A march for those who must not be named

January 18, 2018

 

https://www.facebook.com/events/267368463788979/?active_tab=about

From the Essay: “Why I Choose To Identify As A Womxn” by Natalia Emmanuel

https://www.hercampus.com/school/washington/why-i-choose-identify-womxn

 

“The unpronounceable boldness [] is part of its appeal” – Mark Peters of the Boston Globe

https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2017/05/09/womyn-wimmin-and-other-folx/vjhPn82ITGgCCbE12iNn1N/story.html

 

67 Responses to “A march for those who must not be named”

  1. Jac Says:

    So women with an ‘e’ excludes woc? Well that is a surprise.
    I’ll continue to be women as they couldn’t be bothered to include disabled women like myself. Fuck you Non Disabled Womxns March.


  2. Women ALREADY included women in other countries and women of all races. Poor, lesbian, black, white, Indian, etc. ALL women were already included.

    Why the big charade and semantics? We all know who wasn’t included. Just fucking say it. Jesus.


  3. ‘ILL SAY IT! It’s the MEN. & It’s Fucking Bullshit! The women’s march ALREADY included women of all races, colors, backgrounds, religions, & (dis)abilities.

    Like the march in Florida, telling women they can’t wear their pink pussy hats, cuz it’s not “inclusive” of all women. FUCK YOU. Not all women were wearing pink pussy hats last year!

    Ya know who’s making a big deal about this? MEN. MEN MEN MEN MEN … who have ALWAYS got to be in the CENTER of EVERYTHING. Fucking ASSHOLES.


    • To be fair, most men dont want to be included in a women’s march – in fact they wouldn’t want to be seen dead at a women’s march. But transwomen are extra obnoxious men – I guess because only a deadly serious misogynist would want to erase woman as a class.

  4. Miriam Ben-Shalom Says:

    OK: it is men who are forcing this. We don’t see “mxn” do we? Of course not. So we all can see precisely who wasn’t included: males “who feelz they are women”. I don’t get it–I never will about these handmaidens. I will be a female and a WOMAN until I die–and I will call my sisters WOMEN and celebrate the beauty of their XX biology no matter what any damned man may say.

    If any person ever doubted that female erasure is a goal of the Trans juggernaut, this ought to do the convincing. Dear Good Sisters: when will you wake up and see what is happening? When will you find it finally necessary to stand up to the money of Trans billionaires, big pharma, big medicine? When there is but one or two biologically female humans who identify as female and who live as female left? Sisters, where is your anger?

  5. Oak and Ash Says:

    Why don’t they follow the example of Greenpeace and call it the Non-men’s March? Or make it the All-gender March, the way people do with restrooms these days?

    It seems that if they truly wanted to be more inclusive of women who aren’t white, middle class, and able-bodied (not that they mention the latter two categories!), a change in programming and financial assistance might work, but that would have required more effort than a find and replace command, not to mention the risk of excluding male fetishists.

    And that whole “x as a variable” business is psuedo-intellectual claptrap that makes the knitting of pussy hats look like unified field theory.


  6. “The unpronounceable boldness of ‘womxn’ is part of its appeal.”

    Um… yeah, no. It just looks really stupid.

  7. hearthrising Says:

    Isn’t that disingenuous, to cover for a male trans centered agenda by claiming “women” never included women of color. I guess they’ll have to send a memo to the Womanists. Also, is womxn trans inclusive enough? Bet they wanted to spell it womyn, as in y chromosome, but (drat!) that spelling is already the trademark of a competing philosophy. Maybe they can update it to womxyn or womxyxxn, or even womxyxxlgbtqqiiakan. Now there’s an “unpronounceable boldness” that “forces one to stop and think” what self-identity really means and un-means.

    • hearthrising Says:

      Remember when Prince was ridiculed for taking a name nobody could pronounce? Too bad he never thought of framing it as “unpronounceable boldness.” Won’t be long before we’ll be “the artists formerly known as ‘women’.”

  8. Riffraff Says:

    *include TQ+ persons

    Ftfy, Salem. We all know what this is about.

  9. Medi Says:

    Seems to be copying the term Latinx— the Mexican American women and women from Latin America got tired of Latino being default, so they came up with Latinx, which I thought was rather clever, but no such linguistic confusion exists in English with WOMEN including all women everywhere. More trans obfuscation and academic blather from the left wing inclusionistas….

    • LQ Says:

      Yes, exactly. Trying SO hard.

    • ephemeroptera Says:

      When I first heard of something like this in Spanish from a gay Spanish man in the mid-to-late 2000s, it was the “@” sign to spell “latin@”, so that there was both male and female grammatical gender in words that were meant to include everyone (female ending “a” + male ending “o” = “@”).

      Soon after that, it seemed like “latinx” was everywhere, and “latin@” disappeared… Maybe it was seen as too binary and not radical enough?

    • ephemeroptera Says:

      Sorry for not googling before writing up that last comment…:

      As of 2013, “latin@” had mainstream usage/recognition:

      https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2013/01/07/168818064/latin-offers-a-gender-neutral-choice-but-how-to-pronounce-it

      As of 2016-7, “latin@” was deemed insufficiently inclusive:

      https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_57753328e4b0cc0fa136a159

      “Latinx is the gender-neutral alternative to Latino, Latina and even Latin@. Used by scholars, activists and an increasing number of journalists, Latinx is quickly gaining popularity among the general public. It’s part of a ‘linguistic revolution’ that aims to move beyond gender binaries and is inclusive of the intersecting identities of Latin American descendants. In addition to men and women from all racial backgrounds, Latinx also makes room for people who are trans, queer, agender, non-binary, gender non-conforming or gender fluid.”

      • unabashed Says:

        I *really* dislike Latinx. I got in some hot water debating how linguistically the morphology of it is off, with a Mexican-American female linguist who accused me of language policing and linguistic conservatism (although my critique of it is, in fact, common; it doesn’t *go* with Spanish, which ends on a vowel; and some people throw the “x” in *whenever* something’s gendered. To me, IMO, who cares if “chair” is female, and “ceiling” is male? If “mountain” is female, but “sky” is male? I mean who cares? Some of it may be stereotypical–moon is female, sun is male–but most of it’s random, and the obscenities for body parts are actually misgendered or missexed; “la verga” is Mexican Spanish for “cock,” and “el coño” is, well, the C-word for female genitalia, in English, which is sort of hilarious…there are other examples, including non-vulgar examples; the word for female breasts–los senos–is masculine. So I just don’t see the point in caring about gendered language).

        The only time to care about it is when groups of people are default referred to as male if there’s one male present. I think the replacement of “e” is good for that (Latines, for example).

        The “x” suddenly resurfaced again recently and began to be enforced in “woke” circles *because of the gender identity movement.* This bothers me and yes, “womxn” is an extension of Latinx (rhymes with Kleenex!) and of “folx.”

      • kesher Says:

        What really bothers me about “Latinx” is when it’s used when the subject’s sex (or meaningless gender identity) is known. “Latinx woman” is idiotic, and yet I’ve seen it a number of times.

        Although, now that I think about it, I’m not sure if I’ve ever seen “Latinx” used to describe a man. It wouldn’t surprise me if it’s being used mainly, or exclusively, to erase women, similar to how the trend is to make women’s bathrooms unisex while leaving the men’s bathrooms for men.

  10. fxkatt Says:

    Womxn also has a way of referencing–and thus trivializing, undermining, and reversing the historical radical feminist usage of “womyn,” which was meant to exclude, not include men; or more to the point, proclaim women as liberated from and independent of men.

  11. giuliaalexis Says:

    Well, it is no longer a march for women. It’s just a march. I am not participating in this march because I remember when all this shit first came up after last year’s march and frankly I don’t have the patience for it. We should really make fun of it and do an alternative: womXXn…

  12. LC Says:

    I don’t get it… woMEN, with an ‘e’, already includes the only group of people we know are offended by the word women. At least ‘womyn’ is pronounced the same and makes sense. Are we supposed to be x-men now? I want the powers, just lose the stupid spelling.

  13. Widdershins Says:

    Awwww, poor little male snowflakes feefees is all hurted ‘cos them nasty women didn’t make their march all about their poor little male snowflakes feefees.


  14. Reblogged this on renegaderesearch and commented:
    They can keep their “complexity of gender.” Women should go elsewhere and leave this thing to the womxn.

  15. genderskeptics Says:

    Oh, Oregon.

    • rheapdx1 Says:

      Yep….this bastion of loony leftist thought has done it again….

      I will bet here that the clowns at NPR on Monday morning will call this march a success, a triumph for MRA’s, SJW’s and other mushrooms. As well as those who look like the top draft picks for the new Cleveland Browns offensive line, next year but in dresses bought an yon friendly local Goodwill.

      • Riffraff Says:

        What’s extra funny is that there’s a lot of survivalist right wing loons out in the PNW boondocks. Not just “your weird cousins with too many shotguns and a bomb shelter” but actual anti-government radicals. I’m convinced that OR and WA (Seattle can be Cloudcuckooland Prime too) are trying to outdo Florida and Arizona for Most Batshit State 2018.

  16. Emma Love Says:

    Oh Salem…what a disappointment. This is exactly why I decided yesterday that I cannot go to the march this year. I’m crushed, been waiting all year as I was unable to attend last year…but I can’t support this, or pretend it matters for women. Salem is a small town at heart, seeing this kind of divisiveness, running off real women for the Women’s March, is bizarre.

    The word “Woman” includes ALL women…every race, every culture, every possible permutation of human form with the reproductive capabilities, functional or not, of the XX egg bearing female, or the expectation of those functions.

    Women are being run off from feminism, from every corner of representation. F that, I’m out, it’s time to organize a REAL XX Women’s XX March.


  17. So Salem has become the new Portland? Who’d have thought?

    FTR, I live in Oregon, in the southern part of the state. It is like the Mississippi of Oregon.

    • Emma Love Says:

      I often refer to Oregon as “Ore-tucky”.

    • Lisa Says:

      and, lest people forget, the last Women’s March in Portland involved a male to trans dood— invited into the organizing by naïve liberal feminists—robbing the group of $20,000 and fleeing to Canada.

  18. Carrie-Anne Says:

    I mentally pronounce that stupid spelling as “We mixin,'” as in, “We’re mixed up about who’s a man and who’s a woman.”


  19. “The new spelling is also seen as intersectional, as it is meant to include transgender womxn, womxn of color, womxn from third world countries, and every other self identifying womxn out there.”

    If I hear “intersectional” one more time, I swear to God I’m going to scream.

    Trans are experts on colonizing everything they come in contact with, twisting and bastardizing the original meaning of words. “Intersectionality” originally meant that there were often multiple layers of oppression facing women. That is, race as well as sex. As I understand it, originally, the term “intersectionality” had nothing to do with gender identity or transgender. It was a black woman describing how both sexism and hundreds of years of racism work together to oppress women, particularly women of color. Trans being the ultimate colonizers use it now to mean white males who “transition”, often in their thirties or forties after leaving the kids and wife behind. Or, it could mean white males who identify as Filipino women (Ja Du), or trans abled (transgender who identify as the disabled). Maybe “intersectional” means 52 year old divorced fathers who identify as 6 year old girls (Stefonknee Wolscht). I bet Stefonknee Wolscht would really be “intersectional”.

    This is so insulting to women or color, especially poor women. It is such bullshi*. To the vast majority of women on the planet, “gender identity” means nothing whatsoever. Words such as, “and every other self identifying womxn out there” means nothing to these women because they can’t “identify” themselves out of anything.

    Millions of girls undergo female genital mutilation. If they “identified” as transmen, maybe this wouldn’t happen. The deaths of thousands of poor women who die in childbirth could have prevented if they just “identified” as men. And, women don’t need abortions because they can “identify” their way out of it.

    What does white billionaire transwoman Jennifer (James) Pritzker have to do with poor women in third world countries, or poor women of color in the US? The answer is not a damn thing.

    Get a good look at this billionaire rich white dude, and tell me that he is just like women in third world countries. He made a boat load of money, and then up and left the wife and kids behind to pursue his delusional belief that he is a “woman”.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Pritzker

    Bruce, “Caitlyn”, Jenner is worth about $100 million. If Jenner really were a woman, he would not be worth $100 million because no female athlete of his generation ever made that much money from endorsements, etc. What does this rich old white man, father of six kids by three different wives, have to do with women in third world countries, or poor women of color in the US? The answer is nothing.

    “The hardest part about being a woman is figuring out what to wear.” – Caityln Jenner, Glamour’s 2015 Woman of the Year

    No, it’s really not about figuring out what to wear.

    https://www.theodysseyonline.com/the-hardest-thing-about-being-woman

    Rich old white men can now purchase “womanhood” via cosmetics, fashion, facial feminization, plastic surgery, etc.

    Martine Rothblatt, another white heterosexual late “transitioning” transwoman is worth about at $390 million.

    Transgender activists are supported by rich old white men, and then these idiotic brainwashed women tell us that wealthy white males in US and elsewhere are just like women in third world countries. It’s all about the “intersectionality” bullcrap they learned in their “gender studies” class.

    The vast majority of women in third world countries are just trying to survive, and deciding what to wear is the last thing on their mind.

    Notice how their special “intersectionality” doesn’t include female and male gender abolitionists, radical feminists, women aligned with gender critical analysis, and any and all females who are moderates and liberals who are so sick of “gender identity” that we could scream.

    In the year 2018, “intersectionality” means that women have to get permission from males (this includes males in dresses) before we can have a march. And, it’s all about “self-identification” (they are really into self-identification),and “every other self identifying womxn out there.” What in the hell does, “”every other self identifying womxn out there” mean?

    The way that “intersectionality” has been twisted makes me sick to my stomach.

    I’ve heard women say that “intersectionality” feminism is like the “All Lives Matter”. Black people can’t say, “Black Lives Matter” because it really should be “All Lives Matter”, and it’s just mean to white folks. In the spirit of “intersectionality” (they can’t get enough of intersectionality), “Black Lives Matter” should be “All Lives Matter” because black people can’t talk about issues that are unique to black lives. It’s mean to white people. And, white people should be able to “self-identify” as black people (Rachel Dolezal). Make it “All Lives Matter”, and being black is nothing more than “self-identification”. Let’s really do “intersectionality” and “self-identification” right.

    Why are women the only historically oppressed group of people that aren’t granted the right to define themselves? I say that males are not “women”, and they say they are “women”. Why are they right and I’m wrong? Males define everything in the world, and they get to define woman too.

    • Oak and Ash Says:

      “If I hear “intersectional” one more time, I swear to God I’m going to scream.”

      I have a similar reaction. “Intersectionality” might as well be translated “My feminism will center men or it will be bullshit.”

      Other definitions men seem to have rewritten:
      Privilege — “Someone has something I want.”
      Oppression — “And won’t give it to me.”


  20. I would like to follow up on the bastardized revision of the term “intersectional”. When we add transgender, anything can happen, and I do mean anything.

    Intersectionality: Websters

    “Intersectionality—the complex, cumulative manner in which the effects of different forms of discrimination combine, overlap, or intersect”

    Is this “intersectional”? A white, blue eyed, obviously looking Caucasian transwoman says he is “transracial” and really feels like a Filipino woman. It’s the “intersection” of transgender and women of color, and it’s all based on being a “self-identified woman”. We aren’t talking about a biracial man with some Filipino heritage. No, having Filipino relatives isn’t necessary. He is just a white dude who identifies as transgender, and feels like he is really a Filipino woman. No, no creepy cultural appropriation here. I bet that is really “intersectional”.

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/11/13/transracial-man-born-white-says-he-feels-filipino/858043001/

    https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2017/11/13/im-not-what-is-on-the-outside-worlds-first-trans-racial-childrens-book/

    How is a white male oppressed if he can’t identify as a Filipino woman? We can’t say a white male colonizing and sexual fetishizing Filipino women. No, I better shut my “transphboic” mouth. “Gender identity” is sacred, and it’s “intersectional” too.

    I bet this is really “intersectional”. A transwoman identifies as a disabled person in a wheelchair. He can walk, but it’s all about “self-identification” as disabled. There are disabled people, and “self-identified” disabled people. If we add transgender, all the boxes are ticked.

    https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2012/02/01/national-geographic-taboo-fake-paraplegic-chloe-jennings-white/

    This must really be “intersectional”. It’s the intersection of two different species into one, or something sort of like one species mixed together. And, it’s transgender too, so we know it must be super “intersectional”. This is transwoman lizard woman.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3524063/Transgender-woman-Eva-Tiamat-Medusa-ears-nose-removed-dragon-lady.html

    Stefonknee Wolscht, the 52 year old divorced father of 7 kids who identifies as a 6 year old girl, must be the “intersection” of age and gender identity. There is an “intersection” between 52 year old divorced men and 6 year old girls. Under “gender identity” laws, men like Wolscht have access to all women’s private spaces. And, he is a legally recognized category of person. He is, in reality, just a divorced man with a age play sexual fetish who likes to pretend he is 6 years old.

    https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2015/11/29/transwoman-stefonknee-wolscht-lives-life-as-a-six-year-old-girl/

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3356084/I-ve-gone-child-Husband-father-seven-52-leaves-wife-kids-live-transgender-SIX-YEAR-OLD-girl-named-Stefonknee.html

    (*gendertrender covered this story before the mainstream news picked it up)

    Divorced middle aged white males with age play sexual fetishes are oppressed, and somehow it’s related to “intersectionality” and the real lives of poor women of color. I call this bullshi* out.

    Maybe, just maybe, transgender has little, if anything, to do with intersectionality as it was originally described. Both race and sex impact poor women of color. There is no doubt about this reality. Trans activists have bastardized the word “intersectionality”, and the brainwashed women who bought into it are clueless.

    Yes, there are transwomen of color who are poor, but there are also white billionaire transwomen like Jennifer (James) Pritzker, and millionaire white transwomen like Caitlyn Jenner, Martine Rothblatt and others. And, then there are all the white middle straight men with nothing more than a diaper or age play sexual fetish, or men who cut their ears off so they can call themselves lizard woman.

    Colonizing the very definition of women who are, in fact, a historically oppressed minority has nothing whatsoever to do with “intersectionality”. It’s appropriation. No one does appropriation better than trans activists. Applying the term “intersectionality” to white middle age males with age play sexual fetishes is such a twisted, bastardized revision of the term “intersectionality”.

    • fxkatt Says:

      I notice that whenever Amy Goodman (Democracy Now) has on a woman (more women’s coverage now, of course) who is somewhat more radical than liberal, she corrects this woman’s use of the word “coalition” as in coalition building between mutually supportive organizations, by inserting her own term “intersectional” which, I guess is her way of underscoring her allegiance to the transgender movement, and modernity.

      To me “intersectional” is a perverse term which is meant to obscure the process of identifying oppression and oppressed groups upon which coalitions get built. It says that such identities don’t even exist, and yet would not exist itself (perhaps) if it did not hold firm to its star position in the LGBT… coalition. That bit of reality it achieves there is used to fictionalize (intersectional is head bound) the very identities it subsists off.

      • Bev Jo Says:

        Lesbian Feminists did not need the academic term “intersectional” to say that being a Lesbian Feminist by definition meant being against racism, classism, ableism, ageism, and all oppression and inequality.

        Amy Goodman is so Lesbian-hating and female-hating. The night of the Pulse massacre, did she interview a Lesbian or gay man who had survived? No, she interviewed a trannie man activist in SF.

        I hope Goodman accountable for helping Bush win, which led to the invasions and wars that have never ended, and more loss of rights, more poverty, etc. The day before the election, she focused on slandering Al Gore. If he’d been allowed to be president after winning the majority, things would be very different now. For one thing, his wife is/was very supportive of Lesbians.


    • Beautifully said. Would you mind if I copypasta to a radfem group without your name on it?


  21. I think adding an X to woman is infantile. Wh aren’t men being pushed to add an X. It is a woman’s march. If you’re not pro woman, stay home.

  22. Medi Says:

    Mxwomn— everyone can identify as a man, that means everyone gets a 65% pay increase, everyone can be a catholic priest, everyone gets deferred to, and all men’s clubs are open 24/7 to whomever IDs as a man.

  23. Bev Jo Says:

    I didn’t see any trannies at the Oakland march. There might have been some and there were annoying pro-trans signs, but not many of those either. I hope to hell that women just get fed up with the demanding het men in drag.

    At a recent meeting with the board of the enormous East Bay Regional Park District, before our coalition could talk to them about their plans to kill hundreds of healthy trees, a group of genderqueer Fems came up one by one, taking so much time, to talk about how oppressed and in danger “trans” are. I don’t have any idea why they were even there.

    • Oak and Ash Says:

      “I don’t have any idea why they were even there.”

      This strikes me as cutting to the heart of the matter. Do we know why ANY of these people are ANYWHERE? Although I have wondered if young women identify as nonbinary/genderqueer/agender because they feel they won’t be heard as women–which is true enough–so they try to jump on the trans bandwagon in hopes of sharing in the deference accorded to trans women. It never works that way, of course, since people still know who’s male or female, which makes this just the latest version of some women allying with the power of men in hopes they’ll toss a few crumbs of privilege in their direction.

      But, still, the narcissism of people who won’t even let you talk about trees without whining about their own concerns! It’s as if they only read the first two letters of the topic and automatically assumed it must be all about them–or maybe some of them also identify as trans dryads?

      I do wish you luck in saving as many trees as you can.

  24. Margie Says:

    Apparently, the trans activist mob spotted a “TERF” at the Vancouver march and are targeting her for harassment and destruction. This is a brave woman who showed up and told everyone that the truth, that transwomen are men. Note the violent threats from the trans activists in the comments and replies. I have reported some of these and encourage everyone to flag and report them as well.

    • GallusMag Says:

      What a fierce Amazon!

    • Riffraff Says:

      There’s a comment (screencapped in the Feminist Current article) that talks about running her over with a truck.

      And they want to compare us to the alt-right/Nazis.


      • After much effort, hardly anyone knows Reed’s actual name. Very, very secretive, likely because they also stockpile methadone and actually brag about it online (maybe that’s legal in Canada? here, feds would have knocked on Reed’s door already). They also claim to be in “recovery” but regularly mix alcohol with opiates (and talk about it!) so this is an active addict who lies and claims to be recovering, so they can shake their skinny ass (Reed calls it “gamine”–you know, like Hepburn) and regularly panhandle online.

        So this person who slinks around with their opiate/alcohol cocktails in secret with a fake name (probably several), is declaring a hit on a woman who is does NOT slink around in secret, but is open about who she is and what she believes.
        They are *opposites*… no wonder Reed called in the hit squad.

        Document it all, if something happens to this woman, it was Reed who ordered the hit and should be arrested first. Be ready to forward this tweet to Vancouver law enforcement. Hundreds of the biker-gang have approved it, and those names all need to be copied as well.

        Reed, you are a coward. Doubtless you know who this is and how to find her, but you’ve decided to send your posse after her instead of doing it yourself. I remember you did this during the Montreal demonstration too, you direct things like a pope and then stand around and act like you don’t know why shit is all fucked up. YOU are why. If you were American, you’d already have been run out of town as a nark/federal agent, since 1) most junkies are, its an expensive habit and 2) shit goes to hell whenever you are around and its an identifiable pattern. (Natalie Reed: junkie fuck up or a skilled provocateur? You decide.)

        If anything happens to her, many of us will make it a *personal mission* to hold you accountable. You are. You will be. Yes, kill her for holding a sign… run her over for holding a sign. That is The Way of The Trans and we want to make sure everyone knows that. And Reed was the instigator. This was at the direction of Pope Natalie, and you don’t even have the decency to be ashamed of your sociopathic behavior (most junkies aren’t).

        If yall are *not* men, when are you going to stop putting out hits like biker gangs? But unlike cis biker gangs, you only go after women, not men; its the Bizarro Htrae version of a biker gang.
        (The boys who flunked masculinity spectacularly but always wanted to be in a gang, can now be in the Trans Women Biker Gang, threaten old women and have traditional male fun anyway!) Is this cowardice why they think they are women? I assure you, Reed, I am not afraid of any man, esp not one all fucked up on fancy liqueurs and methadone.

        PS before the more PC among you castigate me for calling someone a junkie–remember, I am allowed and I earned that right. As an ex drug addict I get furious when the word “recovery” is abused by the hucksters who have no intention of “recovering” but just use addiction as an excuse to get methadone, sympathy and oppression-points. Methadone is more addiction, not recovery. FUCK methadone, control-tool of the state. FUCK addicts in denial who shake their asses online to get more drugs, then do irresponsible things like THIS TWEET… when they do arrest Reed, it will be “ohhhh I was all fucked up on druuuugs, I don’t remember”–believe me, they remember it all just fine. They simply don’t have the guts to do it without their favorite brand of chemical augmentation.

        As I said: coward.


    • Thanks for your support. I was beside her supporting her and her brave sign! Check out #iamspartacus on Twitter where 100’s of (mostly women) ppl claim to be the woman who held this sign.

  25. Bev Jo Says:

    I love this. Wonderful. She is so courageous!!!

  26. Medi Says:

    Interesting about the mention of Amy Goodman. She has never been on the side of women when some darling leftist man does something wrong. The whole insisting on using the word “intersectionality” is probably trans support code. She never was interested in the women who accused Julian Assange of rape in Sweden many years ago, so letting lefty men get a free pass on this stuff seems to be who she is. She covers sexual harassment, women’s marches, and the Me Too movement, because she has to, so maybe someone should bring up Assange again on her show in light of this.

  27. Medi Says:

    Wow, I hope loads of women come to the Amazon’s support for bravely holding up that sign that trans women are men, and that trans ideology = homophobia and hatred of women. They can’t even take ONE sign of disagreement–pun intended.

  28. thisismeandonlyme Says:

    What is wonderful about the world wide marches is they are women-centric. Dont let this crap dissuade you. These really are about women.

  29. Margie Says:

    Update to my comment above regarding the Amazon with the sign: The trans mob has not yet identified her. However, they claim to have identified the woman in the green scarf behind her. And even though that woman is not carrying any sign, they have already begun their harassment of her. Her twitter account (or at least, the account belonging to the woman that they claim is the green scarf woman) has closed.

    The “non-binary transman” who is boasting about the doxxing is someone named Kye Rye. (I think it is a play on her actual name, which is Kai.) You can read all of her posts relating to the doxxing by clicking on the FB link in my comment above and scrolling through the comments. But here’s a sample of the poison from Kye Rye:

    “terf defenders/sympathizers take note: when a terf doxxes a trans woman, it’s done maliciously, solely to out her.
    when someone doxxes a terf it’s because she’s a garbage person who’s causing real, material harm.”

    We should all flag and report these comments for harassment and violations of FB policy.

  30. Medi Says:

    Any time you see women standing up to the male to trans aggressors, never ever give out information about the women who have this kind of courage. Better safe than sorry indeed, and they do target older women, and older lesbians big time.


  31. Wish I could tell you what really happened! I will say that the two women in the pic have been well supported and are apparently safe so far. Thanks for your support on this important issue that is erasing women everywhere.


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: