X Close

How the RA uncancelled me Last year they dropped me; now I'm back

She persists. Credit: Tolga Akmen/AFP/Getty


June 15, 2022   7 mins

It has now been a year since I woke up to nearly the entire UK press in my inbox, wanting to speak to me.

The Royal Academy of Arts had just publicly announced that they would no longer stock my merchandise in their shop, after a bunch of incensed embroiderers took it upon themselves to rally the virtual masses against me. Eight emails from “the public” were apparently enough to spook one of the UK’s major art institutions into submission and, without further ado, drop me like a hot potato — via Instagram, no less.

I have heard it said many times that cancel culture does not exist. My story would almost appear to support that idea: here I am, a year on, still making a living and sharing my views. For the last few months, I have been working on a huge embroidery piece; in a twist of fate that I would never have foreseen a year ago, it is about to be revealed in the Summer Exhibition at, of all places, the Royal Academy.

My work on the walls of the Royal Academy, a year after it cancelled me.

And it certainly seems, from what I’ve observed since last year, that cancel culture is in retreat. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t real — or that we should ignore what it has done.

Let’s consider what, exactly, I was being “held accountable” for. Why did I manage to accumulate, over the period of two years, a small but very vocal “anti-fan club”? What caused me to leave the small hair salon inside Soho Theatre’s dressing room that I ran for nearly nine years until late 2019, to subsidise my art career? What inspired the witch-hunting mob that subsequently sabotaged any of my art-related collaborations and relationships with stockists, including a regular gig selling embroidered patches at Liberty’s London?

All this was in response to an essay I wrote to express my steadily increasing concerns about gender identity ideology and its impact on women’s rights and boundaries, as well as children’s safety. When it comes to understanding basic biology, I, like most people, stick to good old science: there are two sexes, male and female. Intersex conditions are very rare and, contrary to the new ideological belief, do not a third sex make. Gender identity as an innate condition — “gendered souls” — is not something I believe in. After all, what is “gender”, if not a word describing sexist stereotypes?

I have compassion for those who are severely uneasy about their bodies and the stereotypes associated with them, but I do not accept the idea that “woman” or “female” is a feeling — an identity that one can opt into. Nevertheless, though my detractors would have you believe otherwise, I don’t hate those who disagree with me. That should go without saying. But sadly, in the age of cancel culture, it has to be spelled out.

Few noticed when I left my hair salon. Nobody came to my defence in a national newspaper when Liberty’s quietly dropped me. Back then, mine was a typical cancellation: hard to pin down, an accrual of several incidents that could be passed off as minor misfortunes, only half in public.

So, in some ways, I was lucky that the RA jumped on the bandwagon. That story was noisy, got a lot of attention, and inspired resistance. Dragged into the spotlight, the “activists” who’d been making my life harder for two years exposed themselves as the nasty bullies I’d always known them to be. The general public saw it happen, and rushed to my support. Ultimately, the chief of the RA apologised to me, and my merchandise was reinstated in their shop. It remains to be seen how long it will stay there.

The whole saga, while enormously stressful and upsetting at the time, was serendipitous in many ways: it actually hugely increased my art sales and commissions.

Still, my story could easily have ended badly. I know many whose have — those who have had their careers destroyed and their lives made hell, because they don’t believe a man becomes a woman if he says he’s a woman. The artist Nina Edge, for example, has been hounded and vilified online for her pro-woman stance by the people behind “The White Pube” and “Terfs out of Art”. She had opportunities stripped away from her and her name smeared. Then there’s Claudia Clare, a ceramicist who has recently been cancelled by Ceramic Arts London and banned by the Craft Potters association. Dance choreographer extraordinaire Rosie Kay, meanwhile, had to leave the company she built from scratch, due to ridiculous accusations of transphobia and the resulting hostility her employees directed towards her. I could go on. There are many more artists, writers and creatives who have had their lives turned upside down: some have reached out and connected with me, to escape the isolation such incidents can trigger.

Silence is deadly. Stonewall — a government-funded, formerly brilliant LGB charity that has made the “T” its new raison d’ĂȘtre — has been instrumental in quenching attempts to discuss gender ideology. Their “Diversity Champions” schemes are embedded in many companies and institutions uber-eager to appear on “the right side of history”. “No Debate” was the rebuttal to the ever-growing mountain of questioning voices, many of which echoed my own concerns regarding a proposed “Self-ID” law that would affect women and girls in sports, prisons, changing rooms and more. 

Since the attempt to cancel me, that mountain of resistance has reached critical mass. More and more people have been willing to express criticism of this noisy ideology. There have been an increasing number of lawsuits against it. Allison Bailey is currently suing Stonewall. James Esses, a trainee therapist who launched a public petition trying to safeguard counselling for vulnerable children with gender dysphoria, is suing the university that expelled him via email for doing so. Gillian Philip, an author whose contract was terminated by HarperCollins, is bringing an Employment Tribunal claim against her former publishers, arguing that she should not have been discriminated against for holding and expressing gender-critical views.

All this has led to the “Self-ID” law being scrapped and “gender-critical” views (or rather, an understanding of science and biology) being protected in law. Meanwhile, many employers have actually left the Stonewall “Diversity Champions” scheme, after recognising that it creates a hostile work environment for people, like me, who are not taken with gender ideology. Among them are Channel 4, Ofsted, the Cabinet Office, and the UK’s equality watchdog, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC). 

Common sense is, slowly, returning to public discourse.

It is essential for the people in charge to step up when gender ideology activists go too far. My own story illustrates that fact. When all hell broke loose last year, the Royal Academician David Mach reached out to convey his dismay at what had been done to me. After all, art requires freedom, and I had been cancelled for doing what all artists do: express our thoughts through our work. That should have bothered many more creatives, yet he was an isolated voice at the time.

A few months later, he contacted me again. Each Royal Academician involved with the Summer Exhibition can issue a few invitations to the annual Summer Show to artists they would like to participate. These artists do not have to go through the usual application process. David invited me. I know this wasn’t an easy stand for him to take; I am very grateful that he took it. And I accepted, of course.

Rest assured, this won’t go down well with the guild of envious embroiderers, much less all those who would like me to never say a word again, have any commercial success, or be given a platform as an artist. I am braced for them to screech: “How can you support this witch, especially during Pride month!?” They are screaming into a void. I’m not afraid of the lies, the smears, the intimidation. Truth has a habit of revealing itself in the end.

The Royal Academy’s Summer Exhibition opens on 21 June.

Concerned and influential voices within the arts are starting to come together, to protect one of our cornerstones: freedom of expression. JK Rowling and Graham Linehan bravely led the charge against this growing authoritarian movement, enduring considerable harassment. Finally, it seems, more and more people are willing to stick their head above the parapet. Comedians Dave Chappelle, Ricky Gervais and Bill Maher have publicly “come out” for common sense, taking on the zealots this movement has produced. The rather erratic protests they triggered helped highlight the absurdity of a movement that purports to have inclusivity and diversity at its heart, while trying to eradicate any dissenting voices that don’t toe the party line.

It’s a hopeful sign of the times that Netflix recently came forward to say it will not censor or reject people or shows on the grounds that they may make some people feel uncomfortable. A statement read: “If you’d find it hard to support our content breadth, Netflix may not be the best place for you.” Cultural institutions, take note!

Despite all the effort made by self-proclaimed “trans rights activists”, people in positions of power are finally realising that the movement’s temper tantrums have held far too many companies and institutions hostage for far too long. Have the adults finally come back into the room? Have years and years of grassroots feminist activism — by organisations such as Woman’s Place UK, Fair Play For Women and Sex Matters — finally shaken people awake, before we sleepwalk into disaster?

It’s easy to be discouraged sometimes. Particularly during the corporate festival that Pride Month has become: a month in which many companies, and even the police, rush blindly to pledge their allegiance to the ever-expanding LGBT+++ movement. (Mattel, for example, has a new “Trans Barbie”: same old sexist stereotypes but with a twist!) “Diversity and Inclusion” has become big business these days.

Meanwhile, many LGB people feel thoroughly disheartened — excluded from a movement that is supposed to champion them. What started as a protest for people’s right to be free to love who they love without stigma and discrimination has become a hostile environment. This is particularly true for those lesbians who point out that they experience same-sex attraction (not same-gender) — and that excluding males, however they identify, is not transphobic, but the very grounds on which their sexuality is based. 

This too shall pass. In the year since I was cancelled, the tide has turned. Common sense will prevail and when it does, we will perhaps have learned a thing or two about genuine tolerance, compassion, diversity and inclusion.

In the meantime, you can see my work at this year’s Royal Academy Summer Exhibition. It is entitled: “Nevertheless She Persisted.”


Jess De Wahls is an embroidery artist based in London. Buy her work here.

JessDeWahls

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

50 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago

Here is a paragraph from a letter I wrote a few days ago to my new pension manager:-
“I have adopted a policy  of zero tolerance for wokeness in my dealings with all corporate, governmental, arts & cultural, educational, and other organizations. Accordingly, any attempt to introduce tenets of gender ideology, critical race theory, or any other fashionable nonsense into our business relationship will result in its immediate termination.”

RJ Kent
RJ Kent
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

Nicked thank you

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago
Reply to  RJ Kent

My pleasure.

Maureen Finucane
Maureen Finucane
1 year ago
Reply to  Richard Craven

Nice one!

Jeremy Bray
Jeremy Bray
1 year ago

“What started as a protest for people’s right to be free to love who they love without stigma and discrimination has become a hostile environment.” as a result of Stonewall’s disgraceful championing of trans ideology.
Delighted that Jess de Wahls is back at the Academy. Let us hope there is no backlash this time.

RJ Kent
RJ Kent
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeremy Bray

I would very much like to see a list of names of the people who accuse those such as Jess, along with their online identities….

John Riordan
John Riordan
1 year ago
Reply to  RJ Kent

It is strange – and unacceptable at this stage – that every incident we hear of in which a person or company has been cancelled tends to refer to “activists” without specifying who they are. It is ludicrous that it is tolerated.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago

Superb exposition of the turning of the tide, and in a very real sense, one about the essence of artistic freedom. Jess has spelt out the boundaries in the gender identity and broader cultural war in a way that, as a visual artist, i find quite gratifying. Its almost as if someone who can see beyond the limitations of language has been able to use language in a precise way, without equivocation and of course, based on personal experience rather than as a jumper on bandwagons.

Unlike her embroidery, the fallacies of trans activism are starting to unravel but it takes someone with an indestructible commitment to artistic freedom to rebuild the walls that protect that freedom. I must admit, i had only a very slight awareness of her work before the RA furore broke last year, but i’m pleased that it can now be seen to have had, on balance, a positive imoact on her career. I’ve no doubt Jess will also have learnt a great deal about herself, which can only make her work stronger.

The more voices that speak out with the same alacrity, the sooner we can all resume the previous progress that was being made in making a relatively free society as welcoming for everyone as possible.

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve Murray
Marcia McGrail
Marcia McGrail
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

..but some of us are still too frightened to come right out and expose our common sense and orthodox biological interpretation to this strange world — the acolytes of these men are big women (or do I mean some of these women are big men?? O, dear
sooo confused) and their language is far too vicious for lil’ ol’ sensitive me.

Jim Wiggins
Jim Wiggins
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve Murray

the fallacies of trans activism are starting to unravel

🙂 Aye lad, coming apart at the seams … 😉
Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch too …

Last edited 1 year ago by Jim Wiggins
J Bryant
J Bryant
1 year ago

I remember the author being interviewed by Freddie Sayers last year. It’s great to see her situation greatly improved. I sometimes ask here in the comments section how we’re supposed to fight back against the cancellers, and Jess De Wahls has shown one way.
In the year since I was cancelled, the tide has turned. Common sense will prevail…
I hope the author is correct. I’m a pessimist so perhaps it’s not surprising I’m still a bit sceptical we’ve turned a corner in the culture wars but I hope we have.
Anyway, well done Jess De Wahls. You certainly have my respect.

Ian Stewart
Ian Stewart
1 year ago
Reply to  J Bryant

One way of fighting back is to support those being cancelled in their work. I commissioned and bought a piece by Jess when she was cancelled by the RA.

Melissa Martin
Melissa Martin
1 year ago

This ideology is an unholy alliance between men who hate women, ‘vicious Queens’ like Owen Jones, and women who love power, ‘High Priestesses’ like Stella Creasy.

They can all get in the sea.

Bryan Tookey
Bryan Tookey
1 year ago

This is a great and uplifting (and well written) story – thank you for sharing it. I hope the exhibition goes well and that the momentum is indeed swinging behind common sense.

Francis Turner
Francis Turner
1 year ago

To be honest it seems like it was the RA so much as a singled Royal Academician, David Mach, who uncancelled you.
But I hope the RA stands behind him

Mary McFarlane
Mary McFarlane
1 year ago

Great news and very much enjoy your writing. Go Jess!

Chauncey Gardiner
Chauncey Gardiner
1 year ago

“So, in some ways, I was lucky that the RA jumped on the bandwagon. That story was noisy, got a lot of attention, and inspired resistance.”
Very interesting point.
JDW makes the larger point that “the tide has turned.” Another metaphor might be “the fever has broken,” or the epidemic is subsiding. Indeed, is Farr’s Law at work? Let me develop this idea.
I myself have written elsewhere:

In a “Letter to the Registrar-General from William Farr, Esq.,” dated June, 1840, William Farr observed that “Five [people] die weekly of smallpox in the metropolis [London] when the disease is not epidemic; 
” So, smallpox was always out there in the miasma. But why would smallpox (1) sometimes breakout in epidemics and then (2) recede on its own back its baseline rate of about five fatalities a week? â€œWhy do the five deaths become 10, 15, 20, 31, 58, 88 weekly, and then progressively fall through the same measured steps?”

Farr’s Law is not so much of a law as say, the Second Law of Thermodynamics, as it is an observation of a regularity… Farr’s regularity is that epidemics have this way of winding down that looks much like the mirror image of the way they had wound up; something clicks and seemingly exponential increase gives way to something that looks a lot like exponential decay.

The difficulty with Farr’s Law is that it says nothing about how far an outbreak (of smallpox, of flu, of SARS, of COVID) will ramp up before receding. When does the ramping up click off? It does tell us something qualitative – that outbreaks follow something of a (possibly skewed) bell-shaped trajectory, but it does not tell us how to calibrate that trajectory. 

So, we get these social contagions, witch hunts and such. And then they fall apart. Predicting when they will fall apart is a tough business. Knowing how to induce them to fall apart may be harder. But, here we all are, friends, reading, writing, sharing ideas. Perhaps that is the best we can do: talk to each other.
I keep finding myself coming back to Vaclav Havel’s essay, “The Power of the Powerless” (1977). What I get out of it is: When everyone knows that the system is a joke, and everyone knows that everyone knows that the system is a joke, then the system becomes susceptible to collapse in a manner consistent with Farr’s Law. The matter of falling apart becomes a matter of drawing a card from a deck on any given day. And one day we draw the Ace of Spades, and the system starts to collapse.
So, we keep talking and reading and sharing ideas. We make it more likely that we will draw the ace.

Last edited 1 year ago by Chauncey Gardiner
Jeremy Bray
Jeremy Bray
1 year ago

I like your analysis and analogy. We just need to keep drawing the cards until the vital ace of spades turns up, or on anther analogy pointing out the emperor has no clothes – eventually one hopes the spell will be broken – and almost everyone will claim they never really believed but just went along out of politeness and to avoid being shot down in flames.

Ian Stewart
Ian Stewart
1 year ago

It took sixty years for the crazy soviet system implemented by Stalin to fall apart. The people knew it was crazy but couldn’t stop it.

Last edited 1 year ago by Ian Stewart
Alice Bondi
Alice Bondi
1 year ago

Excellent article documenting a much-appreciated return to sanity at the RA. I’m less optimistic than you, Jess – I don’t think the tide has turned, and I’m quite anxious about the next few years – but I’m absolutely delighted it’s going the right way for you, and all that your work means.

Richard Craven
Richard Craven
1 year ago

Here is the relevant paragraph from my recent letter to my new pension managers:-
“I have adopted a policy  of zero tolerance for wokeness in my dealings with all corporate, governmental, arts & cultural, educational, and other organizations. Accordingly, any attempt to introduce tenets of gender ideology, critical race theory, or any other fashionable nonsense into our business relationship will result in its immediate termination.”

Jim Davis
Jim Davis
1 year ago

Jess, thank you for standing up for common sense. Much of our world seems upside down, but little by little the tide seems to be turning as you wrote. Your work is beautiful and unique and I wish you continued success with both your art and your freedom of expression.

Christopher Elletson
Christopher Elletson
1 year ago

Good on you!

Sophy T
Sophy T
1 year ago

Excellent article.
Jess, I think you should name and shame the RA employees who cancelled you.

Douglas H
Douglas H
1 year ago
Reply to  Sophy T

But that’s just the sort of aggressive behaviour she’s fighting against

Sophy T
Sophy T
1 year ago
Reply to  Douglas H

Possibly – but it might make whoever was responsible think twice before doing it again.
Also Jess had part of her income removed on the whim of the RA plus a hate campaign waged against her when she had done nothing wrong.
She has every right to fight back.

Steve Murray
Steve Murray
1 year ago
Reply to  Sophy T

She certainly has! But perhaps she’s doing it in the best way possible, without being confrontational.

Fiona Hok
Fiona Hok
1 year ago
Reply to  Sophy T

Totally agree.

Michael Askew
Michael Askew
1 year ago
Reply to  Douglas H

Not really. If someone takes it upon themselves to trash another person’s career and reputation, they should not be able to do so behind the cloak of anonymity.

John Riordan
John Riordan
1 year ago
Reply to  Douglas H

Bit of a fallacy there: you presumably don’t go around starting fights but if someone attacks you, you don’t refuse to defend yourself on the principle, surely?

Margaret TC
Margaret TC
1 year ago

The 60,000 dollar question is: does the trans Barbie have a p***s?:)

John Riordan
John Riordan
1 year ago
Reply to  Margaret TC

Ken didn’t. At least I think not, right?

Anyway reminds me of a joke:

Little girl on Santa’s knee who asks him for a Barbie and an Action Man for Christmas. “But Barbie comes with Ken, doesn’t she?” asks Santa. “No, Mummy says she comes with Action Man, she just fakes it with Ken.”

(boom boom etc)

Ian Stewart
Ian Stewart
1 year ago
Reply to  Margaret TC

And is it a girl’s doll or a boy’s doll, or both. Trans Barbie joins the Marines!

Paul S
Paul S
1 year ago

Clear, free thinking – you have a lot to be proud of.

Lucy Browne
Lucy Browne
1 year ago

Brava, Jess, and thank you for an incisive and powerful essay. Your writing skills are as impressive as your embroidery. I’m glad the RA saw sense.

John Riordan
John Riordan
1 year ago

All this has led to the “Self-ID” law being scrapped and “gender-critical” views (or rather, an understanding of science and biology) being protected in law. “

While I’m delighted for Jess De Wahls in general, I have to say that it is still tragic that our freedom to retain evidence-based views on the nature of sex and gender has come to depend upon their being included as a protected belief. It is not a belief at all, it is a matter of scientifically proved fact. We have still lost our freedom of speech here, because it’s not actually a freedom any more, it is a permission granted back to us after the freedom has been confiscated.

There are many commentators now who are saying that we in the West seem to be in the middle of constructing a secular clerisy who will have the power to decide the truth or otherwise of any particular idea, and who cannot be held accountable for their conclusions. This sounded paranoid to me when I first heard it, but when I heard how Maya Forstater had won her court case, which was how the protection in law for “gender critical” views was decided, it did make me start to believe there is something in this speculation.

A final note: as usual we on the sensible side of the debate have once again fallen for using the language of our opponents: “gender critical” does not accurately describe the position that there are two distinct binary genders and sexes, not a spectrum of them. It is the stupid side of the debate who are in fact gender critical because they reject the binary nature of sex and gender that is axiomatic to the concepts in question.

Robert Eagle
Robert Eagle
1 year ago

Rather appalling that only one Royal Academician had the guts and common sense to reach out to Jess in her moment of need. So as well as congratulating Jess for her resolve and good humour under fire, I’d like to say: Take a bow, David Mach

Alan Osband
Alan Osband
1 year ago

So how does the Trans Barbie differ from a normal Barbie ?

Cathy Carron
Cathy Carron
1 year ago

Three cheers for persistence & fortitude in the face of intolerance & lunacy. I do loved this update on Jesse.

Rachel Taylor
Rachel Taylor
1 year ago

Vote with your wallet. Buy anything you can from people who are “cancelled” by the trans mob.

Maureen Finucane
Maureen Finucane
1 year ago

Your work is beautiful Jess. I didn’t know that “The White P*be” were behind your hounding. The Tate folded in a most undignified fashion when they managed to get Rex Whistler cancelled and closed down.

JP Edwards
JP Edwards
1 year ago

Part of an email I sent to the RA at the time. I don’t normally protest but when I read about what was happening to you I really wanted to complain. You are right though, because it was the RA messing up it made the headlines and your support must have snowballed; there must be many others who are suffering in silence.
————
The RA has now become the useful instrument of a group of extremists who in no way represent the values of fairness, kindness and tolerance of the great majority of people in this country. 
Whether or not the RA agrees with Jess de Wahls views on trans issues, we supposedly live in a society that encourages pluralism of opinion. Her heartfelt views are not unlawful and like everyone else she has a right to dissent from the strongly held views of others. The truth is though, Jess de Wahls has expressed views regarded by most ordinary people up and down the country as being entirely reasonable and grounded in science – it would be correct to say that her views are widely held mainstream views. But even if we don’t agree with the strongly held views of others, we live in a society where we respect the individual and are prepared to tolerate (not respect) the views of those we do not agree with. That seems to be something lost to the RA.
By publicly shaming this artist, the RA has chosen the path of the totalitarian – the ‘cancelling’ or destruction of an individual who does not share the RA’s views on trans issues. Perhaps the RA should pause and ask itself – where in the RA’s values is there room for compassion, compromise and the gentle art of persuasion.
Because of your public shaming of this artist, Jess de Wahls now lives her life in fear from extremists. Did you consider that outcome before publicly shaming her – if not then shame on you. Please now do the right thing and take steps to rectify this terrifying outcome even if that means some back peddling and public acceptance of some blame.
———————————-

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago

It would be great if it truly were the case that this damaging ideology was checked, especially from the point of children.

But I would be highly pessimistic. As other posters have pointed out before, their target isn’t people like the author or say Jk Rowling, who clearly have strong connections. Their target are the millions who have no political reach or know anybody, who can’t afford to lose their jobs.

And the bigger issue is that in reality, little changes. The likes of Damore are still cancelled, and the author and her supporters would be first in line to throw stones at heretics like him. The only reason T ideology is being challenged is not because how grotesque it is, but because they stepped on the toes of other established victim groups that use exactly the same tactics, have the same philosophy, have if anything far more damaging impact on society.

harry storm
harry storm
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Everything you wrote is wrong. 1-There is no parallel between Jess de Wahls and JK Rowling. JDW is an embroiderer. She neither has “strong connections” or a massive income. She had no political reach. She couldn’t afford to lose clients. 2-You have no way of knowing how “the author and her supporters (who include me and so many others commenting here) would react to “heretics” like Damore. I suspect you may be wrong about JDW on this, and I know you’re mistaken with regard to many of her “supporters.” 3-T ideology IS being challenged because of how grotesque it is. 4-Feminist groups don’t “have the same philosophy, and certainly don’t use the same tactics. I don’t recall people who crossed “feminists” getting daily death threats. Nor do I recall any effort by feminists to compel speech in the way trans activists and their “allies” have done. As for the “damaging impact on society,” that’s entirely a matter of opinion, never mind that we have no idea what the trans activists have yet to do and the impact on society they may have.

Marcia McGrail
Marcia McGrail
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

Dear Harry, you surely can’t seriously think ‘we have no idea’? Even about the impact on society? Please climb on the shoulders of a few clear sighted giants where the dystopian view might knock just your socks off.

Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago
Reply to  Marcia McGrail

Ageee. Anyone like me who has a small girl, or cares for other small kids, would ever understate the evil impact of this ideology. Children who are too young to think or even know about “sex” are being brainwashed and convinced to be mutilated or go on life altering drugs.
Unbelievable.

harry storm
harry storm
1 year ago
Reply to  Marcia McGrail

Obviously you misunderstood my comment. I was responding to the ridiculous ccntention that the impact of “other established victim groups… [will] have if anything far more damaging impact on society.” I think that’s silly even now, but given that we still don’t know just how much more damaging trans ideology might become, it’s absurd to maintain that “other established victim groups” — e.g. feminism — have had a far more damaging impact than the trans activist movement will have (and has already had)..

Last edited 1 year ago by harry storm
Samir Iker
Samir Iker
1 year ago
Reply to  harry storm

Oh dear. Never a good show when you call someone “wrong” and end a long essay proving him right.

Let’s start with that very interesting last point 4.

Trans ideology’s death threats, while nasty, are not their weapon. This author wasn’t cancelled as a result of death threats. None of those jackasses have acted on their threats, thankfully.

But guess what? “XYZ threatened us on Twitter, we are victims, we are being harmed unless you sack this guy for making a joke or claiming there is no gender pay gap”
That’s your weapon.

Now, what’s Trans camp’s weapon? How did they cancel people?
Not using threats. By being victims. “She said something, and victimised trans women. Her words cause suicide etc etc”

Notice the similarity?

Google must give preferential quotas to women and fire Damore, because less women at Google = sexism, because there are no biological differences that may explain it.

Sound familiar?
There are no biological differences.
Every feminist, all of you supporting this author, would agree with it.
Who else uses the same philosophy? Who, indeed?

And of course I know how you lot react to Damore. The massive number of feminists and male feminists calling for his head…none of you – NONE – supported him by saying yep, he is right, women are different and that could affect staff mix. Don’t pretend otherwise. Doesn’t work.

harry storm
harry storm
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

The “you lot” gives the game away. You’re a mindreader. You know exactly what “us lot” think of Damore. Except you don’t. I would venture to guess that most everyone here — including, for certain, me — think Damore’s firing was shameful and agreed with him.
So while I have no problem including feminists and lefties in the cancel game, I continue to maintain that trans activists have taken all of this to a new level far beyond anything the aforementioned groups were doing. And I find it Interesting that you you can pooh-pooh death threats as just “nasty behaviour.” I suspect you might feel differently were they directed at you.

Marcia McGrail
Marcia McGrail
1 year ago
Reply to  Samir Iker

Would a quote from ‘Pandora’s Box’ along the lines of ‘bit between the teeth; give an inch..’ and the word ‘opening’ have resonance to your post?