To Advance Civil Rights, Oppose Transgender Extremism

We are very pleased to publish this submission from Lucinda Stoan. She is a social justice activist, mother, and educator, based in Washington State in the  US.   This is a  detailed and comprehensive source-linked overview of trans issues and what is at stake. It will be useful for many people, especially in the US as there are almost no voices on the Left in the US challenging dominant trans ideology and the US-based on-line publishers shy away from gender-critical articles. Lucinda is using a pseudonym to protect her job and her ability to speak on environmental issues.

by Lucinda Stoan

In a very short period of time, a powerful transgender rights lobby has won major policy changes around the world.  Many of us on the Left are appalled.   The dominant trans lobby isn’t advancing civil rights.  It’s destroying women’s rights, undercutting gays and lesbians, and hurting children.  It will ultimately hurt trans people themselves.

Most people don’t get to hear what we left-wing dissidents have to say.  There are mob-like attacks on anyone who lifts their head above the parapet.  And left-leaning news outlets don’t have us on their shows.  They feature only dominant trans voices and their misguided narrative.

Are transwomen literally women?

Transgender people “identify” as the opposite of their birth sex.  “Transwomen” are males who identify as female.  “Transmen” are females who identify as male.  (I will sometimes use the phrase “trans-identified male” in place of “transwoman” in this article to make sure readers know I’m referring to a male.)

I and others in the Suppressed Left strongly endorse the rights of any person to identify however they want, dress how they like, and enjoy basic civil rights.  We abhor violence against people based on their transgenderism.

But we don’t agree that “transwomen are women” (TWAW) and that “transmen are men.”    This is the core distinction between those of us who are silenced, on the one hand, and trans extremists, on the other.   Trans extremists go beyond promoting civil rights for trans people by insisting that transwomen are literally women, and that, as such, they’re entitled to unfettered access to women’s spaces, sports, affirmative action slots, and more.

The extremists have succeeded in injecting the transwomen-are-women concept into all sorts of policies already adopted by sports associations, school districts, and government agencies, as will be discussed below. They’re pushing for more.   The Equality Act pending in the U.S. Congress gives “gender identity” (a person’s self-declaration as to whether they are male or female, regardless of biological reality) precedence over “sex” as a protected category in federal civil rights laws.

Trans extremists also hope the U.S. Supreme Court will give TWAW its blessing in a transgender case currently under its review. That case revolves around Aimee Stephens, a trans-identified male, who was fired by a funeral home, after announcing an intention to wear a dress, as is required for women employees.

Stephens and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) could have argued against the company’s dress code, claiming that it is sex discriminatory.  But that’s not what they’re doing.   Instead, they’re seeking a new definition of “sex” in the federal civil rights statute that addresses workplaces.  They want that definition to include “gender identity” so that anyone who says they’re a woman (including Stephens) will be considered a woman.  If the Supreme Court agrees to that change, its decision will affect other federal civil rights legislation as well, such as Title IX which addresses sex discrimination in education, including school athletics.

Biology 101

Like other mammals, humans are sexually dimorphic.  This means we have two sexes: males and females.  Women are adult human females.  Men are adult human males.

Females have anatomy associated with the production of eggs (the big “gametes”). Males have anatomy associated with producing sperm (the small “gametes”).  In sexual reproduction a sperm fuses with an egg and a new human being is created in a woman’s body, where it grows until birth.  It’s a pretty amazing system which has kept us going as a species for over 300,000 years.

At birth, doctors or other health professionals observe a baby’s sex and record it.  They are stunningly accurate in their observations.  Only rarely does it turn out that a baby is not the sex it appears to be externally.  And only rarely are a baby’s genitals ambiguous, making it difficult to know its sex without further investigation.   These intersex conditions—external sex not matching internal sex, and ambiguous genitalia—occur in only 0.018% of live births.  They are a subset of so-called Disorders of Sexual Development (DSDs) present in about 1.7% of live births.  (There is no ambiguity or internal/external contradiction for most DSDs.)

Every baby, including those with DSDs, is male or female.  None belong to a sex beyond those two categories.  Sex is not a spectrum.

The incoherent trans extremist narrative

In making their case that transwomen are women, trans activists often start by talking about DSDs.  They point to various conditions, falsely implying that these affect far more than a tiny percentage of the population. From there, they leap to the conclusion that sex is subjective and that there are multiple sexes beyond male and female.   They claim that doctors “assign” sex at birth.

Hundreds of scientists have countered this unscientific hogwash by signing the Nettie Project Statement (named after Nettie Stevens, the woman who discovered sex chromosomes.)  This statement reaffirms basic biological facts and points out that “[a]ttempts to recast biological sex as a social construct, which then becomes a matter of chosen individual identity, are wholly ideological, scientifically inaccurate and socially irresponsible.”

Trans extremists imply that transgender people have some kind of DSD.  But this is almost never the case.  And most people with DSDs don’t consider themselves transgender. (In fact, many with DSDs have strenuously objected to trans activists using their situation to advance the trans activists’ ideology and agenda.)

This is crucial to understand.  The vast majority of transgender people have no DSD and are not intersex.  There is no ambiguity or abnormality whatsoever regarding their sexual anatomy. Thus, transwomen are typically 100% male biologically, and have no female biological characteristics.

At times, transwomen seem to suggest that they have some new kind of DSD that’s never been identified and for which there is zero scientific evidence.  They refer to a hidden essence or “feeling” they have which they somehow know to be female.  This is startlingly redolent of the sexist debunked “women’s brain” idea many thought had been defeated ages ago. Moreover, even if we were to accept that there is some as yet undiscovered “trans gene,” why in the world would that one invisible attribute trump the mountain of observable biological characteristics – both macro- and microscopic – in determining a person’s sex?

As an actual woman, let me be so bold as to mention what it feels like to be a woman.    For me, it means feeling the things that arise from my biology – things that someone without that biology simply cannot feel.  Menstrual cramps.  Labor pains.  The fear of getting pregnant.  The joy of giving birth. The frustration of having colleagues comment on your looks rather than the points you’ve made in a meeting at work.

Some trans activists deride women for listing experiences linked to our reproductive organs as a primary basis of womanhood.  “You’re reducing womanhood to your genitals!”  they shout.

Yes!  Absolutely.  I am tying my womanly identity to my womanly physiology.  That makes total sense.  I’m a woman: an adult human female.

But notice the other key word in the definition of woman: “human”.  That’s my primary identity.  I’m human.  Just like males are human.  We all share being human.  And there is a splendid array of feelings, interests, capacities, skills, desires, and dreams that go with our humanity, regardless of our sex.

As they falsely declare sex to be a spectrum, trans extremists casually use the term “gender” interchangeably with “sex”.  This sows confusion because they then shift to a discussion of “gender” based on its use to denote something entirely different than biological sex. That something is sets of roles, feelings, capacities and behaviors assigned to and/or embraced by individuals.

Gender is a social construct that has long been used to oppress people.  Girls and women are told to be pretty, be compliant, let men run the world, and so forth.  Boys and men are told to be in charge, not cry, not wear frilly pink things, and the like.

Trans extremists claim to be fighting this gender binary.  But they actually reinforce it by embracing the idea that a male needs to claim to be a woman in order to “perform that gender.”  Why are a certain set of expectations assigned to females, and another set to males?  This is the very heart of gender oppression!

Similarly, TRAs wax eloquent about helping people be their genuine selves.  How can “being who you really are” have anything to do with denying your biological sex, taking cross-sex hormones, and cutting off parts of your body?   This is irrational.

Some trans activists say that gender is a spectrum—that there are scores or even hundreds of genders to choose from.  Doesn’t it make more sense to acknowledge that there are as many ways of being as there are people on Earth – over 7.7 billion?   Let’s ditch the nonsensical idea of genders, and of choosing and “performing” them.

Girls and women are being thrown under the bus

The claim that transwomen are women is being promoted far and wide.  One consequence is widespread damage to the rights of girls and women.

Sports:   Trans-identifying males are increasingly competing in girl’s and women’s sports.  This is totally unfair and unacceptable.

Male-bodied Canadian cyclist Rachel McKinnon (centre) is winning gold medals competing against women

In most sports, males have massive biological advantages over women.  It isn’t just testosterone currently surging through their bodies that delivers this advantage.  It is a wide range of physical features such as denser muscles with more and larger fibers, higher proportions of fast-twitch fibers aiding explosive movement, ligaments and tendons that better store potential energy and produce more explosive power, bigger hand spans, thicker skin, greater bone mass,  longer arms with greater reach, and greater height. Males have larger rib cages, hearts, lungs and hemoglobin pools which provide muscles with more oxygen.  They have longer legs and narrower pelvises which change the angle of the knees and otherwise produce better running gaits than females.

The list above is just the tip of the iceberg. There are 6500 differences in gene expression between males and females.  And on top of that males don’t have to cope with menstrual cycles, post-pregnancy changes, and the like.

Lowering testosterone levels doesn’t remove or even significantly reduce male advantage.  New research confirms this.  Boys and men still dominate in sports because they still have all that male physiology mentioned above.  By the way, the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) maximum testosterone level for transwomen (male) athletes is 5 nanomoles per litre, but typical elite female athletes have testosterone levels in the range of 0.5 to 1.5 nmol/L.

Performance data drives home the irrefutable fact that males have a massive advantage in most sports.

  • In Track and Field, high school boys regularly do better than the world’s best women. The fastest women in the world can’t make the qualifying times for competitive college men’s teams.  There are at least 10, 219 males who could beat Olympic gold medalist Elaine Thompson in the 100-meter race, not counting males who don’t compete in track.  In Connecticut high school sports, two males now competing as girls have swept up trophies, crushed girls’ records, and forced girls who would have otherwise run to watch from the side in a championship race.   College coaches with scholarships in hand watched that race. (Selina Soule and Alanna Smith are fighting back; ACLU is on the wrong side again, opposing these girls.)
  • In Martial Arts, biological male Fallon Fox won a first fight against women in 2013 in only 2 minutes, and a second in 39 seconds. Fox beat Tamikka Brents in two-and-a-half minutes, leaving Brents with a concussion, a fractured eye socket and seven staples to the head.  Brents said she’d “never felt so overpowered” in her life.
  • In late October, male-bodied Canadian cyclist Rachel McKinnon won gold in female track cycling at the UCI Masters Track Cycling World Championships, setting a new “women’s” record.
  • Weight-lifting. In January of 2019, male powerlifter JayCee Cooper set a new woman’s state record in Bench in the USPA Minnesota State Championships.  Cooper lifted a whopping 57.5 kg (126 pounds) more than the closest female competitor.  In the 2019 Pacific Games in Samoa, biological male Laurel Hubbard took the gold.
  • Tennis star Serena Williams was easily beaten by a man ranked 203rd in the world. Estimates as to where she would rank among men range from 200th to 700th.
  • Swimming: See this great website (http://boysvswomen.com ) for data on “Who would win if the best male high school athletes competed against the best female Olympians”.   In most cases, high school boys come out on top.
  • If men and women competed against each other in the Boston Marathon, women would end up with zero or close to zero prize money. In fact, most women wouldn’t qualify for the race at all.

Sure, some women are better than some men in sports.   But average performance levels for males and females are dramatically different.  For something as basic as grip strength, 90% of women are weaker than 95% of men.  Trained female athletes in sports like Judo and handball which involve gripping, rarely do better than the bottom 25th percentile of untrained men.

Most importantly, in almost every sport, the best female athletes can’t come close to what top males achieve.  Allowing males into girls and women’s sports not only sidelines females whose spots on the team are now taken by males.  It also makes it impossible for qualifying females to stand on the top of the podium, and to enjoy the scholarships and recognition that go with that. It makes it impossible for women to become professional athletes because most prize money goes to males.  And in some sports, it leads to serious injuries for girls and women.  (This is bad in and of itself, and also because females justifiably drop out of sports that pose unreasonable hazards to them.)

We exclude biological males from women’s sports for good reasons.  These reasons don’t go away when males identify as girls or women.  Does this mean that fairness to women requires that trans-identifying male athletes be barred from sports altogether? Of course not.  The obvious, just solution is for trans identified males to compete against other males. Or, if they so choose, trans athletes can advocate for a separate competition category.

Not every biological male competing in women’s sports will rise to the top, leaving all female competitors behind in the dust. But that’s beside the point.  We don’t tolerate a woman who has been doping even if she loses the race to non-doping women.  Nor should we tolerate males – people whose bodies have undergone the equivalent of doping from before birth onward – in women’s sports.  Moreover, by opening the door to some female-identifying males, we open it to all female-identifying males.

We are in the early stages of opening women’s sports up to males.  Nonetheless, despite being a tiny percentage of participants, males are already dominating!  They’re crushing records, taking women’s spots on teams, pushing women off the podium, and more.  Trans destruction of women’s sports isn’t a hypothetical threat. It’s already happening.  And every day the numbers of males deciding to compete against girls and women is growing.

Women’s Spaces:  Males who identify as women are being given access to women-only spaces, such as shelters, prisons,  swimming areas, locker rooms and bathrooms.  This compromises the safety of girls and women.  It denies us our right to privacy, and subjects us to emotional distress.

Women-only spaces exist in part because of the realities of male violence against women.  Overwhelmingly, those who commit rape and other violent crimes are male.  (In 2010, males were the rapists in 98.1% of rapes reported by women.  They were the perpetrators in 92.5% of other violent sexual crimes.) There is no evidence that males who identify as female are less likely to commit these crimes than other males.  In fact, at least one study indicates that the rates of violence are the same for trans-identifying males as for other males.  And, of course, the propensity for greater male size and strength are part of what endangers women.

It should also be noted that there are indeed men who will take advantage of being able to declare themselves women specifically in order to gain access to women in vulnerable situations.  It is naïve to believe otherwise.

Girls and women are highly vulnerable in the female-only spaces males are infiltrating. These spaces are confined, and they include areas where people take off clothing, sleep, and are otherwise particularly exposed. In prisons, women are literally locked in with potential assailants. Many women in prison have experienced male violence and/or sexual abuse, as have women in shelters.  Because of the prevalence of violence against females in general, virtually any female-only space will contain girls and women who have been raped and otherwise assaulted.

Thus, even if individual trans-identifying males aren’t harmful, their presence can make girls and women justifiably very uncomfortable.  And our feelings matter.  Our need to have places where we feel safe matters, especially in locations like shelters where we are hiding and attempting to heal.   See this brief submitted to the Supreme Court in the Aimee Stephens case on behalf of a network of shelters, for example. It quotes shelter residents who experience PTSD when housed with males.

It should also be noted that many people feel uncomfortable in the presence of the opposite sex while urinating, showering, undressing, and washing blood-stained underwear in the sink after a menstrual period arrives unexpectedly.  Some parents are reporting that children are “holding it” all day so as to not use “all genders” bathrooms at school.  Some are refusing to drink water at school to minimize the need to pee, or even skipping school altogether.

Unfortunately, there are already plenty of examples of trans-identifying males hurting women in women-only spaces.  Five women have sued a homeless shelter in California because of their experiences with a trans-identified male housed in the shelter, for instance.  The women complained that this male watched them undress and shower, made lewd comments, showed them sexual pictures and videos, and made sexual advances.

Similarly, trans-identified male prisoner Karen White sexually assaulted four female inmates days after being sent to their prison.  Christopher Hambrook sexually assaulted women in a shelter, which he accessed by dressing as a woman.    These are not isolated instances.  Click here for many more examples.  And check out UK statistics on sexual assault, harassment and voyeurism in changing rooms at swimming pools and sports centers: almost 90% occur in mixed-sex facilities, even though these make up less than half of the total number of changing rooms.

More and more male convicts are announcing that they’re really women.  Government officials are not tracking this well in most places, including the U.S.  Since many law enforcement officials now report crimes by trans-identifying males as crimes committed by women, it’s getting even harder to follow what’s happening.  But we know that of 125 transgender individuals known to be in prison in England and Wales, 60 are convicted sex offenders.

Many males who declare themselves women retain their male reproductive anatomy.  In England, the vast majority do so.  And of course, castration does not stop rape.

No one is saying that transgender males seeking shelter should be left out on the street.  Shelters that exclude trans-identifying males from women’s spaces work hard to find places for them, and strongly support expanding such facilities.  That does not prevent those shelters from being attacked by trans activists.  The Vancouver Rape Relief and Women’s Shelter lost funding from the city of Vancouver as the result of a campaign led by trans activists angered by its women-only policy.  A dead rat was nailed to the shelter’s door and phrases like “DIE TERFS” and “Trans women are women” were scrawled across its walls and windows.  (TERF is a caustic slur that stands for “trans exclusionary radical feminists.”)

Other attacks on women’s rights

Much more could be said about the destruction of women’s rights now underway in the name of trans inclusion.  For example, Britain’s Labour Party appointed a male to serve as its “Women’s Officer,” and the New York State Democratic Party recently voted to let people from “two different genders” represent districts instead of one woman and one man.  (This means two males will be fine as long as one claims to be a woman.)

Billboards featuring the words “Woman, noun, adult human female” have been treated as hate speech and removed. This is part of a larger phenomenon where words and phrases like “vagina”, “breastfeeding”, and “pregnant woman” are being deemed off-limits as “trans-exclusionary.”  This is stripping women of our ability to discuss our bodies, our lives and our movement for liberation.

The list of measures attacking the rights of girls and women goes on and on.

Children are being hurt

Children are being fed scientifically inaccurate and misleading information.  They’re being told that humans are not sexually dimorphic and that grownups “guess” babies’ sexes, often getting it wrong.  The book “Sex Is A Funny Word” informs children that “some bodies have a penis” and “some bodies have a vulva” without mentioning any connection to biological sex until much later in the book.  There the main message is that girls and women can have penises, too.  Boys and men can have vulvas and vaginas. And it’s up to you to decide if you’re a girl or a boy.

Many children’s books purport to challenge gender stereotypes while actually promoting them.  “I have a girl brain but a boy body,” declares the hero of “I Am Jazz.”  Telling children they can be born in the wrong body is incredibly inappropriate!

Health professionals, schools, parents and others are all adhering to a “gender affirming” approach for sex-confused children.  Youngsters as young as 3 are being encouraged to change their names, pronouns, clothes, and bathrooms, and everyone else is required to go along with the new arrangement.  Girls who compress their breasts with binders are encouraged in this activity despite the discomfort and health risks.

Repeatedly we hear about very young children, preschoolers even, who supposedly know that their “assigned” sex is wrong.  People who push for transitioning these children have absolutely no understanding of child development.  (I say this as a parent and as someone who works with young children.)  Click here for an excellent article about small children’s understanding of sex.  Click here for an important analysis of the obvious bias and unscientific nature of research purportedly confirming early trans identity.

As young as age 10 or 11, children are put on puberty blockers.  Virtually everyone who goes on puberty blockers moves on to cross-sex hormones.  As young adults, they may undergo major surgeries such as breast removal, hysterectomies, penis removal, and alteration of the vagina as part of constructing a faux penis.

Gender clinicians claim to be using caution, so as to only recommend transitioning when appropriate.  But whistleblowers and others report that those who urge caution are often chastised and ignored.  As one Ohio woman who transitioned to male puts it, “[t]here’s hardly any overlap between the directives of the [world transgender] SOC [Standards of Care] and the reality of care patients get.”  Clinicians didn’t discuss the full implications of transitioning with her and her transitioning peers, she says. “What the SOC describes and the care people get before getting cleared for hormones and surgery are miles apart.”

The number of children experiencing gender dysphoria is skyrocketing.  And warning bells should be going off for everyone who cares about children.

For one thing, 80 to 90% of children with gender dysphoria grow out of it once they go through puberty.  By blocking puberty, adults deny children the chance to become comfortable with their bodies, delivering them instead to lifelong medical intervention.

Many people, including some health professionals, describe puberty blockers as benign and completely reversible.  But these statements are not backed by scientific data.   According to endocrinologist William Malone, the puberty blocker/cross-sex protocol is being used “in a state of profound scientific ignorance.”  Carl Heneghan of the Centre of Evidence-based Medicine at Oxford University has described the use of puberty blockers for gender dysphoria as “an unregulated live experiment on children.”

It isn’t just reproductive organs that develop during puberty. The brain, bones and other parts of the body develop, as well.   We don’t know the physical, intellectual and social impacts of halting puberty.  (Complaints by adults taking the same sorts of drugs prescribed to children for puberty blockage should also give us pause.)

Early puberty blockage followed by cross-sex hormones is highly likely to cause permanent infertility.  It also greatly reduces the chances of a person being able to achieve sexual gratification.  Children are not competent to make decisions about puberty and cross-sex chemical treatments.  They cannot understand the value of fertility and sexual enjoyment.  They cannot understand the other health risks associated with these treatments.

Girls and women who take testosterone have a much higher risk of heart attacks—four times the risk of other females, twice that of males.  They are likely to experience vaginal atrophy which can lead to incontinence.  Males who take estrogen significantly increase their risks of blood clots and strokes.  Their risk is two to three times higher than that for men not taking estrogen and for women.

And who knows what else flows from cross-sex hormones.  As endocrinologist William Malone explains, “It should be no surprise that if you take male hormones and put it into female physiology at excess levels, that bad things are going to happen.”  The same is true for female hormones placed within male physiology, the doctor notes.

Surgeries, of course, pose risks in and of themselves.  All sorts of things can go wrong with anesthesiology and with surgical procedures.  If you have a strong stomach, watch this video.  It’s somewhat rambling but provides a glimpse of the hellish sorts of things that can go wrong when doctors try to create a faux penis.

And let’s not forget a tragic risk associated with chemical or surgical transitions: not being able to return to your prior body if you change your mind about transitioning.  Testosterone can permanently lower women’s voices, alter their facial structures, and change their skin and hair, for example.  Distressing as these changes may be, they pale before the distress of regretting having had breasts or a penis cut off and building a faux penis where one’s vagina used to be.  Men who grow breasts and then decide to be men, need to undergo breast reduction surgery.  (Patrick, for example, faces this surgery, because he took estrogen, but now identifies as a boy again.)

The number of detransitioners is growing. Those choosing to reverse course often find themselves ostracized and de-platformed by the trans community. Read their stories for invaluable insights on the influences, such as social media and affirming doctors, that led them to the medical decisions they grew to regret.

Affirming social and medical transition for children has another risk that’s important to acknowledge.  It may leave other root causes of their gender dysphoria unaddressed, such as autism (there is a high incidence of autism among gender dysphoric individuals), sexual abuse, other abuse, bereavement, and being bullied by homophobes.  Some health professionals have argued that “[c]onfirming disgust in natal sex or external sexual organs, especially for those with prior childhood trauma, risks medical collusion with, or reenacting of abuse.”

Lesbians and gays are being hurt

The extremist trans agenda undercuts the rights of homosexuals.

Lesbians are being pressured by transwomen (males who say they’re women) to have sex with them.  These transwomen claim that they’re lesbians, too, and that rejecting their advances is “transphobic.”  When lesbians fight back against the pressure they’re experiencing, things get even worse.  Lesbians have been excluded from Pride parades for carrying signs proclaiming that lesbians don’t have penises.

Many children steered towards puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones would become gay or lesbian adults if they went through puberty instead.   Some have described the “transing” of children as “conversion therapy” for gays and lesbians.  But concerns about these expressed by homosexual leaders have prompted accusations of bigotry instead of discussion and action to protect children.

It is interesting to note that some of the most virulently anti-gay countries support transgenderism and TWAW.   Take a look at photos of the 2015 Iranian women’s football (soccer) team.  Eight players – a majority of the team –  are reportedly males transitioning to being women.  Homosexuality is illegal in Iran, but transgender surgery and “transitioning” to another sex is not.

One of the world’s oldest gay rights organizations – UK Stonewall—took on transgender issues in 2015.  Frustrated by the extremist agenda embraced by Stonewall, nearly 10,000 people recently signed a petition requesting a discussion with the organization about alternative views.  Rebuffed in that effort, they have now announced the launch of a new rival organization called LGB Alliance.  Participants include former employees and supporters of Stonewall, including Simon Fanshawe, one of Stonewall’s co-founders, and others.  The new Alliance maintains that homosexuality is same-sex (not same-gender) attraction, sex is not “assigned” at birth, and having women-only spaces is not transphobic.  The group will support freedom of speech, accurate biological definitions of sex, and fact-based education.

Freedom of speech is being trampled

Insisting that a person born biologically male must, upon their request, be recognized by everyone as female, regardless of material reality, amounts to a serious assault on democratic rights. This is tantamount to allowing a religious person to insist that their view of reality must be accepted by all others without question.

Whenever anybody challenges the idea that “transwomen are women”, whenever anyone objects to trans ideologues infringing on the rights of others, or expresses concern about children, here’s what happens.  We get labeled as “transphobes” and “bigots”, and viciously attacked.  We get fired.  People prevent us from giving speeches and being on panels.  We have to fight to prevent the de-publishing of our peer-reviewed studies.   We have to fight to get our books published.  We get kicked off Twitter.  We find ourselves dragged before human rights tribunals.   Complaints are filed against us and investigations launched.   We get hate mail that threatens horrific violence.  We even get assaulted.

It’s a new McCarthyism. Freedom of speech is being severely restricted by a bullying mob that increasingly acts with the backing of law enforcement officials.

The “right side of history”

Let’s get back to the supposed rationale for the sweeping changes referenced in this article:  protecting the rights of transgender individuals.  Ironically, the extremist agenda does far more harm to those who are transgender than good.

In fact, a lot of transgender people strongly oppose the extreme trans agenda.  They do not agree that transwomen are women, or that transmen are men.  They are appalled by the attacks on women’s rights, homosexual rights, and the health of children.  And they are angered by how trans extremists treat people who disagree with them, including trans people.

As more and more people become aware of what’s going on in the name of advancing transgender rights, there will be a backlash that will harm trans people, among others.  As Seven Hex puts it, “the trans-lobby does not represent me or my interests – in fact, the biggest threat to transsexuals like me right now, is the trans-lobby.”

Too many left-leaning individuals and organizations are taking their cues on trans issues from trans ideologues.  Attempting to advance civil rights and to help trans people, they are doing neither.

Share this article.  Visit sites like peaktrans.org, feministcurrent.com, womensliberationfront.org, fairplayforwomen.com and other sites linked here.  And fight back.  The extremist trans agenda sounds good at first.  But it is hurting girls and women, children, gays and lesbians, and trans people themselves.  It must be stopped.

Contact Lucinda Stoan for more information on organizing happening within the Pacific Northwest on these issues. (lucinda.stoan@earthlink.net) 

 

18 comments

  1. I am from the US and her analysis on the Stephens case is not factually accurate. She is using WOLF’s discredited talking points on the issue, which is a big problem with gender critical activists here in the US: too many conspiracy theories and they are following WOLF, a “radical feminist” org with deep-green ideology that is more misanthropic than feminist. The Sixth Circuit Court (court below the Supreme Court) ruled in Stephens favor and stated: “Tolerating Stephens’s understanding of her sex and gender identity is not tantamount to supporting it.” The employer appealed it to the Supreme Court.

    If Stephens loses in the Supreme Court, it could void out the 1989 Price Waterhouse decision that gives some protections to gender non-conforming people in the workplace. A Stephens loss would be devastating.

    Also, as Marxists, you should be supporting Stephens. To support her employer, whose SC appeal is being paid for the the Alliance for Defending Freedom, a far right monster of an organization that opposes trans as well as lgb and women.

    Please don’t contribute to the further dumbing down of gender critical circles in the States with pieces like this.

    • as Marxists, we should be supporting materialism and not idealism, as this claim that a biological man physically IS a woman and not merely a man identifying as one due to some metaphysical, untestable, subjective feeling blatantly is. this is all gonna look as dumb as the salem witch trials or bloodletting in 100 years.

  2. This is comprehensive and fact-based. As a survivor of male sexual trauma, I want my sex-based protections to be respected.

    Many who identify as trans do not believe that men become woman. Miranda Yardly, Fionne Orlander and Jenn Smith come to mind.

    There are now over 7,000 de-trans telling their stories of railroading into gender surgeries, instead of respecting a differential diagnosis and treating underlying psych co-morbidities before having had healthy breast tissue popped off without medical indication.

    The left has abandoned women and girls.

    I appreciate hearing more about womens’ rights and our sex-based rights.

    We need more public dialogues about this exceptional claim made without exceptional evidence provided and impacting 51% population.

    I’ll respect gender when they respect my sex-based rights.

  3. I love this article, am unfazed by “Brandy”‘s pithy putdown and would like to adapt it to French for the TRADFEM volunteer radfem translation website.
    May I, Ms. Stoan? (Your e-mail addy seems to be invalid.)

  4. It would help their cause, if radical feminists didn’t prosecute and bully interested women already on their side, just because they have their own thoughts and insights into life.

  5. It’s not about “bullying” or “prosecuting” or “putting down”, it is about reality and facts. This is a political matter, yet you are treating it like a personal putdown. Why can’t issues be debated politically? And I am not a radical feminist, I am a socialist feminist.

    A Stephens loss in the US Supreme Court would be a huge setback for gender non-conforming people in the workplace. The author of this piece is repeating the far-right ADF talking points that WOLF has put out in their brief. And Brandy Baker is my real name, unlike the author, who is not even using her real name.

    Again I ask, why is a Marxist journal promoting a piece that is siding with an employer in an employment discrimination case? WOLF has sewed a lot of division and confusion on the Stephens case in their siding with the far right. All WOLF had to do was ask the Supreme Court to hold up the Sixth Court’s decision. They sould have been thrilled with the Sixth’s ruling. You do your audience no favors in promoting these discredited talking points.

    • PS For the record, I do not care that the author is not using her real name, it doesn’t matter to me. I was responding to the person above using my name is quotes, I was not criticizing the pseudonym. If we want to be evidence-based, factual, and be taken seriously by the larger public, we have to stop seeing political crits within our own circles as “personal attacks”. I waged no personal attacks here.

      Marx said to question everything.

    • It’s not siding with an employer; it’s pointing out that the ACLU could have made a different argument, namely opposing dress codes based on sex-role stereotypes.

      The author writes: “Stephens and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) could have argued against the company’s dress code, claiming that it is sex discriminatory.  But that’s not what they’re doing.   Instead, they’re seeking a new definition of ‘sex’ in the federal civil rights statute that addresses workplaces.  They want that definition to include ‘gender identity’ so that anyone who says they’re a woman (including Stephens) will be considered a woman.  If the Supreme Court agrees to that change, its decision will affect other federal civil rights legislation as well, such as Title IX which addresses sex discrimination in education, including school athletics.”

      I doubt too many people on the far right would be promoting an end to sex-role stereotypes.

  6. Since Brandy has challenged WoLF’s assessment of the “Harris” case currently before the US Supreme Court, readers might want to learn for themselves what WoLF has to say. This recent reply to a sadly mistaken article posted by Women’s Place UK, is a good place to start.
    http://womensliberationfront.org/if-aimee-stephens-wins-women-lose/

    I’m a longtime member of the ACLU, and CCR (Center on Constitutional Rights) as well, two organizations that ought to be pushing back against this retrograde attempt, under the guise of gender self-identification, to demolish many of the gains of the feminist and labor movements over the past hundred years. Unfortunately, both groups have drunk the Kool-Aid, and instead are front and center in courtroom battles on the “trans women are women” side. Feminists and socialists (not identitarians!) have thus- on this one issue – joined forces with people we might not otherwise be talking with. If you (Brandy) are not happy about that, then do what is necessary to bring our more expected “allies” back into a working relationship with material and biological reality, which is a fundamental basis of Marxism. Be sure to read the linked WoLF article all the way to the end, to read what Simon Fanshawe, one of the founders of Stonewall in the UK, has to say about coalitions. He offers a historical lesson well worth heeding.

  7. i just wanna say thank you for posting articles like this. im in a party full of mostly elderly folks who dont seem to be aware this madness is happening. i feel isolated sometimes being a marxist(and thus obviously a materialist) surrounded by leftists that are — unfortunately against all logic — dogmatically in agreement that this is the next frontier of liberation. no matter what i say, no matter how nicely i say it, if it even hints disagreement, then i get called a bigot and ganged up on by people i once considered allies. its just a breathe of fresh air to see that im not alone in seeing this for what it is: idealism masquerading as materialism to seem more legitimate. genuinely, thank you

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.