The Washington Post Goes All-In on the Kinder, Gentler TERFism

It is emblazoned with a deceptive title: “Pass the Equality Act, but don’t abandon Title IX.”

Just as friendly and inviting as “Don’t Panic,” eh?

The authors profess to believe “The Equality Act’s provisions are much needed and long overdue.”

But, of course, that quoted sentence ends with the following: “with one caveat.”

The Washington Post should have displayed a modicum of integrity and demanded that the title read: “Pass the Equality Act, but ensure that it embraces a reboot of Plessy v. Ferguson‘s ‘separate but equal.'”

Janice Raymond’s 1979 The Transsexual Empire was the full-on TERF analogue to Mein Kampf.  What Doriane Coleman, Martina Navratilova and Sanya Richards-Ross have been permitted to place in the Post‘s pages is the kinder, gentler – and far more media-friendly – call to exterminate trans women.

Think of it as The Transsexual Empire with Lee Atwater’s ghost as an unlisted co-author.

Don’t use the buzzwords. Claim that you want to tolerate their existence.  But then make sure they’re never allowed to actually do anything – wink, wink! They’ll die and go to minimum-wage hell just the same!

I refuse to link to this obscenity.

DMS

Martina Navratilova’s journey into TERFism has been underway for some time, so her involvement in this really should come as no surprise (ditto for the Washington Post‘s, in light of its continued employment of Jonathan Capehart, the presumed author of the transphobic ‘incremental progress’ screed during the ENDA Crisis of 2007). As for Richards-Ross?  Well, NBC is Rachel Maddow’s employer, right?

But what of Doriane Coleman?

Coleman is privileged with a position in legal academia – a venue which is currently as free of trans women as she wants women’s athletics to be.

Yes, we know that certain high-ranking politicos who have law degrees can parachute from political lives (especially ones plagued with scandal) to law school gigs quicker than Samantha can twitch her nose or Jeannie can blink.  But the majority of law school teaching gigs are decided to some degree by hiring committees.

And I’ll reiterate: At the moment, to the best of my knowledge, no law school in the United States permits any trans woman – even ones with scholarly publication records longer than any of their tenured faculty – to be privileged with the level of ivory tower perch from which Coleman is allowed to spew her neo-Plessy v. Ferguson-ism.  (It is possible that there is currently a trans woman adjunct or two as there have been at tiny times in the past – and a few years ago even I was able to teach undergrad sections of a University of Iowa law school course offered to undergrads as well as law school students – but the real doors of the real academy remain closed to us.)

Why should we believe that any TERF‘s espousal of separate-but-equal-ism stops at one particular aspect of life?  Follow any TERF list or TERF Twitter thread. The separate-but-equal-ism does not stop with athletics because the bigotry does not stop with athletics.

DLC

Why should anyone believe that Coleman, when involved – formally or informally – in deciding who the Duke University School of Law hires, would treat a trans woman applicant equally-and-non-separately?

Advertisements

“TERF” is No More of a Slur to TERFs than “NATO” is to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization

The words the letters T, E, R and F represent are a substantive description of what TERFs are and want.

Buying the false claim that “TERF” is a slur is tantamount to siding with TERFs and their bigotry.

But, if you claim that the application of “TERF” to you is a slur, then you must disavow at least one component of the term as applied to you – you know, somewhat akin to crushing at least one element of a cause of action in order to get a case tossed on summary judgment.

So, lets get to the analysis…

Are you seriously claiming that “Trans-Excluding” – the “T” and the “E” – do not apply to you?

Well, because you defamatorily assert that trans women are men you want to exclude trans women from certain spaces, right? If so, how precisely do you credibly deny that “Trans-Excluding” applies to you?

We’re halfway there.

Want to quit while you’re behind?

Are you claiming that “Radical Feminist” (and or RadFem) does not apply to you?

This is a bit trickier – though only a bit.

GOP women certainly won’t claim it (except selectively – namely to get on TV to bash women’s equality; I’m looking at YOU Kellyanne Conjob!). But as for the reminder of the TERFs…

Don’t all of you wear “RadFem” like a crown?

So…

That’s a “T,” an “E,” an “R,” and an “F.”

TERF!

So, TERFs, you’ve lost your case, conclusively.

So much so that an assertion by a TERF (which, as we’ve just proven, is not a slur) that “TERF” is a slur should be regarded as legally defamatory to the person accurately applying “TERF” (which, again, as we’ve just proven, is not a slur) to the TERF (which, to repeat, is not a slur.)

The Next “Silenced” TERF Academic Will Be The First

If your trans-exterminationistic cries of having been “silenced” are emanating from a tenured position in academia that equally- and/or better-qualified trans women were never even considered for, then you just might be an over-privileged bigot.

Has the Future Already Been Forgotten? A Post-2007 Transgender Legal History Told Through the Eyes of the Late, (Rarely) Great Employment Non-Discrimination Act

The article is now available on the website of the William & Mary Journal of Women and the Law.  Please read before all of the pro-HRC revisionist crap is shoveled into officially-approved discourse this fall.

Has the Future Already Been Forgotten

Not That Thinking People Didn’t Already Suspect This, But…

From TransAdvocate:

Fake “Radical Feminist” group actually paid political front for anti-LGBT James Dobson organization

Where WoLF?

There WoLF.

Fake Voter Fraud and Fake Bathroom Predators – Brought to You by the Fake Patriots Who Benefit from Fake News

See a pattern?

The author of the so-called bathroom bill said she is working on potential changes after listening to people “from all walks of life,” emphasizing that her measure is aimed not at the transgender people it would affect but at men who might assert a right to go into women’srestrooms for perhaps nefarious purposes.

“It’s really not about the transgender.[“]

Memo to Senator Kolkhorst: If you want people to believe your christianist anti-trans BS, you might want to avoid using St. Barney Syntax.

 

TERFs for Trump

From the Hollywood Reporter:

Barr is most famous for her breakthrough brand of working class comedy, crystallized in her Emmy award-winning sitcom Roseanne.

The Hollywood Reporter spoke to the comic on the eve of the California primary, at her Los Angeles home, where she praised Donald Trump….

That Roseanne Barr?

You’ve said that Americans can have whatever we want politically — I’m paraphrasing — if we just participate in the process. And it’s true that new groups are participating more in the process, sometimes violently. 

I think we would be so lucky if Trump won.

But of course.

I hope no one is shocked.

Thirty years ago, anti-porn ‘feminists’ had no problem aligning with Jerry Falwell, et. al., against porn despite the fact that Falwell, el. al., actually had more of a desire to rid the world of feminists than they did of porn.

Now, its the trans exterminationists (remember, in “TERF” the “E” actually stands for “exterminationist”) (continuing their) aligning with the radical right in hopes of eliminating trans women.