Trans and Gays — feminists aren’t your friends and they never have been

In 1976, John Lauritson gave an address to the Gay Academic Union Conference in New York, entitled Dangerous Trends in Feminism.

In the speech he states…

“ the first international gay liberation conference in Edinburgh, where women discovered evidence of “sexism” and demanded that the conference change its focus from legislative reform to “confronting sexism”. Laws, they argued, only affected men, and therefore it was sexist to concentrate upon things like repealing sodomy statutes.”

As an indication of how successful this strategy was, contrast the endless stories of sexism — with the accompanying sackings, apologies, twitter-mobs etc — and then read the paper prepared in 2014 by Brian Heiss that compared the US laws on TGBL and the laws in Russia.

Mr Heiss’ reason for writing that paper was a response to the No Agenda show pouring scorn on the anti-Russian propaganda concerning the Russian BGTL community ahead of the Sochi Winter Olympics (that had the NGO’s up in arms.. predictably). As Mr Heiss said himself, he set out to research the issue and was astounded to discover that the laws in Russia were far more liberal than the US.

Later in Mr Lauritson’s piece he addresses three other targets of the feminist ire in the 1970s…

“ In the Gay Academic Union, some feminists have demanded that panels on S&M, pederasty, and transvestitism not be allowed at conferences.”

It is this issue of transvestitism that I wish to address, since it is endlessly being debated in various forms, in the trans issue.

Now I realise that transvestitism is a term that has gone out of fashion, and the word ‘tranny’ or ‘trannie’ is considered hate speech in some quarters.

There are some who get very touchy about the issue, and will dismiss it as a kink for straight cis-males (probably white, if they are going full on SJW) and say that it has no place within GBTL. These are usually the type of people who after a few drinks will say things like, “I would shag a trannie,but I’m not gay,” and not see the irony.

Just as there are many heterosexual trannies who wouldn’t dream of sucking cock unless properly dressed ‘for dinner’.

And yes, there is a world of difference between a post op trans-sexual, a drag queen, a committed cross-dresser (who can easily pass), a not so committed one (who can’t), a transgender person, and some bloke who enjoys wearing stockings in bed with a partner, who equally likes the pleasure of nylon.

Except there isn’t…

Because like so much relating to male sexuality and behaviour, and feminism’s insatiable desire to control all aspects of it, it is a wide spectrum, on a very sliding scale (though one with differing demands and interests).

And I emphasis maleness in relation to this because nowhere have I seen people clutching their pearls, fearing that trans-men are going to start fiddling with kids in toilets, or setting up cameras to film men using the urinals, or that there needs to be some sort of certification to declare trans-men are suitably manly (echoing precisely the fears of the Christian right, and Mary Whitehouse: who no doubt fearing, due to war casualties, there would not be enough husbands to provide for maidens; if men were shagging each other).

Yet, it is practically impossible to see this subject debated without someone using the age old sliding scale to invoke the triad of; S&M, pederasty and, transvestitism- all three according to feminists grounded in misogyny and patriarchy theory- to conjure up perverts akin to the picture painted of homosexuals, by the likes of Anita Bryant, in the 1970's.

Because as we know men can’t be trusted… they are a Company of Wolves.

And they certainly can’t be trusted to be women.

Sure as eggs is eggs, let a ‘biological male’ wear anything with a stiletto heel and you can bet your life that, before you can say Tom Robinson, they will be tying up some limp born-again-virgin or depraving your children in toilets…. and the police will be powerless to act for fear of the invisible force of transphobia…

And why wouldn’t they?

After all, transgenderism — in the form of trans-sexualism- is a mental illness… or it isn’t… well it sort of is, depending on Riley Dennis’ mood (and hormones) that day. Which if you stop and think about that for moment, does rather suggest that there is something wrong with being a woman… (you know… like a woman is a mentally-ill form of being human).

Or perhaps it is a way of saying, you must be mad (like Corporal Klinger) if you think people should let you retire early, get two thirds your jail sentence, not get jail time for the same crime — and all the other female privileges that men don’t get… be they straight, gay, trans or whatever… with the magic words, ‘but I’m a lady.’

Riley Dennis is an interesting figure in this debate (in part because she was promoted by Youtube, and in part because she came to prominence at a time of turf wars between NGOs for funding)… but mainly because so much of the backlash revolves around her (promoted) Tumblrism idiocy…

For instance, one of the things she claimed is it is transphobic if you wouldn’t date a trans-person (and pay for dinner, them being a woman, and all)…. transphobe being the equivalent of sexist (v bad, v,v bad)… all groups need a buzzword for shutting down debate and playing the authority card… how galling must it be that your ‘as a woman’ card, no longer works with a ‘mere man’?

Now let’s be honest, Ms Dennis makes a nice rhetorical point, but in the real world, it is just silly. There are billions of people in the world I would not consider shagging (and more who wouldn’t shag me), and it says nothing about me or them… or indeed anything… but then I am not seeking to virtue signal and a Bic is a pen… (and besides the missus would probably object).

However (and no Riley Dennis didn’t dream this stuff up, some PR company did), these ‘diversity and inclusion’ talking points, have been turned into the claim that lesbians will be forced to have have sex with trans-women, or be accused of a hate-crime…

Or so Sarah Ditum in the New Statesman put it…

“ A lesbian who refuses to consider a trans woman as a sexual partner is guilty of denying that trans woman’s gender identity.”

Really?

Gosh! Who knew that women are currently forced to have sex with lesbians or be had up on charge of sexism and/or homophobia. Why the papers talk of nothing else… the prisons are full of them…

Oh and referring to the protests that disrupted the Gay Pride march in London…

“ The group, which calls itself Get the L Out, carried banners proclaiming “lesbian not queer”, “lesbian = female homosexual” and “transactivism erases lesbians””

Now where have I heard this before?

Oh yes, in John Lauritson’s article…

“ This year in the Christopher Street Liberation Day Committee, a few women (speaking for all women) laid down a series of demands. First, women would march at the head of the parade, to offset what they called “lesbian invisibility”. Second, half of the marshals and speakers would have to be women (actually, this had always been the case). Third, all floats and speakers would have to be approved by a committee, which would censor anything it found guilty of “sexism”, “racism”, “classism” (whatever that is), and perhaps some other “ism”. The main fear of these women was that female impersonators would be allowed, either on floats or as speakers.”

Now, lets be honest Riley Dennis is not the shiniest button in the basket… her video about geography being racist proved that… and if you want to get conspiratorial feel free…

And perhaps, in this instance with good reason. As increasingly the narrative coming from feminist organisations is one of trans-people being violent, and/or perverted…. and probably after your kids - if you look at the posts Jess Bradley was supposed to have liked on Tumblr (oh God Tumblr!)…. and funnily much of this ‘debate’ is based on things Riley Dennis has said or written in Everyday Feminism.

I linked to the Spiked article about Jess Bradley, because they choose not to mention the identity of what they describe as “a whistleblower” — who brings us the shocking news that Gays like porn (who knew?)- and who seems to be linked to #solidaritynotsilence, who are, apparently, a “ Group of women being are being sued for speaking up!” Here’s a link to the crowd funding page — it’s something to do with feminist musicians and an ex-boyfriend…. (meh, it’s probably #metoo stuff, which normally Spiked opposes, but when Brendan can white-knight for the waman (he’s not gay, and will fight anyone who says he is) he’s up on his trans-high-horse like a penguin on a unicycle)

Anyway, the point is I really don’t understand why Gays and Trans people insist that somehow feminism is (or ever has been) good for them.

If Gays in the US had told feminists to go and hijack some other movement in the 1970s, and focused on changing discriminatory laws, it might not be legal in the US to fire someone for being gay or transgender in 28 states.

Who knows…

Men might be able to wear what they like…. without having to go through a whole list of questions — are you gay? — yes but are you gay? — are these the ones I threw out? —do you take hormones?….

So now there are 954 (or seem like it) made up words with which to self-define — none of which describe anyone’s precise sexuality —when for most people, if asked, the answer is (or should be), ‘if I’m not fucking you, then it is none of your business.’ And it should be pointed out most of the categories are to make straight, middle class, girls look interesting during their teenage years.

I have for a while found myself puzzled with trans-women’s fixation on feminist approval (aside from the NGO funding row at at the heart of this conflict), and then I remembered this quote from Quentin Crisp…

“The whole set of stylizations that are known as “camp” (a word that I was hearing then for the first time) was, in 1926, self-explanatory. Women moved and gesticulated in this way. Homosexuals wished for obvious reasons to copy them. The strange thing about “camp” is that it has been fossilized. The mannerisms have never changed. If I were now to see a woman sitting with her knees clamped together, one hand on her hip and the other lightly touching her back hair, I should think, “Either she scored her last social triumph in 1926 or it is a man in drag.”

For it is pure camp. The left-wing trans-activists demand to be 70’s feminists, TERFS demand their right to co-opt everything just like 70’s feminists… and the woke types on the NGO funding boards get to watch on, and pick who to toss money to like the Emperors they are…

If you doubt this, consider the story of the complaints about Walk on the Wild Side, it is pure, unadulterated, hysterical (camp) feminism.

And the sooner Gay-men and Trans-woman — or better still good old fashioned trannies - pushed through the open door offered by calling out feminists (the latest version of High Tory Women), as they did in the 1960’s, before feminists put them back in the closet of the 1980s and 1990s, the better it will be for everyone.