www.spiked-online.com

Brendan O’Neill #transphobia spiked-online.com

Trans: the new ideology of the ruling class

[…]
In another training clip, the same woman is shown telling a big lad in a wig that he can’t come into the ladies’ toilet. ‘Wrong door, love’, she says. Nice touch, HR: having the woman say ‘love’ drives home the point that she’s out of touch and, worse, probably from the working class, where words the middle classes hate – ‘love’, ‘sweetheart’, ‘doll’, ‘darling’ – still abound. ‘You’re not coming in here’, says the wicked woman to the man who thinks he’s female. To some of us, this looks like an admirable defence of female privacy and dignity in the workplace. But the foreboding voiceover chides and corrects us: it’s actually ‘inappropriate behaviour’.

That’s right – the ‘inappropriate behaviour’ belongs not to the hulking bloke making his way into a woman’s toilet, but to the woman who says, ‘Back off, love’. This is a rank moral inversion. A key demand of the second wave of feminism – the last good wave, in my view – was that women should have the right to work. And thus workplaces should not be hostile to women. Working women should be treated fairly and should have access to private spaces for the purposes of changing, going to the bathroom, etc. This video in which the man intruding on the women’s WC is the good guy, while the woman standing up for her sex is the bad guy, speaks to how thoroughly the trans religion threatens to undo the great gains of women’s liberation.

We are all familiar with the professional women who’ve been persecuted and discriminated against at work under the religious banner of ‘trans rights’. Maya Forstater, Allison Bailey, Rosie Kay, Denise Fahmy, Gillian Philip. Now one wonders how many working-class women are also pressured, day in, day out, to bow to their bosses’ beliefs, even if they don’t share them. To greet an obvious man as ‘Ms’, for example, or to sit through lectures about why it’s bad to stop bepenised people from disrobing or urinating in the same place that you do.
[...]

Brendan O’Neill #transphobia spiked-online.com

Trans: the new ideology of the ruling class

[...]
Yes, class domination has had a makeover. It wears bad wigs and stilettos now. Consider the Telegraph’s exposé of the woke training regimes that now pertain in the UK civil service. A vast dossier of internal documents was leaked to the Telegraph showing that the machinery of state has been conquered by the trans ideology, ‘white privilege’ chatter and other culture-war craziness. Civil servants who surely have better things to do are being given LGBTQ+ education and shown training videos about how sinful it is to stop a ‘transwoman’ – ie, a fella – from using the women’s loo.

At the Ministry of Justice, they’re even being told it’s racist to believe in biological sex. ‘In many societies’, said a ‘diversity’ group at the ministry, belief in two sexes ‘is a product and tool of colonialism and white supremacy’. You think biology is real? That a person with a dick is a man, not a woman, no matter how many pills he pops or TikTok transition videos he makes? Then you’re basically Cecil Rhodes. It’s bad enough that crap like this is being taught in universities, but in the civil service? Among the people whose job it is to keep society ticking?

[...]
For me, the most striking thing about the woke soiling of the civil service is its disciplinary undertones. The implicit threat of consequences for those who stray from the neo-religious line. Especially those lower down the social ladder, in the less-educated and thus more problematic section of the workforce. So in one training vid, a receptionist is shown ‘misgendering’ a trans-identifying male. He introduces himself as ‘Miss Caroline Standish’, but she calls him ‘Mr Standish’. Typical ditzy receptionist. Send her to HR. How dare a woman who just answers the phones disrespect this important man in pearls and a dress?

[...]

Brendan O’Neill #transphobia spiked-online.com

The gender jihadists are out of control
Trans activism is now little more than a witch-hunt of disobedient women.


The gender jihadists are out of control

Imagine if mainstream British politicians were photographed at a demo at which someone was holding a placard that said ‘Decapitate coconuts’. A demo at which there were open, horrendous expressions of violent contempt for black people who hold the supposedly wrong views. A demo at which it was stated that such sinful ethnic-minority people should not only be executed but eaten, too. ‘I eat coconuts’, one of the signs might say. There would be uproar, rightly so. It’s unlikely the politicians would keep their jobs for long.

Well, the sexist equivalent of this scenario did happen, for real, in Glasgow on Saturday. Politicians were seen standing in front of protest signs that fantasised about visiting bigoted violence, not upon morally disobedient black people, but upon morally disobedient women. TERFs, as they’re called, which literally means ‘trans-exclusionary radical feminist’, but which really means witch, bitch, scold, hag. Anyone who has witnessed a hardline trans activist spit out the word ‘TERF’ will be under no illusion as to the misogynistic menace that underpins that four-letter slur. Yet while there is concern over what happened in Glasgow, there isn’t as much public fury as one might expect.

[...]
And yet there is a very important question that Oswald, Stewart and the other Sturgeonites at that Glasgow gathering must answer: you might not have seen those particular placards, but how have you not seen the frenzied woman hate that is now a key feature of the ideology of transgenderism? How have you missed the misogynistic bile that flows not only through that Glasgow demo you gladly attended, but also through so much of the trans lobby? How are you unaware that while ‘Decapitate TERFs’ might be a new one, there have been many explosions of violence-tinged fury with TERFs in recent years, both online and off? Not seeing two hateful placards is kind of forgivable – not seeing that trans activism now seems to consist of little more than angry men bellowing ‘witch’ in the faces of women who have the temerity to disagree with them is not.
[...]

Brendan O'neill #enbyphobia spiked-online.com

It’s time to call out the nonsense of nonbinary

What’s more important – women’s rights or Sam Smith’s feelings? We’ve had a loud and clear answer to that maddest of questions over the past few days. It’s Sam Smith’s feelings. Of course it is. The right of this ear-piercing nonbinary balladeer not to suffer the indignity of winning an award with the word ‘male’ on it – despite his obviously being a bloke – takes precedence over the right of female pop artists to have their own sexed awards category and to pick up gongs for their work. Smith’s eccentric identity trumps your right to win prizes, ladies. Suck it up.

[...]

It’s their surprise that is surprising. Gender-critical voices warned that collapsing the male and female categories into one flabby, woke, unsexed Artist of the Year field would disadvantage pop’s women. Even the Brits itself seemed to see the downsides to genderfluidity. In 2021, in response to the trans lament that having male and female categories excludes those, like Smith, who fantasise that they’re post-sex, the Brits said it would make changes. But if change ‘unintentionally leads to less inclusion, then it risks being counterproductive to diversity and equality’, it warned. That’s now happened. The infinitesimally small number of nonbinary pop acts are included, women are not. In 2023, anyway.

[...]
There are some important points to make here. First, Sam Smith was not ‘excluded’ from the Brits. That’s just nonsense. It is demeaning to those who have suffered real oppression to describe a bloke’s infantile, hammy refusal to accept a gong with the word ‘male’ on it as oppression. A man saying ‘Ooh, I can’t accept that award because its wording will offend my outlandish identity as a “they”’ is about as far from Rosa Parks as you can get. Smith excluded himself from the Brits by being in denial about his maleness. He, and Corrin and D’Arcy and the other fashionably post-gender celebs, opted out of sex, and by extension out of sexed awards. It’s on them. Why should awards change to accommodate the faddish beliefs of a nonbinary clique?

[...]

Brendan O’Neill #transphobia spiked-online.com

The sexist self-delusion of Dylan Mulvaney
(submitters note: continued from https://fstdt.com/Y.XKYF9Z65XK9 )

[...]

These double standards expose one of the most sinister elements of the trans ideology: its belief that transwomen are not only actual, literal women but are better women than biological women. They’re the truest women. Embrace ‘your true self with gender-reassignment surgery’, surgeons say. We’re told that, through radical surgery, men who want to be women can ‘become their real self’ and find their ‘true identity’. Real, true – it’s about as far as you can get from the ‘fake tits’ discourse that swirls around women who have cosmetic procedures. The implication is that the body of the man who ‘becomes a woman’ is more authentic than the body of an actual woman, because he had to suffer so much to get it. His ‘femaleness’ is hard won, and thus holier. As Germaine Greer said of Bruce Jenner’s transition to Caitlyn, ‘Misogyny plays a really big part in all of this, [this idea] that a man who goes to these lengths to become a woman will be a better woman than someone who is just born a woman’.

The entire idea of FFS – as I will be calling it from now on – is misogynistic. It really does reduce womanhood to costume, to performance, a mask that can be pulled on by anyone, including those of us who have penises. The highly stylised, or ‘stylishly queer’, manner of Mulvaney’s face reveal confirmed that femaleness is pure theatre for the trans activist. The raised curtain, the spotlight, the canned applause – this was girlhood as entertainment, womanhood as stagecraft. The belief that some hormones, a bit of face chiselling and a name change are all it takes to become a woman is profoundly chauvinistic. It robs womanhood of its biological, social and relational truths and makes it mere garb, to be donned by all who desire it.

[...]

Brendan O’Neill #transphobia spiked-online.com

The sexist self-delusion of Dylan Mulvaney
Note to trans activists: no amount of cosmetic surgery turns a man into a woman.

Just when you thought the trans ideology couldn’t get any crankier, here comes the face reveal. This is when a man who’s becoming a woman, or thinks he’s becoming a woman, takes to social media to unveil his surgically ‘feminised’ face to the world. Gone is his square jaw and big nose, fleshy giveaways of maleness, and in their place is a thinner, more dinky nose and pert cheekbones. Behold my womanly visage! It’s like a woke version of PT Barnum’s museum of freaks. Barnum pulled back the curtain to reveal women with beards – the face reveal invites us to roll up, roll up and gawk at the man who turned into a lady.

[...]
There’s a Frankenstein feel to the face reveal. I’m not saying that to be offensive – Dylan himself used that F-word. He talked about how relieved he was to have the ‘staples and screws’ removed from his scalp – it takes a lot of metal to make a man a woman – because ‘I felt a little bit like Frankenstein having those in’. He means Frankenstein’s monster, but let’s not be pedantic. His reference to Mary Shelley’s chilling morality tale about the misuse of scientific power might be more apt than he realises. Where Frankenstein tells of the dangers of trying to turn inanimate matter into life, the face reveal points to the folly of thinking we can turn men into women. Surgeons who believe they can alter something as immutable as sex are surely ‘playing God’ as much as Victor Frankenstein was when he tried to make a cadaver human.

[...]
The cult of the face reveal tells us a lot about the woke moment, none of it good. First, there’s the staggering and sexist double standards when it comes to cosmetic surgery. For decades now, the cultural elites have sneered at women who’ve gone under the knife to get a smaller nose or bigger breasts. [...] Yet now we’re meant to fawn over men who undergo insanely more meddlesome surgery in the mistaken belief that it will make them women. The same kind of talking heads who were aghast at vajazzles think a penectomy followed by vaginoplasty is absolutely fine (Google it. Actually, don’t.)

[...]

Brendan O’Neill #transphobia spiked-online.com

The gender jihadists are out of control
(submitters note: continued from here https://fstdt.com/PBSVPNH5G8DN3 )
[...]
Any movement that attracts so many bigots really should have a word with itself. Any activist set that helps to make it fashionable again to call women witches really should engage in some self-reflection. For here’s the thing: while it might be the outliers of the trans cult who scream witch and issue death threats and say ‘suck my girldick’, their tirades only express with greater ferocity and spite the misogyny that is inherent to modern trans activism. The root idea of the contemporary trans movement – that ‘transwomen are women’ – is itself misogynistic. Its reduction of womanhood from a biological, social, relational phenomenon to a costume that anyone can pull on, even people with dicks, is profoundly sexist. It dehumanises women. It denies the specificity of their experiences. It turns womanhood into a feeling, something flimsy. So, yes, in saying that all it takes to become a woman is three months of wearing a dress, Sturgeon is contributing to the misogyny that motors 21st-century gender ideology.

The mantra ‘transwomen are women’ underpins the resurgence of misogynistic thinking. There is a traceable line from this mainstream chant to the fringe cries of ‘cunt’ aimed at any woman who says transwomen are not women; that there’s more to being a woman than feeling and image. The violent hatred for ‘TERFs’ might mostly come from unstable individuals online, but it expresses the sexism and intolerance that are absolutely key to trans activism more broadly, and in particular to its belief that a man can be a woman. We need a firmer fightback against the hatred for ‘TERFs’ and in defence of the things that are threatened by this new witch-hunt – women’s rights, freedom of speech and scientific truth.

Brendan O’Neill #transphobia spiked-online.com

The gender jihadists are out of control
(submitters nnote: continued from here https://fstdt.com/8GLF5SY6LQTH )

[...]
We need to talk about the hatred for ‘TERFs’. It is out of control. It is the most vehement form of bigotry in the UK right now.
[...]
Lower down the scale of mental anti-TERFism, we also had an SNP councillor in Dundee speaking about gender-critical feminism in the same breath as Nazism. At a pro-trans rally, she said we need to stand against ‘hate’ (tell that to your comrades!) because ‘I’ve seen first-hand when I travelled… to visit a place called Auschwitz’. Marshalling the atrocities of the Holocaust to demonise women who just don’t want men in their refuges, sports and changing rooms? Every day there’s a new low in this lobby.
[...]
Sexist hate is a daily reality for women who question the idea that you can change sex.
[...]
Last year, Sturgeon issued a formal apology for the witch trials that rocked Scotland between the 16th and 18th centuries. When is she going to apologise for the very modern witch-hunts that she herself has witlessly helped to facilitate?

Or just behold the low-level intimidation that attends virtually every gathering of ‘TERFs’. There will always be gangs of men outside gender-critical meetings; men horrified by the idea of women speaking among themselves about their rights; men who ridiculously believe that their feeling of ‘womanhood’ and badly applied lippy makes them women, too. Better women, in fact. As India Willoughby tweeted at the weekend, ‘I’m more of a woman than JK Rowling will ever be’. That’s misogyny, too. The idea that a man – yes, India’s a bloke – even does womanhood better than women is testament to the low view of womankind that’s been whipped up by the trans cult.

[...]

Brendan O’Neill #transphobia #enbyphobia spiked-online.com

It’s time to call out the nonsense of nonbinary

[...]
That’s the other point – the staggering narcissism of the nonbinary ideology. These people really do believe that the entire world should mould itself around their ideology. Male and female awards must be scrapped. Female toilets, changing rooms and other private spaces must be thrown open to men who feel like women. Even language itself must be twisted and bent to these people’s identity feels. So we’re all expected to use ‘preferred pronouns’ and even to mangle grammar by using ‘they’ to refer to one person. My use of the he pronoun for Smith and the she pronoun for Corrin and D’Arcy will be judged by some a heinous act of bigotry. But I am not willing to sacrifice the sense and universalism of the language I use to appease the fever dreams of a minority movement.

‘For the narcissist, the world is a mirror’, said Christopher Lasch. The narcissist must always see ‘his “grandiose self” reflected in the attentions of others’, he said. So it is with the trans movement. It expects every realm of society – every awards ceremony, every woman’s space, every linguistic tradition – to bow and scrape before its post-truth, ahistorical belief that people are whatever sex they say they are. The truly oppressive force was not the Brits having male and female categories but the pressure put on the Brits to scrap those categories in order to flatter the narcissistic delusions of a few nonbinaries. This is the opposite of a civil-rights movement. Progressive movements in the past were concerned with changing the world to make it better for all. The regressive, navel-gazing cult of gender play is obsessed with altering the world so that its own adherents never have to encounter an idea or a space that dents their fragile egos. The irony of their misuse of the word ‘they’ is that they are myopically focused on me, me, me.

There is a serious philosophical question in all this: should people have the right to liberate themselves from reality? I say no. Sam Smith and Emma Corrin and the rest can wear what they want, call themselves what they want and use whatever pronouns they want. But why should the rest of us have to play along with them and abandon everything we know to be true and right? Sam Smith is a man, Emma Corrin is a woman, and it is not bigotry to say so. Truth is never bigotry.

papercut 100 #fundie spiked-online.com

It's just that if a child finds she likes and trusts a particular adult, and the adult likes and feels love for that child - why shouldn't part of their closeness have a sensual element - the adult can teach the child about hygiene, biology, physical development, interpersonal relationships, mutuality, love and respect, as well as how to safely experience and give pleasure - so many things which another child wouldn't be able to.

Whilst such a relationship would risk being harmful to the child in the context of modern, consumer society because of the intense stigma the child will eventually become aware of, I don't think that such a nurturing, consensual, child-led relationship would be intrinsically any more harmful than children playing at sex with other children.

george #fundie spiked-online.com

If family's are so closed off,ain't that a good case for incest? providing it's
consensual and loving,again just a taboo,I'm not talking penetration here,until past puberty,how much of it goes on anyway,farther daughter,daughter bro,bro younger bro etc?

As far as a non family member is concerned,the owner of the property,can legally eject anyone out their house at any time,regardless of the age of consent,but hay some parents don't give a fuck about their kids,falling into the arms of a benign pedo,could be just what they need.also don't forget
kids who have no parents,due to accident etc.

papercut 100 #psycho spiked-online.com

Alternatives to 'raping a child':

1sublimating the sexual urge in good works and sporting activities
2 consensual sensual activities with an adult
3 consensual sex with an adult
4 consensual sex with several adults
5 masturbation
6 auto-erotic activities
7 celibacy
8 consensual sexual or sensual activities with a non-human animal.
9 sex with a prostitute
10 consensual sensual activities with a child
11 consensual non-penetrative sexual activities with a child (i.e; not legal in the UK but definitely not 'Rape'.)

There, that's 11 alternatives you can contemplate next time you haven't had sex for a long time and are thinking that your only option is to go and 'rape' someone.

holocaust21 #fundie spiked-online.com

Couldn't have made the case better myself. The only thing I'd add is that ages of consent across the world used to be about 12 at the most with some places (e.g. Delaware, USA) being 7. So really the idea of legalising 'paedophilia' being excessively liberal is ridiculous - it is in reality our society now that is excessively puritanical.

The body of evidence in favour of the legalisation of 'paedophilia' is so enormous that there really is no reason not to. The only reason why the arguments are not heard is because governments have clamped down on and arrested those who try to speak the truth, such as the members of PIE, the members of the Dutch organisation Martijn and so forth.

The war on paedophiles really is a war on freedom of speech.