Category: Notes and Comment Blog

  • If that’s common sense…

    Labour MP Fleur Anderson is very glad to see an organization for women “supporting” men at the expense of women.

    It’s not a “common sense statement of women supporting women”; it’s a grotesque statement of an institute for women supporting men who pretend to be women.

    It’s both, you know. Both aspects are important. It’s the women aspect but it’s also the truth aspect. It’s the brazen, ridiculous, insulting insistence that “women” no longer means “women” but we don’t get to have a new word that does mean “women,” we have to go on using the same word but submit to men who change it to mean women plus men pretending to be women.” We have to join them in telling the big stupid lie. We have to pretend we don’t know what the truth of the matter is or be treated like evil demonic hate-mongers. It’s way too much to expect and it’s way too much to demand.

  • Is never good for you?

    Hilarious. LBC announces two new presenters and up pops Inja to yell “what about me????”

    https://twitter.com/IndiaWilloughby/status/1648982589334605824

    Gee why would anybody not want to give Willz a show? Apart from the bad temper, the entitlement, the conceit, the smugness, and the playacting a woman.

  • A charity event for Ramadan

    Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth.

    At least 78 people have been killed in a crush at a school in Yemen’s rebel-held capital, Sanaa, during a charity event for Ramadan, officials say.

    …

    Poor people made their way to the Maeen School in central Sanaa on Wednesday night after being told that a local merchant would be handing out zakat (alms) to mark the end of the Islamic holy month of Ramadan.

    The head of the Houthis’ Supreme Revolutionary Council, Mohammed Ali al-Houthi, posted a photo on Twitter apparently showing hundreds of people queuing outside the school before the crush.

    …

    A health ministry official said women and children were among the 78 people killed in the crush.

    Another 77 people were injured, according to the ministry. Thirteen were in a critical condition in hospital on Thursday, while the rest were discharged after receiving treatment, it added.

    Why doesn’t a benevolent god step in to avert this kind of thing?

  • Concerns

    The WI washes its hands of Threaty McThreatface.

    So he never was a member? He was a supporter, not a member? Did they ask him how he identifies?

  • To paint some picture

    But he says the WI has rescinded his membership. Just for a bunch of threats to kill women!

    Two conflicting stories in one tweet – the WI has canceled his membership, and he won’t be surprised if the WI Labour cancels his membership. Which is it? Who knows.

    It’s the people who object to murder threats who are cruel and heartless. Wah.

  • “Trans activist” boasts of his violence

    This is all fine.

    Now trans activist who boasts of her violence joins Women’s Institute: Self-professed ‘violent and cruel’ martial arts champion signs up to organisation amid row over policy to allow transgender members

    That’s the headline. They do long headlines, the Daily Mail.

    A transgender activist who claimed she was drawing up a kill list of ‘Nazi’ opponents says she has just joined the Women’s Institute.

    Shanu Varma, who has described herself as ‘violent and cruel’ and purports to be a martial arts champion, said she had signed up to the organisation amid a row over whether or not it should allow transgender members.

    No, the row is over whether it should allow men who are trans. It’s not about being trans, it’s about being men, because the Women’s Institute is for women.

    She posted on social media a screenshot of the WI website thanking her for a ‘one-off purchase of WI Supporter Plus’ membership and added the caption: ‘Fantastic news, now a Women’s Institute member.’

    But other Twitter users highlighted her recent warnings that she had drawn up a list of dozens of critics of gender ideology to help friends who wanted to murder them – although last night she claimed the messages had not been meant seriously.

    …

    Ms Varma, who lives in Greater Manchester and claims to have recently joined the Labour Party, uses two Twitter accounts.

    Using one account, under the name DJ Miss Gripper, she has also boasted about her love of fighting. In one message last month she wrote: ‘I’ve permanently paralysed nine people from the neck down. 

    ‘Am a gold medal holder shao’lin kung fu champion. Be careful who you threaten, I can make one phone call, call a favour in and end of troll.’

    It’s extraordinary how many times the Daily Mail endorses this guy’s ridiculous claim to be a woman, even while underlining how ridiculous it is and how dangerous he is.

    In another she said: ‘I am very violent and cruel when I fight and have never lost in 320 fights in 40 years.’ And in a series of other tweets, also now deleted but widely shared online, she spoke of drawing up a kill list of gender critics, known as ‘terfs’.

    She said two friends were ‘going to murder the top 50 prominent terf’ if being trans was made illegal in the UK and had been ‘making a snuff list’.

    Last night on her other account, under the name Dr Shanu Varma, she claimed the kill list messages had been a sting operation. She wrote that she had ‘published some disinformation yesterday only to delete this morning as I wanted to see who would out themselves’.

    And she said that she removed the tweets ‘as the onslaught was horrible’, with ‘thousands and thousands of nasty’ messages, which she has given to Greater Manchester Police.

    Aw diddums did the mean women say mean things to you just for saying you’re going to put a lot of women on a hit list?

  • Most marginalized

    Ok, so this guy is promising to kill any woman who objects to a man in the women’s toilets. “It will be the last mistake you ever make,” he says smugly.

  • Hitting a woman in the face, twice

    One, man charged with punching woman in the face.

    Police have charged a 20-year-old man with allegedly assaulting an elderly woman at an Auckland anti-transgender rally last month.

    The charges arise from the heated clashes at the speaking engagement for activist Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull, who goes by the alias Posie Parker, at Albert Park.

    Videos online show both supporters of Keen-Minshull and protesters clashing, with one showing a man hitting a woman twice in the face.

    Two, he got to hide his name.

    A man charged with assaulting an elderly woman during a protest against an anti-transgender speaker has received name suppression.

    The man appeared in the Auckland District Court on Thursday morning, where he was given name suppression and remanded on bail.

    He was ordered not to associate with the complainant and not to act violently towards anyone or anything.

    Why should he get to hide his name? It’s not a parking ticket – he punched a woman in the face, hard, twice. He fractured her eye socket. Why should he get to hide his violent assault?

    H/t Rob

  • Autre temps, autre moeurs

    Wikipedia sheds light on what is is about Thank You, Jeeves that would make a publisher anxious.

    The book uses the dated and now derogatory term “nigger minstrels” which was once a common term for white performers in blackface. Blackface minstrels were a staple of British seaside resorts until World War II.[19] The term “nigger minstrels” was historically used to differentiate blackface minstrels from “colored minstrels” who were actually black performers.[20]

    Blackface performances, widely considered offensive today, were popular at the time Wodehouse was writing this novel. During this period, Al Jolson, Bing Crosby and Shirley Temple were among the many actors who performed in blackface.[21]

    What’s a publisher to do?

    Maybe there’s no answer to that question; maybe there’s no good option.

    Shirley Temple

  • Fox gazes at the squirrel

    Guess who hasn’t been reporting on the Fox News-Dominion settlement…

    Fox News’s last-minute settlement with Dominion Voting Systems on Tuesday earned banner coverage on every television news network but one: Fox News.

    The $787.5 million settlement was covered only three times by Fox News in about four hours after the settlement became public, amounting to about six minutes of coverage. For most of the day, including during the network’s prime-time shows, hosts appeared to be focusing on other issues, like illegal immigration and Covid-19’s possible origins.

    Sorry, we’re busy here, very very very busy, we’ve got breaking stories about immigration and Covid.

    Anyway. The settlement is a record-breaker.

    The $787.5 million that Fox News agreed to pay Dominion Voting Systems to settle the lawsuit against the cable network appears to be one of the largest settlements in a defamation case in U.S. history.

    While the terms of out-of-court settlements are not always revealed, the Fox-Dominion deal immediately enters the upper echelon of publicly disclosed damages and other payouts in defamation cases.

    Fox makes a lot of $$$$. By destroying everything.

  • Willoughby and the bag of spanners

    Wait a second.

    Willoughby is very grumpy here, but the thing is – he says two trans women are not trans. Starting at 1:28 he says it. He goes on to say they’re not pretty enough. “They both look terrible, they look like a bag of spanners” – so it’s all about what one looks like? Not the soul? I thought it was the soul.

  • Inclusive policy

    Moving past the headline…

    The Women’s Institute will continue to “celebrate” the lives of the transgender women enriching its membership, the head of the organisation said on Tuesday, following reports that it was facing a bid to overturn inclusive policy.

    Why should the WI, or any such organization, have an “inclusive policy” that entails being “inclusive” of people who are explicitly and inherently not part of that organization’s constituency? Why is the WI expected to be “inclusive” of men at all? Should peace organizations be “inclusive” of people who promote war? Should labor unions be “inclusive” of the bosses? Should atheist organizations be “inclusive” of Catholic priests and nuns?

    And, second question, in what sense does a man “enrich” the membership of the Women’s Institute? Why aren’t women enrichment enough? Is it because women just aren’t that valuable on their own? They have to be beefed up a little by adding some men? Is the WI really going with that? Why?

    Melissa Green, CEO of the the National Federation of Women’s Institutes (NFWI), said the organisation did not want to enter into a “toxic and divisive” row that sought to sow discord among women, but instead foster sensible discourse and reflect the lives of all its members – including those that are transgender.

    Well that’s stupid. Stupid stupid stupid. The “row” doesn’t “seek to sow discord among women,” it seeks to continue to be the Women’s Institute as opposed to the Women’s and Some Men’s Institute. The discord is inside the house.

    “Being part of the WI is about the experience of being a woman, and that is a combination of both biology and lived experience,” she said in an interview with the Guardian. 

    Yes, lived experience of being a woman.

    “I know from speaking to so many of our members that they feel that we are enriched by that, that we learn something about being a woman through the eyes of transgender women.”

    They learn that women can’t have anything that’s just for women, that’s what they learn.

  • Continue to celebrate

    The Guardian exclaims

    Women’s Institute will ‘continue to celebrate’ transgender women amid inclusivity row

    Women’s Institute will continue to celebrate men as women object to letting men join the Women’s Institute on account of how they’re not women.

    Women’s Institute will continue to celebrate men as women object to being told, even by institutions that are specifically and explicitly for women, that we must be “inclusive” of men in everything that’s ours, even in things that actually say “Women” on the door or label or title.

    Women’s Institute will continue to celebrate men while women struggle furiously to keep what’s ours.

    Women’s Institute will continue to gloat about celebrating men and to sneer at women for objecting to this campaign to give everything that belongs to women to the set of people who are not women.

    Women’s Institute will continue to sneer at women and celebrate women while still calling itself the Women’s Institute.

    And that’s just the headline…

  • Lies have consequences

    Fox settled with Dominion.

    Fox News and its parent company Fox Corp. have struck a deal averting a trial in the blockbuster defamation suit filed by the election tech company Dominion Voting Systems over spurious claims of fraud in the 2020 presidential race.

    Judge Eric Davis of the Delaware Superior Court announced the settlement from the bench on Tuesday afternoon ahead of the trial’s scheduled start.

    The parties settled for $787,500,000 — about half of Dominion’s original $1.6 billion ask.

    The amount “represents vindication and accountability,” said Dominion lawyer Justin Nelson. “Lies have consequences.”

    Dominion CEO John Poulos told reporters, “Fox has admitted to telling lies about Dominion that caused enormous damage to my company, our employees and the customers that we serve. Nothing can ever make up for that. Throughout this process, we have sought accountability,” he said. “Truthful reporting in the media is essential to our democracy.”

    Fox is a liar and everybody knows it.

  • That’s so 2014

    Did Caroline Nokes mean “basic bitch” when she said ““Well I think that that’s a really basic and to be quite frank insulting way to regard trans women, to keep harping back to calling them biological men”? I don’t know, but it’s certainly possible, so I decided to learn more about the epithet.

    “Basic“[1] is a slang term in American popular culture used pejoratively to describe people who are perceived to prefer mainstream products, trends, and music. “Basic bitch” originated in hip hop culture and rose in popularity through rap music, songs, blogs, and videos from 2011 to 2014.[2][3] Their male counterparts are usually termed “bros“.[4][5][6]

    The Urban Dictionary has more colorful detail.

    Someone who is unflinchingly upholding of the status quo and stereotypes of their gender without even realizing it. She engages in typical, unoriginal behaviors, modes of dress, speech, and likes. She is tragically/laughably unaware of her utter lack of specialness and intrigue. She believers herself to be unique, fly, amazing, and a complete catch, when really she is boring, painfully normal, and par. She believes her experiences to be crazy, wild, and different or somehow more special than everything that everybody else is doing, when really, almost everyone is doing or has done the exact same thing. She is typical and a dime a dozen. 

    Interesting. I’m familiar with that kind of “oh I’m so zany/interesting/nonconformist/original” type, always commenting on her/himself as if we were planning to write a review. I didn’t know that’s what “basic” means.

    I’m still not sure that’s what Caroline Nokes meant by it. The way she used it is compatible with meaning “that’s such a basic [crude, limited, literal] definition when we now know there are nuances.” I could be wrong though.

  • Really BASIC

    How did we get here?

    How did we get to a place where grown-ass adults in government are playing Let’s Pretend and forcing everyone else to play Let’s Pretend too?

    It’s not insulting to say that men are not women.

    “To be quite frank I think we just need to be more inclusive and more understanding of trans women and the discrimination they face, and the hostility,” she says passionately.

    How about the hostility women face for not believing that men are women? Why does her face not contort in anguish about them?

    “I just want to see them included and made to feel comfortable and welcome.”

    “But,” Tom Swarbrick asks, “why would you include a biological man in a women’s institute?”

    “Well I think that that’s a really basic and to be quite frank insulting way to regard trans women, to keep harping back to calling them biological men, and I think it’s really really discriminat’ry and really toxic to try to break everything down to people’s body parts.”

    And this is a Tory. The poison is everywhere.

  • Get used to it

    Man tells women what women have to put up with.

    He got a lot of irritated tweets, I can confirm that much.

  • Gedoverit

    William Hague tells women to get used to it. Easy for him.

    Lord Hague has argued that the Women’s Institute (WI) should welcome transgender women amid a backlash over its membership policy.

    The WI is under pressure from a new campaign group called Women’s Institute Declaration, which argues its policy of welcoming trans women – announced in 2015 – puts it “in an untenable position”.

    A petition, which has attracted hundreds of signatures, calls for a pause in admitting new trans members so there can be a wider debate on the implications of the move. It also demands a vote of WI members on its stance.

    However, Lord Hague insisted those with concerns needed to “get used to and get over” trans people being members of the 108-year-old organisation, the largest of its kind in the UK with more than 180,000 members.

    It’s not about “trans people” being members. It’s about men being members.

    He says he sees the point about women’s sport, which is big of him, but the WI is different.

    “You know, there are transgender people, they have changed their gender. This is part of our society now.

    “And I think large national organisations like the WI have to get over that and get used to that, and welcome new people.”

    Men. Welcome men.

    The grassroots organisation Conservatives for Women led a backlash to his interview, as it insisted it must prioritise “science and reason” around gender issues.

    “Telling women to ‘pipe down’ is never a good look, especially as this translates to ‘you are not allowed to have boundaries’,” said the group. 

    “Newsflash, Lord Hague – women say ‘no’. You ‘get over it!’”

    Sometimes the “women” part matters more than the “conservative” part.

    Asked about Lord Hague’s remarks , the Prime Minister’s official spokesman said: “I haven’t seen his specific comments. I think on [the] membership of any particular group, that is for the group.

    “I think the Prime Minister has said it is vitally important that transgender people are treated with compassion at all times, as a starting point.”

    Really? At all times? Is that said about any other set of people? Does any other set of people even want to be treated that way? As objects of pity at all times? What is it about trans people that makes them such bleeding open wounds at all times?

    The WI’s current policy states that transgender women are allowed to “participate in any WI activities in the same way as any other woman”.

    Sly. Transgender women are not like “any other woman” because they’re not women at all.

  • Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee

    Sigh.

    “Trans people are amongst the most marginalized, amongst the most abused, in our communities”

    No they’re not. That’s an endlessly repeated bit of doggerel but doggerel is all it is. It’s an empty platitude that pops out any time someone presses the right button (which is extremely often).

    There are so many kinds of people who are far more marginalized and abused than trans people – poor people for a start; disabled people; refugees; immigrants; people fleeing violence; abused women; abused children – the list is endless. Being trans at all is a luxury. It’s simply not credible that trans people are high on the list of people who desperately need help and protection.

    “…and I think we can do better than trying to paint them all as dangerous predators.”

    Nobody is doing that. She’s either stupid or a liar. The issue is that nobody knows which men who identify as trans are dangerous predators, and that the mandate for inclooosion of men in women’s refuges and hospital beds and prisons has no way to screen out dangerous predators.

    What about the Women’s Institute, the interviewer asks.

    “Look I think there is a huge challenge around how we can make sure both women’s rights are upheld and trans people’s rights are supported”

    Well step one is defining what those rights are.

    “I always find it fascinating that we argue endlessly about whether trans women should have access to the Girl Guides and the WI, nobody makes the same argument about trans men and whether they should have access to, I dunno, rugby clubs or whatever”

    Ffs. Of course nobody does! That’s because women are the ones who are starting from 100 paces back while men are not. She can’t be that stupid.

    “and I just think that we have to have a rational discussion about this”

    We are. We have been, for years.

    “and recognize that there aren’t huge societal problems around trans issues”

    Oh I see, we have to have a rational discussion about this in order to come to her preferred conclusion that issues about men in women’s spaces and sports and awards are not huge problems.

    “this is a marginalized group of society who absolutely need support and I’m inclined to say when it comes to the WI that they should be entitled to make their own decision”

    That is, that men who say they are trans (who are marginalized and need support because trans) should be entitled to make their own decision to invade the WI if they jolly well feel like it. Women just don’t matter here.

    She goes on to complain about the “toxicity” of the discussion – on both sides of course – and the interviewer points out that in reality men are the ones who present a risk to women, whereupon she pretends to be wholly unaware that men have physical advantages over women which some men exploit to abuse, rape, or kill women. She then, astoundingly, repeats the “trans people are amongst the most marginalized, amongst the most abused, in our communities” mantra, word for word.

  • Wooster becomes culturally sensitive

    Another entry under the heading “publisher tweaks wording of pop fiction writer”:

    Jeeves and Wooster books have been rewritten to remove prose by PG Wodehouse deemed “unacceptable” by publishers, the Telegraph can reveal.

    …

    The disclaimer printed on the opening pages of the 2023 reissue of Thank you, Jeeves states:  “Please be aware that this book was published in the 1930s and contains language, themes and characterisations which you may find outdated.

    “In the present edition we have sought to edit, minimally, words that we regard as unacceptable to present-day readers.”

    …

    An examination of the revised Wodehouse novels reveals that racial terminology has been removed or replaced throughout.

    In other words they’ve removed “nigger” and similar disparaging words.

    Again, I don’t find it all that objectionable. A Berty Wooster who lived now wouldn’t use those words – he’s an amiable nitwit, not a malevolent bully. The overtones and implications of those words were different 80 or 90 years ago – they shouldn’t have been, but they were. And, again, this is pop fiction, not literature. It’s good, skillful pop fiction, but it has no ambitions to literature.

    In Thank You, Jeeves, whose plot hinges on the performance of a minstrel troupe, numerous racial terms have been removed or altered, both in dialogue spoken by the characters in the book, and from first-person narration in the voice of Bertie.

    I do have to wonder how well that actually works, seeing as how Bertie and his friends will sound pretty odd if they’re suddenly using 2023 vocabulary when they’re not 2023 characters.