Call the editorial department

This op-ed about women who resist some items of trans ideology doesn’t begin well:

Last week, two British women stormed onto Capitol Hill in Washington for the purposes of ambushing Sarah McBride, the national press secretary of the Human Rights Campaign.

“Stormed”? Load the dice much? A decent editor would have edited that out. Nobody stormed; they simply went there. They’re allowed to do that. Poisoning the well six words in is just childish, and clumsy.

Ms. McBride, a trans woman, had just been part of a meeting between the Parents for Transgender Equality National Council and members of Congress when the Britons — Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull, who goes by the name Posie Parker, and Julia Long — barged in. Heckling and misgendering Ms. McBride, the two inveighed against her supposed “hatred of lesbians” and accused her of championing “the rights of men to access women in women’s prison.”

Ms. Parker, who live-streamed footage of the harassment on Facebook, contended that she had come to Washington because “this ideology” — by which she presumably meant simply being trans — “has been imported into the U.K. by America, so, to stem the flow of female erasure, we have to come to its source.”

No, she didn’t mean “simply being trans.” She meant the ideology: the substantive claims about reality that the movement makes and attempts to enforce with ever-increasing venom and threats of violence.

Sophie Lewis goes on to explain that what she calls “anti-trans lobbying” is more of a thing in the UK than in the US.

Case in point: Ms. Parker told the podcast “Feminist Current” that she’d changed her thinking on trans women after spending time on Mumsnet, a site where parents exchange tips on toilet training and how to get their children to eat vegetables. If such a place sounds benign, consider the words of British writer Edie Miller: “Mumsnet is to British transphobia,” she wrote “what 4Chan is to American fascism.”

Say what? If we don’t know that Mumsnet is evil, consider the words of this random person who says Mumsnet is evil? What kind of argument is that? Where was the editor when this piece got the green light?

It doesn’t get any less stupid as it goes on; why the Times thought this was worth publishing is beyond me. Maybe they have a program for trans-writers (not writers who are trans, but people who Identify As writers without being able to write), and Sophie Lewis is their first winner. Check out this elegant paragraph for instance:

In America, however, TERFism today is a scattered community in its death throes, mourning the loss of its last spaces, like the Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival, which ended in 2015. And so the strangely virulent form that TERFism takes in Britain today, and its influence within the British establishment, requires its own separate, and multipronged, explanation.

“And so” – nifty.

Then there’s a random paragraph about skepticism, then another grinding change of gears.

It’s also worth noting that the obsession with supposed “biological realities” of people like Ms. Parker is part of a long tradition of British feminism interacting with colonialism and empire. Imperial Britain imposed policies to enforce heterosexuality and the gender binary, while simultaneously constructing the racial “other” as not only fundamentally different, but freighted with sexual menace; from there, it’s not a big leap to see sexual menace in any sort of “other,” and “biological realities” as essential and immutable. (Significantly, many Irish feminists have rejected Britain’s TERFism, citing their experience of colonialism explicitly as part of the reason.)

Oh yes, there was no heterosexuality and no gender binary in India before the colonizers arrived, and that’s why there were no people either.

16 Responses to “Call the editorial department”

Leave a Comment

Subscribe without commenting