32
Books by WomenRecent fiction without the TRA!
Hey Everyone,
After a couple of depressing years in which almost every recently published book written by women that I purchased included some kind of trans pandering, I've been on wave of luck (is the tide turning?) and thought I'd share some blessedly tra-free recent fiction, and invite you all to share some of your own.
The Briar Club by Kate Quinn: my favorite, a twisty house murder mystery with multiple women's stories set in DC during the paranoia of the McCarthy era. Recipes included.
Weyward by Emilia Hart: three generations of wise women/witches persecuted in various ways in different eras. Really enjoyed it though a fair amount of domestic violence.
Night Will Find You by Julia Heaberlin: a psychological thriller that kept me turning pages.
Mania by Lionel Shriver: okay, I admit this obliquely references TRAs by being a glorious satire of the entire goalpost moving, double speak insanity, only using intelligence instead of sex as the subject of their mania.
Piranesi by Susannah Clarke: odd, dreamlike fantasy from author of Jonathan Strange & Mr Norell.
Drive Your Plow Over the Bones of the Dead by Olga Tokarczuk: published in Polish in 2009 but translated into English in 2018, another unique and thought-provoking murder mystery.
Also going to plug my two favorite series: the Winternight Trilogy by Katherine Arden (starts with the Bear and the Nightingale) and the Strike series by Robert Galbraith aka JKR.
I am so very happy that the BBC did this. đ The clumsy âassigned female st birth,â âpeople with vaginas,â language is giving the impression that women are some kind of version of Voldemort- they Cannot Be Named.
I wish the US would get onto this. It seems like the UK is slowly turning back towards feminism away from TRA rhetoric, whereas the US, which is far more rife with neocon bullshit, is paradoxically far more ridden with nonsense like this, that goes unchecked, or at least, doesnât face the same resistance.
Iâm not sure how it is in the UK, but the US has ththis current cultural thread of idolizing trans people- the whole Jazz bullshit, featuring them n commercials for Facebook, making a massive fucking deal out of trans celebrities, putting TIMs in high positions, featuring TIMs as cover models and âWoman of the Yearâ and so on, making veritable overwhelming shit tons of media about how special trans kids/young people are, etc. On the other side; any time a trans person does something heinous, it gets either explained away with No True Scotsman, âyouâd understand if you had a hard life too,â âthatâs not what actually happened,â etc, or just swept under the rug. We have this whole onslaught of how great and special trans people are. I see articles published in mainstream UK media, that Iâd never see published in the US outside of Fox News. Not partisan articles, in fact blatantly unbiased ones, stating facts and events like a disinterested robot. Meanwhile, in the US, articles about trans people in sports refer to the female opposition as âfeministsâ with literal quotation marks around the word. Maybe thatâs why the gender critical movement hasnât taken off here a sit has there.
I know the UK still has a battle to fight, but Injusf wish we could get some more influence in the US. If this had happened here, i strongly feel that the response would have been doubling down on the anti-woman language.
The more the US does this nonsense, the more people are waking up to the BS. Look at how Lia Thomas turned the tide of conversation: even in the NY Times and WaPo, the most woke of our big papers, the comments are 9 to 1 against men in women's sports. The TRAs are so radical, so aggressive, so unused to being challenged, that the things they say out loud show those not really watching this stuff just how horrible and crazy they are. And it's crazy. I had a TRA insist on twitter today that if you say you are a woman, you are a woman. WTF?? I mean, think about hearing that for the first time as someone who hasn't been paying attention. You will be turned off to the entire ideology.
This is such a good point. In a way, the "no debate" tactic is coming back to bite them. They're become used to saying the most outrageous things without challenge, and now the issue is getting more publicity a lot of them are coming out with stuff which to them sounds completely reasonable but to the ordinary person hearing about this for the first time it's like đ”
the US has a problem with deifying transwomen. they idolize them as perfect, esoteric, god-like beings who possess the ultimate wisdom of the universe while also being able to do no wrong. i'm not sure where they got this idea when the average transwoman is literally just a pervert who failed at manhood and decided to try his luck as a rapey TIM lesbian.
Don't know if you've seen this, but it's a pretty good description of TIM as sacred being.
It's not a paradox. Genderism is right-wing. "Anyone who wants to wear dresses is a girl" is just the updated version of "girls have to wear dresses." So we shouldn't be surprised it's catching on so hard here.
We'll get mainstream non-religious criticism of trans stuff when we get universal health care.
We'll get mainstream non-religious criticism of trans stuff when we get universal health care.
So never? đą
They also had to correct "causes of endo..." to "symptoms of endo..."
What kind of amateurs do they have working there? Probably ones too worried about signaling their fidelity to the gender cult to pay attention to the actual substance of what they're writing about.
I honest to god never thought I would see this day.
I've been in the radfem community for roughly 10 years now, under various usernames, and I can't even begin to describe how impossible this seemed.
There was a point where many of us radfems were resigned to our fate, that we'd be stuck with this trans horseshit forever. Things got extremely bleak at times. Things often went backwards.
To see this correction, well... it's given me hope unlike anything I've ever felt before. This is such a good sign I honestly might start crying.
I donât think I realized that AFAB bothers so many people here (though I can understand why), and I feel embarrassed now as I think some of my first comments here used that language when referencing women and trans men. Iâll just say females instead from now on.
It's because we weren't ASSIGNED anything, that implies that our sex is artificial, man-made, instead of what it really is: observed, immutable
Meh. We've all been there. That language was conditioned into us. I personally have a hard time using proper terms outside of here because of shunning. Don't apologize.
I think what especially bothers me in this particular case is the fact that the assignment has absolutely no relation with the situation. A baby girl could have been assigned anything at birth, it would have not prevented her to suffer from endometriosis. In case of situations more linked to gender than sex, like how education given to boys and girls by parents and teachers is not the same, it is more understandable. Baby boys and girls are indeed assigned to a case. On the basis of their sex, but a case which borders have little to do with sex.
No worries, the transition (pun intended) from libfem back to sanity can be pretty rough.
You realize just how much psychological manipulation you've been exposed to by how hard it is to shake the guilt of using biologically correct language.
https://service-manual.nhs.uk/content/inclusive-content/sex-gender-and-sexuality
See this document. (And for the purposes of this ignore how ardent twaw the nhs is outside of this).
Sex assigned at birth is the language they use when talking to a trans only audience. They use sex registered at birth otherwise, as thatâs what is factual and what most people understand. Sex is determined at conception, observed then recorded at birth. The phrasing assigned at birth is the trans audiences preference, and catering to this tiny proportion of people in how we speak about this is the start of how they erode and control our language. Everyone knows that sex isnât assigned at birth, so it feels like a small concession, a minor adjustment that doesnât impact meaning. Except it does, because if we accept this phrase then how do we counter that it could have been wrongly assigned? And what about children who donât yet know that assigned at birth is fiction? And what about everyone who feels silenced by this inaccuracy, because it makes it sound like trans views reign supreme, so people self censor to avoid the vitriol, all because they hear that phrase and assume the user is anti gc. Which, of course, is the trans armies intention when pushing the idea itâs just teensy little phrase to be more inclusive.
Language has meaning, far beyond its meaning.
Iâm so happy BBC decided to do this. And the TRAs having meltdowns in the comments is just the icing on the cake :-)
https://twitter.com/millihill/status/1507942260939309056
It's a small thing, but I'm still happy it was changed.
I like that they agreed to correct it. Many people who go along with this stuff are only trying to be good people and don't really fully believe in all the queer theory nonsense. I think it's good that they changed it when pointed out how insulting this language is to women instead of dismissing people as terfs
Good work. It's important to be accurate when it comes to healthcare, I mean do TIFs on hormones even have this issue? They have a whole host of separate gynecological problems like vaginal atrophy, lumping us in with them probably doesn't even help them. It's stupid on the TIM side too, they can cry about how they're being excluded as "women who don't have endo", yeah so what, I don't have it either. You aren't special..
We have power!! We just need to work together. I wonder how many people here and on twitter would vote on this one issue? I know I am a liberal but I'm now a one issue voter and I won't be voting Dem or Republican this November. I'll write in JK Rowling to every office.
This is good news but the amount of people saying 'cis men can get it too!' is insane. While it can apparently happen, it is so rare that there are fewer than 20 cases recorded in medical literature. But sure, let's pretend that endometriosis is a health concern shared by men.
Men can get endo? Is there endometrial tissue in men? Really? Where? Endometriosis is when the cells lining the uterus...the endometrial lining, travel, go in to other parts of the abdominal cavity?
Since it's so rare, there's been little research into it but the cause is thought to be prolonged hormone treatment, but 2 men who were diagnosed did not meet that criteria. The tissue would test positive for estrogen and resemble what would you see in endometriosis in women.
So it's not endometriosis as in women, it's some other syndrome or disease?
It's classified as endometriosis (I only looked at one article about it, so I really don't know much about this subject!). Apparently it can also happen to women who have had hysterectomies but it's so rare that people should not be acting like this is a concern for men. It's also interesting that they didn't pipe in with this point when the article said 'people with a uterus.'
Apparently "remnant embryonical cells" become the "endometrial tissue" in males. And if estrogen exposure is factor in development, does that mean tims who take estrogen are at higher risk of this?
This is amazing! I think this grassroots "activism" is so effective!
Edit: and I always like to point out that AFAB is coopted from intersex people, and the meaning is to have a gender forcefully and often surgically imposed onto babies who have developmental disorders.
Using it for observing sex is dismissive and insulting to this brutal practice.
I do the same, and people will say it doesn't matter that "AFAB" was stolen from actual victims.