Almost always malign

Julian expands on his brief interview with “Sophie Grace” Chappell:

The published profile is short and allows Chappell to speak for herself with no criticism and minimal eyebrow-raising from me. The source interview, however, left me worried that mutual comprehension between the main actors this fight (for that is what is has become) is now almost impossible. (Supporters can listen to the entire interview here.) 

Mutual comprehension is indeed very difficult. I for one find it impossible to understand how so many otherwise reasonable people can believe (or at least constantly repeat) the core claim.

Listening to Chappell, you would think that the gender critical feminists – derogatorily called TERFs (trans exclusionary radical feminist) – are almost always malign, denigrating and misrepresenting trans people, while their opponents are overwhelmingly reasonable and moderate. So if you’ve been told trans activists are pushing for anything silly or extreme, that’s just misinformation. 

Like a man running the Edinburgh rape crisis centre for instance? Like Lia Thomas competing against women? Like Lia Thomas being nominated Woman of the Year? Like the National Women’s History Museum featuring a page of three men who identify as women? Like removing the words “women” and “mother” from discussion of abortion rights? None of that is silly or extreme?

For example, Chappell argues that trans activism is not captured by any ideology. She said that she didn’t even have a gender theory or ideology and that neither is central to the fight for trans rights.

No theory? Then what makes him think he’s a woman? How did he ever get there? If there’s no theory how does he not just know he’s a man the way other men just know they’re men? How are the facts of his body not enough to convince him he’s a man, in the absence of a theory that explains how people can be women despite having male bodies? PLEASE EXPLAIN.

4 Responses to “Almost always malign”