Hmmmm, disinformation... like?:

1. Intersex people are neither male or female
2. Intersex people prove that sex is a spectrum, or that male people are female
3. Sex is a cultural, or historical concept, and didn't exist before the colonisation of the Americas

4. All gender non-conforming people that existed throughout history are trans in the modern sense, even though that concept didn't exist and they didn't identify as such
5. Gender identity is a scientifically verified concept
6. There is no possible reason why young people
might experience distress with their body or gendered expectations other than them being trans, and that exploring those reasons is tantamount to conversion therapy
7. There is not a significant desistance rate in young people with gender dysphoria if they are not medicalised
8. Puberty blockers are just a pause button
9. Puberty blockers are totally safe and there is tons of medical evidence that the treatment has good outcomes
10. Women are not oppressed on the basis of their sex
11. Gender identification completely
overrides sex in all and every possible instance. There are no salient sex-based patterns either in physicality or behaviour that means we should continue to organise anything by sex.
12. People who continue to think that sex exists and is salient could only be motivated by
hatred of trans people. There is no reason why anyone, let alone people oppressed on the basis of sex (because they're not lol), should continue to assert that sex exists and is salient in any circumstance.
13. When people talk about the continuing existence of sex, that makes
people unsafe, and sometimes causes men to murder trans women. Because of this, no one should talk about sex, ever.
14. Trans people are the most vulnerable people in the world, and we will demonstrate this, every year, using the murders of Brazilian prostitutes.
15. It is very much in the interests of young trans people, for us to constantly leverage their sense of vulnerability, and to tell that that anyone who continues to assert that sex exists and is salient hates them and wishes them harm.
16. The people who think sex exists are all right wing, funded by Christian evangelicals, like racists, and driven by fear of the other.
17. Because of this it is important that they are not allowed to speak, and failing that, that everything they say is treated with derision
18. The progressive way to do politics is to dismiss everything people who disagree with you say, claim that it is bigotry, or lies, and refuse to engage in good-faith political debate
19. This is a democratically normal way to behave, even while you are seeking to change the law
or public policy.
20. People on the right are all driven by hate and bigotry. We are driven only by justice and love and tolerance, other than of course for those terrible people who keep saying sex exists. They should be punched.

More from Dr. Jane Clare Jones

@PennyRed @OpheliaBenson @jk_rowling @bindelj No Laurie, you have repeatedly used the kind of monstering rhetoric towards us that many of the people who have repeatedly threatened, harassed and intimidated Julie and thousands of other women do.

When this is repeatedly brought to your attention you disavow the fact that

@OpheliaBenson @jk_rowling @bindelj calling women terfs, fascists, nazis, in league with the far right, etc etc, is rhetoric associated a broad campaign of harassment and intimidation, disavow the violence, and then carry right on with the rhetoric.

We've watched you do this for years. We've also watched you

@OpheliaBenson @jk_rowling @bindelj repeatedly claim you don't understand our position, and don't understand why we think your complicity with the erasure of female people as a sex class makes your feminism incoherent. We have explained all this to you at length, and you somehow, cannot grasp it, and then carry on

@OpheliaBenson @jk_rowling @bindelj calling us fascists.

Perhaps when women who have been on the receiving end of extreme abuse by trans rights activists for years, review your book, and find your feminism wanting, and then you turn around and claim victimhood, perhaps that's a little bit galling. Perhaps when

@OpheliaBenson @jk_rowling @bindelj you are siding with people who have been repeatedly accusing women of 'weaponising their trauma' because they want space free from males, we find it EXTREMELY GALLING for you to appeal to your trauma when you got some shitty book reviews.

Joanne Rowling is a survivor of sexual
To the small group of women, many of whom have platforms to protect, who are intent on throwing other women under the bus.

1. That a small number of transitioned trans women have been using women's spaces for a long time is not the same as the impact of a new rights movement


that demands that *anybody is a women only on the basis of self-declaration* and explicitly includes cross-dressers under the trans umbrella. There was less than 5000 people who received a GRC. The estimates of the numbers of cross-dressers in the male population is around 4%.

THAT is a MASSIVE difference.

2. Therefore, any comments you make re: women's current resistance are irrelevant. We are not responding to the same thing.

3. Calling women's concerns about the number of males who may now have access to their intimate spaces 'hysteria'

immediately discredits you as a feminist. (Hello Judy!)

4. Female people are socialised into the rapeable class. They are subjected to objectification and violation from childhood, and especially from their early teens. This has a massive impact on


mental health and sense of their own personhood. Many of us experience being female as fucking traumatic. We *do not* share this experience with people who go through childhood and puberty as males, and whose impression of what 'being female' means is informed by patriarchal
Sally Hines' evidence to the WESC.

'I do not accept that male violence is a thing.'

https://t.co/79KG1w83OB


Stephen Whittle.

'I consider female people having any spaces or services to themselves, or being able to stipulate intimate care from people of their own sex, to be a legal abhorrence.'

https://t.co/MO9NVW3XpK


'Stonewall considers allowing ppl access to the spaces and services of the other sex on the basis of nothing but self declaration regardless of the obvious ways this can be abused and the evidence that it already has been to be sensible.'

https://t.co/QWsEayzeXd


'We still don't understand the law'


'Yeah, we really don't understand the law.'

More from Society

@danielashby @AdamWJT @Greens4HS2 @TheGreenParty @GarethDennis @XRebellionUK @Hs2RebelRebel @HS2ltd I'll bite. Let's try to keep it factual. There's a reasonable basis to some aspects of this question, that it might be possible to agree on. Then there are other, more variable, elements which depend on external factors such as transport and energy policy. /1

@AdamWJT @Greens4HS2 @TheGreenParty @GarethDennis @XRebellionUK @Hs2RebelRebel @HS2ltd First up, we know reasonably well how much energy it takes to propel a high-speed train along the HS2 route. We can translate that into effective CO2 generated by making some assumptions about how green the electricity grid is. /2

@AdamWJT @Greens4HS2 @TheGreenParty @GarethDennis @XRebellionUK @Hs2RebelRebel @HS2ltd Secondly, we have a reasonable grasp of how much CO2 is going to be generated by building HS2 - there are standard methods of working this out, based on the amount of steel, concrete, earthmoving, machine-fuelling etc required. /3

@AdamWJT @Greens4HS2 @TheGreenParty @GarethDennis @XRebellionUK @Hs2RebelRebel @HS2ltd Thirdly, we can estimate how much CO2 is generated by cutting down trees, and how much is captured by planting new trees. We can also estimate how much CO2 is needed to keep the railway running and generated by maintaining the track /4

@AdamWJT @Greens4HS2 @TheGreenParty @GarethDennis @XRebellionUK @Hs2RebelRebel @HS2ltd We know how much CO2 is saved by moving goods by freight train on the lines freed up by moving the express trains on to HS2, rather than by truck. /5

You May Also Like