Fish
My goodness, woke activism gets more surprising every day. Here’s @transphilosophr, who describes herself thus:
Writer. Ex-academic philosopher. @RebelMouse | Forthcoming book “Transgressive: A Trans Woman on Gender, Feminism and Politics” with @JKPBooks #WomenInTech
And here’s how she talks about “TERFs” – i.e. women she doesn’t like.
I've figured it out! TERFs smell so bad because they live on a steady diet of red herring. Red herrings for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Red herring body wash. Red herring shampoo. Red herring supplements. If it smells like rotten fish, TERFs probably love it.
— Rachel Anne Williams (@transphilosophr) August 4, 2018
Women smell like fish, haw haw haw.
That’s a misogynist “joke” that goes back as far as jokes, but she’s insisting that it’s about logic and they just don’t get her philosophical profundity.
But also also, WOMEN STINK LIKE ROTTEN FISH.
Don’t make yourself look stupid, fishbreath! LOLOL SMH RN
Also, I’m very academic.
I AM NOT IMPLYING ANYTHING BY THIS but I do feel compelled to note that it is pretty funny that this post comes right after one with pictures of a bunch of dead fish.
Yeah, a red herring’s a fallacy, but she knew what she was doing.
This reminds me of Obama in 2008 doing a “you can put lipstick on a pig” bit after Palin’s “the difference between a pit bull and a hockey mom is lipstick” line had become well known. A lot of my fellow Obama supporters actually argued he was innocently using a well known phrase. Give me a break.
So… RAW’s reply, as an ex-academic (anti-intellectualism and being anti-formal-education is just so cool!), to being called out for using what could easily be interpreted (for anyone who’d been exposed to it previously) as a misogynistic slur is – being generous, here – to make an argument from ignorance. Maybe they just didn’t read through the entire list of logical fallacies.
But am I the only one having a hard time overlooking the overwhelming irony in their dedicating an entire line to referring to ‘Daisy’ as “DUDE”?
Twitter is not the medium in which to have a true debate, and Williams appropriately doesn’t try, but I note also that Williams published a piece just recently proudly proclaiming that they don’t cite sources anymore.
“Dude” is genderless these days.
Or so my teenage nieces tell me.
For a meaningless bit of anecdata, a friends daughter (13), who has been raised as devoid of gender stereotyping as is practically possible (yet has somehow ended up obsessed by horses). I don’t think I have ever seen her wearing a dress or skirt or makeup (in fact she objects strongly to washing or combing her hair), yet she objects strongly to the use of ‘genderless’ male nouns such as dude. She quite correctly points out that she is a girl. it’s been a joy watching her grow up. She asks lots of questions, her parents give precise answers based on facts (both are engineers). That inevitably leads to furrowed brow and further questions, sometimes for an extended period. I held my tongue during the QA on LGBTQIA. Lots of questions. At the end of that she was utterly fine with people choosing anything they wanted to be, but she wasn’t having a bar of a trans girl/women being identical to a physical girl/women since birth. She still can’t articulate why, and she wasn’t obviously lead to that conclusion. It will be interesting to watch that space as she ages.
#5
Most people would agree, but I am wondering if Rachel Anne Williams would agree, particularly when conversing with a stinky terf who uses the term.
I take it you were more vocal during the LGBTI part?
Well played.