God I hope she’s monetized.

YouTube libfem sex ed vlogger Laci Green is hosting a livestream debate on so-called ‘Gender Identity’ Thursday at 1pm Standard Pacific Time.

Participants will be Antifeminist “truscum” transsexual vlogger Blaire White, Radical Feminist author and activist Meghan Murphy, and SJW male funfem vlogger Contra Points (never heard of him either).

Schedule from the YouTube page:

STREAM SCHEDULE(ISH)

1:00-1:15PM: Hello and welcome
1:15-1:45PM Laci interviews Blaire White about anti-feminist views of gender
1:45-2:15PM Audience Q&A about anti feminism
2:15-2:45PM Laci interviews Meghan Murphy about TERFs and radical feminism
2:45-3:00PM Audience Q&A about radical feminism
3:00-3:30PM Laci interviews Contra Points about sex and gender
3:30-4:00PM Audience Q&A about liberal feminism
4:00-4:30PM Laci answers questions from Superchat and closing thoughts

Audience Q&A will be conducted over Twitter and Superchat. Direct questions via Twitter should be sent to Laci, @gogreen18.

Enjoy!

This is pretty funny. An academic on the tenure track in the field of philosophy at Rhodes College named Rebecca Tuvel wrote an article titled “In Defense of Transracialism” which she was selected to present in January at the American Philosophical Association’s Eastern Division conference. https://apaonline.site-ym.com/?page=2017E_Accepted  This was a pretty big deal for someone in her line of work. Only the cream of the crop make the cut and the competition is tough.

Near as I can understand it, the field of academic philosophy involves the application of logic to various questions. Like mathematics, practitioners attempt to follow their computations to an unassailable conclusion supported by data. Then their opponents try to pick holes in either their logic or their data. It’s like a nightmare form of Twitter where every reply requires a 2500 word rebuttal. A brutally unromantic, areligious, aspiration to the highest levels of human thought, all couched in various fightclub lingo only understood by other initiates.

Anyway, Rebecca Tuvel examined the logic behind white Rachel Dolezal identifying as black (transracial), and male Bruce Jenner identifying as female (transgender), and concluded that the premise was one and the same and we could either affirm both identities, or neither. Further, she argued that society had reason to support such identities, and had precedent in doing so. You can read her paper in full here: https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/in-defense-of-transracialism-rebecca-tuvel/

All of this was well and good until a site specifically concerned with women’s liberation, the (ostensibly) feminist philosophy journal Hypatia, reprinted Tuvel’s article. Like all places and spaces dedicated to the specific interests of female human beings Hypatia was heavily monitored by those who wish to preserve sex-roles and police the women who protest or critique them. Particularly the men who identify as transwomen and those who champion them in that endeavor. Long story short, the shit hit the fan!

No one had any idea how to counter her logical arguments. They could easily prove Rachel Dolezal wasn’t actually black, but the same arguments applied to Caitlyn Jenner proved he was a sexist man performing a ghastly pantomime of womanhood. Not only could they not rebut her argument but they couldn’t stop people from reading it, so they did what every gender panicked soul who hates the idea that sex roles are culturally created to ritualize female subordination to males is left to do: Silence, censor, smear, threaten, defame.

Heterosexual white female Nora Berenstain of the University of Tennessee accused Tuvel of being a violent perpetrator:

“Tuvel enacts violence and perpetuates harm in numerous ways throughout her essay. She deadnames a trans woman [Bruce Jenner]. She uses the term “transgenderism.” She talks about “biological sex” and uses phrases like “male genitalia.” She focuses enormously on surgery, which promotes the objectification of trans bodies. She refers to “a male-to- female (mtf) trans individual who could return to male privilege,” promoting the harmful transmisogynistic ideology that trans women have (at some point had) male privilege.”

https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/nora-berenstain-on-rebecca-tuvel-and-hypatia/

Heterosexual white female Alexis Shotwell of Carleton University  https://twitter.com/alexisshotwell organized a demand letter for censorship claiming that Rebecca Tuvel’s work fails standards of scholarship:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1efp9C0MHch_6Kfgtlm0PZ76nirWtcEsqWHcvgidl2mU/viewform?ts=59066d20&edit_requested=true

Archive: https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/alexis-shotwell-open-letter-to-hypatia/

Call for censorship signed by Jack Halbersham

In response, the moderators of the Hypatia facebook page, representing “A Majority of the Hypatia’s Board of Associated Editors” (whatever that means) censored and deleted all previous related posts and announced an unauthorized (?) apology from Hypatia stating that academic philosophy should never hurt the feelings of people who like sex roles:

Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy

23 hrs ·

To our friends and colleagues in feminist philosophy,

We, the members of Hypatia’s Board of Associate Editors, extend our profound apology to our friends and colleagues in feminist philosophy, especially transfeminists, queer feminists, and feminists of color, for the harms that the publication of the article on transracialism has caused. The sources of those harms are multiple, and include: descriptions of trans lives that perpetuate harmful assumptions and (not coincidentally) ignore important scholarship by trans philosophers; the practice of deadnaming, in which a trans person’s name is accompanied by a reference to the name they were assigned at birth; the use of methodologies which take up important social and political phenomena in dehistoricized and decontextualized ways, thus neglecting to address and take seriously the ways in which those phenomena marginalize and commit acts of violence upon actual persons; and an insufficient engagement with the field of critical race theory. Perhaps most fundamentally, to compare ethically the lived experience of trans people (from a distinctly external perspective) primarily to a single example of a white person claiming to have adopted a black identity creates an equivalency that fails to recognize the history of racial appropriation, while also associating trans people with racial appropriation. We recognize and mourn that these harms will disproportionately fall upon those members of our community who continue to experience marginalization and discrimination due to racism and cisnormativity.

It is our position that the harms that have ensued from the publication of this article could and should have been prevented by a more effective review process. We are deeply troubled by this and are taking this opportunity to seriously reconsider our review policies and practices. While nothing can change the fact that the article was published, we are dedicated to doing what we can to make things right. Clearly, the article should not have been published, and we believe that the fault for this lies in the review process. In addition to the harms listed above imposed upon trans people and people of color, publishing the article risked exposing its author to heated critique that was both predictable and justifiable. A better review process would have both anticipated the criticisms that quickly followed the publication, and required that revisions be made to improve the argument in light of those criticisms.

We would also like to explain our review process. Manuscripts sent to Hypatia are sent out for peer review to two anonymous reviewers. The reviewers do not see the names of the author of the manuscript, and the identity of peer reviewers is not known to authors. The journal has had a long-standing policy of minimizing desk rejections due to its commitment to providing constructive feedback to feminist scholars. Revised manuscripts are also sent to the same readers for review. In the case where two peer readers disagree, a third anonymous reader may be found. Members of the Associate Editorial Board might be asked to provide another opinion and are expected to serve as readers on two articles each year. Some have wanted us to reveal the identities of the peer reviewers for this article. We cannot do this. We are a scholarly journal committed to an anonymous peer review process. We want readers to feel free to offer their honest feedback on manuscripts submitted to Hypatia. Anonymous peer review is important for the scholarly reputation of Hypatia; mistakes in particular instances should not compromise the commitment to anonymous peer review in scholarship.

In addition, to reconsidering our review policies, we are drafting a policy on name changes that will govern review of all work considered for publication in the journal from this point forward. We wish to express solidarity with our trans colleagues in our condemnation of deadnaming. It is unacceptable that this happened, and we are working to ensure that it never happens again. We also wish to express solidarity with our colleagues of color (understanding that gender and race are entangled categories) in our condemnation of scholarship about racial identity that fails to reflect substantive understanding of and engagement with critical philosophy of race. We are working to develop additional advisory guidelines to ensure that feminist theorists from groups underrepresented in our profession, including trans people and people of color, are integrated in the various editorial stages. This does not mean that we want to place future responsibility solely on transfeminists and feminists of color. We are committed to improving our review process and practice in order to make the best decision about publication and to prevent similar mistakes in the future.

Hypatia is a journal committed to pluralist feminist inquiry and has been an important site for the publication of scholarship long-considered marginal in philosophy. Too many of us are still characterized as “not real” philosophers by non- and anti-feminist colleagues. As a feminist journal, Hypatia is committed to providing mentorship to all who submit articles by encouraging substantive feedback on essays submitted for consideration. Clearly there was a mistake along the line in the review process, and we are doing our best to figure out a way forward.

Several further types of responses have been suggested to us, including issuing a retraction and setting up a blog or website for further conversation about how to move forward and improve our process. We continue to consider those responses and all of their potential ramifications thoughtfully. We welcome more feedback and suggestions, as we intend to learn from this mistake and do our best to be accountable and worthy of the trust of all feminist scholars.

Finally, we want to recognize that following the publication of the article, there was a Facebook post from the Hypatia account that also caused harm, primarily by characterizing the outrage that met the article’s publication as mere “dialogue” that the article was “sparking.” We want to state clearly that we regret that the post was made.

We sincerely thank all who have expressed criticism of the article’s publication and who have called on us to reply. Working through conflicts, owning mistakes, and finding a way forward is part of the crucial, difficult work that feminism does. As members of Hypatia’s editorial board we are taking this opportunity to make Hypatia more deeply committed to the highest quality of feminist scholarship, pluralism, and respect. The words expressed here cannot change the harm caused by the fact of the article’s publication, but we hope they convey the depth and sincerity of our commitment to make necessary changes to move forward and do better.

Sincerely,

A Majority of the Hypatia’s Board of Associated Editors

 

https://www.facebook.com/hypatia.editorialoffice/posts/1852550825032876

 

As you can see, no rebuttal of Rebecca Tuvel’s arguments exist. Her paper was vetted by both the American Philosophical Association and the Hypatia Journal.

The capitulation to genderist harassment by some members of the Hypatia organization who have taken control over their facebook content (Board of Associated Editors have no input or control over editorial decisions, they seem to be interns) has raised the alarms among academic philosophers.

Leiter Reports calls for a defamation lawsuit against the genderists:

http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2017/05/the-defamation-of-rebecca-tuvel-by-the-board-of-associate-editors-of-hypatia-and-the-open-letter.html

Daily Nous did a piece in response with a comment by Rebecca Tuvel:

http://dailynous.com/2017/05/01/philosophers-article-transracialism-sparks-controversy/

The jist of all of the protest seems to be that if transgender people were what they actually are (Not the other sex! As Dolezal is Not Black!) it would be the most awful thing imaginable.

Gender Identity. (Artist unknown)

Gender Identity. (Artist unknown)

The Obama administration’s ‘Guidance’ had eliminated the protected legal category of ‘sex’ and replaced it with an individual’s personal identification with the sex role stereotypes culturally assigned based on sex, called ‘Gender Identity’.

Adherents of the ‘Gender Identity’ movement believe that biological sex, and therefore sex-based discrimination, does not exist and that instead, sex-role stereotypes need to be legally enforced, supported, and protected. By eliminating sex as a recognized category the Obama era “Guidance’ allowed male students to occupy formerly protected female showers, locker rooms, and bathrooms, and eliminated the rights of female students to privacy from males in those spaces.

Gavin Grimm, the high school senior whose Title IX lawsuit is scheduled to be heard by the Supreme Court in March, described in a 2016 essay how years of sexism, bullying, and homophobia led to her adopting a belief in ‘Gender Identity’:

 

“When I was little, I didn’t think of myself as a boy or a girl. I thought of myself as a kid who did what I wanted. When I started school, though, that gender divide became more apparent. I noticed that boys didn’t want to play with me. I had a best friend in elementary school, and one day he just said, “Hey, we can’t hang out any more.” When I asked why, he said, “’Cause you’re a girl.” I was indignant. “What are you talking about?” I asked. “What does that even mean?”

I never, ever, in a million years envisioned myself growing up to be a woman. I don’t think I thought of any alternatives, but I knew for sure that I was not going to grow up and be a woman. When puberty hit, my biggest struggle was not only feeling betrayed by my body, but also the increasing pressure to become a little lady.

It was around this age that my leg hair started growing in — and I did not want to shave it. I loved having leg hair; I thought it was cool! But, my classmates didn’t agree. My mother, of course, put a lot of pressure on me — because I was “blossoming into a young woman” and all that — to conform to feminine archetypes. That caused a lot of conflict in my family relationships. I was a very volatile, angry kid in that time period.

But, I didn’t give up; I just continued refusing to shave or wear dresses. I gravitated towards boys’ clothes. It started slowly: Oh, here’s one Pokémon shirt because I love Pokémon. Soon, I was only shopping in the boys’ section. My mother (and I want to make it very clear that she has come a very, very long way) is Christian. She had a lot of problems with homosexuality, and she perceived me to be a homosexual female because I was very masculine in how I acted and dressed. At one point, she came to me and said, “You’re so angry, and I know why.” I said, “Wait, you do?” And, she said, “You’re a lesbian.”

I was about 11 or 12 at the time. And, I knew I liked girls, but I’d never, ever, ever identified with the term “lesbian” — calling yourself a lesbian means asserting yourself as a woman, and I didn’t want to do that. I wanted to live in that gray area where I didn’t have to say that I was anything. So, the conflict started again. Apparently, being a lesbian doesn’t excuse you from shaving your legs.

I found out about the word “transgender” when I was watching YouTube. I clicked on somebody’s video, and he looked like a girl. Then, I watched another video from, like, two years later — he was a dude! And, you know, I was 12 and thinking, Holy crap. What did he just do? I want to do it!

By the time I was 13, I started questioning things that the Christian Bible considered “sinful.” My body was betraying me more and more, the older I got. It was a horrifying experience — one that I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy. There’s nothing that I can think of that compares to the emotional and mental anguish. I was bullied a lot for being masculine and for being perceived as a lesbian. I was chubby and I was different. It was a cacophany of bad.

That’s when I finally revisited the idea that maybe male vs. female wasn’t all there was to it. I actually came across a scientific study showing differences in the brains of cis males and trans females — despite both being born with “male” bodies. I thought, Wow, maybe I’m not crazy.”

 

[sic]

http://www.refinery29.com/transgender-teen-aclu-bathroom-lawsuit

 

‘Gender Identity’ doctrine reframes the cultural issue of sexism and misogyny as an individual, personal, medical adjustment issue which eliminates the ability to meaningfully critique or politically address the male supremacist power structure of sex-roles themselves. ‘Gender Identity’ eliminates sex as a recognized category while codifying the roles.

Gender Identity. (image: London Science Museum)

Gender Identity. (image: London Science Museum)

The text of yesterday’s letter withdrawing the Obama administration ‘Gender Identity’ Guidance is as follows in bold:

 

U.S. Department of Justice

Civil Rights Division

Dear Colleague:

U.S. Department of Education

Office for Civil Rights

February 22, 2017

The purpose of this guidance is to inform you that the Department of Justice and the Department of Education are withdrawing the statements of policy and guidance reflected in:

  • Letter to Emily Prince from James A. Ferg-Cadima, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Office for Civil Rights at the Department of Education dated January 7, 2015; and
  • Dear Colleague Letter on Transgender Students jointly issued by the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice and the Department of Education dated May 13, 2016.

These guidance documents take the position that the prohibitions on discrimination “on the basis of sex” in Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX), 20 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq., and its implementing regulations, see, e.g., 34 C.F.R. § 106.33, require access to sex-segregated facilities based on gender identity. These guidance documents do not, however, contain extensive legal analysis or explain how the position is consistent with the express language of Title IX, nor did they undergo any formal public process.

This interpretation has given rise to significant litigation regarding school restrooms and locker rooms. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit concluded that the term “sex” in the regulations is ambiguous and deferred to what the court characterized as the “novel” interpretation advanced in the guidance. By contrast, a federal district court in Texas held that the term “sex” unambiguously refers to biological sex and that, in any event, the guidance was “legislative and substantive” and thus formal rulemaking should have occurred prior to the adoption of any such policy. In August of 2016, the Texas court preliminarily enjoined enforcement of the interpretation, and that nationwide injunction has not been overturned.

In addition, the Departments believe that, in this context, there must be due regard for the primary role of the States and local school districts in establishing educational policy.

In these circumstances, the Department of Education and the Department of Justice have decided to withdraw and rescind the above-referenced guidance documents in order to further and more completely consider the legal issues involved. The Departments thus will not rely on the views expressed within them.

Please note that this withdrawal of these guidance documents does not leave students without protections from discrimination, bullying, or harassment. All schools must ensure that all students, including LGBT students, are able to learn and thrive in a safe environment. The Department of Education Office for Civil Rights will continue its duty under law to hear all claims of discrimination and will explore every appropriate opportunity to protect all students and to encourage civility in our classrooms. The Department of Education and the Department of Justice are committed to the application of Title IX and other federal laws to ensure such protection.

This guidance does not add requirements to applicable law. If you have questions or are interested in commenting on this letter, please contact the Department of Education at ocr@ed.gov or 800-421-3481 (TDD: 800-877-8339); or the Department of Justice at education@usdoj.gov or 877-292-3804 (TTY: 800- 514-0383).

Sincerely,

/s/ Sandra Battle

Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights U.S. Department of Education

/s/
T.E. Wheeler, II

Acting Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights U.S. Department of Justice

 

 

giphy

When GenderTrender was born six years (!) ago, I wasn’t sure if the day would ever come when members of the general public would be informed about the problem for women and girls created by ‘Gender Identity’.

Not because the issue is complex, but because ‘Gender Identity’ is an anti-feminist and homophobic men’s rights construct, and as such is backed by all the institutional power and violence of the male establishment. Merely asking questions or discussing the issue resulted in a deluge of death threats, harassment, and what can only be described as terrorism of the women who did so. And the censorship. Oh lord, the censorship.

Yet we persisted in the hard (and sometimes tedious) work of speaking, teaching, writing, tweeting, posting, commenting, educating, and otherwise consciousness raising.

There was no funding, no backing, no institutional support, no sponsors, no media, no celebrity spokespersons, no advertising campaign. Just us. Just women (and a few men!) working together. Lighting one lamp, then another, and another, and another.

"And she told two friends, and so on" Shampoo advert

“And she told two friends, and so on” Shampoo advert

So I’m amazed and delighted when I see something like this: the fabulous AdLand’s article critiquing the (Oscar-nominated director!) Richard Linklater’s advertising campaign for ACLU Texas, designed by the guys at Austin’s GSD&M ad agency to promote ‘Gender Identity’. In truth, I LAUGHED MY ASS OFF! LOLOLOLOL

It is so damned refreshing.

Refreshing!

Refreshing!

Read AdLand’s informed and lucid smack-down, and snicker at Linklater’s ‘Midnight Movie’ worthy ad campaign “I Pee With LGBT” (Hahaha! LOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!) here:

https://adland.tv/commercials/aclu-tx-taking-seat-making-stand-2017-60-usa

Enjoy! And keep up the good work! ❤

lightbulb

 

Purple Sage

Women in Vancouver have created a women’s library to promote writing by women authors and “continue the legacy of women-run bookstores.” The library is run by women volunteers. Despite the fact that they announce themselves as queer-positive right on their website, with a “queer space” sign and a notice that the library is for “all self-identified women and girls,” a group of “radical queers” have launched an attack against the library.

Guerrilla Feminist Collective reports the following intimidation tactics used at the library:

“Last night we had to push through physical intimidation and lots of verbal nonsense to enter the new Vancouver Women’s Library.

Anti-feminist protesters actually showed up for once! They were welcomed inside (snowing, cold, everyone was welcome), but asked to leave when they tried to tear down feminist posters in the space and continued their physical intimidation inside. Police had to be called for fear of destruction…

View original post 1,182 more words

R.I.P. John Berger

January 4, 2017

John Berger passed away yesterday at the age of 90.

Over the years when various people have asked me if there is any particular thing they could share with their female teen or young adult when she announced that she is “transgender” and isn’t open to being directly challenged, I always suggested this program for shared viewing: John Berger’s ‘Ways of Seeing’. Particularly Part 2: The Female Nude, but really all four segments in order.

It is art criticism with some Second Wave Radical Feminist analysis thrown in (uncredited!) and is a good introduction to awareness of gender and the male gaze as well as critical thinking and cultural competency in general. Really every teen should be forced to watch this program. It also has some fun anachronism and 70’s kitsch for a bonus.

Selling points?

First: it has nothing directly to do with transgender.

Second, you can insist it is a necessary part of their art education (and it is!) and view it together.

Third, it’s a great entry and conversation starter on the degraded status of the female caste that pervades all aspects of culture now and throughout history.

But most importantly, it teaches young people to see beyond the surface how representation itself works.

Kind of pathetic to recommend a 45-year-old program by a male (who steals feminist ideas) for such a purpose, no?  But there it is.

These days, thank god, there are some desperately needed materials being produced- particularly by dysphoric women and detransitioners- that are likely more directly helpful. Blogs, YouTubes, and some upcoming books! But I’m still not aware of any sort of “family movie night” program like this directed at teaching teenaged young women and girls to recognize the male gaze that has been inflicted upon them and all females throughout time, and that does so gently in the guise of edu-tainment. One made by women! Perhaps I’ve missed it. Leave comments with suggestions if I have. I think it is very desperately needed.

To media makers looking to make a difference for young women and girls struggling with gender, please consider making such a program that teaches youth not by instruction, but by giving them the tools to see.

Rest in peace John.

Image of Justin Kramer's media campaign. Nice purse strap!

Image of Justin Kramer’s media campaign. Nice purse strap!

The student newspaper of the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee republished a hilarious 8-page mass email sent by penis rights activist Justin Kramer to Chancellor Mark Mone and 458 other “members of the university community” following a lecture presented by Milo Yiannopoulos, who is touring the country featuring his First Amendment flexing Alt-Right gay Andrew Dice Clay revival.

You’ll remember Mr. Kramer as a ‘nonbinary transgender woman’ (who took no hormones or other steps to “transition”) and demanded the right to gaze upon female students undressing in the locker room and sauna, and the right to expose his penis to them, as an expression of his personal laydee-brain-feelings. Or something. He made a big media stink about it, and ultimately he was permitted to inflict himself on the female students, with the caveat that he keep his dick covered. He refused. Or as he says in the email:

“It was only—and I repeat, only—because your attorneys advised you that you had to allow access that you ever let me back in to the locker room after originally banning me. And even then, you insisted I follow special restrictions (which by the way, I long, long, long ago disregarded. You’re in another fucking world if you think I’d submit to that bullshit.) And you continue to marginalize other trans and intersex individuals in locker rooms to this very day. If someone who appears trans wants to use the facility, you’ll have them yanked aside and given a body-shaming lecture where they are told they must always cover up in a locker room…a fucking locker room where undressing is expected…fuck you really are backwards. It’s apparent our bodies will never be acceptable to you.”

 

This latest outburst was spurred by the brief attention given Mr. Kramer’s case by Mr. Yiannopoulos, who mentioned it in his lecture as an example of identity politics gone awry.

 

You can view the mention here [timestamped]:

 

Apparently Justin was in attendance at the event and stayed for the entire presentation. He describes his experience in the email:

“I was at Milo’s event. You have NO FUCKING IDEA what that was like. NO. FUCKING. IDEA. I knew this event would bring out all the worst people on campus, but I wasn’t going to let that stop me. Standing in line was bad enough. Luckily at this point in my life, I look substantially more feminine than I did last spring (when almost everybody perceived me as a “boy in girls’ clothes”), and I’m correctly gendered as a woman probably 90%+ of the time now. Anyway I’m in line waiting, and in front of me two dudes are making hateful comments about trans folk. Yet 10 minutes after that, one of them was looking at my chest and checking me out. In my mind the only thing I’m thinking is, “If this person knew he was sexually attracted to a trans girl…holy shit…” because asshole boys like him tend to get extremely aggressive if they realize a girl they found attractive has a penis.

But that was still bearable and I was prepared in case they realized I’m trans (thankfully they didn’t). I also knew Milo was going to regurgitate a profound amount of racist and transphobic hate. What I did not anticipate was being specifically targeted and called out in the way he did. I hadn’t said anything or made even the slightest disruption: He had his harassment of me planned out well in advance. I’m sitting there and I hear him say “(my name” and I just froze up. I have never, ever, ever been more terrified in my life of being outed. Ever. He put my picture up, which as already stated, was taken from a prior period when my masculine features were significantly more sharp and extremely noticeable. And I am sitting there frozen in total terror that somebody around me would recognize me, point me out, and incite the mob of the room against me. Nobody did point me out, thank god. But do you have ANY idea how much power Milo had and how it feels to pray that your ability to “pass” doesn’t fail you now? That’s what it was like. Fuck, you can’t even appreciate what I’m writing. You say you do but you really don’t. You do NOT have this perspective. I was looking at the stage, consciously aware of trying to not look “suspicious” and reveal I was the person he was talking about (even as I could feel the color draining from my face), but also not looking at Milo directly ‘lest he recognize me and instantly set off dozens of people screaming at me.

I was trapped in fear and went numb. Completely numb. I felt nothing. I was having a severe, emotional, traumatic response to being fucking called out and directly targeted by this transphobic asshole in front of thousands of people, and my body’s main coping mechanism for severe stress is to shut down all emotions. I couldn’t even cry, and that’s probably a good thing because it would’ve outed me. Even after the event, I still felt nothing and was “fine.” It wasn’t until hours later, as my body began to process it, that I broke down sobbing uncontrollably. I can handle transphobia (you’re basically forced to as a trans girl) but Milo went way the fuck beyond that in what he did to me.

Do you have any fucking idea how hurtful this is? Do you know what it’s like to be in a room full of people who are laughing at you as if you’re some sort of perverted freak, and how many of them would have hollered at me (or worse) if I was outed? Do you know what this kind of terror is? No, you don’t, because as a cis person you do not understand. Sorry-not-sorry, but you don’t and you can’t. You don’t understand how misgendering is violence. Yes, VIOLENCE. And did you miss the part where Milo was talking about having sex with me? Aka shoving his dick up my ass, and joking about applying lipstick to seduce me. How the fuck is this acceptable? This is both gender and sexual harassment. What court upholds this as free speech? Answer: NOBODY. THIS WAS SPECIFICALLY TARGETED AT ME. WHAT FUCKING COURT HAS EVER UPHELD THIS SORT OF HARASSMENT DIRECTED SPECIFICALLY AGAINST A STUDENT AS “FREE SPEECH”? Just wait, now an apologist for fascists will find one lonely example, amidst a plethora that protect students from harassment.

If you actually cared about students, you would have blocked this student org from bringing Milo here, and had they fought it in court you would have battled back and prevailed. The difference here is Milo harasses specific people and incites violence against them. That is not protected, and other universities have successfully blocked him because of that. But you’re too busy kissing the ass of trans-hating republicans running the state and letting fascists attack whomever they want.

But whatever, let Milo joke about fucking me (up the ass). Who gives a fuck about sexual violence. It’s not like I’ve been raped or anything before (actually, I have). Universities regularly push that under the rug in order to protect their sorry-ass reputations. I sure as hell wouldn’t put that past UWM either. And Milo is the Dangerous Faggot after all. Let him repeatedly commit violence against me by erasing my identity and painting me as some sort of male sex predator preying on women in the bathroom. Because who cares if a student is slandered? WHO THE FUCK CARES ABOUT THOSE GODDAMN CODDLED STUDENTS? Who cares if they get harassed?

 

Perhaps this might be an explanation you can somewhat, partially understand on what it’s like to be misgendered and how this is violence, Mark Mone: Pretend you go to a restaurant to order a meal, and when you arrive, you’re given a gendered greeting of, “Hello woman, how may I take your order?” After placing your order, “Thank you ma’am, that will be such and such.” Then when you receive your order, “Oh hey, did you know you’re STILL not a man? Because you’re not. Oh and here’s your food, thank you!” And whenever anybody interacts with you, you’re called she all day, every fucking day. Imagine a similar scene again an hour later at the gas station. Now imagine it CONSTANTLY happening, on a DAILY basis, every week of the year, EVERY GODDAMN YEAR OF YOUR LIFE. You get to a point where it really, really severely fucks with you. The endless invalidation and relentless attack.

Oh who the fuck am I kidding. Why am I bothering even trying to explain what it’s like? It completely escapes your mind the very real violence Milo intentionally committed against me by calling me a man over and over in the name of “free speech” and slandering me as a sex predator.

You will also never know what it’s like wanting to die every day, you don’t know what it’s like attempting suicide multiple times, you don’t know what it’s like looking down 20 stories to a concrete ground and being an inch away from plummeting to death, you don’t know what it’s like putting your neck on a railroad track, only to chicken out right before the train got there and cursing yourself for not going through with it, (to your fucking bullshit police, no I am not suicidal right now but you fucks will try and twist past-tense into present. you pretentious assholes), you don’t know what it’s like to look in the mirror every goddamn morning and see a face you don’t recognize, YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT IT’S LIKE GOING THROUGH PUBERTY FOR THE WRONG FUCKING GENDER. THIS IS A HELL YOU CANNOT, AND WILL NOT, AND ARE UTTERLY FUCKING INCAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING. And then being denied medical access for years and years and years. Do NOT have the audacity and gall to say you “understand” our concerns. NO YOU DO NOT. You don’t know what it’s like being in poverty and unable to pay for physical transitions, and locked in the wrong body. You have NO FUCKING CLUE what it’s like to be in our shoes and having to pretend everything is fine and dandy. And then to have the university defend a speaker that targets you by name and puts up a masculine-looking picture of you to laugh at…regardless if I had been there in person (sitting in terror) or hiding in my home, HOLY FUCKING SHIT. FUCK YOU. JUST FUCK YOU.”

[sic].

Kramer, pictured right, during the event. He loves that purse!

Kramer, pictured right, during the event. He likes that purse!

You can read 8 more pages of this statement and related material (or not!) at the UWM Student Newspaper in an article entitled ‘Transgender Student Tells UW-Milwaukee Chancellor to “F” Off After Yiannopoulos Speech here: http://mediamilwaukee.com/top-stories/milo-yiannopoulos-milwaukee-tour-twitter-uw-uwm-transgender-lockerroom-policy-breitbart-alt-right

Transgender Twitter described Milo’s mention of Justin Kramer’s media presence as “outing trans students”, “terrorizing trans students” and “outing trans kids”, and responded with calls for his murder and death. Also for the University to be sued for allowing the case to be publicly discussed by individuals who are not in support of Kramer’s campaign to expose himself to women.

milo1

milo2

milo4

milo5

milo6

milo7

milo9

purse!

purse!