Saturday, December 9, 2023

When people cite Rowling, Shrier, and Walsh and the 'evils of the trans movement,' they're transphobic

On November 22, Katya — a drag queen, you can buy her book — tweeted "FREE PALESTINE" (context: the war following October 7). Someone responded 40 minutes later: "You should visit Gaza, I am sure they are going to like you over there. All chopped parts of you." Katya replied 13 minutes later saying that this wasn't relevant, since queer people are murdered everywhere, and while we're at it, she'd like not to be murdered in Massachusetts for being queer.

katya_zamo on X: And to those ignorant fools who have the nerve to tell me I would be decapitated in a heartbeat in Gaza: what about Glasgow? What about Moscow? What about Medford, Malden or Marlborough Massachusetts? As a gay person who can’t pass, as a cross-dresser, as a sissy—they have, they do and they will kill us anywhere. Bitch.

Talking back to an annoying internet troll to defend one's dignity is a valid choice, and not wanting to be murdered for being queer seems a reasonable position.

Two days later, Michael Broukhim complained about "posts like the one below" (i.e., Katya's) which, according to him, is one example of how "the trans movement" manipulates language, in this case (so he says) to imply that there are no meaningful differences between Gaza and Massachusetts. Which is reading a lot into Katya's tweet, and I don't believe that's what she was saying. She was saying that queer people are under attack everywhere, so pointing out that a nation is homophobic or transphobic is not a very good reason for her not to have solidarity with their political goal of freedom. She was responding briefly to a person who aggressively said that Gazans would turn her into "chopped parts," and who was using that claim as a reason to say she couldn't have her political opinion. That person didn't really deserve a reply at all. Broukim, in attacking Katya, chose to turn his ire at a drag queen who was rolling her eyes at a jerk making annoying murdersome comments at her.

I say he attacked her because he used the word "evil" three times in his tweet.

If we are committed to combatting evil, we have to do so wherever we see it. There are 3 particular evils of the trans movement: 1) It erodes much needed spaces for women. Trans women playing women’s sports means no women’s sports. @jk_rowling is a hero for taking this issue head on. 2) It preys on impressionable youth. Children who still believe in Santa Clause are being put on a path to make decisions that can permanently destroy their health and fertility. @AbigailShrier has done incredible work here with her book, “Irreversible Damage.” 3) It attacks language clouding our ability to agree on obvious truths. Gaza and Massachusetts are a universe apart in how they treat LGBTQ communities, but if you can blur scientific and biological truths (see: “What is a woman?” A documentary by @MattWalshBlog), you can blur this truth as well, which leads to posts like the one below. There is nothing wrong with being trans. That’s your choice. But the trans movement has gone far beyond its mandate to protect that right. It’s been co-opted by those who seek the destruction of our society and perpetuates these evils in service of that aim.

Who are Rowling, Shrier, and Matt Walsh?

So glad you asked. See my articles:

— "On the 3rd Anniversary of J.K. Rowling’s Pledge for Trans Rights" It's a 6-min read on Medium.

— "Books Like This Cause Irreversible Damage". It's a 42-minute read on Medium.

— What I wrote about Matt Walsh on this blog.

People who cite Rowling, Shrier, and Walsh — that's Michael Broukhim — are the sort of people who refer to trans people as "evil" three times in a single tweet — also Michael Broukhim. Calling trans people evil is called transphobia.

Anyhow, I hadn't heard of Michael Broukhim until I heard that he was co-CEO of FabFitFun and was siding with Elon Musk. Elon Musk is also obscenely, powerfully transphobic. That's that.


Regarding who's blurring biological and scientific truths:

"Ted Cruz joined that push [to distance the term abortion from the procedures that many people sympathize with] on his podcast last week [in 2022], insisting that television host Chrissy Teigen was mistaken about her experience when she revealed that she’d had an abortion in 2020 to treat a pregnancy that had led to a partial placental abruption, a life-threatening complication. Cruz explained that he didn’t see her personal medical experience the way Teigen did: “She may want to characterize it as abortion in this political context, but she described it at the time as a miscarriage, and it certainly sounds like that was an accurate description,” Cruz said on the show."

He also told host Liz Wheeler, “If there’s a medical procedure in that context, it’s not an abortion.”

That might feel true to Cruz based on the vibes, but according to medical professionals, the context of the procedure doesn’t change what the procedure is called.

The Effort to Redefine Abortion Goes Beyond Ted Cruz, Dan Solomon, Texas Monthly, September 27, 2022

No comments:

Post a Comment

In case you missed it

Have you seen inside the book 'To Climates Unknown'?

The alternate history novel To Climates Unknown by Arturo Serrano was released on November 25, the 400th anniversary of the mythical First ...