Something I have noticed about online discussions and ‘debates’, particularly around the subjects of porn, male violence, prostitution, rape and even trans issues, is that the defenders of these things distract from the points we raise, using several tactics.
Depending on the topic, say male violence, the most common tactic is ‘exceptionalism’. The most obvious one is “men are victims too” which tries to obscure the overwhelming fact that victims are predominately female, and the perps and very predominantly male. Even when male victims exist in victim categories, they are as likely, or more likely to be victims of other males, not females. In looking at topics like domestic violence, you must always analyse the perp and victim stats side by side to see the trend. Ballbuster has written a post on exceptionalism. Exceptionalism are the minority cases held up in order to try and disprove the (majority) rule. Trans try to do this with the intersex case, as if it proves anything other than they are idiots.
Bait and switch is another common tactic. Whereby the male suppremacist supporter will either pretend to address our direct question(s), but somehow twist it around in their answer by not answering the direct question, and answering something else, or just posing a question in response that usually relies on some sort of exceptionalism. Here is a bit of an example out in the wild. I found this link* via one comment on one of the IBTP trans threads:
I always find this very frustrating, but I think an important point is highlighted by the way this debate is typically framed.
The “trans people in public toilets” debate is almost always framed in terms of protecting cis women from trans women
Quite often this framing is not explicit, but is implicit in the language used to frame the issue, and in terms of what is and is not said.
The issue we frame is about protecting FAB women, but not necessarily from “transwomen” (although that can be part of it). The main issues we bring up are multi-faceted and not quite as simplistic. Transactivists aren’t that discerning as to who they let into their little clubhouse, including “transwomen” with penises. So that is the first problem, their lack of drawing a distinct line on ‘woman’, their party line is “anyone who feels like they are a woman” or “anyone who identifies as a woman”. They aren’t too fussy, and rapists/pervs and murderers who quite obviously dress or use this line to get close to their (female) victims, or get transferred from a men’s prison into a female one, or avoid jail altogether. On second thoughts, perhaps we should be afraid of them! But the primary issue is that transactivists refuse to draw the line, opening up places like women’s restrooms to “anybody”, when they are already dangerous enough without even allowing men in there. Transactivists insist that their feelings and ‘rights’ to be seen as women, trump women’s safety. No deal.
Another bait and switch tactic so very commonly used is how twanzphobic radfems are. It is not the radfems bashing or murdering M2Ts, it is men. Are they ever singled out like radfems are? No, they only ever get mentioned in a general ‘the whole world is soooo twanzphobic’ kind of way. Only the radfems constantly get slapped down with the ‘haters’ and ‘twanzphobic’ labels for merely using words to express disagreement with the trans ideology. Hardly the same as having your brains being blown away by some homophobic (twanzphobic) dude, is it? So go ahead transactivists, find all those cases of bashings and murders of M2Ts committed by radfems. That fruitless search should keep you busy for a while.
The final tactic they use, when the above tactics or silencing techniques aren’t working is to lie.
The reason these threads of ‘debate’ get so long is not because they are overly complex, but there is a shit load of time wasted untangling all of the above tactics. Well done to all of you who go in there and hold the radfem position – mAndrea, delphyne, yttik, AlienNumber, Noanodyne, and the many others.
– – – – –
Now, just before you go off testerically screaming “twanzphobia”, highlight the passages that:
1) denied you were a human
2) said I hated you
3) wished you bodily harm (telling you to piss off or calling you ‘idiot’ does not count)
4) point to the ‘loads’ of articles where radfems physically have beaten the crap out of a transperson
If you find those bits, then please do run around screaming “twanzphobia”.
– – – – –
Radfems, feel free to use or adapt the disclaimer in any of your posts or comments. It *might* stop the twanzphobic namecalling, but I doubt it.
– – – – –