Read on Twitter
I try to talk about transgender issues in a careful, calm, and measured fashion, but this latest ruling - and the clear agenda visible in its wake - are really too close to the bone for me to manage that.
These people will not be happy until all trans people are gone. https://twitter.com/shonfaye/status/1335176071688450048
These people will not be happy until all trans people are gone. https://twitter.com/shonfaye/status/1335176071688450048
We’ve known it all along - all trans people have known it all along. These lobby groups are pushing for extermination under the guise of “reasonable concern.” They talk about the “slippery slope” of affirmation.
Well, let’s talk about the slippery slope of bigotry.
Well, let’s talk about the slippery slope of bigotry.
[CN: transphobia] The thin-wedge-end of it, the “concerns” about predatory men and medication and “protecting the children” from non-normative lives, and teenagers doing things their parents don’t like, the bigotry about gender non-conforming bodies.
Then you turn to marginalised groups and you say, “Why don’t you and her fight?”
And you muddy the discourse, and you lie, and you tell certain truths in a way that misrepresents them entirely (eg, the desistance rate.)
And you muddy the discourse, and you lie, and you tell certain truths in a way that misrepresents them entirely (eg, the desistance rate.)
And you stir up enough of a hate campaign that eventually a case like that becomes plausible. That you’re given a seat at the table for these discussion.
People who want us gone - radically, entirely, at any cost - being seen as authorities upon the matter.
People who want us gone - radically, entirely, at any cost - being seen as authorities upon the matter.
And you cannot give these people an inch, because if you give them an inch they will ask for another, and another, and another. Endlessly.
Because they are bigots. Because they hate us.
Even if, even if against all scientific evidence, genuinely believe that puberty blockers are subject to “reasonable concern”, what possibly harm could affirming a kid’s choice of name and pronouns do?
Even if, even if against all scientific evidence, genuinely believe that puberty blockers are subject to “reasonable concern”, what possibly harm could affirming a kid’s choice of name and pronouns do?
Unless you consider simply BEING TRANS as harm.
Loads of kids change their name, or go by a nickname, or dress/cut their hair in a way they later regret. Social transition is entirely reversible. Affirmation of it is simply kindness.
Loads of kids change their name, or go by a nickname, or dress/cut their hair in a way they later regret. Social transition is entirely reversible. Affirmation of it is simply kindness.
[CN: suicide, ED, MH, self harm]
The thing is, the “danger” of affirmative care is that a kid might be trans, might live their life happily as trans.
The dangers of non-affirmative care are suicide, self harm, eating disorder, and lifelong mental health problems.
The thing is, the “danger” of affirmative care is that a kid might be trans, might live their life happily as trans.
The dangers of non-affirmative care are suicide, self harm, eating disorder, and lifelong mental health problems.
That’s not a “threat”, by the way.
Having your reality shamed and denied is mad-making. It is the definition of gaslighting, and these “vulnerable young people” you keep going on about will react as those subjected to intolerable circumstances often do. By hurting themselves.
Having your reality shamed and denied is mad-making. It is the definition of gaslighting, and these “vulnerable young people” you keep going on about will react as those subjected to intolerable circumstances often do. By hurting themselves.
I just... I don’t have any grace or patience left on this matter.
