The past 20 years haven't been easy. Credit: Alamy
Twenty years ago, the slur of “Terf” had not been invented, and the concept of gender ideology was confined to university lectures on Judith Butler. Radical feminists were fighting for the rights of women, and everyone knew they didn’t have penises. But then, something changed.
Back in January 2004, the year I left academia to become a full-time journalist, I wrote a column for Guardian Weekend Magazine on the issue of transsexuality. It was entitled “Gender Benders, Beware”. It wasn’t the first time I had written about the issue. But this piece in particular lit the touchpaper for a fire that is still burning even today.
I wrote it on the suggestion of the magazine’s editor, Katharine Viner. She wanted, she said, something about the trans issue. At that point, I mainly wrote about male violence, and sometimes lesbian politics. I had no other direction from her, except the deadline. So I wrote about how a bastardised version of “human rights” was being used against women, with Vancouver Rape Relief (VRR) as an example.
In August 1995, two of VRR’s employees had asked Kimberly Nixon, a trans-identified male, to leave its counsellor training as they thought it might not be appropriate for a man to be treating abused women. Nixon immediately filed a human rights complaint and began suing VRR. The legal battle was long and arduous. In 2002, Nixon won $7,500, the highest amount ever awarded by the tribunal, for injury to “her dignity”. But when I wrote my piece, that decision had just been overturned.
Here’s a taster: “…having not experienced life as a ‘woman’ until middle age, Nixon assumed ‘she’ would be suitable to counsel women who have chosen to access a service that offers support to women who have suffered similar experiences, not from a man in a dress! The Rape Relief sisters, who do not believe a surgically constructed vagina and hormonally grown breasts make you a woman, successfully challenged the ruling and, for now at least, the law says that to suffer discrimination as a woman you have to be, er, a woman.”
It was like a bomb going off. The letters page exploded. Two-hundred-odd complaints landed and, in his weekly column, the readers’ editor felt bound to apologise on behalf of the newspaper, claiming my words had: “…abused an already abused minority that The Guardian might have been expected to protect”.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeKBO, Julie. You’ve got something much rarer in this world than brains or money. You’ve got guts.
If I may mix metaphors a bit, cajones.
Cojones. A cajón is a percussion instrument.
Beat me to it.
I expect that’s caused some painful repercussions.
Quite – or, more generally in Spanish, a box.
Cajones means “drawers”. Like in a cabinet or desk. I think you mean “cojones”
One often gets the sense that what underlies trans ideology is malice: no matter what concessions society makes for transfolks, it’s never enough, because the goal is to aggravate and humiliate. Recently a young man at my work declared himself to be “non-binary” and changed his name to a supposedly asexual one. Fair enough, I don’t have to interact with him, so I really don’t care. Then I happened to notice in one of his posts in the company chatroom that he was no longer using his birth surname, but was instead demanding to be called “Elfslayer” or something equally ludicrous. The point, of course, is not that this young man thinks he’s actually a Tolkienian orc or a character from Star Wars or what have you, it’s to force us to dance to his tune, to force us to comply with his “identity”. I have no doubt that he would claim that this “Elfslayer” is the “authentic” him, but it’s a very poor form of authenticity that requires validation from other people. It’s all an act; not surprisingly, the only expressions I’ve seen him wear are a smirk or a sneer.
This blows my mind. How can someone like this actually contribute to a productive work environment? Maybe he’s some kind of savant at some specialized skill.
Exactly Jim, what about the poor bloody employer; how good at his actual, you know, work is this apparent obsessive, I suspect not very?
Yet if the employer were to ‘let him go’ because he/she/they are, at best, suboptimal they would be dragged into Hell’s ravening maw.
Or maybe he’s a dissolusioned moron.
That’s why interviewing and vetting carefully is critical. Viewing a potential employee’s social media is eye-opening to say the least. It’s much easier to NOT HIRE an individual who is potentially problematic than it is to fire. If they are already an employee, written warnings, keeping notes and verify verify verify company policies are being broken. There is always a way… It takes courage and good housekeeping
Not Barry Elfslayer from accounts? Did he ever get that promotion?
No doubt he didn’t slay his quota of elves.
Tolkien’s elves would make short work of him! They were depicted as skilled warriors and orc hunters.
It’s dwarves who make short work of things .
Now become a key worker in elfcare.
Or elf and safety.
Chuckled at that, John!
No, no – Elfin Safety!
Only by re-invention – he is now known as “CorpseGrinder”
In a right thinking world, anyone who insists on being called “Elf-slayer” should find himself on minimum wage as a “Shelf-stacker” until he’s learned to be a grown-up
Surely you meant elf-stacker.
OMG – you dare to insult “Shelf Stacker the Disemboweller” in public? I wouldn’t want to be round your place on Burn’s night… you could well end up part of the main course.
THE MIGHTY SHELF STACKER TO YOU! Fear the Value Range beans!
“…the only expressions I’ve seen him wear are a smirk or a sneer.” Have you uncovered champagne socialist?
He has been outed.
Yes, malice plays a role, but so does pure misogyny, which is quite often malicious. These men not only see themselves as better than women, but they also want to be the better women. It’s an utter farce.
Malice driven by Envy. The full spectrum of men from those seeking a lifelong companionate marriage with one special person…right across to those seeking a quick fling with a willing partner…mostly don’t want to do either with a bloke in a frock, complete with a c#ck…
Men who seek to do either with somebody thus equipped would generally identify as Gay, which is now perfectly legal and widely accepted…even celebrated…
…so that seems to identify the trans as gay men desperate to pull straight ones, which seems to me very peculiar indeed…as indeed their conduct suggests…
That really isn’t what’s going on, the overwhelming majority of gay men want nothing to do with the trans lunacy, and the LGBGOLFGTI+ nonsense is becoming as much of an insult as ‘queer’ used to be.
Stu N is right. Many LGB people do not want to be linked with T and reject the term ‘queer’.
…the overwhelming majority do, certainly, and I’m pleased for them..I’m just suggesting that a tiny handful struggle with the freedom they now enjoy, and some of them pursue this rather peculiar way through it.
Actually from what I see most of the trans want to have female partners and call themselves lesbians. The fact that actual lesbians don’t want to date them is immaterial. Straight women usually don’t want to either. That leaves them bitter and frustrated.
Many trans-identified males are/ have been married and when they ‘come out’ they demand that their wives stay with them in a ‘lesbian’ relationship. These men can be very manipulative and coercive. Trans widows tell their own stories at https://www.transwidowsvoices.org/.
This right here Nancy G. Some of the stories are absolutely gut-wrenching. The biggest casualties are the children. This whole mess is enraging
Misogyny is by definition always malicious. But where are the laws against it? There are none!
Underlying malice. Yes, so true. Great observation, RWH.
DEI = dragons, elves and … idiots
“it’s never enough” is the guiding philosophy of all activism, not just the trans lobby. The goal is to perpetuate the issue, not solve it, because a solution means the gravy train stops rolling. Who wants that. Problems are manufactured where non-existent, the demand for phobes and ists outstrips the supply, and on we go.
Exactly. If the ‘problem’ were ever fixed then their life’s work would be finished and they would be out of a job.
Look at reparations in the US, for example. It’s completely absurd, but it keeps people pumped up about their cause.
Well written. For example see: Racism in the United States.
True look at all the dosh that rolls into Stonewall from the government alone, as they run workshops that tell captive audiences that women have p3nis3s
I wish I could make that kind of money telling people utter nonsense!!!
Did this person legally change his name? If so, then go with it. If not, then use his legal name and if there are complaints simply say you are following the law.
In the UK, you don’t have to legally change your name. You just inform your bank, employer etc that you wish to be known as ‘whatever’ from now on. You can make it official by deed poll but it’s not obligatory. Not that I support the views of the idiot elfslayer, just saying.
Interesting I did not know that!!!
That’s the modern progressive movement in a nutshell. At one time it was about obtaining human and civil rights. Now it’s about forcing the majority to bend the knee.
I wanted to take the professional name ‘Bøddel’, but sadly i work in very hazardous/life critical environments so it wouldn’t go down well – a bit like “queers for strict sharia” lolz. Then Frank Watkins passed and thats the end of my scheme – out of respect for him i would never assume a name he took and played to the hilt.
Why would anyone derive pleasure from slaying elves? What have they done wrong?
They’re closet white supremacists.
unless “Elfslayer” was amazingly good at his job and got on well with those around him. His days at the company should have been numbered. People who piss off their employer for the fun of it, run fowl of the internal blokes network or Sisterhood. Should have a limited future with the organisation. Most but not unfortunitely not all organisation are quite component at getting rid of administrative liabilities, with managable repercussions
Demand that he calls you Lord Voldemort, or Sauron, or Henry Higgins. Why shouldn’t you identify as someone different each day? Perhaps if ordinary folk tried this those demanding special treatment would go away. More likely they would attack you and you be blamed for it and summarily fired.
He’s anti-elf??? Bigoted p***k!
Equally, it could be claimed what underlies feminism is malice. It seems to me transgender women are using exactly the same strategy as feminists. Feminists blame men for not having included them when developing the western world. They have made men villains, and with a sense of moral superiority have set about seizing everything men have built up over the millennia. Demanded high status, high paying positions as a right whilst spurning low paying, dangerous and low status work traditionally undertaken by men. Women have been using moral superiority as a weapon to bash men for decades. When I was a child, there was a sense of gratitude towards older men for having fought in the war. Men were valued. When I was young, the argument for including women was that it benefited society to develop the skills of every member. It was a positive not malicious message.
Barry Jobnocky would suit better. It must be quite empowering to get people to dance to your tune. We should all do it. In fact, I think more and more people will start to join the bandwagon, until it collapses…..
First, Julie, I honor you for your courage and persistence.
I think that longshoreman philosopher Eric Hoffer had it right when he wrote “What starts out here as a mass movement ends up as a racket, a cult, or a corporation.”
The mass movement of Fighting for the Victim long ago decayed into rackets and cults. Maybe the trans game will be the Bridge Too Far. How are things in Arnhem and Remagen these days?
Lesbian politics, terfs, trans and technicolour flags are not my long-suit so I don’t tend to read your gear all that often, but you’ve got sand, and the Graun’s loss is Unherd’s gain.
She hates you Tony. You may agree with her on the tranny issue, but she still hates you
I’m sure there are many subjects on which Julie Bindel and I might disagree. But we should all be supremely grateful to her (along with others like Maya Forstater and Helen Joyce) for holding the line against this madness.
Not only for women’s rights. Though it is of course terrible that rape victims are being gaslighted about the sex of staff by the very organisations they look to for help, that mediocre male athletes are trampling all over women’s sports, and that lesbians are being compelled to include female-identifying men in their definition of same-sex attraction.
But also for fighting for freedom of speech, the freedom which ultimately underpins all others. Recent Orwellian cases like Prof Jo Phoenix’s employment tribunal victory against the Open University have highlighted the terrible extent to which trans-rights activists, their fellow travellers, and cowed authorities are determined to silence dissent by any means necessary.
It is no exaggeration to say that if they can take away your right to say that a man is not a woman, then they can take away pretty much anything.
Women are not the only big losers at present. Jews are equally deep in the mire. Isn’t it interesting how these ostensibly separate issues are coalescing? Gaza – decolonisation – institutional racism – environmental activism – climate change – trans rights. When you look to see who is on which side, the same names seem to crop up over and over again.
They are ‘activists’ first – the cause is unimportant since it’s their activity that gives them pleasure and draws attention that they crave.
The activists will say that this is because of “intersectionality”. i.e. that multiple dimensions of marginalised identities intersect.
Personally I prefer the term “omnicause”.
Functionally this is almost indistinguishable from the traditional Marxist concepts of infrastructure and superstructure. The main difference is that Marxism expresses a very concrete view of what forms the infrastructure (relationship to the means of production) and what forms the superstructure (everything else). Whereas progressive identitarianism adopts a kind of amorphous free-floating concept of what forms the core of the privilege/marginalisation dichotomy. As long as you are not a straight white male then you’ll land somewhere in the omnicause.
i just posted my reply then saw yours.
AKA the Omnicause.
No one is questioning what it is to be a man. And there are women making that transition all the time. But the world has lost its mind and is bullying and gaslighting and threatening women with it’s preposterous ideas of what it is to be a woman. The abuse women are getting, who aren’t going along with the madness, is disgusting! If one of these men who claims to be a woman, can tell me how it felt the first time he started his period or when he thought he might be pregnant, fair dues. But they cannot! Putting makeup on or inverting your p***s into a ‘vagina’ does not make you a woman. Never!
“If one of these men who claims to be a woman, can tell me how it felt the first time he started his period or when he thought he might be pregnant, fair dues.”
Unfortunately there are men who identify as women who claim exactly those things and their supporters demand the rest of us go along with this nonsense. To the extent of demanding access to already overstretched medical resources intended for women.
Being “kind” and “inclusive” now extends in these people’s view to validating the delusions of the mentally unwell to the detriment of women’s gynecological health.
“if they can take away your right to say that a man is not a woman, then they can take away pretty much anything”
You have got that wrong.
If they can take away your right to say that men and women have different strengths and characteristics or that men can be better or earn more in certain situations…..
Then, only then, can they take away your right to say that a man is not a woman, because you have already admitted that there is nothing to differentiate the two.
The first happened over the past few decades, which in turn laid the groundwork for the second.
Both are equally ridiculous, but the first was more reasonably accepted.
And the reason it was accepted, the root of the second problem, is the identity of “they” who took away both rights.
It’s the same group of people. And no, it’s not the evil “misogynistic” men, who invariably come up in the comments section here.
The most vociferous support base, the most likely to support this nonsense, are middle to upper class college educated (almost always with a non STEM degree) liberal women.
And because they have such political power, because it’s become impossible to tell them they are spouting rubbish (for instance when they claim females are equally good at football or physical strength or IT), that’s why something as ridiculous as the current trans theme has proved impossible to stop.
Yes, the root of this goes, I am afraid, to second wave feminism. We screwed up.I blame Andrea Dworkin, the fanatic. After her, feminism became about putting down men constantly as testosterone-poisoned rapists, etc., and barging into their spaces.
And it was second wave that was pushing the nonsense about girls and boys being interchangeable (viz the Reimer twins) and when that went south, nobody had the guts to say, we were wrong. REALLY wrong.
Result? Women-friendly men were intimidated and shouted down, and the misogynistic types out in the shadows came out of the woodwork to get their revenge.
Great post.
All the feminist like the author brought it on themselves.
They denied reality by claiming that women are as good as men in science or business.
We just see revolution devouring their children.
Julie Bindel is just Danton to Robespierre or Bukharin or Trotsky to Stalin.
Luckily she lives in democracy of sort, so she can moan about her situation instead of ending up dead.
“After all, I have chosen to spend all my life, since coming out as a lesbian at 15, campaigning to end bigotry. And I like to think I still do.”
Is this the same Julie Bindel who, in conversation with Julie Burchill, claimed that “most men are emotional cripples”? And the same Bindel that wrote an unironic piece for the Guardian entitled, “Yes, Women are Superior. Let Me Count the Ways”?
I dislike Bindel’s general misandry. (Her opposition to trans ideology is a separate issue, and I have no particular dog in that fight.) Still, nobody should *ever* be threatened for expressing an opinion, on trans rights or anything else.
I’m not bothered by her misandry. As a lesbian she might be expected to have a less than full understanding of how men’s minds work. Generally though she tells it like it is.
Homosexual men don’t hate women, they seem to get on very well with them. A large % of lesbians seem to hate men
Oh gay men can be the worst misogynists!
It took me reading up on the fashion industry to make me realize this truth.
100%
Not sure how you can judge the emotional health of a whole sex. There is no independent yardstick. One might with as much meaning say that most women are emotional flamboyants.
I’d say Julie’s opposition to trans ideology is a function of her misandry. After all, a trans-identifying man is in fact a man, and especially loathsome if he’s trying to access women’s spaces.
That’s just stupid. I’m a man and I despise these sick bastards.
Well so do I. However, it’s not rocket science to point out that Julie’s opposition to transgenderism is partly driven by her man-hating. You obviously haven’t read enough Bindel.
Agreed. I fully support free speech and admire the courage that Bindel has shown, but she has an enormous blind spot when it comes to her take on men. I love my son as much as I love my daughter, and there is not one thing “wrong” with him because he is male.
As soon as second (or was it third? I’ve lost count) wave feminists declared “gender” to be a “social construct” they opened up a Pandora’s box, in which gender identity is no longer anchored in biology.
Now, I’m sure that at the time they had no idea that old-school feminists would end up being marginalized as “TERFs” but here we are: the law of unintended consequences strikes again…
Gender and sex are different – sex being biology and immutable, gender being how humans express their sex and thus culturally defined. I am not sure how we express gender in the mainstream is anchored to biology any more – why can’t anyone where a frock or make-up? Personally I have not done either for half a century but that is my choice. I dress for comfort and utility and frocks and makeup offer neither of those. I am entirely happy for anyone to play with their gender but to pretend that you can change your sex is flat earth speak and dangerous for all concerned – particularly women and gender-confused kids. Feminist in the 70s & 80s did start a conversation about gender (I was one) and it a conversation that trans activists have now all but silenced, whilst imperilling hundreds of confused kids, vulnerable women, denying space to actual women and academic freedom – meanwhile conning a large chiunk of the younger generation. It is a considerable public relations coup but also very dangerous and fascism in practice.
Sex is biological reality. Gender is a made up construct; a stereotype of how some people think a man or a woman should behave.
The idea that one “feels like a man” or “feels like a woman” is equally absurd. I’m a man, but I don’t know what it “feels like to be a man”. None of us knows what it “feels like to be a man” or a woman. Each of us only knows what it feels like to be ourselves.
Hey, nice one! I’ve been saying that to friends for ages. None of us can identify what it feels like to be a man, or a woman, all they can say is whether they feel like what they think it feels like to be one or the other – in other words, their guess based on stereotypes.
Imbecile, only no less than 14999 out of 15000 have no trouble saying with confidence they are men or women, so you are perfectly wrong.
“Feeling like ..” implies the person having these feelings is outside the personality they are insisting they resemble. They are looking in, from outside, through the window. They can never be inside.
“Sex is biological reality.” <– So is gender.
“Gender is a made up construct” <– A lie. It has never been created in a person after birth.
“a stereotype of how some people think a man or a woman should behave.” <– Those are gendered behaviors, not gender.
“The idea that one “feels like a man” or “feels like a woman” is equally absurd. I’m a man, but I don’t know what it “feels like to be a man”. None of us knows what it “feels like to be a man” or a woman. Each of us only knows what it feels like to be ourselves.” or “feels like a woman” is equally absurd.” <– Except a good 14999 people out of 15000 never question that it is how they feel — you are claiming reality is absurd.
You are absurd.
To go by your name, you are claiming you would with perfect equanimity, with nothing between your ears changing, be perfectly comfortable to make tomorrow to be a woman.
You are abjectly, objectively, an idiot.
The irony being that many of the people loudly claiming that gender is a social construct are rebelling by adopting the most cliched and stereotypical forms of gender expression of the opposite sex and then defining themselves by that sex. I can’t take someone seriously that pretends towards a sort of post-human intellectual gambit while wallowing in a bawdy display of costuming. The silliness of late night, alcohol/drug-fueled entertainments and theatre have morphed into a tolerance (however uneasy) for always on personas and masks. This desire to be a fictional character all the time is at best a sign of depression and self hate and at worst a manipulative interpersonal power play that at scale undermines any claim towards a shared reality.
“Gender and sex are different – sex being biology and immutable, gender being how humans express their sex and thus culturally defined..”
No. This is wrong, yet it is repeated over and over. You are confusing gender with gender-behaviour and gender-roles. Gender is not gender-behaviour. The first is physiologically determined, the second determined through culture. Gender-behaviour has no bearing on gender.
When gender was a simple genteel synonym for sex, there were two genders, non-binary gender did not exist, (and still doesn’t) and there were no mentally-ill bewildered lesbians having their healthy breasts removed and celebrating it as though it were an achievement.
Gender is physiological, and gender is not gendered behaviors. Gender is a result of a part of the anatomy between the ears, and just as is the sex between the legs, not always occurring per usual in every individual. The brain can be as intersex in and of itself as the sex of a person can be — that means non-binary people definitely exist, and you have no excuse to claim otherwise. . .
. . . to the extent you make yourself a clown to claim it.
I wonder if this could be the most important point made in this thread.
It’s a point made in every thread following a Julie Bindel article*, to the point of repetitive banality.
*The article about losing her pet pooch excepted.
So, implying that women are responsible for male violence against them is “original?” Sorry to disappoint you, but I don’t think it’s original to the Taliban. They’re just not embarrassed to say the quiet part out loud.
Even in the modern Anglopshere, this truism simply gets reinvented every decade or so, to undermine organized attempts by women to improve our collective circumstances. Thinking back decade by decade, women just keep causing men to sexually abuse them. Reasons have included:
1) wearing leisure wear exposes too much body shape and men lose control;
2) dressing in pantsuits emasculates and angers men, who can’t control their desire to reestablish domination;
3) showing bare legs while wearing a skirt is open invitation;
4) living outside your parents home at all to work a job in a city is an invitation to be raped;
5) using your own car is an invitation to have illicit sex (which the Saudis have figured out);
6) working outside the home at all w/o appropriate supervision is asking for rape;
7) walking outside the home w/o a chaperone is asking for rape;
8) organizing for suffrage undermines a nation’s capacity to fight World War I;
9) riding a bicycle is asking for rape, and ruins a woman’s womb, causing hysteria;
10) requesting entrance to the professions for the top .5% of female minds also ruins wombs and emasculates men.
11) Oh, and measures to enable women to safely empty their bladders while traveling outside the home will encourage women to leave that gentle domestic sphere for which God made them, leaving them vulnerable to men’s uncontrollable sexual energies.
Wait–transactivists are actually reinstating a barrier to women’s safety and public access that we overcame in 1880-90? Gotta hand it to them.
Do you ever leave the house?
unintended consequences or foreseeable consequences? This is the problem with activism; it can’t help itself. There is a never a solution because that would end the gravy train. Existing problems are to be perpetuated and in the absence of real issues, activists will manufacture them.
I still read and contribute financially to the Grauniad, but do wonder from time to time when and why their editorial stance became so gripped with cowardice in the face of transactivism.
Does it sell newspapers? Are they just bandwaggon-jumpers?
Or do they *really* think a woman can have a p***s?
Happy to be enlightened…
I would vote for your post were it not for the financial contribution to the Guardian.
Point taken. Its only a few £ a month, but I will not mention it again!
You’re entitled to spend your money how you like. I have remained firm in my refusal to subscribe despite the various attempts of the G to employ emotional blackmail to change my mind. My main gripe was all the stupid opinion pieces it published which fanned the flames of intergenerational conflict which I felt was divisive and unnecessary. But I also disagree with their moderation policy which is inconsistent and far too influenced by woke nonsense.
The Guardian publishes in the US, and I suspect they are concerned about the impact on their sales there. After all, it’s US academia that invented this rubbish along with other rubbish such as Black Live Matter, and it was adopted by gullible academics and students in the UK.
Agree that’s part of it. Editor Kath Viner ran their US operations for many years, and took this deep into wokery, but as the article explains, all this hatred of scientific reality ie transactivism and the nasty “TERF ” slurs started before the G became obsessed with the US market.
If you read and financially support Guardian, you can not be helped, sorry.
An interesting article Julie. I wasn’t really aware of just how long this issue has involved such organised bullying. You have helped reveal the massive contradictions in trans activist groups. There is more awareness because of you and (I hope) a growing challenge to the assault on women’s rights by such people. I absolutely support anybody presenting themselves how they want but not male born people at the expense of women in particular circumstances (single sex spaces, awards and sports). That leaves the great majority of life completely open to everyone.
Massive respect to Julie Bindel, among a whole host of other feminist writers critical of transgender ideology, writing in UnHerd, Spiked, The Critic, Quillette and less well known dissent magazines. Julie’s story underlines what a travesty of Leftism and Liberalism transgender ideology is. To me, it’s fascism hiding in a frock. Long live Julie!
I lost any sympathy I had for the trans movement and trans people generally years ago.
They are largely a vile, nasty, bullying group that I believe are all largely mentally ill in some way. They are just angry at the world, at God and they do not like themselves. They just rage.
Occasionally they fixate on a target and attack. They want to hurt others because they hurt.
Yup. But I differ in the take on bullies. Generally, they bully because it works. It gives them what they want, without the extra hassle of having to be nice about it.
I think you may be talking about the vocal minority… I met three guys in the 1980s who all subsequently transitioned, well with varying degrees of success. I think back then at least they just kind of wanted to get on with what they were best at doing. ( they were all in computers back then. I have to say I haven’t met them in the last 10+ years so it could be they have got involved in the latest trends, who knows)
The one thing the transmafia have done is convince me, and I suspect a number of dyed in the wool unreconstructed Thatcherite males like me, that Julie Bindel is in fact right on many things.
Twenty years ago that was not something I would ever have expected
People who claim that men can become women and vice versa are either liars or mentally unwell, since it is patently and obviously nonsense. The most extraordinary revelation is that there are so many of them, throughout the western world, and smeared across all strata of authority, in government, institutions, academia, professions, corporations… all the engines of our civilisation. They walk among us, they make our laws, they pay our wages, they teach our children. That’s what terrifies me. Julie Bindel, Kathleen Stock and their ilk are flickering beacons of light in this very dark world, God bless them.
It’s the Emperors new clothes. I’m sure you remember the story from your childhood. At the time I thought I understood the story, but its only the arrival of the trans mania they I truly understand it
Most of the people pushing this nonsense know well it’s all lies, but on and on it goe, where it stops nobody know
Jennifer Bilek writes about transgenderism in terms of “Synthetic Sex Identities” (SSI). https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/billionaire-family-pushing-synthetic-sex-identities-ssi-pritzkers
And she is an idiot. There is no such thing as a synthetic sex identity, or gender identity. — it is only biological.
That is why David Reimer was David and not Joan.
Julie you with the other strong women that you mention and others like Sharon Davis are all heroes of mine. Meanwhile Ruth Hunt sits in the Lords having been enobled. Gender ideology is unscientific, mysogenistic nonsense untethered from material reality – please stand tall as the majority of people agree with you. I am a gay man and just think the ever lengthening absurdity of the 2SPLGBTQI+ acronym has done sun told damage to same sex based rights.
Oh no, gender ideology is untethered from biology, but it is not untethered from “material reality” if we think of the latter in terms of MONEY.
Imbecile, what you pretend is an ideology is rooted exclusively in biology — biology you deny according to your factless, pro-child abuse ideology.
I’ve never been entirely sure why an L, G or B person should have any more common ground with a T person than a heterosexual person does. Is it because they too suffer discrimination and mockery? In which case, why not add black to the alphabet soup, or Jewish, or gypsy, or disabled, or redhead, or poorly educated white male, or fat person, or bald person.
L, G and B are types of sexual attraction. T is not.
More or less what they’ve done with the Pride flag. Take a rainbow to represent ‘all sorts that make a world’ and then insist that each colour actually stands for a repressed sub-group, turning it into the abomination it now is.
You’ve excluded my own minority group, the white hetero middle-aged male. We’re very much in the minority and nobody likes us. It really upsets me. Honest.
Maybe you can take comfort in the knowledge that the dead white hetero guys are hated even more. 🙂
Julie Bindel, you have shown great bravery over the last 20 years..
It would be interesting to know if there is a common thread amongst all these trans ‘supporting’ women (eg Viner, Hunt, Mordaunt, Sturgeon etc).
How come there are so many women who don’t know what a woman is?
They very well know.
When that black Supreme Court candidate was asked to define a woman, she demurred. The next question should have been: “Are you a woman?” and then “If yes, what makes you a woman?” or if “No, why not?”
We know that would’ve just ended up going full circle.
“Are you a woman?”
“Yes”
“Why?”
“Because I identify as one”
“What is it you are identifying as?”
“I’m not a biologist”
What hurts most is being labelled a bigot, homophobe and fascist. — I imagine so. Now, if one were to review Julie’s life work, how many negative references toward men might be found? This particular shoe is uncomfortable no matter the foot wearing it. That she and I may agree on the trouble with Ts doesn’t make the rest go away. I’m sure Ms. Bindel is happy to have allies on this front, and will be just as quick to discard them when they are no longer convenient.
Well, people do change their minds every so often… 🙂
Grateful to you, Julie, for your smarts, courage, persistence, and, well, all that you are and all that you do.
Well done Julie – a whole article without any gratuitous misandrist comments, which just detract from the cause. Julie thinks it is all down to her and people like her (left wing lesbians) to fight against gender ideology and against violence against women and her attitude alienates a lot of those who should be most staunchly on her side – all the decent men who were brought up to protect women and children.
For those decent male readers who hate those who commit violence against women may I commend the White Ribbon organisation https://www.whiteribbon.org.uk/
TBH – she’s part of the problem Feminism created transgenderism as night follows day.
“Twenty years ago, the slur of “Terf” had not been invented, and the concept of gender ideology was confined to university lectures on Judith Butler.” <– Starting off with a lie is your sort’s usual, and a bad look. Your sort came up with the acronym TERF, and then tried to bury when it when it didn’t play well.
You shot that albatross, so wear it. You are as evil as those politicians talking about the “end game” of getting rid of transgender people, and as evil as Reinhard Heydrich and his “final solution”.
Your problem with TERF is not that is is a slur, it is that it is accurate.
What politicians?
Trannys seem to get almost everything they want, while simultaneously claiming to be oppressed
And stop claiming there is a genocide being precticed against trannys, complete BS
Do you actually believe what you have written there?
Of course. It is every word of it factual. TERFs named themselves that, back in that day.
What facts do you have to support your belief that Julie Bindel is “as evil as Reinhard Heydrick”?
Don’t disappear this time Talia, when challenged about facts, as you did last time. Provide us with those facts. Over to you.
I never have “disappeared” liar. And the mere fact she wants to force any boys to breasts and a period and to force any girls to have beards and deep voices speaks for itself.
You never have “challenged me about any facts — I am the only person who has cited any.
Not true, bordering on bullying. Calling people evil because they disagree with you is contemptible.
Here the inventor / populariser of the term, Viv Smyhe, explains the actual history and context:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/29/im-credited-with-having-coined-the-acronym-terf-heres-how-it-happened
Nonsense. Accurate is not bullying unless you are a bully — TERFs are bullies and bigots, there is not more to them. All they are is misplaced misandry.
TERFs used the term before anyone else and fully adopted it until it was a political liability — something only disputed by them recently.
If Starmer, who believes some women have penises, becomes PM, which seems highly likely at the moment, then I am thinking of identifying as non binary. It does not seem to involve having to do anything specific and would seem to be the best way of avoiding the increased oppression of heterosexual white men that will ensue.
A bit weak… whimpish dare I say. Is that a nb characteristic?
Stand firm, Julie Bindel, those of us who see the writing on the wall stand with you.
“Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”
-Theodore Dalrymple
If Labour gets into power, Julie Bindel and many of the so called “TERFs” will pay an even bigger price. It’s inevitable since Mr Starmer believes a woman can have a p***s.
Trans idealogy is as fake as lefties like Bindel with their Che Guevara and Brigate Rosse infatuations (note i say “like”), not “such as“. I hope the IDF leave enough high rise buildings in Gaza for the locals to deal with “queers for Palestine” should they dare to volunteer in person. Similarly if you are planning a war of national liberation or even a bombing campaign against civilians, brass bands or parade horses to bring about your utopia i would seek active volunteers with healthy BMIs and good stamina – evinced by cardio-vascular health. I would avoid people who’ve plastered their faces all over the internet especially if they are distinctly unattractive: they will be easy for security services etc to spot. (Not so much as issue in UK and US where it appears spooks have downed tools in favour of more lucrative work).
I have the greatest respect for women like Julie Binden, who demonstrate unwavering tenacity in adhering to objective (and moral!) truths in a world going increasingly insane. How insane ideas spread in a cognitively naive society, akin to a novel pathogen in an immunologically naive one, would be subject worthy of its own study, but similarly to a novel virus, there are always a few people who remain immune to a novel harmful ideology.
In that context, the slur TERF should be a seen as a badge of honor.
If a person does not grow up as a woman, that person is not a woman just merely by later “identifying” as one. Paragraphs 4 – 5 are on the mark. I don’t know what it is like to grow up as (= to be) a woman, lesbian or straight, the closest I get is from knowing my mother, having learned a lot about her life, her struggles, fears, traumas and achievements among the men and the other women in the world, and the love I feel towards her, and that is how I know what a woman is. And I know that she is not a “cis-gender” woman, and if anyone calls her that in my face I will break his nose (for women a derisive, sardonic laugh will have to suffice).
Men dress up as “queens”, exaggerating their stupid stereotypes of femininity, push their hulking frames into beauty contests, have the chutzpah to grin holding gold medals in women’s sports events, and for the life of me I can’t understand how it all came to this. To make it all worse, both these people, and their supporters, all they do is demand, demand, demand, when in fact the proper attitude would be humility, if they wanted to be accepted “as women” (which they are not, but they may be allowed to live it if they ask very nicely).
I believe that most straight men know what a woman is and would support JB and the other TERFs if were given the opportunity. They do have my support, whatever that is worth.
The Age Of Absurdity is upon us. It will pass. Just point and laugh for a moment or two and then get on with something worthwhile.
Except that, for women, our way to getting on with something worthwhile is often barred by transgender invaders into our spaces, our sports etc.
I am sorry, but it all started by women claiming they are as good as man at everything.
They are clearly not, and it was proven by trans.
I am against trans nonsense but feminism is responsible for it.
I am a 72 year old devout Roman Catholic grandmother of 16 who thinks Julie Bindel is a true hero and model of run-of-the-mill feminism that actually works for woman. And, yes, I can answer what a woman is as it is not above the paygrade of a second grader or any honest person.
I find it disturbing and bizarre that trans activism is nominally about kindness. Please be kind to trans people because kindness is important. And if you’re not kind to trans people I will murder you, tear you to shreds and feed the shreds to rats. So please – be kind.
There is one inarguable scientific reason trans ‘women’ are not women and it is embedded in every cell of their body. Genetically standard human males (men) have an X chromosome and a Y chromosome; females (women) two X chromosomes. They can tinker with structures all they like. Their gender, thus defined, is inalterable.
‘Yiannopoulos was eventually disinvited after feminists kicked up a fuss’ – LOL
Yes – happy to salute your brave TERFism. But you’re still an unreconstructed feminist – and all this stuff comes from the same source. Gnostic protestantism, Enlightenment humanism, Marxism, Feminism…..and now transgenderism…..all making a fetish of self-determination, denying individual or societal constraints, denying natural law….all Promethean hubris from the ground up.
Julie you are brave…but you’re also part of the problem. Feminism is part of the problem. The attack on marriage, on family….the valorization of the state….The assertion that individuals should only be accountable to what they want or need…..
Alexandra Kollontai wanted to socialize all children at birth. Feminists want to deny marriage and have the state play father. Woke social workers want to give babies to trans-fetishists and gay men…. Where does feminist socialism end and woke transgenderism begin?
The root problem for most women, for all fatherless young me, for lost/abusive/ sexually unrestrained Andrew Tate wannabes…. and for society is the collapse of marriage and the expansion of the coercive welfare state…..And all that starts with the pill and the sexual revolution.
If you are still enthusiastic for the last two, then you better stop railing against Trans. Because it follows like night follows day
You seem to have in mind some society of mobile individual women, independent….accountable to no-one but themselves. But we are ‘dependent’ on mothers, fathers, friends, children….from birth. And because we are dependent, our desires, sex life….habits, and routines…need forming….need honing into virtues. With out communitarian restraint from below (what you would decry as conservative or traditional)….there is only constraint from above.
Very well said.
I wonder how many in the “baying mob” she cited have gone to the trouble of going through the course of hormones and surgery at all, rather than merely “identifying as” the target gender? When I see the angry tweets that J K Rowland was subjected to during this controversy, I don’t see how most of them can be made by women, natal or converted. They are the catcalls of men dressing up as women.
Around 95% of trans identified men retain their male tackle (even if they take hormones and/or get breast implants). That’s because for the vast majority it’s about sexual gratification – centred around fetish and fuelled by exerting power and control over women. Trans rights are actually about the license to practice their perversions and flaunt their misogyny in public without censure.
You are a factless idiot. No such thing as “95%” is true.
Thank you for all you have done.
Keep going Julie! You and I probably won’t see eye to eye on a few things, but I’ll defend your right to say your bit.
This is a powerful essay, Julie and just came here to say that I have admired you for so many years. I first started reading you when you were a columnist in the guardian, and your writings really opened my eyes and they were a major education for me to understand what feminism is and where it is Your book is great too.
Your work on the sex trade is crucial and I’ve often wondered if attacking you for being “anti trans” is a cover for silencing this huge problem.
What has happened to you over the past two decades is really shocking but certainly an indication of the strange times we are living in. You know you have an enormous amount of support and dare I say it admiration, not just from me but from so many women and even I guess quite a few men of the more intelligent variety.
Well said.
Trans = (narcissism + mental illness) X Ego²
+ paraphilia
You and Charlie are liars.
https://taliaperkinssspace.quora.com/People-are-born-transgender-they-are-not-mentally-ill-it-is-no-paraphilia-it-is-a-physical-birth-defect-no-more-a-men
I’ve noticed that the most aggressive trans-activists seem to be exclusively trans-females (biological men.). Given that the most significant behavioral difference between men and women is level of aggressiveness, this is not surprising. The fact that this quality remains quite dominant in trans-women simply reinforces that their behavior communicates who and what they are more strongly than their demands.
You’re a rock star JB.
Thank you for fighting, and continuing to fight, Julie.
i’m quite in favour of the royal family, so I identify as a Serf & Terf.
What a brave woman.
You’re brilliant, Julie. Thank you so much for everything.
Julie thank you for this inspiring if not shocking account of your career and life experiences.
Some women have a particular skill in fanning the flames of those men who are misogynists, the type of women who stand their ground and grow in response to threats, who seek eye contact. I know some of the times I have stood my ground, I’ve been assaulted by strangers (misogynist men) in public.
I listen to your podcasts and read everything you write and am so inspired. I understand the strength it takes to continue to be so unashamedly outspoken, even when that task itself becomes more and more of a challenge and a gamble, and we become more unusual as a result, and so much less compliant.
If you ever do a charity raffle I would pay a pretty penny for a dog walk with you Julie, I would shout us lunch if you had the time.
Thank you for your writing and apologies to readers not offering much to debate here.
Yet another self-congratulatory yet un-self-aware essay from Ms. Bindel. When will she actually confront the real issue here…? It is an uncomfortable fact that the very same principles and beliefs that liberated homosexuals, have been seized and extolled by gender dysphorics. Do our feelings and desires trump all, or must we confront our creaturely constraints? Does natural law matter?
Ms. Bindel sees men-who-think-they’re-women and views them as a threat to women. Yet she ignores that children need opposite sexed parents, and that gay men who ‘marry’ each other typically have open marriages, and a host of other socially destructive out-workings of the insistence that society not merely tolerate homosexuals but normalize them. Gender dysphorics are further along the spectrum of disorder, and hence are more likely to suffer from numerous other mental illnesses, as well as acting irrational, violent, hyper-emotional, etc. But until Ms. Bindel confronts and responds to the underlying similarities between the gay liberation movement and the transgender movement, her complaints of being lumped in with them will fall on deaf ears.
Bottom line: Ms. Bindel believes her feelings of attraction to another woman justify dissolving the sexual dichotomy that has underlay social structures for millennia… yet a gender dysphoric’s feelings of being a woman in a man’s body, do not. Pray tell why not? The only possible answer, of course – that your feelings are wrong, and do not justify trying to impose an artificial structure on the natural world – hoists her by her own petard.
Julie Bindel is a doughty fighter and a good writer. Her battle for women who love women to be left alone to be women is one I never thought would have to be fought all over again but here we are. More even than that, the very right to follow observable facts where they lead is now in question, a fight therefore for us all. When I read today about what has been done to Linzi Smith from Newcastle I see just how far down the totalitarian road we have gone. This is everyone’s fight: first they came for the lesbians…
We were warned:
“The very concept of objective truth is fading out of the world. Lies will pass into history.”
“All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome.”
“Political language… is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”
“So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don’t even know that fire is hot.
“Political chaos is connected with the decay of language… one can probably bring about some improvement by starting at the verbal end.”
“In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
“In our time political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible.”
“One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes a revolution in order to establish a dictatorship.”
“Each generation imagines itself to be more intelligent than the one that went before it, and wiser than the one that comes after it.”
“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
― George Orwell, 1984
Slightly off topic, but I need to rant. I recently received at work our yearly survey checking the “pulse” of the employees and how engaged and empowered we are feeling. This time round there was a diversity section where we were asked what our ethnicity and gender are, whether we are trans and what our sexual preference is. I am proud of my ethnicity, my gender is self-evident, but I find it insulting to be asked by my employer (even anonymously) whether I prefer men or women sexually.
The progressive cultural marxist virus has to evolve to survive by attacking the traditional. Once change occurs and the new becomes the traditional, it is attackedby the progressive cultural marxist virus.
Thank you Julie for spotting the misogyny so long ago and fighting for women all these years.
Poor Ms Bindel! Her article is completely ignored and the first 25 comments are all on some clown called ‘Elfslayer’. For shame!
So, a lifelong lesbian freedom fighter, and good for her. I don’t ‘get’ homoeroticism myself – I can’t imagine that the sight of another male will ever inspire in me the sort of profound desire that the sight of some women can, even now I’m well past doing anything about it – but I can guess that Bindel’s attitude towards men in general (‘not for me, and a bit of a downer’) is an expression of her preference for women (‘lovely jubbly’). That anyone should be surprised that she’s not keen on men identifying as women and then, as it were, parking their tanks on ‘her’ lawn is itself surprising. Forgive the dated personal pronouns, I can’t get the hang the new usages. My own position on this is sort of Rowling Lite, a bit surprised that we are even talking about this when there are far more important things to get excited over. What would suit me most is that all these people would stop telling me how I ought to feel about them, when I don’t much care one way or the other. Racism, on the other hand, gets me well mad.