Suzanne Moore quits The Guardian [split topic]

[Zetetic]

Not really, no.

Edit: Radical feminism has a long history of pushing for an alternative conception of womanhood, at least partly based in common experiences of the female body[nb]Which if you're stupid means that you're only a woman if you have a particular set of experiences, but if you're not stupid obviously doesn't mean this.[/nb], rather than simply trying to dissolve womanhood under the guise of equality.

There's a difference between a society treating women as only existing (at least with value) in virtue of their procreational[nb]Or indeed recreational, once children were no longer actually that valuable.[/nb] potential, and believing that this potential and its realisation might be important aspects of what it is to be a woman rather than a man.

I don't think that's fundamentally transphobic, to be clear. It's a problem for a whole bunch of reasons if you take these things as essential to being a woman, but significance to the collective experience isn't the same essential to a definition.

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

I must point out again that many Big F feminist thinkers/writers espoused transphobic views, even if some of them have since changed their minds after learning more about transfolk and transness. Even the SCUM Manifesto ends up pulling into Transphobia Station. If you have even a surface level understanding of feminism and male privilege, it's super easy to cook up reasons that "biological males" shouldn't be allowed in "female spaces". Even easier to cite A Feminist Icon who agrees with you.

[Zetetic]

and while sexism and gender inequality has not been solved, it is a different situation and requires a different approach.

A slightly less gentle way of putting this is that liberal individual-focused politics steamrolled any sort of radical collectivism, and continues to do so.

[Sebastian Cobb]

I'm sure I've seen 'bathroom debate' stuff across the pond too. I note Black American women have forked feminism into Womanism through presumably some sense of lack of inclusivity, so perhaps the American Suzanne Moores have to defend themselves against different accusations about their lack of inclusivity? Not that I doubt the same problem happens here.

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

Would it be fair to say that a lot of these feminists have been saying their whole lives that they're not defined by their ability to have children, but now trans women have come along[nb]well they were always there but you know what i mean[/nb] they're having to do a sort of complete 180 and say, actually, our childbearing capacity is bloody important thank you very much?

The reasoning is that women have been oppressed for millennia because of our biology. Our enticing bodies that men objectify, our ability to bear children which makes us a valuable commodity for men who want to procreate, our silly ladybrains that can't do maths, our hysterical emotions, etc. The notion that you can uncouple gender from biological sex is therefore ridiculous, insulting, and erases women.

This is garbage. A figurative handful of women who used to be men changes nothing when it comes to agitating for women's rights. [nb]Heck, if they're as pushy and forceful as TERFs insist, make them our spokespeople. We might get some shit done, like decent abortion laws and stronger sentences for stalking and rape.[/nb] But there is a logic behind it.

[pigamus]

Thanks for the replies - bit out of my depth as you can tell

[Zetetic]

In fairness pigamus, I think it speaks less about you as much as the extent to which second-wave feminism has been so utterly buried in the popular conciousness – except now in the context of being unpleasant about and to transpeople.

[idunnosomename]

A slightly less gentle way of putting this is that liberal individual-focused politics steamrolled any sort of radical collectivism, and continues to do so.

and that radical collectivism is, ironically, smeared as "identity politics"

yas Ayn Rand we stan a kweeen

oof im too tired for this now.

[Mister Six]

Not to mention that a lot of the prominent figures from first wave feminism

Second-wave feminism (first wave was the Suffragettes, second wave in the 1970s and 80s), but other than that you're on the money.

I think the other thing is that, counterintuitively, the UK's recent history as a more progressive and liberal society than the US has led to second-wave trans-exclusive feminists like Greer, Burchill et al becoming embedded in the liberal media elite (Greer was on Celeb Big Brother FFS) whereas in the US, outspoken feminists didn't get in until the trans-friendly third wave was ascendant, so the second-wavers couldn't poison the well.

[Zetetic]

There were/are extremely prominent American second wave radical feminists whose idea of radical feminism was trans-inclusive.

Dworkin, Mackinnon.

Edit: I guess it's arguable that they're not as "embedded in the liberal media elite", but I think that's also because they were ultimately more threatening for other reasons, not that their society was less accepting. Arguably they're at their most threatening when they're anti-liberal.

[Mister Six]

Oh yeah, I didn't mean to imply that the second wave was uniformly transphobic, just that there were strains within the movement that were, and some of their proponents entered the UK media class and affected the way transwomen were perceived for decades afterwards.

Meanwhile, third wave feminism is notably more inclusive towards transgender people.

Can't imagine Greer becoming as comfortably ensconced in the US media scene had she gone to Columbia in the 1960s rather than Cambridge.

[TrenterPercenter]

Probably useful to try and consider that feminism (like a lot of leftwing movements) are vulnerable things that feel they need protecting.  If the ultimate goal for feminism is equality then the ultimate goal is too eventually remove the need for feminist pressure (or drastically reduce the need for it), as movements gain traction they need to evolve and readjust to the gains it has made.  This allows it to include a wider platform which then exponentially influences thought.

A few militant feminists throwing themselves under horses may have more concentrated radical impact on views but millions of middle aged dads being a bit ignorant to sexism but teaching their daughters they can achieve whatever they want and understanding that there are views out there that are discriminatory, is a massive win and much more likely to affect further change.

The problem often comes with a radical core, scarred in the previous wars, holding on the fundemental embers like it is a coverted sourdough starter that must be maintained incase we need to start again.  This often seems unintuitive to us as most things increase that are successful increase with time but radicalism shouldn't.  That isn't to say radicalism isn't important, it is, but it needs different tools for different times (it needs to evolve like all things).  The counter to this is without the internal affects of radicalism in individuals they run the risk of becoming comfortable and exclusionary themselves.  This is has long been a criticism of Guardian feminist writers who regularly fail to represent working class women and BAME communities in favour of culture wars with the worst examples of men.

My reading of a lot of the trans-debate with feminists are that the manner in which they are conducted in is simply nasty and spiteful.  If we are having a debate about a section of society being maligned and you are bringing nasty discriminatory language into the proceedings then it's very hard to see any debate is taking place in good faith.  Likewise I think, this all being conducted largely over things like twitter, which make it really easy for people on both sides to be agent provocatuer.  It then just becomes a big online fight, because it's safe but stimulating for people, when actually it is the real world impacts that should be important.

Btw has anyone invited Suzanne Moore to meet up with and experience a day with the trans community? This are the things that generally change and shape peoples views rather than just shouting names at them.

[George Oscar Bluth II]

 A lot of the above is over thinking this I think given that the base transphobic argument is "these people are men who want access to women's toilets to commit sex crimes".

[TrenterPercenter]

A lot of the above is over thinking this I think given that the base transphobic argument is "these people are men who want access to women's toilets to commit sex crimes".

That's that sorted then.

[chveik]

My reading of a lot of the trans-debate with feminists are that the manner in which they are conducted in is simply nasty and spiteful.  If we are having a debate about a section of society being maligned and you are bringing nasty discriminatory language into the proceedings then it's very hard to see any debate is taking place in good faith.  Likewise I think, this all being conducted largely over things like twitter, which make it really easy for people on both sides to be agent provocatuer.  It then just becomes a big online fight, because it's safe but stimulating for people, when actually it is the real world impacts that should be important.

Btw has anyone invited Suzanne Moore to meet up with and experience a day with the trans community? This are the things that generally change and shape peoples views rather than just shouting names at them.

it would help if transpeople were allowed to have a voice in mainstream media and not be forced to fight for their right to exist safely on social media. terfism being a cult, it makes explaining to them why they're so fucking wrong quite difficult.

have a little wander on mumsnet, you'll see the astonishing level of thickness people are dealing with.

[idunnosomename]

Suzanne's substack is worse than graham's. Pop lyrics as a starting point for a bit of egotistical whimsy.

https://suzannemoore.substack.com/p/contagious

And it seems, without a sub, she genuinely can't punctuate properly. Incredible. Is it any surprise she has such shitty opinions when she's so consistently inept?

[Ferris]

Crikey that's bad prose.

[Sebastian Cobb]

It reads like it was written by a subtitler.

[JaDanketies]

What a loss to journalism. And here's me thinking writing ability is key to becoming an influential columnist.

[TrenterPercenter]

it would help if transpeople were allowed to have a voice in mainstream media and not be forced to fight for their right to exist safely on social media. terfism being a cult, it makes explaining to them why they're so fucking wrong quite difficult.

have a little wander on mumsnet, you'll see the astonishing level of thickness people are dealing with.

I agree with you chveik and mumsnets is a complete dog egg of a site.

[Zetetic]

A lot of the above is over thinking this I think given that the base transphobic argument is "these people are men who want access to women's toilets to commit sex crimes".

The question is really why they think this is such an interesting topic to spend so much time to the exclusion of much else.

[idunnosomename]

What a loss to journalism. And here's me thinking writing ability is key to becoming an influential columnist.

lol

[TrenterPercenter]

The question is really why they think this is such an interesting topic to spend so much time to the exclusion of much else.

Maybe that is the whole point.

[jobotic]

I need to get me a substack about how everyone thinks I'm great. And watch the money roll in.

Oh I can't, I'm not important.

[Urinal Cake]

I believe in the free market of ideas and won't be censored. So let me start a subscription service where only my biggest fans will actually pay for my content creating an echo chamber. And if any 'haters' subscribe I can always ban plebs from commentating or revoke someone's subscription if they annoy me too much.

[idunnosomename]

genuinely surprised she started this rather sad grift so early. so she left her job at the lefty wokey blokey garun, then immediately wrote for other papers and probably collected good payouts from those. why can't she just write for Unherd as a freelance? surely she isn't desperate? and has no one told her about grammarly?

[JaDanketies]

I started a substack about how maybe backlinks from substack are good for my SEO clients thanks to the hard promotional work of Linehan and Moore

[idunnosomename]

linehan and moore

the trans-busters of the net

linehan and moore

they're totally cishet

[GoblinAhFuckScary]

Anyone see Jayne County apparently commenting on Moore's substack there what the fuck?? Moore herself appears to confirm it's her in the reply



_{(speaking of grifts (and i'm always regretful to make anything about myself), still trying to fund my own transition and if anyone felt comfortable putting a couple quid in pls shoot me a pm xxx)}

[canadagoose]

Anyone see Jayne County apparently commenting on Moore's substack there what the fuck?? Moore herself appears to confirm it's her in the reply



_{(speaking of grifts (and i'm always regretful to make anything about myself), still trying to fund my own transition and if anyone felt comfortable putting a couple quid in pls shoot me a pm xxx)}

Arguing against trans rights seems to be surprisingly common amongst older trans people. Must be some kind of Stockholm Syndrome. I know two on Twitter who are constantly arguing in favour of the transphobic wing of the SNP, signal-boosting blatant TERFs, and railing against GRA reform. Needless to say I follow neither of them nowadays.