Fire the transgender awareness trainer
Could they be any more insulting? The Telegraph tells us “academics” say Queen Elizabeth I wasn’t a woman. Gee, I wonder why they think that – because she was powerful and tough and clever perhaps? Can’t be no girl because girls are weak and soppy and stupid? Thanks, academics, you’re doing brilliant work.
Elizabeth I has been presented as possibly non-binary in an essay published by the theatre, which refers to the female monarch with the gender-neutral “they/them” pronouns.
The essay was written by a “transgender awareness trainer” in defence of the Globe’s decision to stage a new play featuring a non-binary Joan of Arc, but both the play and the essay have raised concerns that famous females are being written out of history.
Probably because that’s exactly what’s happening.
I’ve found the essay, but that will be for a separate post.
Imagine the Globe writing an essay saying Frederick Douglass probably identified as white, because look how clever he was. They wouldn’t do that, would they, but for some reason this “strong women were not women” crap is ok?
Philosopher Dr Jane Clare Jones said: “This is a really great example of the inherent gender conservatism in gender identity ideology. Traditional gender conservatism says that men must do ‘manly’ things, and women must do ‘womanly’ things.
“Gender identity ideology reverses that and then we end up with the idea that anyone who does ‘manly’ things must be a man, and anyone who does ‘womanly’ things must be a woman.
“This is how we end up in a situation in which historical women who have performed traditionally ‘masculine’ roles end up being re-categorised as ‘trans men’ or ‘non-binary’ or ‘not-women’ in some way. This is a really regressive message to be sending out, especially to young women.”
Joan Smith, author of the feminist volume Misogynies, said: “Women and girls are entitled to reject stereotypes without losing our sex. We didn’t have enough female role models to start with, we have spent decades rediscovering women artists, authors, leaders. And now a regressive ideology is trying to take them away.”
It makes me livid.
It’s not all one way, either. They’re using the same logic to deny women the accolade of being the first in any field.
Besides posthumously turning extraordinary women into being ‘really men’, I read something this week that claimed we cannot say that the current vice president of the US is the first woman in the post, because we can’t know how her predecessors ‘identified’, and some of them might have thought that they were women.
Really, I cannot think of a more obvious way to show the misogyny inherent in the ideology.
WTF? Seriously, WTF? Look, I hate sports, like to cook sometimes & prefer females as friends but I’m male. Period. I have a niece (I think, we’re not close) who chose the “he/him” pronoun at least at one time and I’m fine w/that as well. I know that some men prefer to dress up and pretend to live as women, again I have no problem w/them as long as they respect female-only spaces such as dressing rooms & toilets, not to mention shelters & prisons.If a male really truly wants to be a woman than he needs to have the surgery to “make it so” in a permanent manner… This ‘trans rewriting of history’ thus removing real women from the human story is imho “nucking futz bs” & my ‘wtf’ is this – where does my opinion of trans (pro f->m, suspicious m->f) put me on the political spectrum? I’m 65 and on this issue I’m just plain lost.
Infidel753’s link sent me here once again (I’m a frequent visitor via). This post and the linked essay above are the first genuine WTF I’ve so far encountered so far, in many of their Link Round-ups.
oops, should have checked the followup box…
What’s Infidel753?
Not what, who – https://infidel753.blogspot.com/