Thursday, May 16, 2013

The sparkle of your china

Just returned from the local March Against Monsanto meeting. This event will be nationwide on May 25th.

Next meeting before the event will be at the Swamp Rabbit Cafe and Grocery, next Thursday at 6pm, yall come. In the meantime, please support Vernon Hugh Bowman in his fight against Monsanto's legal abuse.


As promised on the air today, here is the link to today's show. I started out a little jumbled, since we had some technical issues (we weren't in our usual studio and the acoustics were somewhat off), but I changed microphones, finally got going and tried to make some sense. Our first subject was the confrontation between trans activists and an anarchist group called Deep Green Resistance, while they were selling feminist books at the Law and Disorder Conference at Portland State University this past weekend. I react pretty strongly to defacing books or otherwise rudely rousting politicos at a table because it has happened to me many times; harassed by bikers at outdoor festivals for lefty literature, jeered at by fundamentalists at Occupy, and so forth and so on (in fact, I wrote about one such incident HERE). So, I asked, what IS hate speech and how should we handle it? One's person's hate speech is another person's Gospel (literally!), so what should we do in a pluralistic society that values the First Amendment?

Aside: I used to warn radical feminists that their eagerness to call everything (such as porn) 'hate speech' would some day come back to bite them in the ass, and here we are.

Increasingly, I am puzzled by trans activists' fixation on radical feminists (whom they call 'radscum'). Why not focus on fundamentalist right wingers who are far more numerous and say the same things? More to the point, the radscum do not seek to deny GLBT equal rights or try to keep folks from transitioning; they just argue (endlessly, relentlessly) about the physiological and social meaning(s) of "woman" and "female". The Christian fundamentalist Republicans think trans people should be forced to use their birth names on their drivers licenses and if they don't, locked up in mental institutions and/or arrested for fraud. Who is worse? And who has more power to enforce their prejudices?

Why not go after the REAL scum?

I'm ready when you are.


Today's blog post title comes from Steely Dan's excellent album, COUNTDOWN TO ECSTASY (1973).

As I continuously plow through Shantideva's The Way of the Bodhisattva, I just keep thinking of the lyrics.

Would you take me by the hand
Would you take me by the hand
Can you show me
The shine of your Japan
The sparkle of your china
Can you show me
Bodhisattva, Bodhisattva
I'm gonna sell my house in town
I'm gonna sell my house in town
And I'll be there
To shine in your Japan
To sparkle in your China
Yes I'll be there
Bodhisattva, Bodhisattva, Bodhisattva...

Bodhisattva - Steely Dan


Anonymous said...

Wow, another cis feminist telling trans women they're doing it wrong- I'll certainly know better than to click over from Feministe next time.

DaisyDeadhead said...

Wow, another young person who can't read. Literacy ain't what it used to be.

I asked a series of questions; I didn't 'make statements'--or tell anyone what they should do. You should probably learn to answer such questions, or don't call yourself a political person and/or do not clutter up political spaces with your stupidity and inability to do so.

Now THAT is telling someone what to do. See the difference now?


DaisyDeadhead said...

PS: It took me over 3 days to reply to this without saying "fuck off"--see how much better I am getting, yall? (giggle)

Anonymous said...

Those questions were ignorant and smug. Your response to being called out - dismissive. Go educate yourself - read the responses at Feministe, read trans blogs. It's not difficult to figure out. I suspect you of being highly disingenuous.

Anonymous said...

Pretty pathetic defense, Daisy. Calling people "stupid" when they criticize you -- how persuasive. What crap. Yes, it was phrased as a question, but it was a rhetorical question; your opinion was obvious. And the question was accompanied by factual assertions that were entirely false -- so much so that the assumption of good faith I give to people doesn't apply. Feh.

Donna L from Feministe.

PS: Any attempt to call me "stupid" will make you look even more foolish and ignorant than you already do.

DaisyDeadhead said...

I am tired of the elite college girls pulling rank on redneck-Grandma. Its getting old, pardon expression. Tired of being ganged-up on, but its as predictable as you accuse me of being.

Once more, with feeling. I asked: why the obsession with the radscum and not others who say the same things? Its a simple question, and I meant it. I don't get it. The Vatican (to name only one of a million examples) say the same things, so why do they not rate the same ire? And you have not answered, but instead, deflect the question and get mad at me for asking. This is the modus operandi from the Third Wave. Just get mad and fulminate about my inferiority.... but still, NO ANSWERS. Where I come from, people who can't answer the question are dismissed as 1) mere troublemakers, or 1) stupid. I was certainly given no such latitude when I first became political and entered activist spaces.

I am tired of people getting angry at me for asking questions, since I am 'supposed to know the answers already'--but in truth, I don't know. I really don't. It puzzles me A LOT and I really wish someone, anyone, would address the question instead of getting mad at me for asking. If you don't know, say so. But ranking me for asking is a form of outright elitism/classism and ageism. No, I don't know and I don't understand it, so I ask. Then I get yelled at for asking. Over and over and over. This just makes me more curious about why this situation is considered so uniquely volatile.

Anonymous #2. You say "its not hard to figure out"... well, for me, it certainly has been. Some help in pointing out what is obvious to you and not to me, and actually sharing what you know, might be nice.... but I have learned not to expect that from Feministe readers. Yes indeed, I am ignorant. I did not attend college. I am not from your class of people. I am also old enough that I often do not understand what people are talking about or understand the lingo; I rarely know what is trendy, hip and acceptable to say and what is uncool and beyond the pale. (Example: I still do not feel comfortable using the word 'queer' and find it extremely offensive ... and since I strongly associate it with biker-violence that I've witnessed, I will probably always feel that way. However, my sensibility is not the dominant one and is not respected as valid.) I have never hidden my ignorance, and I have made it clear MANY times.

Telling me to 'educate myself' is pretty disingenuous also... what am I supposed to be reading that I have not read already? I have read Julia Serano, Kate Bornstein, Leslie Feinberg and all of those folks. I religiously follow Natalie Reed on Twitter and I love her writing... however, these people are not obsessed with the radscum, thus, I do not get the answer to this question from them. In fact, Reed was pointedly singled out and attacked by Cathy Brennan (who also called ME stupid and a 'collaborator', for the record) and she still did not let it get to her and did not rise to the bait. Thus, I will not learn this answer from any of them. I am asking the people who think throwing a burrito at someone for selling a book is an acceptable response. If you do (and I take it that you do?), then I need to know why you are instead not throwing that burrito at someone like Pat Robertson or (better yet) Jim DeMint.

2b continued

DaisyDeadhead said...

Reply to Anon continued.

No, I do not read responses at Feministe, since I have often been terribly devastated by overt hostility at Feministe in the past. Besides that, I guest-blogged there some time ago, and all of my posts (about 7 or 8 total) have since been deleted with no explanation given when I asked. (they were on the site for a couple of years... so if they were offensive, it seemed to take them a couple of years to do the offending.) One of these posts included photos which probably can not be replaced. (One of the guest-posts was about an African-American trans police officer in Atlanta, BTW.) I post there on Sundays (and I do visit other blogs posted there on Sunday, which I consider a real treat) but have stopped posting there on other days, since it just isn't a good idea. I don't like to be put down any more than you do.

Anyway, think what you like. But your responses are exactly indicative of the problem. Nobody is allowed to ask questions, even someone who is on record (since the late 70s) as being on your side and who wants you to succeed. I have no idea what you would do here in upstate South Carolina, around rabid tea-partiers who really DO wish you harm, and wonder if you can even tell the difference between them and me. Do you respond to ALL questions in the same manner, or just those from old feminists? What do you say to right-wingers who ask truly hostile questions?

Something tells me, you have the luxury of tuning them out. I don't.

Locally I am on WOLI radio every day at 5pm. I will eventually be responding to your comments, since I already went on record as saying I would be shamed for asking in the first place, and you have not departed from that script. The snobbery of the established Left (including feminists) is one of our ongoing topics, since we believe it is largely why our region has been forsaken and sacrificed to the right-wing, make it safe for them to use as a base of operations. In light of this, starting a dialogue with us (even as dumb as we are), might be a good thing... but no, I don't expect that to happen.

I can't even find out why my posts were deleted. I don't expect much to change.

Sorry I got mad and called you stupid. But assuming people actually know things, when they are ASKING QUESTIONS in the first place... well, I just don't understand why you would think that. Unless it just makes you feel better.

Namaste, yall.

bryce said...

*passes out gay marriage leaflet to

st8: "so what's this about? i'm not married so why should u be?"

a: go educate yourself!!!! ignorant!!!!


since that would get u executed in the upstate. even just the leaflet might get u executed lol.

remember i was telling u about 'tumblerization of everyday life'? sjw taking over lgbt spaces - be afraid, be very afraid: "trash yr travis tritt cds bitches!!!!" (u might find this useful)

b strong my love. memorial day show rocked. downloaded &listened in cayce. xoxo

DaisyDeadhead said...

Thanks Bryce! LOTS of downloads on yesterday's show! It was FUN to play the antiwar songs, too.

Notice to the haters: Please check the guidelines above. No more insults. No more anonymous comments. If you can't sign your comments AND say your piece without cruelty and condescension, please leave.

THIS, as I said, is the problem. If only all this nastiness were directed at the Tea Party instead of at lil ole me, we could get rid of Nikki Haley by lunchtime. (sigh)

And rest assured, they know it too.

Mama Moretti said...

Daisy, I'm proud of you for not reading replies and fighting with them over there. Seriously, I know how hard that is for you. You aren't missing anything except the usual proud self righteousness, marked by people saying "THIS!" to Donna's outrage that you don't already know what she knows. In short, the usual. And still no answer to your question, so it would be for naught. Move along, nothing to see here.

It used to take much less to get them all worked up. I've noticed these same peeps don't post on websites like gender trender and face the haters directly, so they take it out on a safe target, someone who has already shown empathy. After all, shaming is no fun unless someone will play along and BE shamed. I'm also interested in why blogs like GT and Kathy Brennan get *huge numbers* of hits. Why do they have the time to read that hateful shit, but no time for real politics? Not as much fun, nothing to wallow in. You can't be self righteous with fundys, doesn't work.

Chances are, they really *do* see throwing a burrito at some girls selling books, as real politics. How would they know the difference?

Bryce, I loved that article you linked, especially:

Seriously, I'm just not down with:

[] The derailing of conversations to debate semantics

[] The need to process it all publicly (look at me look at me look at meeee! I am the very MOST aware of my privilege and am therefore the very BEST progressive on the entire internet!)

[] The righteousness

[] The intolerance and inability to respect that those who share your values might not share your opinions on this particular subject

This is where this kind of conversation begins to feel more like liberal bullying, where the only correct response is agreeing and acquiescing. Any other response is seen as ignorant at best, hateful at worst.

THIS! (lol)

Feminism was bound to come up with their own implosion, imitating your much beloved (j/k!) Barnard conference implosion. They enjoy the binging and perging. The MRAs are happier every day.

See you later, you know where. I won't further shame you by telling the whole world which online games you play! :P lol

DaisyDeadhead said...

To the person who threatened me: I have your IP address and your ISP. Be advised. Comcast doesn't allow threats and you are hereby in violation of your service contract.

Observation: Last time I had to worry about threats was from irate Bob Jones University people. (From one group of crazed fundies to another, can't tell em apart without a scorecard.) I've received 4 vicious messages from Donna's posse since late last night, none signed. (Two appear to be from the same deranged individual, the Comcast subscriber mentioned above.)

Hm. I don't think any group of feminists has ever physically threatened me before, and I have been involved in some pretty nasty ideological in-fighting in my life... over decades, even. Yet, I write a couple of paragraphs expressing an opinion (using no epithets of any kind!) and this is what I get? Incredible!

What exactly has changed over the past decade or so, that makes this language acceptable? Its worth thinking about, isn't it?

MM, I know, right? I am sure that there will be even more posts now about how I deserve to be threatened (or actually harmed), how I brought it all on myself, etc. Just like those evil DGR people brought on the physical attack by selling books! (I'd really rather not read that stuff; how depressing is that?)

Physical threats over a blog post?!? (Over some BOOKS?!?) The only thing required for evil to thrive is for good women to do nothing. Feminism is finished, somebody alert Paul Elam so he can declare victory.

And we STILL have to deal with Nikki Haley. (sigh)

Excuse me, but I need chocolate.

senchi said...

d, chk fb msgs plz. under siege.
long story - tried 2 make short !

"why us & not demint?"

grls = ez 2 bully

SOCIALIZATION: dissin grls all thr life - 2afraid2 confront MEN, GODS, STATE !

Anonymous said...

To Daisy and "Mama Moretti":

Actually, both I and other people commenting at Feministe did try to explain how much real damage is done with the anti-trans radical feminists (I don't like the term radscum, since I think it plays into their hands), why they upset people so much (it has a great deal to do with expectations vs. lack of expectations), why it's possible to oppose more than one group of people at one time, and why Daisy's statements about things that radical feminists supposedly don't do were entirely false. Kind of like your fatuous, sycophantic characterization of the general tenor of the Feministe comments, as if they consisted of mindless cheerleading. Nonsense. Oh, sorry if I'm taking too long to respond to Daisy's question. The last time I checked, my comment hadn't yet even appeared.

And the fact is that I do have time for real politics, and have had time for several decades now. I may not quite have reached Daisy's vintage, but I started personally engaging with political activity by going to antiwar demonstrations in the late 1960's. And grew up hearing my father's and mother's stories about their own political activities, dating back to my father handing out leaflets for Al Smith in 1928, when he was 8 years old.

And yes, not that I have to justify myself, but I do argue with conservatives and right-wingers about trans issues all the time. Few or none of them, by the way, engage in rhetoric as vile as the people on gendertrender or their ilk. (About whom you obviously know nothing, if you think that confronting them in their home venue does any good at all.)

Not to mention that I view the very fact of my existence, living in the world as I do, as something of a political act.

Look, I like a lot of Natalie Reed's writing too, but I happen to disagree very strongly with her arguments about anti-trans radical feminists not being worth confronting.

If Daisy's question was, in fact, a genuine question -- and I'm still skeptical, because it was immediately followed by a series of statements indicating exactly what her own opinion is -- I think I've answered it.

And although I'm much more of a First Amendment defender than many people I know, hate groups like DGR have no entitlement to a table at a conference. "Free speech" has nothing to do with it. I happen to believe it's extremely important to deny people like that a platform to express their views, as much as possible. Nobody at that kind of conference would give a table to people spouting equivalent racist or homophobic rhetoric, and the DGR people are no better. More than 40 years ago, I stood next to my mother (a Holocaust survivor and child refugee) as she confronted some old Nazi handing out anti-Semitic literature from a table on a Manhattan street, and knocked it all onto the ground. Good for her. Too bad for him. And too bad for DGR. Maybe some of them will wake up and realize that their antediluvian opinions have no place in this world.


DaisyDeadhead said...

Donna, I deleted a nasty comment from someone who claimed to be male and said you were 'old enough to be his mum' ... as well as a couple of really nasty, whack ones... but no others.

If DGR had no right to table at the conference, the issue should have been taken up with the people who allowed them to do that, i.e. The Law and Disorder conference organizers. As I said, I have been in exactly that position before: "We didn't know that what you were going to say/distribute was ____" (usually regarded as unpatriotic or anti-military, in our case) and then, bounced out, or (worse) sacrificed to the bikers or the mob. I personally do not believe that the organizers 'didn't know'--because that is the bullshit I have also heard over the years. When you allow (example), anarchists, Yippies or Occupiers to set up a literature table, WHAT DO YOU EXPECT? They were either negligent or stupid, and in any event, DGR thought they had the right to be there. They asked and were given permission; it was the Law and Disorder people who hedged and acted like (what we used to call) 'shit-liberals' who pretended they had no clue what was going on. Lierre Keith has a reputation -- so why didn't they expect controversy? (I already hate what she says about vegetarianism but until now was unaware of her anti-trans crap.) The Law and Disorder organizers who sanctioned her involvement should have been the ones to be confronted. The DGR people got clearance for what they were doing, like it or not. THEY should not have been attacked for doing what they got permission to do. Go after the people who instead GAVE THEM THE PERMISSION.

Having said that... do you think it is a good thing to suppress books, trash them with magic-markers or throw burritos at people who sell them, whom you disagree with? I don't. I have worked in retail establishments where the fundies have invaded and trashed (examples) Bruce Weber photography books or Alan Moore graphic novels as obscenity, and I consider that no different. I don't like seeing this kind of intolerance from the Left that I associate with the Right...and in these parts, it is ALWAYS from the Right. I do not want to imitate the worst of fascist behavior. I have worked in bookstores where I have sold Mein Kampf, Ann Coulter, Mark Fuhrman, The Bell Curve, anti-immigration books, Jerry Falwell, all of that. I also sold books that were amazing and that I was proud of selling ... I don't think you can have one without the other in a large bookstore.

If we can do it to them when WE are in charge, they can do it to us when THEY are in charge, is the thing. Free speech cuts both ways, as does denial of free speech. When you are comfortably in the majority (as your mother was in New York, trashing nazi literature), that is an easy call... but the same thing could happen in reverse, in another area of the country. And that is something I am VERY aware of, in the south, where MY VIEWS are the minority views.

2b continued

DaisyDeadhead said...

Response to Donna continued.

In 1978, I marched in Skokie against the nazi party, as the police protected them... but living in the South has made me wonder if our rioting against them was a good idea. (I also rioted against the kkk here, go to 3:18-3:22, where you can see me front and center, hollering.) Should we have just ignored them instead? (is that even possible?) The attendant court case/ACLU's stand made me wonder if we hadn't given them lots more press attention than they otherwise would have gotten. Similarly, I wonder if I would even have HEARD of this group Deep Green Resistance if this whole event had not become "a thing". A few days ago, I blogged here about the Blue Ridge Christian Academy and their 'science quiz' (not) and how the fact that it went viral turned into a unexpected financial windfall for them. They were expected to CLOSE DOWN and now, they are going to get the money to continue, since they are now perceived as being bullied and have received worldwide sympathy. Will DGR be in a similar position?

I DO NOT know the answers to these questions, which is why I asked them. I wanted to DISCUSS them. I pointedly asked what to do when one person's Gospel is another's hate speech... I MEANT THAT. I am sincerely interested in talking about that. Instead, my whole post got written off as transphobic and I was mocked, and incidentally, nobody really addressed these free speech issues that are VERY close to my heart. Asking questions does not mean I have the answers.... in fact, it meant I DID NOT KNOW and wanted some input from others; I arrive at my political conclusions from consensus and discussion. I didn't want knee-jerk bullshit, which is what "you are a cis woman telling trans women they are doing it wrong" IS. I didn't tell trans women SHIT. I ASKED about whether this might do more harm than good, and if that did not come across, its totally MY FAULT for not being a good enough writer. I KNOW I DID mention that I am triggered by the whole "we are gonna trash your table, hippies" phenomenon... which bothers me A LOT. And as I said above, I am TIRED of MY triggers and MY issues getting short shrift from young people and people who do not share MY history... yet it is understood that I am automatically supposed to respect theirs.

Further, I am very wary of the whole atmosphere of "call outs" and PC posturing. Yes, everyone is very politically right-on and correct and always has been. Everybody wants to beat up on the person who has dared say the 'wrong' thing. Again, I used to do the same thing, but now I am wary of where all of that leads. I have had it done to me too many times to now find it acceptable.

I am not going over to Feministe and get verbally abused. Been there, done that. It will only make me upset; is this your intention? Shaming me and upsetting me? I am trying to move away from Irish Alzheimer's (you forget everything but the grudges) and instead learn to move beyond the name-calling... but I am not so spiritually advanced that I don't get very defensive. I said I was a redneck, and I meant it; when people take certain SUPERIOR TONES with me, I still react. The best thing is not to read that stuff in the first place.

Thank you for your reply. I hope this has been intelligible.

Mama Moretti said...

" I stood next to my mother (a Holocaust survivor and child refugee) as she confronted some old Nazi handing out anti-Semitic literature from a table on a Manhattan street, and knocked it all onto the ground. Good for her. Too bad for him. "

How brave. " some old nazi" And what if they had outnumbered her? Would she have done it then? The DGR people were outnumbered so you got brave and self righteous. Next time it might be *you* who is outnumbered. If you think it's ok to do this to them you must think it's ok when it happens to you. That's what Daisy is saying. You ignored the free speech aspects of her post - concentrated on 1 sentence about transpeople. Why? Because you saw opportunity for 'callout culture' and self righteousness and you couldn't resist it. I did read your posts on Feministe, unlike Daisy, and that is what I saw. You couldn't wait to say f-you to Daisy. Over there for an audience - not here. Everyone pats you on the head to say 'poor baby' - so do you feel better now? Grow the fuck up! High school! I hated high school the first time and that is what these callouts ammount to.

bryce said...

MM, tell us how u really feel!

Donna i read the comments.

Q: why this imediate spiteful callout when someone who tries hard 2b ally says ONE thing u don't like? i find lack of honor & trust in feminism 2b super fucked up, hope lbgt doesnt get like that. but i do see it more &more on tumblr.

if it ever gets as common other places as it is there, i'm out.

DaisyDeadhead said...

Bryce, good question. I think MM has a point: she wanted to perform for an audience. Otherwise, why not come over here and talk to me and sign her NAME to her post (which I would have recognized), instead of simply posting an anonymous drive-by insult (that I assumed was from some tumblr sjw person!) guaranteed to piss me off? Because then she could go back to Feministe and tattle about how disrespectful I was to her. High school, indeed.

As Elvis Costello once said, its all so calculated, she's got a calculator.

Notice I responded carefully here, in a long two-parter, and have since been ignored. DIALOGUE was not the goal. Shaming and being superior WAS. This is why I refuse to play along at Feministe; oodles of threads melt down into just this kind of oneupwomanship with the constant "calling out." And OUCH! That remark about trust and honor HURT, Bryce!

Today on our show: Amelia Pena will be talking about domestic violence programs locally. A Christian, I doubt she even calls herself a feminist (I'll ask her though!) but nonetheless works rings around these ultra-PC feminists who spent all their time ridiculing people for political heresy of one sort or another.

Increasingly, these are the people I am eager to work with, not the 'ideologically correct' who don't really like to get their hands dirty.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous drive by insult? I DID SIGN MY NAME TO MY COMMENTS! What in the world are you talking about? If you are accusing me of posting without signing my name, please provide proof. Because I didn't. Even though I would have every right to. By the way, Donna happens to be my real name. I don't even use a screen name that's different from my own.

And if you don't want people to respond at Feministe to what you post at Feministe, don't post a link to it there. Hello? What do you expect?


PS: Believe it or not, I've been swamped at work all day. I don't check your blog regularly, and I haven't had time to give you a substantive response, which would require a lot more than 5 minutes. I will get to it. But you're hardly in a position to complain that someone doesn't respond to you quickly enough here, when you refuse to respond to anything at Feministe. You can't have it both ways.

Anonymous said...

"How brave. 'some old nazi' And what if they had outnumbered her? Would she have done it then?"

Daisy, this is acceptable? With friends like this, you don't need enemies.

And I'll tell MM exactly what my mother would have done: exactly the same thing she did when she was 14 years old in 1937, staying with her grandparents in Sulzburg in the Schwarzwald (she lived in Berlin), and was taking some Jewish kindergarteners for a walk in the forest, and was attacked by a group of Hitlerjugend who threw her and all the children in a pond and tried to drown them. She fought them off singlehandedly and fished all the children out. And that's not the only time she was attacked before she finally was able to get out in late 1938.

I have nothing against Daisy personally, and had always thought of her as being a trans ally. You, on the other hand, really are demonstrating yourself to be both contemptible and vicious.

Somehow it's OK for Daisy not to respond to comments at Feministe, even though she posts links there, because she finds people "hostile," but I'm criticized for not responding here quickly enough, when I get addressed like this? And when I only commented here in the first place because Daisy ignored people's responses to her post at Feministe more than a week ago? Again, a real double standard.

By the way, I've never before heard of a non-trans person as familiar as MM seems to be with both gendertrender and cathy brennan, who didn't also share some or all of the views expressed there. Given her sneering, dismissive attitude, it wouldn't surprise me.


Anonymous said...

By the way, the "you" to whom the contemptible and vicious remark was directed wasn't you, Daisy. It was MM for essentially accusing my mother of cowardice, and of standing up to hatred only when she was "safe." If my mother were still alive, I'd enjoy seeing MM try to say that to her face.


Willard said...


Coming in a bit late, but I'm game to try and answer your questions in the last bit of the post. Here's a list of trans activists, only a few of whom I immediately recognized as going anti-radfem tears every once in a while. It's a long list and I've got no clue who most of them are but there ya go.

So yes, there are people out there focused along political or religious lines that take them straight into the conservative right wingers. They're the enemy to the fore, but you don't win by leaving your flank exposed. Both groups deserve attention, though that attention will be expressed differently. Radical feminists do seek and have sought to deny the rights of trans people (Janice Raymond, Brennan and Hungerford, every time one of them writes an op ed rife with intentional misgendering, etc).

Who is worse is completely subjective and really a non-starter. Both groups have gleefully contributed to legislation that has led to the shitty insurance boondoggle that surrounds trans care in this country, they both spread hateful rhetoric far and wide. Conservatives mostly preach to the choir, but rad fems have the veneer of feminism to disguise their misogyny and that is a dagger in the back.

Again, conservatives technically wield more political power (which was your point with that question I think), but rad fems are propping up that same hatred inside the camp. GLBT to often gets cropped down to GL, and feminism often stretches only far enough to cover "womyn born womyn." So the first group gets to enforce their prejudice in law, while the second group gets to poison the hearts and minds of the non-trans people opposing the first group, thereby driving a wedge between trans and ally and derailing the whole thing. It's the racism/sexism problem of the labor movement all over again.

So finishing up with your last question, they're both real. They both cause real damage, and they both deserve real responses. Implying that one isn't raises a hell of a lot of hackles.

On to your statement, see the list up above, every one has some sort of contact info. I agree with you about the assaults and defacement being the wrong way to go about it in our society, but I definitely understand the anger and feelings of betrayal that incited it.

deadhead lurker said...

This is turning into a clusterfuck.

Mama Moretti said...

Donna, save the victim act. Boring.

I've been a feminist for a long time. Not as long as DD but almost. I've been following the argument since the days of Robin Morgan at MS. magazine, printing the chapter by J. Raymond. You've "never heard" of nontranspeople being familiar with these arguments? Aren't WE special? I don't post on most blogs since the hayday of the MS. Bulletin Boards, where I posted under this names and met DD who posted as China Cat Sunflower. What was your name on the MS. boards?
Remember all the fighting over Rainsong (Renee) being outed as trans? Wendy McElroy even covered that. How did you ever miss it?

Is everyone 'suspicious' to you unless you personally know their name?

DaisyDeadhead said...

Donna, there is a place to enter your name under "choose your identity" on the comment section, just as when you comment at Feministe. When I go to moderate, if that box is not filled in, it says "Anonymous" -- I can not read the comments through to the end, so unless that part is filled in, just says "Anonymous". (I prefer that it link back to a profile unless I already know you.)

Still no answer to my First Amendment concerns? That was the focus of my entire post: One person's Gospel is another's hate speech. Are you suggesting we censor only one side? How would that work, exactly? You have deliberately ignored everything I said here about that, and that is my deepest concern and was the catalyst for the post. This post is a reply to the DGR incident at the Law and Disorder conference and how I don't approve of the way it played out. I take it then (I asked several times, question ignored) you think throwing burritos at people for selling books you don't like is civilized, acceptable behavior? I don't. I think it is reprehensible, since as I said, I have been on the other side of that behavior. Have you?

In this part of the country, it will be the trans people who get the burritos thrown at them. That is a major reason I do not countenance such behavior. In which case (if you do), we will simply have to agree to disagree.

Willard, thanks for your response. I have written about the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival (for instance) here before and have tried to cover the radfem vs trans feminist feud here at length--including my own shortcomings and mistakes. You might want to click 'transgender' in my tags (over in right margin), there are lots of entries. I do my best, but in many ways, I am on the outside looking in, since neither faction totally represents me. I think the transphobes have done plenty of damage, but I'm not going to read blogs with "die cis scum" on them either. That rhetoric disgusts me.

I live in a state in which MOST counties do not offer ANY abortion services. Some states now stand as high as 82% of counties not offering abortion services. In many respects (not all, of course) when trans women say they can't get medical services, they can join the club. This is the way it is for ALL OF US under the Republican war on women. I don't like seeing us at each other's throats about this stuff instead of standing together. I argued at length with trans feminist Valerie Keefe on the Genderratic blog, saying she didn't care about cis women's abortion rights until trans women got estrogen on demand. Guess what: as a post-menopausal woman *I* can't get it on demand either. I wish trans women understood that cis women have always been patronized and belittled by male doctors who think they know everything, it's nothing new. It's the status quo for women.

I am curious if trans men get hormones easier than trans women do; I'd like to see a survey. I am betting they do. (It seems to me that male doctors would automatically sympathize with another man more than they would sympathize with women.) I think many trans women do not realize that they are now going to be dissed right along with rest of us. I enjoyed Julia Serano's book for this reason; she seems to have a handle on it. "Transmisogyny" is a useful term and very real phenomenon.

Again, thanks for your comment.

Conseglieri said...

what IS hate speech and how should we handle it?

From Wikipedia: Hate speech is, outside the law, communication that vilifies a person or a group based on discrimination against that person or group.

what should we do in a pluralistic society that values the First Amendment?

From me: Engage in dialogue in hopes of enlightening others to the hate in their speech. Westboro Baptist Church, KKK, Nazis etc are well aware that their speech is hateful...that is their goal. DGR may or may not know that their speech is hateful. That said, each *individual* involved may not know that the speech is hateful. As much as our non-southern friends may not agree, there *are* some southerners who don't understand why singing "Dixie" or waving a confederate battle flag is hateful, having been taught that it's a "heritage" issue...and yes, I have heard that from Black folks too.

Why not focus on fundamentalist right wingers who are far more numerous and say the same things?

From me: I think others have answered this too, but I tend to believe it's primarily because they are arm-chair activists and/or self-important people who are more concerned with building up brownie points with one or another group.

Who is worse? And who has more power to enforce their prejudices?

From me: I think Willard did a good job of answering this question, but I'll add my 2cents even so. White straight male middle class privilege you know. :-) I believe that, while both can be damaging, the people in power are the ones who can effect real policy. Just as people of color (by and large) can be prejudiced but not racist because racism is manifested by the ability to implement policies which damage a group of folks, people who have an anti-trans attitude but have little power to enforce it are not the same as those with both a prejudice and power to make it happen. IMO, focusing on the uninformed individual with little ability to enforce policy when giving the PTB a pass is foolish.

I feel that I must point out that I do *not* consider Daisy to be uninformed, nor anti-trans in any way whatsoever.

Why not go after the REAL scum?

Again, from me: Because going after the real scum is risky, and going after an ally is safe.

Final comment for now, the freedom to speak is freedom to speak in our own house and in public. The organizers of the event in question were allowing speech in their house. The folks who trashed books and the book sellers were the equivalent of people coming into someone's home and telling them what they think. Had the people who attacked DGR's table done so via placards and protest on *public* space not paid for by others, as I understand was the case here, they would have been within their rights. Sorry Donna, and I am impressed by what you say your mom did in Germany all those years ago, but the US today is not Nazi Germany of yesteryear, and selling books is not equivalent to trying to drown children, which I suspect you know.

SophiaBlue said...

To add to what Donna and Willard are saying, I think one reason trans women go after TERFs so strongly is that trans women (and other women TERFs attack, like sex workers) are the only ones willing to go after them.

Going after conservatives in uncontroversial in the feminist movement. Everyone's willing to cheer you on. But as soon as trans women start pointing out the terrible things TERFs are saying, we start hearing about how divisive we're being, and how we should be going after our real enemies.

Let me turn the question around. Why do you, cis people, care who trans women decide are our enemies? Why is it more important for you to chide us for criticizing them, rather than chide them for saying the terrible things they do?

DaisyDeadhead said...


I have written umpteen posts about TERFs before. I assumed everyone knows where I stand, since I have written about my own process many times. I have chided them dozens of times.

Since I have made my positions clear over many years, I thought it was safe to talk about THIS SPECIFIC EVENT, the one at Portland State Univ concerning Deep Green Resistance getting their books destroyed and having burritos thrown at them. THIS IS THE INCIDENT I AM TALKING ABOUT. I do not think it is acceptable to attack people for selling books or distributing literature. As I have said (a million times in this thread, and have been ignored), IF YOU THINK THIS BEHAVIOR IS ACCEPTABLE, IT MAKES IT OKAY WHEN IT HAPPENS TO TRANS PEOPLE TOO.

And... please: Everyone's willing to cheer you on. Are you serious?

I live in the most conservative county in the USA. (This was the last county to approve the Martin Luther King Jr holiday.) This is the home of Bob Jones University. NOBODY is willing to cheer you on, they are ready to lynch you. I have been stalked for what I have said on the radio, visions of Alan Berg dancing in my head. They have put up hate pages about me on Facebook. Do not assume that I live in the liberal place that you live in, with the values you take for granted; anyone who says "everyone's willing to cheer you on" needs to come on down here and see what-all we are dealing with. And that is the reason this behavior bothers me: in this area of the country, it will be GLBT folks who have THEIR/OUR literature trashed (which has already happened to us, as I said and linked one such event). If you are arguing for tolerance of censorship and (what amounts to) book-burning, it will be US who suffer the consequences for your ideological purity. Saying "rah rah rah" (which is what I read from trans women about the event) is a huge mistake, and will be used to justify keeping YOU out next time. Or trashing your books in retribution. This is NOT GOOD.

And this IS my opinion, which BTW, you will one day share when it finally happens to you, as it has me.

prefer not to say said...

Daisy, did you ever find out why your guest-blogged posts at Feministe were deleted? Was no reason ever given?

SophiaBlue said...

I live in Texas and my extended family is "Bush was too liberal" level conservative, so "the liberal place that you live in" made me laugh. When I said "Everyone will cheer you on" I meant within the feminist movement. I thought that was clear from context, but I apologize for not being clear. The point I was trying to make was that feminists are all in favor of criticizing conservatives, but as soon as soon as you start pointing out that a lot of radical feminists are saying the same things they start hemming and hawing. Obviously we should engage with conservatives, but we also have a responsibility to clean house every now and then.

To you larger point, first of all, no you were not talking just about the specific incident initially. You said "Increasingly, I am puzzled by trans activists' fixation on radical feminists." That's a general statement about trans women's priorities, and it's what I was trying to respond to.

And I think "IF YOU THINK THIS BEHAVIOR IS ACCEPTABLE, IT MAKES IT OKAY WHEN IT HAPPENS TO TRANS PEOPLE TOO" is frankly an absurd statement, akin to saying "if there's a feminist movement it must be OK to have a masculist movement too." There is a huge power imbalance between cis and trans people. Cis people destroying trans literature would just be yet another manifestation oof cis oppression, and far from the worst at that. Trans people destroying TERF hate literature is part of a pattern of resistance against oppression.

Willard said...

The original question about "real scum" was directed at trans activists opposing TERFs (I'd forgotten the abbreviation earlier). I get that you're conflating the conflict that kicked this off (trans v DGR) with the fallout one (trans+ v Daisy et al), but my respose still stands. To call one (right wingers or TERFS) real creates a false dichotomy and pisses people hurt by both off. "Going after an ally" is the only available reaction to the second conflict since things that ally (Daisy) said were not really in line with the reality on the ground. There is no monolithic trans activist collective targeting TERFs with laser guided precision, and suggesting that any activity directed at them should instead be focused on a target that is of more benefit to the broader progressive population is one of the more frequent wedge issues between smaller marginalized groups operating under a larger umbrella.

Sophia said "within the feminist movement," no one expects the opposing camp to cheer one's attempts to dismantle them on. I did read through a couple of your posts before responding, so I do get the outlines of your stance. I basically divided your orignal post here into two halves, the first portion of which I agreed with, not just for the easily reversible nature of who's on which side of the table and has burritos to waste, but for the pragmatic fact that it feeds the opposing propaganda machine.

The second half though didn't make a lot of sense, for some of the reasons I gave Conseglieri above, and the reversal from some of your previous posts where you clearly got the damage done by these people. My nerd analogy is that it's like the end of the Lord of the Rings. Sure the Fellowship manages to do all that great stuff and save the world from the Big Bad, but when they get back to the Shire Sauruman has turned it into a slag heap and they have to fight again while Gondor and Rohan and the elves chill out with all the awesome stuff they can do now. It's labored and mixes too much stuff I know, but Sauruman=TERF and Hobbits=Trans and the Shire is probably a women's bathroom. The thing to really get is that this big picture sort of argument crops up a lot with even a cursory check of the history of trans activism in relation to larger more established groups and guess who ends up getting the shaft? DADT touted as a huge win for LGBT movement, but only benefits the first three letters. Trans folks needed to fill out the crowds, but not a word from the podium. VAWA finally gets LGBT protection thrown in, but phallocentric TERF philosophy will probably still dominate shelters for years to come. I'm drifting, but you get the idea.

TLDR: Trashing books bad, calling out activism against TERFs is problematic, brought to you by Ravenswood Shiraz, cuz fuck it, it's Saturday night and I'm staying in.

Anonymous said...

I am Anonymous #2 / Mr Rabbit at Feministe.

Please don't assume my class or the circumstances of my life. They are very different to what you've assumed.

Ignorance is not class based. Being open to the answers you receive is not class based. After being given answers to your questions and responding the way you did, I think it's reasonable to say, continue your quest for answers on your own because you are not listening.

Over and over, you've been answered. After your dismissive first response, people got angry. And replied to you in kind.

If you're receiving threats, that's horrible and totally unacceptable and I feel for you. It's not okay to respond that way.

DaisyDeadhead said...

SophiaBlue: And I think "IF YOU THINK THIS BEHAVIOR IS ACCEPTABLE, IT MAKES IT OKAY WHEN IT HAPPENS TO TRANS PEOPLE TOO" is frankly an absurd statement, akin to saying "if there's a feminist movement it must be OK to have a masculist movement too."

Interesting analogy. Because I do think its important to be fair with the MRAs when they make good points (there IS a sentencing disparity between women and men tried for the same crimes, for example) and criticizing them when they are wrong. It means, "if its okay to treat MRAs like shit when they comment on our blogs, don't be surprised when you go to dialogue with them at their blogs, when they treat feminists the same derision with which you treated them"--which no, I do not approve of. Tit for tat, eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, leaves the whole world blind and toothless, as Gandhi said.

There is a huge power imbalance between cis and trans people. Cis people destroying trans literature would just be yet another manifestation oof cis oppression, and far from the worst at that. Trans people destroying TERF hate literature is part of a pattern of resistance against oppression.

That all sounds very ideologically-correct and nice, but when it comes down to actually dealing with the tit-for-tat phenomenon/sentiment (actual human behavior), that is not the way the rest of the world sees it. And ideological arguments are as important for the educational value (for onlookers/lurkers) as any other reason. Just as in my example of the MRAs above... they experience it as you censoring their comments and making fun of/belittling their concerns. So, they do the same to us (ME, to be exact about it), when we show up on their blogs to dialogue. That is not the kind of dialogue I am interested in (not) starting. If you want to totally silence one side of a debate as somehow "beyond the pale" and declare that THEY (whoever THEY are in any given instance) are not worth talking to (i.e. their books are worth destroying because they say things we disagree with), we are already coming from very different perspectives. I am all about the dialogue. I am on talk radio in the Bible-belt south; I believe in talking to anyone and everyone, whether you have arbitrarily assigned them/us "oppressor" status or not. Closing down one side of a debate is widely perceived as not having an argument to make, as not being ABLE to reply. If you are from Dubya's Texas, you should realize this.

Do you understand that *I* am in this for the long haul? I have learned over the years, that unnecessarily alienating people (and throwing burritos is alienating) is NOT the way to win the big battles. As Dr King taught us, we must always take the moral high ground.

Willard, you do seem to understand my points, and thanks. Anything I say further will only be read in an uncharitable fashion. I have said all I am going to say, and if my 5-6 years of posts aligning myself with trans politics mean nothing, I hardly know what ELSE I can say.
You write: There is no monolithic trans activist collective targeting TERFs with laser guided precision

True, but there DOES seem to be this collective silence in not criticizing these excesses, such as throwing burritos at booksellers. Is there ANY trans person who will say, "that was out of line"? If not, I call that some laser guided precision (groupthink) of its own.

And along those lines, the threats have brought me up short, and I am not going any further in this brawl. (For the record, they haven't abated and I got a new round of them starting on Thursday, for some reason. New linkage, I assume.)

DaisyDeadhead said...

Mr Rabbit.... if I am too ignorant for you to talk to, you are hereby dismissed from this discussion. What is the purpose of your post here, simply to tell me that?

After your dismissive first response, people got angry.

I thought that was a response HERE, did not realize high school-ethics kicked in and people promptly ran back over to Feministe to tattle on me and stir up the hate machine. Now that I understand how high the stakes are (death threats) I would have modified my flip reply to people I thought were simply anonymous trolls.

Now that you have thoroughly trashed and humiliated me, winning your fight, is it necessary to keep rubbing my nose in your victory? I've been in party-purges before, many times... I am actually rather used to it. Most of the people involved in these purges dropped out of politics after a few years, but I'm still here. I've learned to wait them out; most will move on to middle-class jobs defending and perpetrating the status quo: lawyers, social workers, professors and suchlike. (In fact, it seems this is a brand new crop of trans activists I am arguing with now, not the same crop that commented on my early posts, two of whom were then regularly blogging at Feministe. What did you think of my earlier posts, Mr Rabbit? I don't remembering you commenting back then.)

As I said in my commenting guidelines, you do not get to insult me, which is why I deleted your first post. (Really, its a small thing, not insulting people.) If I am ignorant, oh well. We can't all be as enlightened as you obviously are, as well as the other politically-advanced Feministe posters. Guilty as charged.

Speaking of which, PNTS, you gotta be kidding. My questions about the 8 disappeared posts have all been ignored. To those at Feministe who laughed at me when I said the place was hostile for me: would YOU regard it as a hostile gesture if your (much-labored-over) guest posts for a blog were suddenly deleted with no explanation after two years, with all your requests about that action pointedly ignored? I think you probably would.

PS: Hey Feministe mods, I am still wondering about that... any word from up on high? Or am I still persona-non-grata?

Mr Rabbit said...

Daisy, you haven't deleted any of my posts. Everything I've written has appeared here, so you must be confusing me with someone else.

As for everything else, your own words condemn you. And I will oh so cheerfully accept your dismissal.

DaisyDeadhead said...

Mr Rabbit, I expect smug, posturing asshole-showoffs to act like smug, posturing asshole-showoffs, so you don't disappoint either. Thank you for illustrating the problems with the modern internet-disease known as "call-out culture" -- next year you'll probably be a born-again Christian or a Republican, and you'll be angrily calling THEM out about not being conservative enough. (yawn) I've watched the self-righteous children come and go over the decades. Mostly go.

Years after you have forgotten this little stunt of yours (just some idle late-night entertainment/harassment), I'll still be working and you'll still be sitting on your entitled, spoiled ass, doing nothing except typing your bullshit-yammerings into a machine.

Adios, my terribly-indignant young dilettante, don't let the doorknob hit you in the ass.

FAABulous TERF said...

see daisy? happy now? yes, you've chided us dozens of times, in your own words, but look how it hasn't helped you at all. one uppity paragraph and they'll tar and feather you just like you're one of us. they don't see you as any different than us. too bad you burned all your bridges and now have no true feminist friends left. never sell your soul to get men's approval. as a married woman, bi or not, your used to doing that. you sold out real feminists to suck up to trans, and now they've attacked you & cut you loose. We've been waiting for this to happen since your epic argument with v. keefe.

I'd tell you to join our side, but none of us trust you either. You've totally isolated yourself. Hope it feels good since you seemed so proud of yourself when you were busy putting down "cis" radfems and Mary Daly.

It got you exactly nothing. Remember that next time.

Real Lesbian said...

Seconding my sister TERF. Thoroughly enjoying this. You wanted the friendship of the tyrannies and now you see what their friendship is worth. Not a single one has come to your aid. They are men first, and they've just proven it to you. I hope this teaches you a lesson. Violent threats is what you get when you cross them, no matter what you might have said in the past. Total devotion is what these men demand.

Ask other radical feminists what it's been like to live in constant fear of the tyrannies and their death threats.

I didn't post in your nasty thread about Margie Jamison, which was disgusting, but I sure will post in this one and remind you that Margie and Kitty told you so.

Anonymous said...

Hm. I don't think any group of feminists has ever physically threatened me before, and I have been involved in some pretty nasty ideological in-fighting in my life... over decades, even. Yet, I write a couple of paragraphs expressing an opinion (using no epithets of any kind!) and this is what I get? Incredible!

not incredible at all. you fought w/womyn b4 daisy. these are MEN. everything they do can be explained by that. raised as men & learned to bully women from the time they were born. they get their own way when they do, so they do it again & again.

comments at feministe are way down since donna & her goons took over. pretty soon, will be an all trans site. womyn will just move somewhere else private, like michfest.

yes the womyn @ arooo warned u & hope u understand now.

The Divine Miss B said...

Daisy, you've been invited to join private FB group about these issues. My invitation went to your "other" file since we're not FB friends. We are on ALL sides of feminist divide but committed to dialogue, as you are.

Check it out and hope you will join up.

Ursula said...

DGR account of the Law and Disorder Conference event, by Lierre Keith and Derrick Jensen

Daisy Deadhead said...

Follow up thread about Michfest. Comments continue where these left off. Oh joy!

Just posted this thread over at Genderratic, so welcome to any new readers.