in ways that other issues simply are not. The ‘witch hunt’ tone of the CiF comments attests to that.

    So, whilst provocative, Burchill’s frustration emerges from a real and worrying context. I hope the inquiry will find in favour of free speech, and against the calls for censuring this important voice.

  30. luckynkl Says:

    Even the lowest man on the totem pole is granted power and dominion over 81% of the population on the basis of his sex – and that includes M2Ts. (51% women + 30% children). Is the dude white? Let’s raise that figure to 85%. Is the dude heterosexual? Raise it to 90%. Is the dude middle class or wealthy? Now we’re talking 95 to 100%. On what planet is a person considered oppressed when he is granted power and dominion over 90 to 100% of the population?

  31. Marie-France Lesage Says:

    Given their penchant for playing dress-up and pretend, I have begun to wonder if these supposed legions of “trans” supporters on-line might not be mostly sock puppets — or at least fomented and bolstered by hundreds of sock puppets.

    In my day-to-day life, I have only encountered three “trans” people out in the world — and all three of them were extremely socially isolated and quite obviously about three beers short of a six-pack. One of them looked like Ichabod Crane in Jackie Kennedy drag — stalking around a small bedroom community in Southern California wearing Chanel, pearls and a pillbox hat over his collar-length pageboy cut in the early 2000’s, not in the 1950’s. I met him through a “women’s” support group (!!!) and I’m pretty sure that he didn’t have a single friend on this earth.

    I have this mental picture of these M2T sitting alone at home, night after night, creating twenty or fifty sock-puppets each, using them to create this huge impression of support for the “trans” insanity on-line that simply doesn’t exist in real life.

    Even with the recent case in Olympia of sexual weirdo “Colleen Francis”, I have yet to meet one person who knows anything about the case or who supports his invasion of the women’s locker room and showers. I have brought it up casually in conversation with people around Seattle and with people I know from Evergreen or from Olympia and their reactions have been, universally:

    1) Oh, gross, what a disgusting creep; and
    2) No, I haven’t heard about that case – how shocking.

    These are not right-wing soccer moms from Talibangelical churches. These are progressive voters, left-of-center, feminists, people who (given on-line commentary) you might expect to say, “Oh! She has a right to be in the womens – and stop calling her ‘he’.” Face to face, I get nothing of the sort. I get grimaces. I get rolled eyes. I get, “What? That’s awful! Those poor girls.”

    So where do all these “supporters” come from?

    • cherryblossomlife Says:

      Same for all the “women” who turn up saying “you don’t speak for me”. How do we even know they’re women? 1999 out of the 2000 commenters on there could be men for all we know.

    • Beth Says:

      Re: ColleenFrancis.

      I tell people about this all the time. Online, no trans/allies ever replies back about it. It’s never “that is wrong”, you’re just met with silence.

      In real life most people are seriously disturbed by Colleen. Men will usually say stuff like “If he pulled that shit here/to my missus/to my daughter, I’d smash his skull in”.
      Women are horrified. You also get the obligatory “The left has gone mad”.
      Occassionally, a trans ally will appear online and their argument is torn to shreds and drowned out with a massive “you are talking out your arse so hard”.
      There is hope. Most (in my experience) people don’t buy the trans bullshit. Especially straight men. Maybe because they know all the shit men will pull in order to harass women?

  32. Beth Says:

    Note on the article now:

    “This article is the subject of an inquiry by the Observer readers’ editor, who responds in the thread here. For those reading this on a mobile platform and unable to view comments, his post reads as follows: “As you might imagine, I have received many emails protesting about this piece this morning. Thank you to those who have written. I will be looking at this issue and will be replying to all in due course.”

    I didn’t get censored. ( You may have to scroll to see it.

    I got called stupid and crazy though. Despite the fact that having males in female spaces makes females uncomfortable I got labelled a hate-monger for pointing this out. Despite stressing I think MtT’s pose little threat, I was still slandered. All I got was “We just want to pee/change in peace”, funny…isn’t that what actual women are fighting for?

    This is bullshit, total utter fucking bullshit. We are expected to allow men in our changerooms because they feel unsafe or triggered in the mens? What about women not wanting men in the change room? I have never met a female that felt comfortable undressing around strange males. Even if a male doctor needs to examine your breasts or vagina, they let you change in private.

    I mentioned Blanchard’s theory as part of the bit I stole from EqualRightsandProtections piece on Brain sex (which was so well put, it was fantastic) and instead of addressing the issues with the science one of them was all “Blanchard’s theory is offensive, read some Julia Serrano”. Fuck Julian Serrano. He knows as much about women as I do about galactic spaceflight (fuck all).

    I am so fucking sick of this bullshit.

  33. Eva Says:

    The people have spoken!

    The commenters at the Daily Mail overwhelmingly support the right to free speech of Burchill and Moore. For better and worse, the Mail’s readership is much more representative of the average British person’s opinion than the Guardian. All the hectoring Guardianista comments are getting downvoted:

  34. girlsoftheinternet Says:

    There are many, many comments suggesting that Burchill and Moore are just jealous because transexuals are better at being women than them. This would be laughably ironic given the “Brazilian transexual” comment that kicked this whole witch hunt off. If it wasn’t so utterly tragic.

  35. rubyfruit2 Says:

    Glad you have this here GM, it has been removed from CiF.

    I somewhat optimistically hope that some of the anti-radical feminists will think on in terms of all of our words being censored like that

    I won’t hold my breath

  36. pegasus olsen Says:

    My username there is now blocked from making comments. Good to know that mild-mannered comments from lesbians and feminists who oppose males co-opting us are not acceptable.

    • Marie-France Lesage Says:

      I am so sorry that you (and the rest of us) have experienced this obscene level of censorship at the hands of the “trans” cultists and their enablers.

      It’s shocking, really.

      But know that you are not alone. I’ve been censored and had accounts deleted many times for the thought crime of being a true feminist in this patriarchal world. Carry it as a badge of honor. I do.

  37. Marie-France Lesage Says:

    Well, another craven bunch have tucked their tails between their legs and bowed down in ridiculous, unprincipled subservience to the “trans” cultists. The article has been pulled, along with all the comments. I have written again to their so-called reader editor:

    I see that you have gone ahead and practiced censorship against Julie Burchill.

    I am deeply offended by this act of editorial cowardice.

    Women SHALL speak out against the bullying we get on a daily basis from the “trans” cult.

    Women SHALL refuse to accept men in drag as “true” women or “real” women or, frankly, any kind of woman at all.

    Reality will ALWAYS trump delusions and insanity — eventually.

    You are on the wrong side of history here. For shame.

    • girlsoftheinternet Says:

      Here’s my letter:

      I am writing to express my extreme disappointment and frustration at the removal or Julie Burchill’s recent article from your website. I have been on the receiving end of the kind of abuse she is criticizing and to me it is a real shame that you have silenced your own writer for highlighting it. She did not express herself in the politest terms but her point was entirely valid and I’m not surprised she was angry at the abuse and harassment suffered by her friend. This has been lost in the ensuing witch hunt. Women have always lacked a voice to define our own struggles and boundaries, and you have now taken away Julie’s. In doing so, and in bowing to the same online trans presence that abused Suzanne Moore, you have done all women a great disservice.

  38. sheela Says:

    The Gu/Observer have just taken down Julie’s piece and apologised profusely. But Roz Kaveney’s patronising piece remains up. (This individual was instrumental in preventing radical feminists from meeting in London last year.)

    This one is more than the usual insane men mob, I reckon. The Guardian’s health section is funded by Pfizer. Every week they have an drugs company advertising suppliment pushing new vaccines and statins and all sorts of shit. So this flurry against Julie and Suzanne may also be a concerted, organised pharmocorporate attack. Think of the hundreds of billions at stake if people started listening to us, not altering their bodies, just being human. Wow. Would the pharmaceuticals ever suffer…

    • girlsoftheinternet Says:

      I left this comment on Roz’s article:

      “could we please stop with this canard about a worldwide war on trans? To take the apparently pertinent example of trans murders in Brazil. You are saying 126 killed this year. Well, 50000 Brazilians were killed last year. Brazil is just about the most murderous place on earth. There is also an eff of a lot of people living there. Also they have a higher than worldwide average incidence of people with trans identities, much like Thailand. 126 people who are trans in one year is actually less than you would expect if they weren’t being particularly targeted.

      Please stop being deliberately offended by everything.”

      I figured that I should write something that wouldn’t get deleted.

    • Eva Says:

      Radfems still met in London last year, just not at Conway Hall.

      • Marie-France Lesage Says:

        Thank you for point that out. THEY like to claim victory in their efforts to censor women, but it was a pathetic victory: forcing a venue change.

        Women will NOT be censored by the “dicks in chick’s clothing”.

        (Ha! That was refreshing. I’ll have to be inappropriate and rude more often. It’s kind of fun, actually.)

    • GallusMag Says:

      Roz Kaveney:

      Seriously- the post is not only lulz 4 days but provides really good insight into the whole trans vs. feminist thingy for the new or casual reader. Also, Roz = insane.

      • LJ Says:

        Roz’s pieces are all extremely tiresome and condescending; the ones about trans rights and the ones about poetry etc alike.

    • cherryblossomlife Says:

      I’m glad that article has been written in the Telegraph. The Daily Mail can’T be taken seriously because it’s the most misogynistic paper out there, (I haven’t bothered to read their article) and I’m sure they’re defending Burchill on the grounds of ACTUAL transphobia i.e because they don’t like “queer” men.

      Whereas the Telegraph article really is about the issue of freedom of speech, and Toby Young is absolutely right that the whole *ethos* of freedom of speech is that you MAY sometimes hear opinions you don’t like. I do feel a great relief at the fact that this form of censorship is being taken seriously by a serious paper .

      (I DID however find some snidey swipes at “the left” so guaranteed Young’s defence of free speech has got eff-all to do with women, and everything to do with slamming a lefty paper. For example:

      “Or is it okay to offend the Right but not the Left? The Guardian, the Observer’s sister paper, has published plenty of things that I’ve found deeply offensive in the past 12 months – such as this piece on paedophilia or this anti-Semitic Steve Bell cartoon – yet I wouldn’t dream of petitioning its editor to remove them from its website. “

      • cherryblossomlife Says:

        Does anyone know what the “LEvenson’s proposal” is? It seems to have something to do with free speech. From Young’s article:

        “For if professionally offended, Left wing lobby groups can silence a journalist for being politically incorrect before the Leveson proposals have been implemented, just imagine how influential they’ll be after a new independent regulator has been set up, particularly if it has the power to take complaints from third parties and a remit to enforce “the spirit of equalities legislation”.”

      • Eva Says:

        The Leveson inquiry happened after the News of the World phone hacking scandal. Lord Leveson wants some kind of press regulator which has a lot of people worried:

      • Beth Says:

        Most of the misogyny on the DM post was stuff like “the Brazilian transsexual looks better then those two” (Suzanne, Julie)

        It was mostly stuff about free speech, people being allowed to express dissenting opinions and some people saying “WTF is the this transphobia bullshit?”

        All in all, not too bad. The Guardian comments were worse.

  39. hearthrising Says:

    So The Observer pulled the Burchill piece. What a surprise.

    People are saying it’s because the article was so inflammatory and used name calling, but the Christine Benvenuto article that got pulled from Kveller was quite the opposite. No way to state the “wrong” opinion right.

  40. Em Says:

    Regarding the upthread mention of the triggering power of the word “menstruation.”

    A significant subset of males fetishize menstruation–pregnancy and lactation, too. Not surprisingly, these fetishes show up as bizarre behavior among the m2t set. Some of them put tampons into their anuses for several days out of the month; others force themselves to vomit every morning for awhile, and then walk around with padded bellies for months afterward. No, I am not kidding.

    Interestingly enough, I have yet to hear of a m2t who puts himself through a simulacrum of menopause. Evidently there’s no public for that.

  41. Bev Jo Says:

    I agree completely, Lucky. Most of the men claiming female and Lesbian identity are the most privileged of men. Yet the creeping acceptance of them continues, often from women afraid to not call them “trans” or give them our pronouns. “Trans” is an illusion and myth. Imagine not worshipping at the altar of other silly myths and being yelled at and threatened. No, they do not have “body dysmorphia” or grew up thinking they were in the wrong body. At some point in time, and for many of them, quite late in life after having full het, married, father privilege, they become obsessed with Lesbians and fetishize and pornify us, and demand access to us.

    If only women would stop feeding their cult line and say no….

  42. Debs Says:

    The reason the deranged trans activists usually win these skirmishes is because they spend a lot of time and energy organizing and and radical feminists do not. These folks coopted the lesbian and gay civil rights movement, and in just a few years, transmogrified it into something called “LGBT”. In one swoop, they redefined a movement and a community, making themselves joint owners, all without discussion or debate. Now, when they howl in protest at the Guardian, there is an assumption that they are speaking on behalf of gay and lesbian people and the Guardian is inclined to accommodate the demand du jour.

    Against this, putting up a few tumblrs and fuming in the comments section of this blog isn’t going to have an effect. If we want to start winning, we have to go back to basics. Start organizing. Start asserting ourselves. Demand that the LGB movement stand with lesbians and all women and stop mindlessly supporting this violent and misogynistic gang.

    • GallusMag Says:

      Since you think my work here at GenderTrender, and the work of other feminists who work their ass off running blogs and publishing information and dialogue online is “having no effect” why the FUCK are you commenting here.
      It is LAZY whiners like YOU who sit back and bemoan the work of others WHILE YOU USE THEIR PLATFORM TO DO IT that is the reason we are not “winning”.
      This blog, and many others, and the wonderful contributions of all these women’s voices are having a HUGE “effect”. It is YOU who are not.
      DO NOT COMMENT HERE AGAIN. If I could reach through the computer and prevent you from even READING here- I WOULD.
      FUCK OFF.

      • Eva Says:

        That lunatic Joelle Ruby Ryan presented a paper titled “The Rad Fem Internet War Against Transgender Women” (LOL) so these puny little blogs are having an effect. Trans activists are terrified of any dissent at all, because their case is so weak they can’t win without complete control over the discourse. Blogging isn’t a complete activism program, but any public dissent at all is valuable. The intense hostility Tumblr bloggers like Gay Not Queer received shows how afraid some people are of free discussion taking place anywhere.

      • GallusMag Says:

        The “allies” like Debs who trot over to suggest I should just shut down the old blog have without exception never ever done a fucking drop of work on the issue. I’d LOVE to be proven wrong. I look forward with GREAT ANTICIPATION to seeing the results of Debs multiple free hours a day of labor around this issue. I won’t hold my breath.

      • Debs Says:

        May I apologize to you and clarify what I meant to convey? I wasn’t attacking you or this blog. I come here to read and comment, so I hope that it is clear that am not against you or your work. I like you and love the blog. And I would never suggest the blog be shut down.

        All I was trying (and failing) to say is that we all have to do more if we want to win. I shouldn’t have said that this blog has no effect. That was wrong. But it is true that this blog and the few others like it are not, by themselves, enough to counter and defeat trans encroachments on women and their coopting of the LGB movement. The trans activist thugs are going to have their Creating Change conference, paid for by lesbians who donate to NGLTF. They will have their Camp Trans and their separate trans political organizations, which are substantially funded by LGBs. My hope is that we will get in the game and fight back on a variety of fronts, in addition to, not in lieu of, this excellent blog. Because right now, I don’t think we are winning the war of public opinion.

        Well, that’s about it. If I’ve still offended you, and you don’t want me back, then I will respect your wishes and will not comment again.

      • GallusMag Says:

        @Debs- I was wondering if maybe I had overreacted. You really pissed me off. Thank you for saying something. I spend time every day working on this issue. Do you? Do you spend time everyday on this? I do. I’m just so fucking tired of do-nothing nay-sayers. Debs, if YOU don’t do it, no one will. Take action. You say throwing out a comment on a blog won’t get the job done- which is arguably true- so DO SOMETHING. DO SOMETHING.

        Add: BTW I think throwing out comments does a TON OF GOOD! A shitload of good. And I thank all of you who go out and comment on fucked up articles and posts. I think what you do is hugely important and effective and I appreciate your work. Enormously. ❤

      • tired old radfem Says:

        You know, Debs, in England it’s now illegal to gather as women. And elsewhere, women-only gatherings are always, ALWAYS infiltrated by men who dress up as women and complain that lesbians don’t want to fuck them.

        Newspapers censor any opinion that doesn’t suck the ladystick. So what are your ideas about how and whether to gather and mobilize? How shall we ensure our safety while doing so?

    • hearthrising Says:

      Debs, if you read the radfem blogs, you can see the substantive things women are doing. Some outrage is reported on a blog (and discussed in the comments), women take steps in response, at least some of that response is written about in the blog. See how that works? Also, I think an article on censorship is a strange place to put your argument.

      • GallusMag Says:

        Speaking of censorship, I will revise my above angry statement and welcome Debs back to report on the results of her organizing activities as soon as she does anything besides drop a turd on my work.

      • doublevez Says:

        I do think trans have a lot more money, time and energy than women do, and also have the power of their male privileged careers. They have committees working on the legal aspect, the school board harrassment/curriculum changes and then there’s the rabble harassing us here. Although they are far fewer in number than us, they have nothing else to do while we run blogs, earn our minimum wage living, clean up after the world, raise children, look after elderly parents and friends, do the shit work in the eco orgs and ‘charities’. Etfuckingcetera.

    • cherryblossomlife Says:

      If you’ve got enough power and money, you can co-opt any movement. Especially if the people you’re trying to colonize have got very little of those things.

  43. Marie-France Lesage Says:

    Well the mods at the Telegraph site obviously disagree with Mr. Young. I’ve been posting over there with a different moniker and they’ve been quietly deleting my posts every few hours. Perish forbid that anyone speak the truth about “trans”. Perish forbid.

    • Eva Says:

      It’s interesting that the Telegraph is censoring reasoned arguments about the trans issue. What’s in it for the so-called conservatives to censor this discussion? Is it medical industry money?

      Something even the Torygraph readers could relate to is the medicalization of gender nonconformity. Do they want some quack diagnosing their 18 month old as transgendered and pushing hormone blockers on kids? Trans bloggers like Natalie Reed are pushing the idea that Lupron is harmless and should be given to gender variant kids:

      http: .//freethoughtblogs DOT com/nataliereed/2012/02/13/preserving-choice-lupron-and-the-medical-ethics-of-treating-transgender-children/

      This study says that lupron can cause reduced fertility and even sterility in girls:

      According to a former FDA officer:

      After years of use of [Lupron] in a great number of patients, the evidence is clear that TAP [Takeda Abbott Pharmaceuticals] didn’t study [Lupron] adequately before marketing,” Gueriguian states in his report. “After its introduction into the marketplace, TAP did not perform enough long-term studies to detect potential long-term and irreversible side effects of [Lupron], which has been shown, through independent observations and studies, to be able to cause irreversible side effects and permanent severely disabling health problems. Lupron temporarily stops menstruation, but does not eradicate endometriosis for long-term. Lupron should only be limited to six injections for the initial treatment, and a retreatment should not exceed six injections. Lupron cannot be given more than twelve injections per lifetime.”

    • doublevez Says:

      If you post on Mr. Young’s article rather than Julie’s it may be different, and also, different work shifts, different mods. Complain to Mr. Young that mods are modding for their personal bias, not blog/Telegraph mod policy. And as you know trans have got ACLU et al on speed dial, men working for men.

    • hearthrising Says:

      I wish I understood what causes mods on mainstream rags to censor some comments and approve others.

      • GallusMag Says:

        I suspect trans hit the report button on every comment they don’t like, or even report it as spam. Women must be silenced at all costs!

      • doublevez Says:

        It depends on who is modding, and if they are pushing a deadline in the paper. Mods are usually low-rank copy editors. Most, and most of the time, they don’t actually read the comment that’s been ‘flagged’. Flagged? Hit it.

      • doublevez Says:

        Why is your site taking so long to load: up to 2 mins here and timing out, every time, Much larger and more image heavy sites coming in faster.

  44. Eva Says:

    Sorry for the OT, but I have to mention this:

    Oh my God – looking at the comments to that Natalie Reed blog, the infamous Valerie Keefe raises his head:

    http: .//freethoughtblogs DOT com/nataliereed/2012/02/13/preserving-choice-lupron-and-the-medical-ethics-of-treating-transgender-children/#comment-2891

    I think my only concern with this piece is the double-standard when relating to puberty: The idea that a cis puberty is something any teen can consent to, but a trans puberty needs to be held off until the age of majority.

    Logically then every child, no matter how sure and how repeatably they assert their gender identity, should be on a prophylactic course of Lupron.

    And perhaps we should consider that not all first puberties are equal: That testosterone does more to mark a person than estrogen. That much was apparent when you were discussing the horrific effects of puberty. Estrogen didn’t appear.

    At any rate, delaying a puberty, a puberty that someone is repeatedly and emphatically consenting to, and letting the efficacy of that puberty diminish, is still policing trans identities.

    Keefe is a fucking maniac. A woman comments:

    Lupron causes osteoporosis. Why isn’t this a concern for trans youth? I have endometriosis with pelvic adhesions. I was offered Lupron as a treatment for my endo because birth control did not help me. I REFUSED to take Lupron because ALL of the endo patients in my support group had horrible things to say about it.

    One of the girls in my my support group shrunk TWO INCHES from being on Lupron for two years. She had reached the “maximum allowable treatment” and extensive surgeries.

    Have they even researched the longterm effects of Lupron on children? Nine years of Lupron is a LOT. Sounds VERY scary 😦

    Why on earth are you all saying this drug is harmless? I absolutely do not agree with you here.

    I sure hope they find a safer alternative for trans youth.”

    Keefe responds:

    They have, it’s called Es-Tro-Gen.

    But we must protect children from the horrible spectre of being trans, mustn’t we?

    What a sick man. Let’s put all male children on Lupron and estrogen! And MRA Keefe accuses radfems of being misandrist?

    Keefe is for intentionally making children trans, and enslaving everyone to the Medical Industrial Complex for life. Only Pfizer and Merck can create an egalitarian society!

    A lot of men don’t care about women having to put up with males in restrooms, but they’ll care when trannies want to put their sons on estrogen.

    • Marie-France Lesage Says:

      Valerie Keefe (Sean Tisdall) is a seriously f’ed up individual. He’s obviously angry that he cannot pass (at 6’4″ and over 225-lbs.) and wants to “protect” M2T children from normal male puberty as he no doubt thinks that going through it ruined his life.

      The fact that MOST “gender nonconforming” kids (whatever THAT fuzzy, ill-defined, sexist concept might mean) will end up being perfectly happy with their biological sex seems to be beyond his ability to comprehend.

      If only these heterosexual, male “trans women” could be happy with weekend cross-dressing and going to the bars to play “gender dress-up” the way gay male drag queens do. But no, they have to spend night and day lobbying for laws that directly harm women and children, and censoring/silencing any intelligent, rational people who disagree with their perniciously sexist agenda.

      As others have pointed out before me, male heterosexual “trans” who claim to be “lesbians” focus on children because it takes the spotlight off of the fetid sexual fetish aspects of their own “transition”. Who would claim that a 5-year-old is “trans” for reasons of sexual gratification? These guys NEED kids to be “trans” in order to give themselves a simulacrum of legitimacy.

  45. girlsoftheinternet Says:

    It’s never ending. Now we have this:

    “Hate crime Charity Galop has become the latest LGBT organisation to criticise Julie Burchill for writing a highly offensive article about the trans community in last weekend’s Observer newspaper.”

    And further down in a highly hyperbolic statement from Galop:

    “we’ve supported the complaints to the Press Complaints Commission and the Observer, and we’re pleased that the Observer’s editor has removed the article from the website, and look forward to a more detailed response from the Reader’s Editor.”

    I can’t describe how sad this is all making me.

    • Marie-France Lesage Says:

      Buck up! You KNOW we’ve got them running scared when all they have left is censorship. They feel they MUST silence us because, deep down inside, they know that we’re right.

      Any rational person knows deep down that no one can “change” their sex — not when our sex chromosomes are in every cell of our bodies, our organs, the size and shape of our bones and skin and muscles, our features and walk and voices. Every time a “trans” handmaiden menstruates or becomes pregnant or lactates or is targeted for sexist abuse by males for the “crime” of walking through life being female, her denial gets a little more thin and fragile.

      The “trans” handmaidens are just PRE-rational. That’s all. They’re eventually going to have one of the many, many VERY negative experiences that most of us have had with a “trans woman” and their denial is going to pop like a bubble.

      In my case, it was a “trans woman” who was a relative stranger to me suddenly start stalking me and hinting darkly that he was going to commit suicide — and possibly “worse” — because I didn’t want to be his “lesbian lover”. When I realized that this kind of hateful, frightening, histrionic manipulation is the NORM among “trans women” I was encountering on-line?

      POP!!! No more unthinking “nicey-nice” for me. I woke up and started educating myself. I have encountered many, many women — especially lesbian and bisexual women — who have had similar awakenings. Once your denial pops, you can’t really go back to thinking of heterosexual male “trans women” as being these innocent, harmless victims who deserve our self-abnegating support.

  46. Eva Says:

    Oh lawd. Rod Dreher from the American Conservative has discovered the cotton ceiling!

    He quotes a blogger, Jessica Sideways, who gets it laughably wrong:

    http:// jessicasideways DOT com/2012/04/the-cotton-ceiling/

    The Cotton Ceiling refers to discrimination against transsexual people at lesbian sex parties. It is called such because transsexual women are required to keep their underwear on while the rest of the lesbians have fun. Essentially, it renders the transsexual people in attendance as “asexual” and is another form of cissexist bullshit that transsexual people have to endure.

    Hey, you gals didn’t tell me about the orgies!

    On the bright side, it looks like nearly a year later some of the crazee we dealt with is reaching the mainstream. Dreher’s a pretty well known columnist.

    I haven’t even finished the Jessica Sideways piece yet because I wanted you all to see this.

    • GallusMag Says:

      Also: Excellent comment Eva!!!

    • Marie-France Lesage Says:

      OMFG!!! That’s hilarious! “You can come to our lesbian orgies but you have to keep your panties on.” WTF?!?

      WHO comes up with this crap? It’s like something out of a really, really, REALLY bad porno.

      Oh wait, I just answered my own question: men come up with this crap.

    • Beth Says:

      This was just the pick up I needed. Thank you!

      This comment:

      PS: Isn’t this an incredibly dangerous statement for LGBT activist to make?

      ” I believe that many cis queer women do not see queer trans women as viable sexual partners in large part due to the cultural messages that exist.”

      I thought that orientation was inborn and unchangable? If all it takes is a little cultural messaging… counseling to turn gay Johnny into straight Johnny ought to work. Right?

      Interesting. Gender/trans is inborn according to T
      and homosexuality is inborn to the LGBTQIAOMGWTFBBQ so a lesbian needs to ‘address’ the issues of her dislike for ‘lady peen’.
      Conversion/aversion therapy anyone?

    • Ave Says:

      “There is nothing inherently male about a woman’s body, unless she identified things about it as male herself. So, no, I do not consider trans women with penises to be male-bodied, unless that is how they identify.”

  47. […] last 200 years, today, like earlier this week (and every minute of every day since) women are being censored and silenced, and im not talking about the goddamned first amendment mkay — i am talking about patriarchy, […]

  48. semar Says:

    this is a fair and balanced article.

  49. tomtom Says:

    “To have your cock cut off and then plead special privileges as women – above natural-born women, who don’t know the meaning of suffering, apparently – is a bit like the old definition of chutzpah: the boy who killed his parents and then asked the jury for clemency on the grounds he was an orphan.”


  50. Beth Says:

    Not sure how many outside Au have seen this, but I think it sums up the trans very well:

    Watch it the whole way through

  51. Debs Says:


    I am posting here because WordPress wouldn’t allow a further reply on the tree below.

    You are absolutely right. I *should* be taking my own advice and should “do something” in the real world to fight this. The problem is figuring out how and where to begin to tackle this toxic issue. But I take your words to heart. I am up for it and I am guessing that I am not alone in feeling this way.

    May I propose something? How about one open thread post here on this blog dedicated to the topic of how we, the readers, can organize both online and in the real world to beat back the trans attack? We could swap ideas about how to organize and where to start. Maybe we will have great success, or maybe it will go nowhere, but it couldn’t hurt to give it a try, Anyway, thanks for hearing me out and I again want to say that I am sorry for the misunderstanding that I caused earlier.

    • GallusMag Says:

      “May I propose something? How about one open..”

      No. YOU do something. thx.

      • Debs Says:

        I intend to. But there is no way for me to reassemble the community on this blog. So I was proposing an open thread here. You wouldn’t have to do anything other than create a post and title it “Open Thread to discuss organizing.” Obviously, it is your blog and if you don’t want to do it, that’s fine. But I don’t see what the downside is.

    • Marie-France Lesage Says:

      Well, I hate to be negative, but those of us who are working on this issue are, for the most part, very careful about strategizing in public forums. Members of the “trans” borg are not above threats of violence and physical misbehavior (glitter bombing, disrupting meetings and feminist book signings with shouting and abuse, mobbing meeting venue owners with threats and public humiliation until the venue owners cancel feminist women’s gatherings, bringing and brandishing weapons at places like “Camp Trans” outside MichFest, sabotage, sneaking into workshops designated “women only” to talk about their penis, etc.)

      Scary crazy dudes can be…well, scary and crazy.

      I think organizing a “cell” of like-minded women in your area and working anonymously on-line is safer.

      I selectively send letters via snail mail to government agencies (e.g. reporting parole violations by criminal “trans women”, objecting to pro-“gender identity” rules and regulations that harm real women and water down women’s protected status based on our sex, thanking venue owners who reject male-bodied men from invading their women’s locker rooms, bathrooms or showers) as a way of making sure that my voice doesn’t get drowned out by the on-line crazies.

      But many of us do fear being too open — in my own case, I am actively being stalked by a deranged “trans woman” and must be very careful about how open I am, lest he sees me at a gathering or event and decides to follow through on his (so far) veiled threats.

      • Debs Says:

        I understand your concern. The trans activists use violence and the threat of violence to intimidate their opponents. But fortunately, that is also their Achilles Heel. Those are the tactics that can quickly destroy a movement once law enforcement is brought to bear.

        In any event, if a brainstorming forum were set up here or on another site, I don’t see why you couldn’t participate anonymously. You don’t have to post under your real name.

  52. GallusMag Says:

    Trans are literally voting on whether they should use:

    1. Coffins
    2. Pitchforks and Burning Torches

    -at their demonstration against Feminist free speech in London tomorrow.
    Couldn’t make this shit up.

    • Guls Says:

      What a great piece – deep, eloquent, compassionate. The day I can write 1000 words as spot-on as that I can die happy. Detractors take note: no hatred here, no hyperbole, no calls for decapitation…

    • Eva Says:

      How has the left ceded the word “freedom” to the right? It maddens me.

      I’ve gone back and forth over whether Burchill should have stayed out of it, but this response by Moore makes it all worth it in my opinion.

      It looks like most of the Grauniacs don’t understand her argument but the increasing illiberality of the pomo left is something that needs discussion. I never did support hate speech laws, and now they’re being used to shit on the rights of half the population.

      They’re telling us to be happy with reproductive rights, and to otherwise sit down and shut up, which is of course nothing new. So we have control over our uteri, but access to our vaginas is up for public debate? I guess they can’t allow us too much freedom.

  53. sheela Says:

    piccies of the trans demo at Guardian

    comments on what a love in between police and demonstrators it was (unlike the violent repression on recent demos against the cuts, bankers, capitalism,climate change oil companies– eg genuine challenges to the status quo) bely any claims that they are any threat to capitalist patriarchy or are about anything other than me me me identity politics.

    Their demo on the day this was published about global femicide and the hundreds of millions of missing girls with-fewer- girls-20130116- 2ctp1.html

    But that’s nothing compared to the need to silence an uppity female.

  54. […] and replaced with an apology and a promise to ‘investgate’ (you can still read it here). Their liberalism – prevalent today – is of the ‘I’m ok, you’re […]

  55. girlsoftheinternet Says:

    Press Complaints Commission to launch an investigation into Julie Burchill article.

  56. girlsoftheinternet Says:

    And a groveling apology from the Observer with promises of “discussions with members of the transgender community” to take place over the coming weeks. And no mention of anybody writing to support Burchill, only the insinuation that everybody that responded was angry about the “attack” on trans people.

    (sorry for spamming your blog with links GallusMag, but this seems to be pretty much *the* place to connect with like-minded feminists on this issue. I attempted it on reddit but I’m sure you can guess how that turned out).

  57. […] I posted the entire text (and published imagery) of Julie Burchill’s “Transsexuals Should Cut it… […]

  58. GallusMag Says:

    As some of you may know, my posting access to my GenderTrender blog was suspended at the end of the business day on Friday January 18. My last post, on Friday morning, was a collection of screen caps: a random sampling of the abusive and threatening tweets directed at Suzanne Moore following her “SEEING RED: THE POWER OF FEMALE ANGER” article re-publication.

    Prior to Friday morning’s post I did five controversial posts in succession:

    1.) I outed an MD and Phd who threatened to murder a bunch of radical feminists, also specifically targeting myself and Cathy Brennan. 1/10/2013 FRI

    2.) I posted the text of Professor Sheila Jeffeys’ submission to the Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill 1/12/2013 SUN

    3.) I posted the entire text (and published imagery) of Julie Burchill’s “Transsexuals Should Cut it Out”, which was subsequently censored in toto by the Guardian/Observer and for which she is now facing a government criminal inquiry. 1/13/2013 MON

    4.) I posted commentary and photos and a partial re-blog of Dirt’s article calling out the racism and homophobia at the core of the initial trans response to Suzanne Moore’s use of the term “Brazillian transsexual” in her “SEEING RED: THE POWER OF FEMALE RAGE” article. 1/16/2013 THURS

    5.) I posted a video of Precious “Jewel” Davis, a (self-professed) gay drag queen who recently “turned trans” from the “We Happy Trans” project . 1/16/2013 THURS

    What a week!

    My blog is “newsy”. When things are going on, I post them. And there is a lot going on right now. Specifically, there is a peak of public discourse around the feminist critique of gender. We have about a week before the general public becomes bored with this topic (as they do with all topics). Right now, this discourse is peaking- into the mainstream- in a way I’m not sure it has ever done before. This is a critical time.

    Some of you have taken issue with the language Julie Burchill used in her now criminalized article and claim her bombastic tone has undermined the message. As if there was EVER a platform for that “message”. Suzanne Moore wasn’t “bombastic” and look what the fuck happened to her! Some of you have actively taken steps to discredit Burchill or distance yourself from her. Must step lightly, you say. Throw her off the boat! Backstabbing is a pointless discussion to have at this point. Clearly the trans politic is seizing the moment to re-frame their violent suppression of feminist – of WOMENS and LESBIAN voices- as an anguished “what about the menzzzz” cry to promote further censorship and no-platforming of feminist gender critiques, but remember, that is the same tact they use whether you are rude or polite. The polite Conway Hall feminist conference was no-platformed by the MRA/Trans alliance with terrorist bombing and murder threats. Mainstream feminist discourse has been taken over by males in an “oh so polite” way- backed up by threats of rape and death. Feminists who have tried to discourse with the trans politic have been- at best- mocked and distained. Whether you give an inch or a mile. Burchill simply chose to take on the abuse in stead of her friend Suzanne Moore. Julie is not a stupid woman. She has lanced a boil. That boil is the silencing of feminist voices by the transgender lobby. Whether that wound heals or encapsulates will be determined by our response. She has directed attention to this issue by throwing herself on a pyre into the angry mob. Immolation. That Burchill broad kicks some balls and goes down swinging. And where the fuck are you?

    Let’s not waste this opportunity, shall we? We have the world’s attention. LET US SPEAK.

    Unfortunately for me at GenderTrender, my voice has been silenced now by my website host at

    Yesterday Janet Mock of People Magazine, (he of “Girls Like Us” fame), decided to start a campaign against my blog. Early Friday morning (before my Suzanne Moore Tweet post) I became aware of a censorship campaign against GenderTrender, and all wordpress radical feminist blogs. There have been a million of these campaigns, but Mock is a very powerful man.
    Mock initially became enraged when he read my post (Number 4 above) and saw a photo of himself, and “misgendering” (because it mentioned that he was male) and decided that women have no right to discuss or post photos of public figures on feminist blogs. Instead of filing a complaint with wordpress or messaging me with his demands (or just shutting the fuck up) he started a twitter campaign to ban my blog which was quickly seized by trans activists smelling blood in the water following their successful censorship of Burchill and success in driving Suzanne Moore off of twitter. All the usual suspects came on board within minutes: Hetero female “fag” Stephen Ira, Lefty “TGirl” inventor of the ladystick Savanna Garmon, Transfeminist Natalie “Die cis scum” Reed and all the rest. NO DISCUSSION of TRANS ACTIVISM by WOMEN they railed. GAG THESE BITCHES.

    When I did not notice Mock’s campaign (because I never check my tweets and I was sleeping) he engaged his pals to post news articles complaining about’s hosting of gender critical and trans-critical blogs. The proposed banning of all female voices re: politics relating to gender, especially mine. I took action when I became aware of Mock’s campaign, specifically his charge that the public news-site photo I had used was off limits. To placate his male rage I replaced that pic with an alternate screen cap from another (NBC) appearance, and I kindly tweeted him that I had resolved his photo issue. Seriously, these guys literally think they can lobby on the national news and women have no right to discuss it. HOW DARE IT SPEAK???

    I posted a few of the Suzanne Moore tweets, went to work, and when I came home my blog had TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND hits. And I was LOCKED OUT by

    I now have NO WAY to POST on MY OWN BLOG due to It’s all well and good for feminists to have blogs and such that are gender critical, as long as no one is paying attention to them. You can post the most intelligent, elegant legal critique of the ways “Gender Identity” status negatively impacts woman AS LONG AS NO ONE READS IT. AS LONG AS NO ONE IS LISTENING. Women can have their tiny corners, their sekret cabals AS LONG AS NO ONE IS READING. Let the gals blow off steam in dark corners on Facebook. As long as it doesn’t hit the mainstream. Let the edumacated upper class folks have their little talks that no one finds interesting or engaging. But god forbid feminist voices start being heard en masse. God Forbid Julie Burchill says what EVERY FUCKING WOMAN ON EARTH IS THINKING. GOD FORBID Trans Media Watch cites GenderTrender as a SOURCE in the women vs. gender discourse.

    Someone said this as a comment on my blog recently, much better than I’m about to mis-quote, but it was basically that the transgender politic around the social hierarchy of the sexes is so utterly flimsy that it can tolerate no critique whatsoever from women, and as a male-centric philosophy the realities of female experience CANNOT be tolerated., hosted by Automattic, has prevented me from posting this on the blog I have built up from the ground against all odds. And Gosh who cares about that? Who cares about Bindel and Greer and Jeffreys and Brennan and Moore and Benvenuto and Burchill? We still have our little corners where they can’t silence us. Keep voices hushed. Avert your eyes, sisters. Let’s spectate.

    IF YOU GIVE A SHIT ABOUT ANY OF THIS – and I know many of you DO, I encourage you to RAISE A HOLY FUCKING SHITSTORM about the silencing of feminists who critique GENDER and PLASTIC SURGERY and MUTILATION and RAPE and FREEDOM FROM THE PEEN and ETC ETC ETC.

    I mean this literally: SPEAK NOW or FOREVER HOLD YOUR PEACE.
    Have a blog? UPDATE IT TODAY with a focus on FREEDOM OF SPEECH for women. COMPLAIN about death threats on women- and NOT to your “friends” on Facebook. COMPLAIN about CENSORSHIP of women. Call the fucking news agency. Call ten fucking friends to meet on Tuesday night to set out a goal-oriented political action plan to support freedom of speech for women. ASSERT the right for women to DISCUSS POLITICS even if those public figures are “TRANS GENDER”. Make that lame fucking account so you can leave that comment on that awful news story. Take action every single fucking day. But ESPECIALLY TODAY. It’s time to say NO to the censoring of women- even if they are more (or less!) plain-spoken than you would like.

    You liked GenderTrender, you counted on me- well I have been ELIMINATED. Fucking GAGGED because people were listening.

  59. Pam I Says:

    I am now in ‘pre-moderation’ at the Graun because I have posted not comments but links to this page. So all opinions other than pro-trans ones are censored outright.

  60. […] gossipmongers are left, ahem, unmolested whilst Feminist discourse is moderated without mercy. As Julie Burchill‘s recent Observer piece demonstrated, the voices and opinions of real women can sometimes be ugly – though […]

  61. Gayle Says:

    Are you back up yet?

    This is b#llshit, WordPress!!

  62. […] out of her own account. This happened after she reported on the Observer’s censorship of Julie Burchill’s column, which Burchill wrote in defence of Suzanne Moore, after Moore (and her children) were bombarded […]

  63. […] and transplainin’” for a TOS violation, and in the wake of recent internet witchhunts and burnings of women who dare express a fucking opinion which is incompatible with womens sex role […]

  64. […] The Press Complaints Commission has issued its ruling following an inquiry into the Julie Burchill article.  Transgenders called for the criminalization and censorship of Burchill when she described trans activists who use threats of rape and murder against feminists as “bedwetters in bad wigs”. The title of the article “Transsexuals should cut it out” referred to the ubiquitous harassment, violent threats, and bullying against feminists by transgender activists. You can read her censored article in full HERE. […]

  65. ArealPERSON Says:

    This is hilarious. So you are basically saying that the Trans community should just accept the disrespect and bigotry of feminists because “they aren’t the bigger enemy”. It’s damn hypocritical that you think they should be forced to take your groups thinly veiled slurs because you are on the “same” side. Or maybe it is just that they threaten your concept of femininity. Having had a psychological need for their body to match their brain that they willingly gave up feminism’s long desired “male privilege” and opened themselves to even more ridicule and discrimination. That would qualify them as having done far work and put in much more effort and desire into femininity than any born woman. But of course they are just men in dresses pretending to be pretty pretty princesses because… The are spies of the evil male patriarchy? Yea that must be it.

    The bigotry and discrimination in the feminism movement is absolutely disgusting. The reason feminism is looked down on is because it isn’t about equality for EVERYONE it is about equality for a select few. Gaining equality should not be about punishing others (in fems case, men) it should be about educating and uniting ALL people with a common goal. This is the reason why feminism looked is no longer looked at seriously and the man hating feminist stereotype is a funny joke.

    Feminism has become a joke, but it is its own fault.

    • Brunhilda Says:

      Oh yay, an MRA troll.
      What about the real women? Are they supposed to accept the bigotry and violence threats from the trans community? Are we supposed to accept their fetishization of our bodies, and their demand that they are women based on nothing more than feelings?

      Feminism is about equality for all, and trans people are people with an issue separating biological sex from gender stereotypes; being a girl doesn’t mean you have to like pink, and just because you like pink doesn’t mean you’re a girl.
      They aren’t ‘agents for the patriarchy’ in the manner you are suggesting, they are people who support a portion of the patriarchy though, and so repress women (and men) with their stereotypes.

      Currently, the ‘brain science’ doesn’t make sense, because the brain and the body are linked, and honestly, the brain has been proven too fluid to have any structure/etc. set as female or male. The studies done on gender/brain are highly flawed, due to lack of controls, and a lack of understanding how human brains change over time.

      What the trans community should do is accept that sometimes women will NOT want them in their community, and that it’s okay. We have a right to safe space without them.

  66. Kitten Says:

    What i don’t get is that what was said in the article was deeply hurtfully to many people not just trans people, but there family’s, friends and Partners and allies. I am not really interested in politics or the lobby groups and such. My biggest issue that its deeply hurtful and really feels like spite. I guess as all of us are Human beings, perhaps the reason trans people are up in arms about it, is not political or lobby, but because what she was hurt them, and pretty much invalided what trans people have been fight so hard for. Perhaps you disagree with medical evidence and research that’s fine. But deeply offending, invalidating and hurting a whole group of people for actions of few is not what i consider decent human being does.

    • Brunhilda Says:

      Kitten, if someone’s identity is based on having other people agree with them, it’s a pretty weak identity – as is stands, someone will ALWAYS disagree with you, and that’s a good thing, because you need to have the dialogue open for change.
      Furthermore, what Trans are doing is co-opting WOMEN’S bodies, and trying to take over their spaces. That’s not invalidating, that’s war. If/when laws meant to protect WOMEN’S bodies (eg. laws for abortion, birth control, FGM, etc.) start to include trans, what happens?
      Well, transwomen can NEVER give birth, so, who cares about abortion or birth control (Note; many of them have stated that they find menstruation and uteruses to be OFFENSIVE, and they often try to avoid talking about the issue of women getting pregnant; as it stands, the main reason WHY women WERE enslaved back in the day was pregnancy, and it still is. Think about how much pregnancy leave the US has, think about how difficult it is for a woman to go back to a job after having kids, think about the laws currently in place designed to protect the fetus, even if it hurts the woman). Second, Female Genital Mutilation, well, what would you call trans altering their penises? A very harsh form of male genital mutilation, that’s what. Not to mention giving drugs to kids to halt their normal puberty and alter their bodies…?
      It’s not a good thing.
      Suffice to say they are fighting for the rights to alter their bodies (regardless of how damaging and unsafe it is), and to be taken as women and treated as women in EVERY WAY (which is impossible, since, hey, lesbians generally don’t want a male, and neither do straight men, and NO ONE has the right to say that you HAVE to date someone because of their gender identity, which they are doing with their Cotton Ceiling), regardless of how dangerous it makes it for actual women.
      As it stands, if we allow trans into women’s bathrooms, then effectively ANY MALE would be allowed in, and could harass the women (both real women and trans), because of that law. There isn’t a way to tell the difference. Not to mention, if a transwomen DID behave improperly towards women in the bathroom, or say, raped them with his penis, well, that’s problematic legally isn’t it? After all, if another real woman holds you down in the bathroom and rapes you, there’s no chance of you getting pregnant, and she’s probably going to be stuck using a dildo. She’s also probably going to be smaller and physically weaker. If a transwoman rapes you, it’s the same as a male raping you, unless they’ve removed their penis, and then it’s a bit more complicated. Point being though, would the law be able to ban that rapist transwoman from women’s bathrooms? Unlikely. (And yes, I know, not all transwomen are rapists, that’s not the point).

  67. dylan Says:

    Look I never asked to be in the whole trans thing.Being born like this really isn’t fair to me.I have tried to ignore only to have it come back and bite me in the rear.Its like knowing that you are supposed to be a woman and that you have the body of man.Lord knows if had the chance just to be one or the other I would welcome the peace of mind.When I was 22 I almost took my life over this stupid birth defect.I wish I could be what I’m supposed to be and not caught somewhere in between.Its just that everything I’ve read tells me if I don’t transition that depression will over come me which sad to say it has somewhat.For the most I have had to come to accept what I am.So I have had some peace of mind plus had the fact that I have just recently lost my cousin adds to the emotional pain of both being a transexual and the loss.Is almost to much to bear.What I am supposed to do live lie or discover my womanhood? Can’t have either according to the christian schools that I went too.

  68. real women exist Says:

    I’m glad there’s free speech on this issue. In Sydney, Australia currently there is an interesting situation. I personally have met over 250 trannies, of those I would only judge one to be sincere in the desire to be ‘female’. For the rest, who seem to magically (or by scamming) get instant housing from the government, immediate access to welfare benefits for severely, permanently disabled and or terminally ill . A lifestyle choice is NOT a disability. A sexual perversion is not a disability. It also does not make a woman, nor will you ever be one. Consider the psychiatrist’s point of view on this in Australia, it is well known and documented as a deviance and they are legally and medically classified as sexually deviant males, for that is what they are. The 249 I mention all work as prostitutes, are all male and have no intention of removing their genitals. Apparently ‘straight’ men ask if they “still have it ‘?” because these men want to prostitution a man. Keep kidding yourselves if you want to men, but you are men and gay men at that. No one is fooled. I have done a lot of research in this area as I am curious why there seems to be more of them. The internet probably has a lot to dowith this. These men want to infiltrate women’s groups and activities aimed at women only. They sexually harass women, bully them, make filthy sexual comments, talk dirty to women in order to dominate women’s in these place Is and services. They have their own centre but are slowly and unsucessfully trying to push women out of all women’s places. They have been banned at many places for indecent exposure. These are and make no mistake, perverted, deviant misogynists. Religion in particular, chrisinanity is not helping by not accepting naturally occurring sexuality (gay, lesbian). Gay men in particular are coerced in to making a supposed sex ‘ change’ to get happy there is open discussion of this issue. They love to play the victim: everyone is discriminating against them. This is just a diversion from their actual misogyny and perversion. Or, as another researcher put it, for them it is a fetish. I

    • silkyvelvet Says:

      Very well-said. I get so tired of these creepy trannies who, either due to delusional thinking and/or their hatred of us women, try to push their way into ever aspect of women’s lives, all the while playing the oppression card. These men – and yes, they ARE men – are sick in the head.

  69. Anna Says:

    I loved this piece so much I nearly cried.

  70. […] was that Julie Birchill quip about “bedwetters in bad wigs” out of line? Yeah I guess. But actually, I’m not even […]

  71. mary Says:

    Comparing oppression. Your analogy of the two inner city youth shooting at each other was great. I’m surprised that having realized this you joined in the shooting. I think you spoke very well in parts of the article to the pain you personally felt regarding the incident with your friend. Do you suppose that personal unhealed pain is why the shooting starts? It just hangs on and hurts so bad that acting out is the results. Heal as quickly as possible from all this pain on both sides.

  72. bart Says:

    What the hell? Everyone just get a job or volunteer .Get over ourselves .What would extraterrestrials think if they saw all this crap?

  73. Bree Says:

    ME ME ME ! Is that all you web people bitch about, it’s either blind shallow hate twards transexuals or passage aggressive ignorant so called “facts” vomited into cyberspace bashing anyone who isn’t agreeing with your cause, being ts myself I’m appalled by you people, you think you have it so fucking bad with your little rallies and cardboard signs. You act like we have it better than you, for my generation prostitution is the glass ceiling and it’s no fucking play date. Half these kids are forced into a lifestyle that involves little more than getting sodimized and beaten on a daily basis and you bitches have the nerve to deny any form of acceptance or hope to re assimilate themselves back into society and attempt a normal life. Because of people like you no one is helping people who really need it and the best you can do is pick a one sided fight. Self absorbed much ?
    When feminism was a fresh issue it was about equivalent rights. Now that nobody really cares anymore and it’s old news, you move on to someone else and make it about them.
    I’m no activist but this hole thread seems hipocritical

    • Guls Says:

      ‘passage aggressive’; ‘hole thread’; ‘bitch’ (x2). Mr Freud would have a field day with you, Bree 😉 And if you’ll pardon the pedantry, you say you’re Transsexual and you can’t even spell it…

  74. Ashland Avenue Says:

    “When feminism was a fresh issue it was about equivalent rights. Now that nobody really cares anymore and it’s old news…” Uh, no, dude, that would be men (such as yourself) who don’t care. Billions of women still care, and care very much. But I don’t expect you to get that.

  75. Ks Says:

    Trans activists are going after Julie Burchill again after her (now deleted) comments on Paris Lee’s revolting article.

    “Paris, if you were a BORN WOMAN, bothered since the age of 12 by GROWN MEN, you wouldn’t find it fun. You’d find it boring, wearisome, wearing. When you’re a plain old trans, ten years from now, you’ll get a big old identity crisis on, if you rely on random lechery for self-esteem.”

    • jo Says:

      That quote = truth. Not to mention how frightening street harassment can be for little girls and also adult women.

      This man has some serious privilege going on if he can enjoy catcalling instead of feeling harassed, annoyed, unsafe.

  76. happy Says:

    First of all my life isn’t yours . Ok If I want to be a woman I will be addressed as so . You haven’t been through what I’ve been through never ever have you lived in my shoes one day in history. Ok being trans isn’t easy as putting a pair of high heels and going to the mall. There is procedures you have to take it takes big bold steps to become what you were meant to become. I’m not going to let some prudes to tell me who I am and who I am not.

  77. weja sey Says:

    A male will always be a male.
    A female will always be a female.
    The word transsexual is a myth.
    Hormones fake breasts implants.
    All just a load of nonsense.
    I guess transsexuals are trying to prove they are not gay.
    But as said your gender remains no matter what !
    Thus it proves transsexual hate being gay.
    So should not be gay.

    • oopster74 Says:

      Erm, not wanting to not pick, but what you say about transsexuals sexuality, falls apart when you realise that the sexuality ie gay / straight / bi of trans people, is as varied as any other section of society, whether you view trans women as women / trans men as men or not.

      • michelle Says:

        a male-to-tranny that dates guys is gay…if they date women then they are straight. There isn’t much to comprehend there…male is male, and a bunch of pills or cosmetic surgery won’t change that fact.

      • Maria Says:

        That’s a little confusing. If you mean the majority are straight, sure. However, just to be clear: the number of Trans males pretending they’re “lesbians” is not at proportionate rate with the rest of society (<5% gay).
        It's almost like Trans "women" are just a bunch of straight dudes who want to play dress up and have sex with lesbians! Who ever would have thought?!

  78. d Says:

    i think people don’t understand us transwomen completely because they don’t know how feminized our brains are, so they jusdg us by what we are biologically and say we are just like other men! which i untrue at all! and i as a transwomen am jealous of real women becuase they can have a man in their life so easily and a lot of transwomen like me are lonely and are rejected by many men and i’m not saying all men reject transwomen! becuase some transwomen do have a man in their life, but not all transwomen! because so many men are ignorant and judge us by how we look! as well as real women do too! there are a lot of transphobia and ingnorance becuase of a lack of education! and many just simply don’t want to accept us! but people pls remember, that we transpeople are human and have needs too! and that transphobia do lead to suicide! we are living in a terrible world where most people treat non transgender better! like we transgender people don’t desrve the same treatment!? what a shame to treat us like we are worthless! etc

    • GallusMag Says:

      This is a very sexist and offensive comment. Also, romantic rejection is not “transphobia”. Threatening suicide because people reject you romantically is abusive and outrageous and entitled rapey male-socialized behavior.

      • d Says:

        Gallusmag. i did not appreciate your absurd comments! i was not being very sexist and offensive in anyway!, yes there very ignorant people in this world today and transwomen are women in their minds, so it does not make us gay if we want a romantic relationship with a man! we have needs too! it’s men who are ignorant and hateful which is a big problem in society towards us transwomen! and when we express our pain of being rejected, it does not make us abusive! because rejection is painful do you understand?

      • GallusMag Says:

        I think we all understand abusive sexist entitled rapey male homophobes like yourself all too well. Goodbye now. Thank you for your valued contribution to the feminist dialogue. (snicker).

      • d Says:

        i am not an abusive sexist entitled rapey male homophobe! i am just simply a nice transwoman who wants a man in her life, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that! and i don’t appreciate you judging me and calling me names! you don;t know me at all you transphobic fucking bitch and whore i am sure! you obviously don’t know anything about transexuals!! and you call transwomen men!? you are so wrong! i am more woman than you know you fucking bitch! that proves to me you are extremely ignorant!!!! and i will not read your next aburd hateful comments and i will just delete it! i snicker at you too! and say FUCK OFF!!!!

    • Ashland Avenue Says:

      What were we saying about illiterate trannies?

  79. Danny Says:

    What about FTM people? They’re out there too you know…it’s quite common in some cultures to recognise a third gender… everybody has met super feminine men/super masculine girls at some time in their lives… it’s not even a new thing, women were bandaging their parts up and joining the royal navy 200-300 years ago, a lot of them had relationships where they played the male role… fwiw I don’t think this will ever change, if anything as we become less defined by our physical roles, gender is likely to become more fluid…

  80. […] Julie (2013) ‘Transsexuals should cut it out’ GenderTrender 13 […]

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: