Great interview! Lauren is so right on! I remember woman’s festivals that were mostly attended by lesbians. We were proud of our bodies and would walk around topless or totally naked. We were sistahs, proud of our strengths, power, creativity, artisanship, camaraderie, totally safe space. We encouraged girls to dress and play whatever games and sports and go into any careers they wanted to. Then men calling themselves woman slipped in. Then the men calling themselves lesbians came. Unfortunately, women started wanting their own bodies to look like a Man! Woman started hating their breasts and genitals! Mothers started thinking their children know more than them. Parents proud to say there 3 year old is trans! I used to love Pride events but they have been overcome with trans. How sad!
Hi Agnes, Yes to all of this. I have the same cherished memories, and owe to those experiences much of my confidence, self-love, and determination to support other women.
Mariah - do you think this means that all young females who are masculine presenting are lesbians? Is that the only conclusion? (Or when you say "most" - what would be an exception that you would find acceptable?) Do you think medical professionals could be more thorough in their processes, and still *sometimes* come to the conclusion that some people have gender dysphoria that might go beyond what *your personal experience* of (something similar) was like? Or do you believe it should *never* be a diagnosis or consideration, regardless of the circumstances?
Similarly, in regard to "stone butches" - do you think if someone is not interested in that kind of physical affection that they are intrinsically disordered, and they just need to address the "disorder"? And if so, how exactly would they do that? Be coerced into learning how to like that kind of touch even if they really don't? (This feels so similar to how people talked about gay people and asexual people years ago. That something must be wrong with you if you are not experiencing these things that the majority of the population experiences, or not experiencing them in the usual ways, so it must be unnatural, so it must be fixed.) When is "unnatural" just the way in which a person is different from others, and when is it a "disorder" that needs to be "fixed" by going with the flow, or by some other intervention? Who gets to decide that, in your opinion? The person? A professional? The law? (Curious what you think more in general about that - not in regard to access to sports categories or bathrooms. Just in general.)
As for whether "all young females who are masculine presenting are lesbians" - no.
As for stone butches or women who do not want to be touched in certain ways, no, I definitely would not condone "coercing anyone to like that kind of touch if they really don't," and do not judge people for their sexual preferences so long as they express them only with consenting adults, and no one is injured in the process.
The main question could be simplified as this: do you think there is *ever* a scenario for *any* human wherein it might be acceptable for a medical professional to recommend and oversee treatments that are in the direction of what is called "gender affirming care"? (Whether that person has typical or atypical sex characteristics.) Because it sounds like from the comments throughout these posts, you and your readers are saying there is *no scenario* in which that would be acceptable or appropriate for *anyone* - because there is no such thing as changing sex. So I am trying to understand if that an accurate summary of what you are saying.
Hi A Girl Named Earl, I say this sympathetically, because I know you well enough to know that this is not the answer you probably want to hear. But you've been asking repeatedly -- tho I suspect you've done much of the same research yourself -- so here goes:
There are two recent comprehensive summaries of all the research studies (Cass Report and HHS). Both conclude: There is zero evidence to support "gender affirming care." No evidence that it resolves underlying comorbidities (autism, anxiety, depression, adverse childhood experiences, history sexual abuse). Nor does it decrease suicidality.
And lots of evidence of dangerous medical harms since healthy bodies are, via drugs and surgeries, made less healthy. Healthy tissues and organs and endocrine systems and sexual function and reproductive function and nursing ability and bone strength and cardiovascular health and much, much more are being damaged or destroyed. Contrary to the "First, do no harm" oath.
For instance: female bodies need estrogen. Without it, young women often develop osteoporosis. How bad will that get over a lifetime? We have no idea. We are experimenting on young people.
Also, there is no reliable way to differentiate "true transsexuals" (if there are such people; I'm agnostic but dubious) from natural gender-nonconformers (usually gay) and cross-dressers (usually AGP) who are unhappy, confused, or depressed for other reasons and latching onto this one idea as the cure.
Therefore every medical intervention risks damaging the wrong person for life. Hence all the detransitioner lawsuits underway. And the gradual shuttering of sex-surgery clinics in Europe and the US.
Which is not to say I judge people who choose this as adults. There are powerful social forces, including sexism, homophobia, and extensive cultural indoctrination, at play. And absolutely I support individuals' rights to dress and behave in non-stereotypical ways. And all should be respected as humans struggling to make the best decisions we can.
Thank you for answering my question. Yes, I have asked it different times and ways because I want to understand if this is the scope of what you are saying. And if this is the scope of what this movement is about.
I appreciate that you make distinctions about wanting to he respectful and not judgmental of adults who want to choose their own path, and I believe that you are trying to achieve that. But honestly, that is why I was asking directly. Because using polite language to say that there is no appropriate time or place for trans identity is still ultimately saying that there is no appropriate time or place for trans people in our society. And whether or not it is your intention to imply that trans people should be directly removed from society, or forced into some sort of involuntary "mental health treatment" or conversion therapy, I believe traction from these arguments will be used to try to justify that very thing. (Much like what is being suggested for houseless folks right now. Involuntary "care" and "treatment" for people deemed to be making poor decisions with their lives.) And that terrifies me.
Mariah did not say, “There is no appropriate place for trans identity.” Those are your words, not hers. She said that there is no evidence supporting extreme cosmetic medical interventions—none of which we can reliably say are safe.
In the spirit of achieving understanding, may I ask you a question, a Girl Named Earl? It appears that opposition to "gender-affirming care" troubles you, despite the paucity of evidence in its favor and the abundance of evidence to its detriment. If I understand correctly, opposing estradiol injections and T-blockers and castration for a "woman born in a man's body," for example, represents to you "that there is no appropriate time or place for trans people in our society." Yet for me, it represents the opposite.
Leaving aside for the moment all arguments about gender, comorbid conditions, intersex, "true trans," etc, if I understand you correctly, you would call this person who feels like a woman born in a man's body "trans." And, if I understand you correctly, you believe applying estradiol injections and T-blockers and castration would transform this trans person into a woman--a woman due every right and dignity of her sex, from women's sports and spaces to pronouns. Which seems to me to represent the very removal of trans people from society which you wrote terrifies you. It certainly terrifies me, as the most brutal and pervasive form of conversion I could imagine, intended specifically to correct the perceived mismatch between gender and sex (and/or to capitalize on it). For those seeking to erase trans from society, I imagine the consequent sterilization is a bonus.
Respectfully, how did you reach the opposite conclusion, when Mariah answered your question about gender-affirming care?
Trans is mental illness. When you give them these janky surgeries you condemn them to a life of sickness and complications from the surgery. How many years does it take off of your expected lifespan when you let a quack surgeon snip and cut and sew and basically just fuck around and find out if any of this works, or just condemns the victim to a lifetime of hospitalization, infection, and loss of function.
I think there is a lot of gray area in this issue, but most people I encounter see it all as black and white. So it is hard to have a conversation in this realm without it turning ugly. So I usually stay out of it. (I will probably step out after this comment, because when I have tried to comment here as Mariah has suggested she is open to, I tend to get jumped on by other people who just want to shut down the conversation. And perhaps this is not the place for actual back and forth conversation, but more of a place for people who are already agree on these points to gather. So perhaps I shouldn't chime in here anyway. If I am asked by her to refrain from commenting here, I will.)
I personally don't have an opinion on the women's category sports issue, partly because I am not an athlete, and I do not have a good understanding of that realm. I do not choose to get into that part of the conversation, mostly because I do not see participation in elite sports as a basic human right, in the same way that people going about their daily lives without harassment or harm should be a basic human right. So I don't see the women's sports category issue as holding the same kind of weight, or even being in the same general category, as other access issues for trans people.
I think there are people in this conversation who advocate for more consideration of the state of mind of young people who are just learning about trans identity, to make sure they are not being coerced down a medicalized path that is not really right for them. This is brought up especially when kids are involved, and so they talk about safeguards to be put in place to make sure children are not harmed by being led into a process they may not be able to fully understand at that age or stage. This, I understand. I think anyone making a major decision about their body should have extensive support along the way in doing that, to prevent an unwanted outcome.
But then in the next layer of conversation, the same people or groups who started out talking about kids (or about access to women's sports or spaces, etc.) also seem to be going ever further - essentially saying that there is never a scenario in which it is really okay for a person to opt into hormones or procedures that have to do with sex and gender, because they see it as nothing more than disordered thinking or mental illness. And then further concluding that it must only come up for other specific reasons (like because they are really gay and uncomfortable with their bodies, or that they are dangerous/perverted by nature, or because it's related to a disability or mental health issue, etc.) and therefore should not be allowed to proceed.
By the time the conversation gets to that level, I think it is making the case that anyone who identifies as trans - regardless of their age or situation - is inherently disordered and therefore should not be taken seriously or allowed to make their own decisions. (Or that their decisions regarding their own bodies or life paths *necessarily and negatively* affect the population at large.)
So it gets very quickly into a separate issue, of who should be allowed to make decisions about people's bodies - including their own body. A medical provider? The person? Society as a whole? The law? This is why it sounds like a lot of questions. But the real question about bodily autonomy can be boiled down to *whose decision should it be* to make changes to one's body, regardless of the reason? Because bodily autonomy is being threatened in every direction, and that affects all of us. To say one group of people should have bodily autonomy, but another group of people should not have bodily autonomy, will ultimately end in none of us having it. So that is also my concern.
Hi again, Sorry to hear you're terrified. That must feel awful. Thanks for explaining that persistent question.
The only part of the movement I can speak for, tho I'm by no means a spokesperson, is the women's rights side, esp sports. I write enough you're probably aware of my concerns.
Unfortunately, male intrusions into women's sports and intimate spaces, including women's prisons, are, from my perspective, the main impetus for any backlash you may be seeing/fearing from the trans or trans ally perspective.
Unfortunately, thie ant-trans sentiment often becomes anti-gay and lesbian, too; the rainbow umbrella is increasingly viewed with derision due to trans overreach into women's rights, sexualized public appearances at Pride and Drag Story Hour, and children's books that define sex based on whether you prefer Barbies or Kens.
You asked about medical treatments. But according to the Washington Post and the Kaiser Family Foundation, just 31 percent of tran-identified adults have used hormone treatments, HRT, or puberty-blocking hormones, and only 16 percent have undergone surgeries. In other words, they're just gender-nonconforming folks -- like lots of lesbians and gay men and others who prefer practical, comfortable clothing.
Only when the males insist on women's rights -- and parents are denied rights, or pressured to "trans" their kids, and when people are pressured to refer to men as women -- do many women resist, criticize, or judge, and assert our boundaries.
I share your hope that innocent people will not be harmed as society sorts out how to handle these issues. So far, it looks to me as if the primary victims are women, lesbians, gay men, and children, but I understand you're probably reading different sources and have more concern for people who identify as trans.
I strongly suspect sports and athleticism can be an antidote to gender dysphoria. I disliked my female body for all the ways it was “unpretty” until I became an athlete in my 20s. In athletics, the focus shifts from what one’s body looks like to what one’s body can do. I came to love being flat-chested because it made running easier. I no longer cared about being “pear shaped” because my big thigh muscles made me a faster cyclist. I had no control over whether my body was pretty, but through training I had a lot of control over whether my body was fast and strong. A girl with gender dysphoria can’t change the fact that her body is female. But if she comes to value athleticism, she will value physical traits ARE within her power to change – – her strength, speed, stamina, and flexibility. When people evaluate themselves based on criteria over which they have control, they have better mental health than when people evaluate themselves based on criteria they cannot control.
Love it. I think it can probably prevent gender dysphoria too. It’s not just about discovering what we can do. It’s about discovering what we can do as girls & women, in these female bodies.
I'm glad to have Lauren's eye witness account of what has happened to young lesbians, disturbing as it is. It makes me wonder what is the antidote? How do we make lesbians cool to young women? There are virtually no visible lesbians for them to see (unless you count The Hunting Wives, hah, which makes bisexuals erotic as all get out).
For many of us, it was only recently, when the term lesbian was coopted by men, that we even wanted to use the word lesbian as opposed to gay. We had our own aversions to the word lesbian and to looking like one. Is this then the just desserts of our rejection of our own category?
The lipstick lesbians of the '80s pulled us out of the seriously dull flannel shirts of the '70s that repelled me as a young person. I welcomed this uptick in fashion. The dapper butch lesbian also became fashionable soon after with the bowties and suits. There was a brief revival of Butch/Femme. Then the lesbian baby boom pulled women away from the political front, and as we repeatedly tell the story, once we got gay marriage the gay men gave it up to the trans money.
All my lesbian mentors of the '90s are sitting in retirement homes unwilling to fight because this overwhelms and confuses them; they fought already. They didn't fight for gender expression. They fought for equality and sex based rights, so why didn't that work? Because it was won and feminism is no longer sexy? Or is sexuality itself too scary and lesbians just a porn category?
With every piece of writing I try to argue against medicalization of gay and lesbian youth and trans ideology being pushed in schools, but that only reaches my own peers who are old and unwilling to break from their anti-Trump/No Kings march because they believe fighting fascism is far more important than a few transexuals. Some even believe that backing trans, as a category representing individual freedom, will defeat fascism.
So that leaves me wondering where is the cultural messaging that lesbians are cool and actually have a culture? One that will reach young people. I put my hope in sports because humans (along with our primate cousins) can innately see when something is unfair.
Sorry for the rant. You're touching on something here, in this non-sport post, that speaks to something bigger so I'm riffing on it.
Hi Amanda, not a rant -- or if it is, it's more than welcome. Thanks for all these interesting thoughts and questions. I take heart in the recent decline in trans ID among young people (See link.) Maybe lesbian culture will thrive again, as trans ideology begins to collapse from its own irrational weight. One can hope.
So it was just a contagion after all. Hah. A pandemic overreach that had us enthralled to medicalizing everything. Young people tired of shoring up an illogical, non-reality and cutting up their bits. Maybe the thought of being dependent on medical treatment for life not as appealing when it’s no longer seen as life saving, but is, in fact, problematic especially in the face of collapsing planetary resources. But what of the middle-aged fetishistic men who now have access to women’s spaces? I await their diminishing popularity. Much creepier to support men who increasingly show they do not have the interests of women in mind.
Yes! We had a tour guide who used the they/them pronouns. She was a lesbian … it didn’t seem that she was medicalized or had surgery that I could tell. Hopefully not … then once all this trans stuff dies down she can just be a lesbian with healthy body intact.
Precocious puberty hit hard during covid. I saw both my kids affected. I went all in on organic dairy products. Not everyone was able or aware to do this for kids. Many girls got their periods as young as eight years old.
I went through intense dysphoria as a teen. Why do we need to make everything be about gender? It's an obsession.
It's like the sexual revolution. The kids are going to do what kids do. It's a rebellion. Ok. We get it.
The camp sounds great, getting kids back in touch with their bodies is such a good idea. The rumination on feelings and identity and internalising and theorising and categorising every little thing is unhealthy for anyone, but young people especially.
my daughter is thirteen now, and has given up swimming. She was a good swimmer! I went through the same thing at her age. Conscious Embodiment has helped me. Do you know of Luis Mojica?
To be fair, I’ve never met anyone else like me in real life. I went to a “woke” college where there were a lot of women who identified as queer or nonbinary but I only knew one other lesbian.
Hmm. Sorry to hear that. Would love to hear more about your story. What was that college experience like for you? What did you see as the differences between you and the other women who were attracted to women, but use the terms queer or NB? Feel free to contact me privately if you’d rather chat there.
Yay! Delighted to hear from you. We didn’t really think you were non-existent. :-) I’m sure Lauren would grant that she was generalizing. Tho maybe young women like you are less likely to frequent the sorts of bars, with the sort of clientele, that she described?
I love the idea of physical activity and sports as a way to be embodied and empowered and serve as something of an antidote to trans ideology. But then I feel puzzled by Nikki Hiltz, such a powerful amazing athlete yet who just celebrated getting top surgery this year. Seems like such a disconnect.
Yes, Layshia Clarendon of the WNBA: Same "nonbinary," no-breasts decision. But many factors influence female self-perception, self-love, self-acceptance. There would always be outliers. Glad you like the idea. It's not a full-fledged theory yet; needs more consideration, even research. But worth exploring somehow. We do already know from research that girls who play sports have a better body image, and are less likely to get pregnant before they want to, and are more like to finish high school and attend college, than those who don't. Makes sense that it would help them accept and appreciate the essential fact of femaleness. I look forward to other input.
Thank you Mariah and thank you Lauren for this really important discussion. All of this is part of the mighty anti-female and anti-lesbian rhetoric of this ideology. It needs to be called out for what it is! Misogyny on high!!
I haven't seen this issue addressed before, and I realize the focus here is, appropriately, the intense danger to women, but I fear the predation may run against trans-identified men as well. Rape, after all, is more about power than sex. My trans-identified son, who has always been exclusively attracted to women, is ready to start dating after 3+ years on estrogen (though he now identifies as asexual, thanks, I believe, to the estradiol). But he is shy, unassuming--he's never had the gall to refer to himself as a lesbian. So who would date him? I fear, only an aggressive "transwoman" whom he would not have the political will to reject (because TWAW), though he's confessed to being molested by men in the past. I know for a fact he does not want to date men, but I fear he'll be bullied into it, just as lesbians are. Skinny as a rail, weakened by years of "medicalization" and medical neglect, I fear he's also part of the victim pool the predators are creating.
It’s always a relief to me to find lesbians who don’t think they need to be “trans”. I got into an argument with a fellow teacher last week because I “misgendered” his student. First of all, I had no idea that the young woman had changed her name and pronouns, I described her to him as a “short Latina girl who is really smart and quirky”. After several rounds of this, he could not fathom which of his students I was talking about. I finally said, “I think she’s one of those girls who might have changed her name.” It finally dawned on him who I was talking about- he named the girl with her male name and said, “but he is a he, not a girl!” I responded with, “I am so upset by the number of young lesbians who run away from womanhood and need to pretend to be men!”
He came to me a few days later telling me how insulted he was by my making that statement and misgendering her. In a rush before my class began, I kind of let him have it- “there are NO role models for butch lesbians at this school- all these young lesbians see are reels of young women like them taking testosterone and cutting off their breasts! The older lesbians are silenced- no one is listening to them- I didn’t fight for LGB rights during my 20s to be silenced about the erasure of lesbians! I am not going to misgender her- she is female, and I want her to be proud of that!”
After my outburst, I texted him asking for a more calm discussion because I was angry and probably didn’t do a good job explaining my point.
I think there are many supporters of gender affirmation in youth who are more likely to accept or at least slightly more tolerate a semantic scolding from a butch lesbian, than from a cis woman or any male. For example, it makes ad hominem diversions a bit harder to justify within their worldview and social circle. So I think you may be able to push the envelope a bit more in terms of speaking plainly rather than walking delicately around the issues, than some other could.
That said, it’s also possible that trying to bring down the heat and bring some more mutual rapport into a calmer discussion (as you suggested to him) could nevertheless be useful, even if a notch less required.
In my best current understanding, teachers like him are “trying to do the right thing” and are good people - but the psychological payoffs from claiming the undisputable moral high ground, and seeing oneself as the protector of the most vulnerable, can corrupt even well meaning people. The hidden payoff of status seeking or maintenance begin to enter the mix of motivations, mostly unconsciously.
If the question is “how can we best serve the youth in our charge” there could be more openness to discussion. But changing one’s mind in the face of counter-evidence runs into maintaining one’s confidence as one of the good ones (and fear, admitted or not, of being shunned and punished oneself), the task becomes much harder. Changing one’s mind then becomes a matter of shifting one’s self-image, one’s “identity” as a good progressive ally, and listening to people that one’s friends call nasty names (and will call one the same names).
I’ve had friends who had to leverage themselves out of a religious cult, and it takes courage and insight that not everybody musters easily.
I’m not sure how to bring people back, once they get addicted to being on the right side of history and being a protectors of the innocent in their own minds and in their social/professional circles. The payoffs of alignment to reality may be a harder sell than self-righteousness. (And I don’t want to get into being self-righteous in my own political take, either. It corrupts integrity, open mindedness, critical thinking, and humane interpersonal interactions. I’m not immune).
PS: nice meeting you in person at the library today.
I appreciate your commentary. And I enjoyed meeting you as well. I think we have to keep pushing for this “radical” idea of open debate and the free exchange of ideas. We knew that it would be increasingly hard with tv pushing narratives, then social media, and the ideological bubbles that have formed. Most people in education that I talk to have never heard anyone articulate another viewpoint on child medical transition. This has to change. My worldview gets bigger everytime I go into the world and really talk with people, whether that’s in Latin America, Asia, or in the “Bible Belt” of these United States. We understand nothing if we only care to be “right”.
I think you made your point rather well. Plain language is needed to avoid the tolerance for interpretation of more carefully phrased urges. Indeed, confounding terminology takes forms so familiar that it is too easy to fall into the trap. Heard of feminine boys & masculine girls? What about sensitive boys and bold girls? Each can be both, neither is reflective of sex and there is no need for multiple surgeries or a drug regime through life if required to maintain the fiction that a child is born wrong.
I think angry outbursts can be super productive. He had probably never heard this point of view, and he had never considered the harms to women and girls. I have a history of pointing out hypocrisy in education and in our school district and in our school. I know that this has always rubbed him the wrong way. He’s more of a “make the best of the situation” kind of teacher and I’m always trying to get at the root of the problem and identify it in order to raise awareness and change it. I think he used this interaction as an opportunity to push back on my direct communication style which he doesn’t appreciate. Moments before he raised his complaint about me, I had asked him to go to the administration to insist on action surrounding an out of control freshman boy who the female teachers had been trying to manage without success or admin support. I told him that admin needed to hear from a male teacher like him and not just the chorus of female teachers who were being gaslit by the administrators into thinking that they were the “problem,” not the student causing constant disruption. As much of a feminist that this male teacher claims to be, I don’t think he appreciated me asking him to stand up for these female teachers who were facing retaliation for kicking the student out of their classes in order to teach the other 30 students. So, he resigned to do this, but then needed to raise this other festering resentment that I had “misgendered” a student and flippantly told him that she was a lesbian. Well, in the end, it didn’t go so well for him as I raised a social justice issue he had never heard before. But, he is my department chair and I need to make nice with him.
“He’s more of a “make the best of the situation” kind of teacher and I’m always trying to get at the root of the problem and identify it in order to raise awareness and change it.”
I hear you loud & clear, my sister in arms!
I see the negative reactions of others to my usually but not unfailingly ruthless truth-seeking to be a “them” problem; I also believe the the second and third of Rumi’s (attributed and conceptually useful) “gates” on how and what to speak — Is it true, necessary, and kind — to be optional, as necessity and kindness (especially this last, on this topic about which we, and women in particular, are told constantly to “be kind”) are in the eye of the beholder, but truths derived from reason, logic, and evidence are brute realities.
Reality always wins out in the end, though usually with far too much unnecessary harm along the way, exacerbated by the efforts of those who wish to deny that reality for whatever reasons 😢
Speaking out against medical predation on kids is true, necessary, and kind.
Standing up against male violation of the privacy, dignity, and safety of female-only spaces is true, necessary, and kind.
Speaking out against male oppressors appropriating the identities of the females they oppress is true, necessary, and kind, for as long as we live under violent patriarchy.
The only people who don't think these things are necessary and kind are the predators and oppressors of violent patriarchy.
Parents who support their children enforcing gender stereotypes--which are nothing but the tool of male supremacy--on themselves and those around them are oppressors of violent patriarchy.
They are trying to force all of us to submit to male supremacy.
I know this will be news to all the fake-leftist parents who think they can get away with expressing their own internalized misogyny by supporting this crap. But it's true.
"I didn’t fight for LGB rights during my 20s to be silenced about the erasure of lesbians! I am not going to misgender her- she is female, and I want her to be proud of that!”
I was seeing this trend in the later years of the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival, primarily around the crew and staff. One beautiful butch after another would show up the next summer with changed voices and missing breasts. Even Maxine Feldman, author of Amazon Women Rise, the festival theme, changed her name to Max and called herself "he" by the end of her life. I attended her memorial service. Today, Wikipedia calls her a "non-binary musician." This is overt female erasure, lesbian erasure.
And it's hard to be a publicly visible out lesbian today in support of young women because lesbian spaces have been queered. Here in Albuquerque there is not one gay bar left, just a queer bar. No women's bathroom, and Dyke Night ads say "No terfs."
I agree with Lauren that girls need more opportunities to work with their hands and bodies - to create, move.
Oh my. Thanks for this history lesson and on-the-ground report from Albuquerque. Dyke Nights with "No TERFS"! In other words, these spaces originally designed for women that now exclude women who want women-only spaces. Appalling.
Great interview! Lauren is so right on! I remember woman’s festivals that were mostly attended by lesbians. We were proud of our bodies and would walk around topless or totally naked. We were sistahs, proud of our strengths, power, creativity, artisanship, camaraderie, totally safe space. We encouraged girls to dress and play whatever games and sports and go into any careers they wanted to. Then men calling themselves woman slipped in. Then the men calling themselves lesbians came. Unfortunately, women started wanting their own bodies to look like a Man! Woman started hating their breasts and genitals! Mothers started thinking their children know more than them. Parents proud to say there 3 year old is trans! I used to love Pride events but they have been overcome with trans. How sad!
Hi Agnes, Yes to all of this. I have the same cherished memories, and owe to those experiences much of my confidence, self-love, and determination to support other women.
Mariah - do you think this means that all young females who are masculine presenting are lesbians? Is that the only conclusion? (Or when you say "most" - what would be an exception that you would find acceptable?) Do you think medical professionals could be more thorough in their processes, and still *sometimes* come to the conclusion that some people have gender dysphoria that might go beyond what *your personal experience* of (something similar) was like? Or do you believe it should *never* be a diagnosis or consideration, regardless of the circumstances?
Similarly, in regard to "stone butches" - do you think if someone is not interested in that kind of physical affection that they are intrinsically disordered, and they just need to address the "disorder"? And if so, how exactly would they do that? Be coerced into learning how to like that kind of touch even if they really don't? (This feels so similar to how people talked about gay people and asexual people years ago. That something must be wrong with you if you are not experiencing these things that the majority of the population experiences, or not experiencing them in the usual ways, so it must be unnatural, so it must be fixed.) When is "unnatural" just the way in which a person is different from others, and when is it a "disorder" that needs to be "fixed" by going with the flow, or by some other intervention? Who gets to decide that, in your opinion? The person? A professional? The law? (Curious what you think more in general about that - not in regard to access to sports categories or bathrooms. Just in general.)
Hi A Girl Named Earl, I don't understand all of your questions, and there are oodles in this post, but I think I answer some of them in today's post:
https://strongerwomen.substack.com/p/who-are-trans-kids
As for whether "all young females who are masculine presenting are lesbians" - no.
As for stone butches or women who do not want to be touched in certain ways, no, I definitely would not condone "coercing anyone to like that kind of touch if they really don't," and do not judge people for their sexual preferences so long as they express them only with consenting adults, and no one is injured in the process.
The main question could be simplified as this: do you think there is *ever* a scenario for *any* human wherein it might be acceptable for a medical professional to recommend and oversee treatments that are in the direction of what is called "gender affirming care"? (Whether that person has typical or atypical sex characteristics.) Because it sounds like from the comments throughout these posts, you and your readers are saying there is *no scenario* in which that would be acceptable or appropriate for *anyone* - because there is no such thing as changing sex. So I am trying to understand if that an accurate summary of what you are saying.
Hi A Girl Named Earl, I say this sympathetically, because I know you well enough to know that this is not the answer you probably want to hear. But you've been asking repeatedly -- tho I suspect you've done much of the same research yourself -- so here goes:
There are two recent comprehensive summaries of all the research studies (Cass Report and HHS). Both conclude: There is zero evidence to support "gender affirming care." No evidence that it resolves underlying comorbidities (autism, anxiety, depression, adverse childhood experiences, history sexual abuse). Nor does it decrease suicidality.
And lots of evidence of dangerous medical harms since healthy bodies are, via drugs and surgeries, made less healthy. Healthy tissues and organs and endocrine systems and sexual function and reproductive function and nursing ability and bone strength and cardiovascular health and much, much more are being damaged or destroyed. Contrary to the "First, do no harm" oath.
For instance: female bodies need estrogen. Without it, young women often develop osteoporosis. How bad will that get over a lifetime? We have no idea. We are experimenting on young people.
Also, there is no reliable way to differentiate "true transsexuals" (if there are such people; I'm agnostic but dubious) from natural gender-nonconformers (usually gay) and cross-dressers (usually AGP) who are unhappy, confused, or depressed for other reasons and latching onto this one idea as the cure.
Therefore every medical intervention risks damaging the wrong person for life. Hence all the detransitioner lawsuits underway. And the gradual shuttering of sex-surgery clinics in Europe and the US.
Which is not to say I judge people who choose this as adults. There are powerful social forces, including sexism, homophobia, and extensive cultural indoctrination, at play. And absolutely I support individuals' rights to dress and behave in non-stereotypical ways. And all should be respected as humans struggling to make the best decisions we can.
Perhaps other readers have other input.
Thank you for answering my question. Yes, I have asked it different times and ways because I want to understand if this is the scope of what you are saying. And if this is the scope of what this movement is about.
I appreciate that you make distinctions about wanting to he respectful and not judgmental of adults who want to choose their own path, and I believe that you are trying to achieve that. But honestly, that is why I was asking directly. Because using polite language to say that there is no appropriate time or place for trans identity is still ultimately saying that there is no appropriate time or place for trans people in our society. And whether or not it is your intention to imply that trans people should be directly removed from society, or forced into some sort of involuntary "mental health treatment" or conversion therapy, I believe traction from these arguments will be used to try to justify that very thing. (Much like what is being suggested for houseless folks right now. Involuntary "care" and "treatment" for people deemed to be making poor decisions with their lives.) And that terrifies me.
Mariah did not say, “There is no appropriate place for trans identity.” Those are your words, not hers. She said that there is no evidence supporting extreme cosmetic medical interventions—none of which we can reliably say are safe.
In the spirit of achieving understanding, may I ask you a question, a Girl Named Earl? It appears that opposition to "gender-affirming care" troubles you, despite the paucity of evidence in its favor and the abundance of evidence to its detriment. If I understand correctly, opposing estradiol injections and T-blockers and castration for a "woman born in a man's body," for example, represents to you "that there is no appropriate time or place for trans people in our society." Yet for me, it represents the opposite.
Leaving aside for the moment all arguments about gender, comorbid conditions, intersex, "true trans," etc, if I understand you correctly, you would call this person who feels like a woman born in a man's body "trans." And, if I understand you correctly, you believe applying estradiol injections and T-blockers and castration would transform this trans person into a woman--a woman due every right and dignity of her sex, from women's sports and spaces to pronouns. Which seems to me to represent the very removal of trans people from society which you wrote terrifies you. It certainly terrifies me, as the most brutal and pervasive form of conversion I could imagine, intended specifically to correct the perceived mismatch between gender and sex (and/or to capitalize on it). For those seeking to erase trans from society, I imagine the consequent sterilization is a bonus.
Respectfully, how did you reach the opposite conclusion, when Mariah answered your question about gender-affirming care?
Trans is mental illness. When you give them these janky surgeries you condemn them to a life of sickness and complications from the surgery. How many years does it take off of your expected lifespan when you let a quack surgeon snip and cut and sew and basically just fuck around and find out if any of this works, or just condemns the victim to a lifetime of hospitalization, infection, and loss of function.
I think there is a lot of gray area in this issue, but most people I encounter see it all as black and white. So it is hard to have a conversation in this realm without it turning ugly. So I usually stay out of it. (I will probably step out after this comment, because when I have tried to comment here as Mariah has suggested she is open to, I tend to get jumped on by other people who just want to shut down the conversation. And perhaps this is not the place for actual back and forth conversation, but more of a place for people who are already agree on these points to gather. So perhaps I shouldn't chime in here anyway. If I am asked by her to refrain from commenting here, I will.)
I personally don't have an opinion on the women's category sports issue, partly because I am not an athlete, and I do not have a good understanding of that realm. I do not choose to get into that part of the conversation, mostly because I do not see participation in elite sports as a basic human right, in the same way that people going about their daily lives without harassment or harm should be a basic human right. So I don't see the women's sports category issue as holding the same kind of weight, or even being in the same general category, as other access issues for trans people.
I think there are people in this conversation who advocate for more consideration of the state of mind of young people who are just learning about trans identity, to make sure they are not being coerced down a medicalized path that is not really right for them. This is brought up especially when kids are involved, and so they talk about safeguards to be put in place to make sure children are not harmed by being led into a process they may not be able to fully understand at that age or stage. This, I understand. I think anyone making a major decision about their body should have extensive support along the way in doing that, to prevent an unwanted outcome.
But then in the next layer of conversation, the same people or groups who started out talking about kids (or about access to women's sports or spaces, etc.) also seem to be going ever further - essentially saying that there is never a scenario in which it is really okay for a person to opt into hormones or procedures that have to do with sex and gender, because they see it as nothing more than disordered thinking or mental illness. And then further concluding that it must only come up for other specific reasons (like because they are really gay and uncomfortable with their bodies, or that they are dangerous/perverted by nature, or because it's related to a disability or mental health issue, etc.) and therefore should not be allowed to proceed.
By the time the conversation gets to that level, I think it is making the case that anyone who identifies as trans - regardless of their age or situation - is inherently disordered and therefore should not be taken seriously or allowed to make their own decisions. (Or that their decisions regarding their own bodies or life paths *necessarily and negatively* affect the population at large.)
So it gets very quickly into a separate issue, of who should be allowed to make decisions about people's bodies - including their own body. A medical provider? The person? Society as a whole? The law? This is why it sounds like a lot of questions. But the real question about bodily autonomy can be boiled down to *whose decision should it be* to make changes to one's body, regardless of the reason? Because bodily autonomy is being threatened in every direction, and that affects all of us. To say one group of people should have bodily autonomy, but another group of people should not have bodily autonomy, will ultimately end in none of us having it. So that is also my concern.
Hi again, Sorry to hear you're terrified. That must feel awful. Thanks for explaining that persistent question.
The only part of the movement I can speak for, tho I'm by no means a spokesperson, is the women's rights side, esp sports. I write enough you're probably aware of my concerns.
Unfortunately, male intrusions into women's sports and intimate spaces, including women's prisons, are, from my perspective, the main impetus for any backlash you may be seeing/fearing from the trans or trans ally perspective.
Unfortunately, thie ant-trans sentiment often becomes anti-gay and lesbian, too; the rainbow umbrella is increasingly viewed with derision due to trans overreach into women's rights, sexualized public appearances at Pride and Drag Story Hour, and children's books that define sex based on whether you prefer Barbies or Kens.
By demanding and disrupting women's rights, men who claim a trans identity are triggering the backlash. It's not the women who identify as trans men. They are not invading male spaces, demanding male rights -- or acting violent toward female protesters, as men often do. (https://sex-matters.org/about-us/what-we-are-up-against/intimidation-threats-and-violence-by-trans-rights-activists/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)
You asked about medical treatments. But according to the Washington Post and the Kaiser Family Foundation, just 31 percent of tran-identified adults have used hormone treatments, HRT, or puberty-blocking hormones, and only 16 percent have undergone surgeries. In other words, they're just gender-nonconforming folks -- like lots of lesbians and gay men and others who prefer practical, comfortable clothing.
Only when the males insist on women's rights -- and parents are denied rights, or pressured to "trans" their kids, and when people are pressured to refer to men as women -- do many women resist, criticize, or judge, and assert our boundaries.
I share your hope that innocent people will not be harmed as society sorts out how to handle these issues. So far, it looks to me as if the primary victims are women, lesbians, gay men, and children, but I understand you're probably reading different sources and have more concern for people who identify as trans.
Do we need to vote on a theme song?
https://youtu.be/wp4OQI3Ybfc
Hey L Word, Love the new theme song! Yes from me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wp4OQI3Ybfc
I strongly suspect sports and athleticism can be an antidote to gender dysphoria. I disliked my female body for all the ways it was “unpretty” until I became an athlete in my 20s. In athletics, the focus shifts from what one’s body looks like to what one’s body can do. I came to love being flat-chested because it made running easier. I no longer cared about being “pear shaped” because my big thigh muscles made me a faster cyclist. I had no control over whether my body was pretty, but through training I had a lot of control over whether my body was fast and strong. A girl with gender dysphoria can’t change the fact that her body is female. But if she comes to value athleticism, she will value physical traits ARE within her power to change – – her strength, speed, stamina, and flexibility. When people evaluate themselves based on criteria over which they have control, they have better mental health than when people evaluate themselves based on criteria they cannot control.
Love it. I think it can probably prevent gender dysphoria too. It’s not just about discovering what we can do. It’s about discovering what we can do as girls & women, in these female bodies.
The kids today just love those “extra steps” it’s sad.
I'm glad to have Lauren's eye witness account of what has happened to young lesbians, disturbing as it is. It makes me wonder what is the antidote? How do we make lesbians cool to young women? There are virtually no visible lesbians for them to see (unless you count The Hunting Wives, hah, which makes bisexuals erotic as all get out).
For many of us, it was only recently, when the term lesbian was coopted by men, that we even wanted to use the word lesbian as opposed to gay. We had our own aversions to the word lesbian and to looking like one. Is this then the just desserts of our rejection of our own category?
The lipstick lesbians of the '80s pulled us out of the seriously dull flannel shirts of the '70s that repelled me as a young person. I welcomed this uptick in fashion. The dapper butch lesbian also became fashionable soon after with the bowties and suits. There was a brief revival of Butch/Femme. Then the lesbian baby boom pulled women away from the political front, and as we repeatedly tell the story, once we got gay marriage the gay men gave it up to the trans money.
All my lesbian mentors of the '90s are sitting in retirement homes unwilling to fight because this overwhelms and confuses them; they fought already. They didn't fight for gender expression. They fought for equality and sex based rights, so why didn't that work? Because it was won and feminism is no longer sexy? Or is sexuality itself too scary and lesbians just a porn category?
With every piece of writing I try to argue against medicalization of gay and lesbian youth and trans ideology being pushed in schools, but that only reaches my own peers who are old and unwilling to break from their anti-Trump/No Kings march because they believe fighting fascism is far more important than a few transexuals. Some even believe that backing trans, as a category representing individual freedom, will defeat fascism.
So that leaves me wondering where is the cultural messaging that lesbians are cool and actually have a culture? One that will reach young people. I put my hope in sports because humans (along with our primate cousins) can innately see when something is unfair.
Sorry for the rant. You're touching on something here, in this non-sport post, that speaks to something bigger so I'm riffing on it.
Hi Amanda, not a rant -- or if it is, it's more than welcome. Thanks for all these interesting thoughts and questions. I take heart in the recent decline in trans ID among young people (See link.) Maybe lesbian culture will thrive again, as trans ideology begins to collapse from its own irrational weight. One can hope.
https://substack.com/@strongerwomen/note/c-166248351
So it was just a contagion after all. Hah. A pandemic overreach that had us enthralled to medicalizing everything. Young people tired of shoring up an illogical, non-reality and cutting up their bits. Maybe the thought of being dependent on medical treatment for life not as appealing when it’s no longer seen as life saving, but is, in fact, problematic especially in the face of collapsing planetary resources. But what of the middle-aged fetishistic men who now have access to women’s spaces? I await their diminishing popularity. Much creepier to support men who increasingly show they do not have the interests of women in mind.
Yes! We had a tour guide who used the they/them pronouns. She was a lesbian … it didn’t seem that she was medicalized or had surgery that I could tell. Hopefully not … then once all this trans stuff dies down she can just be a lesbian with healthy body intact.
Keep fighting the good fight!
Precocious puberty hit hard during covid. I saw both my kids affected. I went all in on organic dairy products. Not everyone was able or aware to do this for kids. Many girls got their periods as young as eight years old.
I went through intense dysphoria as a teen. Why do we need to make everything be about gender? It's an obsession.
It's like the sexual revolution. The kids are going to do what kids do. It's a rebellion. Ok. We get it.
Yes but more dangerous & life-altering than many other rebellions.
The camp sounds great, getting kids back in touch with their bodies is such a good idea. The rumination on feelings and identity and internalising and theorising and categorising every little thing is unhealthy for anyone, but young people especially.
my daughter is thirteen now, and has given up swimming. She was a good swimmer! I went through the same thing at her age. Conscious Embodiment has helped me. Do you know of Luis Mojica?
No. Pls tell us more. Lots of girls give up sports at puberty for a variety of reasons, all related to sexism.
Yes. Get outside, work and play together, get strong, make things. Hope they make it happen.
This is so good, and so, so important. Thank you.
Thanks Palmer! 😀
I’m a lesbian under 30 who’s masculine and not trans, we’re out here
To be fair, I’ve never met anyone else like me in real life. I went to a “woke” college where there were a lot of women who identified as queer or nonbinary but I only knew one other lesbian.
Hmm. Sorry to hear that. Would love to hear more about your story. What was that college experience like for you? What did you see as the differences between you and the other women who were attracted to women, but use the terms queer or NB? Feel free to contact me privately if you’d rather chat there.
I’ll dm you!
Yay! Delighted to hear from you. We didn’t really think you were non-existent. :-) I’m sure Lauren would grant that she was generalizing. Tho maybe young women like you are less likely to frequent the sorts of bars, with the sort of clientele, that she described?
I love the idea of physical activity and sports as a way to be embodied and empowered and serve as something of an antidote to trans ideology. But then I feel puzzled by Nikki Hiltz, such a powerful amazing athlete yet who just celebrated getting top surgery this year. Seems like such a disconnect.
Yes, Layshia Clarendon of the WNBA: Same "nonbinary," no-breasts decision. But many factors influence female self-perception, self-love, self-acceptance. There would always be outliers. Glad you like the idea. It's not a full-fledged theory yet; needs more consideration, even research. But worth exploring somehow. We do already know from research that girls who play sports have a better body image, and are less likely to get pregnant before they want to, and are more like to finish high school and attend college, than those who don't. Makes sense that it would help them accept and appreciate the essential fact of femaleness. I look forward to other input.
Thank you Mariah and thank you Lauren for this really important discussion. All of this is part of the mighty anti-female and anti-lesbian rhetoric of this ideology. It needs to be called out for what it is! Misogyny on high!!
I haven't seen this issue addressed before, and I realize the focus here is, appropriately, the intense danger to women, but I fear the predation may run against trans-identified men as well. Rape, after all, is more about power than sex. My trans-identified son, who has always been exclusively attracted to women, is ready to start dating after 3+ years on estrogen (though he now identifies as asexual, thanks, I believe, to the estradiol). But he is shy, unassuming--he's never had the gall to refer to himself as a lesbian. So who would date him? I fear, only an aggressive "transwoman" whom he would not have the political will to reject (because TWAW), though he's confessed to being molested by men in the past. I know for a fact he does not want to date men, but I fear he'll be bullied into it, just as lesbians are. Skinny as a rail, weakened by years of "medicalization" and medical neglect, I fear he's also part of the victim pool the predators are creating.
My heart is with you, Chela. So many young people stolen by this ideology.
Good points. So sorry about all of it, including the early sexual abuse by men.
Thank you, and heartfelt thanks for fighting this fight.
It’s always a relief to me to find lesbians who don’t think they need to be “trans”. I got into an argument with a fellow teacher last week because I “misgendered” his student. First of all, I had no idea that the young woman had changed her name and pronouns, I described her to him as a “short Latina girl who is really smart and quirky”. After several rounds of this, he could not fathom which of his students I was talking about. I finally said, “I think she’s one of those girls who might have changed her name.” It finally dawned on him who I was talking about- he named the girl with her male name and said, “but he is a he, not a girl!” I responded with, “I am so upset by the number of young lesbians who run away from womanhood and need to pretend to be men!”
He came to me a few days later telling me how insulted he was by my making that statement and misgendering her. In a rush before my class began, I kind of let him have it- “there are NO role models for butch lesbians at this school- all these young lesbians see are reels of young women like them taking testosterone and cutting off their breasts! The older lesbians are silenced- no one is listening to them- I didn’t fight for LGB rights during my 20s to be silenced about the erasure of lesbians! I am not going to misgender her- she is female, and I want her to be proud of that!”
After my outburst, I texted him asking for a more calm discussion because I was angry and probably didn’t do a good job explaining my point.
I think there are many supporters of gender affirmation in youth who are more likely to accept or at least slightly more tolerate a semantic scolding from a butch lesbian, than from a cis woman or any male. For example, it makes ad hominem diversions a bit harder to justify within their worldview and social circle. So I think you may be able to push the envelope a bit more in terms of speaking plainly rather than walking delicately around the issues, than some other could.
That said, it’s also possible that trying to bring down the heat and bring some more mutual rapport into a calmer discussion (as you suggested to him) could nevertheless be useful, even if a notch less required.
In my best current understanding, teachers like him are “trying to do the right thing” and are good people - but the psychological payoffs from claiming the undisputable moral high ground, and seeing oneself as the protector of the most vulnerable, can corrupt even well meaning people. The hidden payoff of status seeking or maintenance begin to enter the mix of motivations, mostly unconsciously.
If the question is “how can we best serve the youth in our charge” there could be more openness to discussion. But changing one’s mind in the face of counter-evidence runs into maintaining one’s confidence as one of the good ones (and fear, admitted or not, of being shunned and punished oneself), the task becomes much harder. Changing one’s mind then becomes a matter of shifting one’s self-image, one’s “identity” as a good progressive ally, and listening to people that one’s friends call nasty names (and will call one the same names).
I’ve had friends who had to leverage themselves out of a religious cult, and it takes courage and insight that not everybody musters easily.
I’m not sure how to bring people back, once they get addicted to being on the right side of history and being a protectors of the innocent in their own minds and in their social/professional circles. The payoffs of alignment to reality may be a harder sell than self-righteousness. (And I don’t want to get into being self-righteous in my own political take, either. It corrupts integrity, open mindedness, critical thinking, and humane interpersonal interactions. I’m not immune).
PS: nice meeting you in person at the library today.
I appreciate your commentary. And I enjoyed meeting you as well. I think we have to keep pushing for this “radical” idea of open debate and the free exchange of ideas. We knew that it would be increasingly hard with tv pushing narratives, then social media, and the ideological bubbles that have formed. Most people in education that I talk to have never heard anyone articulate another viewpoint on child medical transition. This has to change. My worldview gets bigger everytime I go into the world and really talk with people, whether that’s in Latin America, Asia, or in the “Bible Belt” of these United States. We understand nothing if we only care to be “right”.
I think you made your point rather well. Plain language is needed to avoid the tolerance for interpretation of more carefully phrased urges. Indeed, confounding terminology takes forms so familiar that it is too easy to fall into the trap. Heard of feminine boys & masculine girls? What about sensitive boys and bold girls? Each can be both, neither is reflective of sex and there is no need for multiple surgeries or a drug regime through life if required to maintain the fiction that a child is born wrong.
Good for you! It sounds to me like you did a GREAT job.
Please don’t do a good job explaining your position. Do the terrible job you thought you did.
And do it again and again and again.
Thank you for the terrible job you are doing.
I think angry outbursts can be super productive. He had probably never heard this point of view, and he had never considered the harms to women and girls. I have a history of pointing out hypocrisy in education and in our school district and in our school. I know that this has always rubbed him the wrong way. He’s more of a “make the best of the situation” kind of teacher and I’m always trying to get at the root of the problem and identify it in order to raise awareness and change it. I think he used this interaction as an opportunity to push back on my direct communication style which he doesn’t appreciate. Moments before he raised his complaint about me, I had asked him to go to the administration to insist on action surrounding an out of control freshman boy who the female teachers had been trying to manage without success or admin support. I told him that admin needed to hear from a male teacher like him and not just the chorus of female teachers who were being gaslit by the administrators into thinking that they were the “problem,” not the student causing constant disruption. As much of a feminist that this male teacher claims to be, I don’t think he appreciated me asking him to stand up for these female teachers who were facing retaliation for kicking the student out of their classes in order to teach the other 30 students. So, he resigned to do this, but then needed to raise this other festering resentment that I had “misgendered” a student and flippantly told him that she was a lesbian. Well, in the end, it didn’t go so well for him as I raised a social justice issue he had never heard before. But, he is my department chair and I need to make nice with him.
“He’s more of a “make the best of the situation” kind of teacher and I’m always trying to get at the root of the problem and identify it in order to raise awareness and change it.”
I hear you loud & clear, my sister in arms!
I see the negative reactions of others to my usually but not unfailingly ruthless truth-seeking to be a “them” problem; I also believe the the second and third of Rumi’s (attributed and conceptually useful) “gates” on how and what to speak — Is it true, necessary, and kind — to be optional, as necessity and kindness (especially this last, on this topic about which we, and women in particular, are told constantly to “be kind”) are in the eye of the beholder, but truths derived from reason, logic, and evidence are brute realities.
Reality always wins out in the end, though usually with far too much unnecessary harm along the way, exacerbated by the efforts of those who wish to deny that reality for whatever reasons 😢
*veritas ex lux, lux ex veritas*
In Sol ☀️ and In Solidarity,
DC
Speaking out against medical predation on kids is true, necessary, and kind.
Standing up against male violation of the privacy, dignity, and safety of female-only spaces is true, necessary, and kind.
Speaking out against male oppressors appropriating the identities of the females they oppress is true, necessary, and kind, for as long as we live under violent patriarchy.
The only people who don't think these things are necessary and kind are the predators and oppressors of violent patriarchy.
And parents who have affirmed.
Parents who support their children enforcing gender stereotypes--which are nothing but the tool of male supremacy--on themselves and those around them are oppressors of violent patriarchy.
They are trying to force all of us to submit to male supremacy.
I know this will be news to all the fake-leftist parents who think they can get away with expressing their own internalized misogyny by supporting this crap. But it's true.
Go Sasha!
"I didn’t fight for LGB rights during my 20s to be silenced about the erasure of lesbians! I am not going to misgender her- she is female, and I want her to be proud of that!”
Go, Sasha!
I was seeing this trend in the later years of the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival, primarily around the crew and staff. One beautiful butch after another would show up the next summer with changed voices and missing breasts. Even Maxine Feldman, author of Amazon Women Rise, the festival theme, changed her name to Max and called herself "he" by the end of her life. I attended her memorial service. Today, Wikipedia calls her a "non-binary musician." This is overt female erasure, lesbian erasure.
And it's hard to be a publicly visible out lesbian today in support of young women because lesbian spaces have been queered. Here in Albuquerque there is not one gay bar left, just a queer bar. No women's bathroom, and Dyke Night ads say "No terfs."
I agree with Lauren that girls need more opportunities to work with their hands and bodies - to create, move.
Well that's depressing AF.
💔
Oh my. Thanks for this history lesson and on-the-ground report from Albuquerque. Dyke Nights with "No TERFS"! In other words, these spaces originally designed for women that now exclude women who want women-only spaces. Appalling.
I wonder if they all accept the girl dick now. And if they do, why?
No. They don’t. They’re still lesbians.
Social pressure.
So these vulnerable young women are voluntarily submitting to homophobic conversion therapy.
Have we accomplished nothing in the past fifty years?
Yes and no.