Is it because I was born-male that I can say this crap and not get fired?

The short answer is “yes”, so you can stop reading the post now.

Dr Joelle Ruby Ryan PhD is no ordinary transjacktivist, nope, this dude actually is a lecturer of Women’s Studies at the University of New Hampshire. As such, he should be held more accountable regarding Herstory, respecting all political branches of feminism, and be a non-misogynist. Not really too much IMHO, but apparently it is.

The biog from the university:

Dr. Joelle Ruby Ryan graduated from UNH in 2005. She has nearly 20 years of experience as an activist for various progressive causes, including feminism, racial and economic justice, pacifism, size acceptance/weight diversity and transgender, bisexual, lesbian and gay liberation. She is a the author of Gender Quake: Poems and the co-producer (with Peter Welch) of three autobiographical films, including Transilience, which is currently in production. In her teaching, research, organizing and activism, Joelle tries to promote inclusion, intersectional analyses and community-building for positive social change. She is currently a Lecturer in Women’s Studies and the Director of TransGender New Hampshire.

So what happens when a lecturer of Women’s Studies says crap like this:

Well, apparently nothing. But really, should someone who thinks the word “female” is “offensive & passé” be teaching Women’s Studies to a majority of actual born-females? It is pomo-bullshit, all this ‘nothing means nothing’, fed as a steady diet to young women who deserve to be taught the TRUTH about feminism and their reality in the world. But nooooo:

This is actually the tranz/pomo agenda, re-define ‘female’, ‘woman’, ‘sex class’ or erase them out of existence. Because if there is no such identifiable thing as ‘female’ or ‘woman’, you cannot unite together and challenge/overthrow the discrimination against females, can you? Pomo and ‘transfeminism’ (twanzphleminism) are actually anti-female, and anti-feminist, disguised as feminism. It is exactly what patriarchy/twanz want, so you cannot object to being treated as 2nd class citizens (it becomes an ‘individual failing’, and erases the systematic nature of female oppression). This is (in part) what ‘sex class’ means. But anti-feminists like Ryan don’t want you to notice that, and will tell you that you are wrong. Apparently this happens:

If any lecturer does do this sort of crap, he should be fired – it is completely unethical. It is also a form of public humiliation (aimed at the female-born obviously).

A few thoughts on that claptrap:

Thanks for the twanzsplaining on female biological reality dude. As we say in reproductive rights: “no uterus, no comment”. Females are the ones that deal with the consequences of reproductive reality, contraception, abortion and child-rearing.

Should some dude who does not even understand the basics of cultural conditioning of girls (into heterosexuality, looks obsession, ‘feminine’ traits as desirable) really be teaching Women’s Studies? He is also pushing the myth that just because females come from all classes, colours, backgrounds, that their is no shared experiences of female oppression – yet it is fine and dandy for ‘twanzwomen’ to claim a shared oppression of twanzwomanness, even though they come from all different backgrounds. Yay for contradiction!

Twanzjacktivists both appropriate and re-define girlhood experiences out of existence. It is rather ridiculous for middle-aged men to go around calling themselves “girls” – where would they get that? Porn, porn which defines all adult females as girls, as a way of removing their autonomy.

Ryan also teaches “intersectionality”. Whilst we understand that ‘multiple oppressions’ do contribute to a worsening of experiences suffered by the individuals themselves, it basically translates into an online game of Oppression Olympics. Twanzjacktivists have been saying for years how they are the mostest oppressedest of all ‘women’ (and the rest of you bitchez had better stfu about your petty oppressions because twanzwomen have it much much worse than you, and you should put your energies into resolving twanzwomen’s oppression before you address your own).

So a token hat tip to FAB-WOC there, but guess what, TWOC trump that in the Oppression Olympics, because anything that menz suffer must be taken seriously (like rape or racism) and if a female suffers and complains about it, she is deemed a whiny-beyatch and should be focusing her energies onto “moar serious issues” (that affect menz of course!). Radfems get called “bigots” because they prioritise the female-born over the male-born. It’s just a way in which males try to make us stfu about the problems females face. We ain’t gunna.

That all flies in the face of reality doesn’t it? The smallest most discriminated-against ‘class of woman’ (pomo says that doesn’t exist anyway), yet they have a massive five day conference in Philadelphia on Tranz health, financially backed by corporations and government healthcare. Have we ever seen a Women’s Health conference of that size ever? Nor do I recall ever seeing any general feminism indoor conference of that size. Yet Tranz do. Here he is bragging about about the size of the Philly conference (menz just can’t help bragging about size can they?)

See the contradiction there? Still claiming to be the ‘most oppressed’, but massive conference with massive financial backing. Women’s services do not get that degree of support from these sectors. It is the classic ‘bait and switch’, in order to get support and sympathy from libfems claiming the ‘mostest oppressedest’ status, but the reality is they actually do have a shitload of funding and support from everywhere – libfems get blinded to the reality, and take their eye off the under-funded women’s services sector.

A paraphrase/compilation from twanzjacktivists, but radfems are often accused of ‘oppressing’ twanz because of our criticism of transgenderism. One can only ‘oppress’ another if they are in power – last time I checked, the world was being run by menz, not radfems.

Next comes the erasure and re-writing of Herstory, the denial that death threats by twanzjacktivists towards radfems were just something we made up. In a word, bullshit.

Nice use of scare quotes there dude.

Ryan denies that these regular death threats take place (Ryan is closer to being a holocaust denier). Anyway, shit like “die in a fire” and “die cis scum” is fairly findable on google. What a fucking moron to deny something so easily provable, but twanzjacktivists do think libfems are fairly stupid and will fall for any bullshit, hence these outrageous lies. Sadly, libfems do seem to be falling for them.

Ryan has been “an activist” for 20 years, I assume twanz for quite some time too – but his bullshit and anti-radfeminism is indistingishable from the average MRA – and with all his bullshit, he still gets to teach Women’s Studies to a bunch of born-females. Talk about a trojan horse – get a misogynist to teach females that their oppression doesn’t exist, that the male-born are more oppressed, and concern for your biological/reproductive vulnerability and main reason for female oppression is just a made up fantasy by you, that Second Wave is passé, probably First wave is passé to him as well. This guy should not even be teaching classes on how to boil an egg, let alone Women’s Studies. The unfortunate women taking his course are getting their heads filled with useless male propaganda, and accumulating student debt for the privilege of being brainwashed by this shit. Further, a male-born twanzwomen is occupying a teaching position that could have been taken up by a FAB – see how twanzwomen are actually used as ersatz-females in equality monitoring?

Males of any stripe should not be teaching Women’s Studies – it is akin to having white people teaching black people about their own oppression – of course the oppressor class is going to take full advantage to impart as much bullshit propaganda as they can cram in.

Mind you, the above bullshit and contradictions by Ryan is just over the last few weeks in Twitter – I am sure if I could be assed, there would be far more to find.

Anyway, a few more random memes on Ryan, made by various anonymous persons. Poking some fun at someone who really is overdue for it. Remember: Poking fun ain’t the same as death threats. We couldn’t care less if you poked fun at us, but the constant stream of death threats really isn’t funny (as well as being a terribly male thing to do when something meets with your disapproval).

Joelle Ruby Ryan is a joke that should not be teaching Women’s Studies, in the same way of getting the KKK to teach a class on black civil rights just isn’t a good idea.

We have renamed him for the fake that he is – Joelle Zirconia Ryan.

42 thoughts on “Is it because I was born-male that I can say this crap and not get fired?

  1. Hecuba

    Thanks Joelle Ruby Ryan for erasing me because I apparently do not exist!! Same old, old male misogynist propaganda and same old, old male lies because it is essential all biologically born females never, ever challenge the fundamental lie that biological males’ definitions of reality and women’s lived experiences are ‘truths’ not men’s lies!

    World is indeed apparently one wherein default human is male and in this mythical world biological males can magically become ‘females’ but continue to proclaim ‘truths’ from the myopic biological male experience – complete with the requisite horses’ blinkers because men only see and recognise other males. We biological females do not exist in their mythical world.

    minus zero out of 10 Ryan for failing basic feminism theory – whilst no two biological females lived experiences are identical there is one global denominator all biological women are subjected to and that is enforced male domination over all biological women. Culture is not ‘culture’ is it a male supremacist system whereby biological males have created and continue to maintain the male supremacist system whereby all biological males are supposedly superior to all biological females. Any biological female who gains a tiny amount of socio-economic power only does so because biological men permit it and this tiny amount of power can and is taken away immediately said woman/women dares to speak out against male claims ‘this is women’s reality and lives!’

    Ryan is a cuckoo claiming he is the expert on Women’s Studies and we all know what cuckoos do we not? The cuckoo lays the egg/eggs in a different bird species nest and when cuckoo is hatched this invader pushes out the other fledglings in order to have all the food parent birds bring to their supposed chicks. Parent birds think this huge invader – who is not the same species as the parent birds is really parent birds’ chick – but we Radical Feminists aren’t fooled by men’s lies and that is why cuckoos such as Ryan exist because they infiltrate and take over women’s spaces and women’s field of studies. Infiltrate and erase biological women is these cuckoos mandate.

    Like

    Reply
  2. doublevez

    Ruby Coockoo’s uni needs to hear from some outraged FEMALES. How dare you spend taxpayer and granter money paying this MALE to spout SEX RACISM!! Rise up WOMEN and demand this Ruby Cuckoooooooo be rolled out of the nest.

    Like

    Reply
  3. DaveSquirrel Post author

    Complaints, yes. Look at his ‘rating’ from students, and the comments:

    shes so pushy sometimes i think shes a man.

    (no shit!)

    I think she sometimes became too pushy with her own beliefs and did not seem to want to listen to those who opposed her.

    and

    but she is very opinionated and lets everyone know what she believes and doesnt let others believe what they want…

    NOT ONE POSITIVE COMMENT

    Like

    Reply
  4. DaveSquirrel Post author

    Male privilege strikes again!
    I went to check to see if any more memes had turned up, guess what, It’s been pulled. Joe or his mates must have thrown a little tantrum.
    It must be nice to be born male.

    Like

    Reply
  5. Nicky

    Since the University of New Hampshire is a state supported taxpayer funded public university. I think it’s high time to dump all this information on the legislators, Taxpayers and even the board of trustees of New Hampshire. I think the Taxpayers in New Hampshire would like to know that their tax dollars are paying for someone to teach their kids to hate women. I would even start an Email campaign to the Gov of New Hampshire and the President of the University of New Hampshire as well to get Him removed from the University. Why would taxpayers in the state of New Hampshire would want to fund a college professor who teaches women to hate themselves on Taxpayers money and time.

    Like

    Reply
  6. Nicky

    Show this to the people at the University of New Hampshire, the New Hampshire legislators, The Governor of New Hampshire and even the Voting Taxpayers of New Hampshire. Let’s see what happens. See how fast they get him removed or even fired for wasting taxpayers money and using taxpayers money to promote hate. I would start sending this stuff to the New Hampshire legislators, Univ of New Hampshire and even the Media in New Hampshire. I’ll bet ya, the minute the people in New Hampshire find out about this, the rest will be history. It’s time we tell the People in New Hampshire that their tax dollars are being used to finance hatred toward Women and teaching hatred towards women at taxpayers expense.

    Like

    Reply
    1. elizabeth1848

      Who do you think hired this sociopathic misogynist? This man was hired because of his hatred of women. The New Hampshire bureaucrats know exactly what they’re doing and they know the effect Ryan’s poisonous misogyny will have on women and the women’s movement: confusion, dismay, disgust, hopelessness and especially divisiveness. Back in the late seventies when the New Hampshire bureaucrats appointed a “Women’s Commission” to look into issues like rape and “domestic” violence, one of the woman appointees declared that, “Some of these women deserve to be beaten.” Yes, that was the sentiment of the “Women’s Commission.” You get the picture. For at least the last forty years the Univ. of NH has sponsored and employed Prof. Murry Strauss a leading scriptwriter for the Men’s Rights Movement. He’s the propounder, propagandist and promoter of the theory that women are more violent than men, i.e. he says women are usually the initiators of violence (against men). So why wouldn’t the New Hampshire Old Boys hire a sexual fascist like Ryan? He fits their agenda perfectly. I can just imagine them laughing up their sleeves.
      Hiring a man like Ryan to teach women’s studies is not only just like employing a KKK member to teach African Americans about their history, but like he was also encouraged to wear blackface while doing so.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
  7. Nicky

    I say start dumping all the info on Joelle Ruby Ryan to the Academic dean, Provost and the University President at the University of New Hampshire. I’d also dump letters to the New Hampshire legislators and New Hampshire Governor to let them know that their tax dollars are being used to teach hatred towards women at taxpayers expense and time. Let the know that one of their professors is threatening harm towards women. It’s actually unprofessional conduct for any professor to do that and I know if a Academic dean saw that, they would be booted from the University faster than they boot students for plagiarism.

    Like

    Reply
  8. Linda Radfem

    Fucking hell how much more irrational can my world get? The publishing of student’s work on Facebook would have to violate at least one of the university’s policies. Would be enough to get the prick investigated. And when will we see the first sign of some kind of awakening of libfems??

    Like

    Reply
  9. KittyBarber

    I wrote to the co-ordinator of the Women’s Studies Program twice. Here is the letter I sent, and the response I received:
    From: Kitty Barber [mailto:kittybarber@verizon.net]
    Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 1:44 PM
    To: marlab@unh.edu
    Subject: Fwd: Joelle Ruby Ryan

    I am sending this again, as I have had no response from you.

    If you would prefer I write to the Dean of your department, I will be happy to do so.

    Begin forwarded message:

    From: Kitty Barber
    Subject: Joelle Ruby Ryan
    Date: May 25, 2012 12:08:41 PM CDT
    To: marlab@unh.edu

    Greetings;

    I am writing to make you aware–if you are not already–of the actions of one of your faculty members, Joelle Ruby Ryan.

    Ryan is conducting a hate campaign against radical feminists from Portland, OR to London. For some reason, Ryan does not believe that females have a right to gather for any purpose whatsoever. Ryan is obviously a very angry, hate-filled person who uses terms like “radfem scum” to describe those like myself, feminists who do not happen to believe everything that he does in exactly the same way.

    Ryan calls us bigots, “cis scum,” and much much worse on Twitter, and other sites on the internet. You should be ashamed to have this person on your faculty, condoning violence against women simply because they happen to disagree with his politics.

    I am tired of rabble-rousing, violence prone transgender people threatening feminists like me with violence and death. I have come to expect it from some of the more radical members of this minority, but I should think that a University faculty member ought to be held to a higher standard.

    I have written your department before, and have had no response.

    I would like to know what you plan to do about this. Hate-mongering is not something I expect from anyone in a university setting. Please make your own inquiries as to Dr. Ryan’s statements and threats via the internet to all who do not dance the way Ryan happens to want them to.

    This is unacceptable behavior. I want it stopped.

    Sincerely,

    Kitty Barber
    Arlington, MA

    …and the answer:

    Thank you for your note.
    From: Brettschneider, Marla
    Subject: RE: Joelle Ruby Ryan
    Date: June 3, 2012 10:22:08 PM EDT
    To: Kitty Barber

    I thought I did respond.
    All the best on your good work.
    M.

    I’m not kidding. That’s the response I got.

    Like

    Reply
  10. Nicky

    We have to find out who runs the Faculty senate at the University of New Hampshire. Once we know who it is, we can flood their inbox with complaints on Joelle Ruby Ryan. Also send an email to the Academic dean, Provost and the University President as well. At the same time, send emails to the Governor, Lt. Governor and speaker of the house in New Hampshire as well. At the same time, put an op-ed article in the New Hampshire Newspaper as well and included all the evidence.

    Like

    Reply
  11. BadDyke

    Having a man teaching womens studies (I use the word teaching very loosely here!) isn’t the thing to attack, since on that one the libfems have hoisted themselves on their own petard. But then we have the same ole trope that doing ‘womens studies’ means anything in terms of being a proper feminist.

    What makes ANY teaching worth it in that sense is not the name of the course, whether it be womens studies/gender studies/total pomo crap/philosophy/theology/english etc etc, but WHO is teaching it.

    In terms of academic freedom, being a total arsehole and spouting nonsense has never been an impediment, else half of almost all faculties would be out of a job. Will just get labelled as ‘robust debate’, and that’s that. Unless there is something that you can call overt sexism or racism (rather than just what will be seen as a political disagreement with radfems).

    Anyway (american academic rankings being a bit different to UK ones), isn’t lecturer pretty low down? Not tenure track, not research, given that to british ears, almost everyone seems to be some sort of professor.

    Marla Brettschneider — well, seems to think queer studies is a GOOD THING, so not much hope there. Seems to think gender matters as well (rather than sex). To be totally frank, having a transwomen about makes them look sooooooo progressive — although they probably already know what a pain he is, and frankly I can’t see that she is going to worry herself unduly about a very junior non-research, teaching gofer, UNLESS he does something so outrageous that they have no choice. Taking a pop at radfems online ain’t gonna do that, however nasty (they probably don’t like radfems that much either, not QUEER or intersectional enough………).

    The only hope I see here is the publishing student essays online — THAT is a definite no-no. So, boring ole administrative procedures is the only way to go.

    Like

    Reply
  12. DaveSquirrel Post author

    Quite a few of the quotes/paraphrases are grounded in stuff he has said – “female = hateful” (I’d call that fairly sexist), the “girlhood experiences are ridiculous myth”, “death threats to radfems are myth”. I haven’t really followed him, but I am sure that is just scratching the surface, the dude is a motormouth of misogyny.

    Mmm, we probably need a blog for “stoopid stuff twanzjacktivists say”.

    Like

    Reply
  13. BadDyke

    Well, as we know from Lawrence Summers, just having objectionable opinions can take a while to get you kicked out………………

    I know what WE’D consider sexist and unsupportable, just that I don’t think his colleagues (even if they did personally consider his ideas to be stupid/objectionable/sexist) will think that it is grounds for dismissal, or indeed actionable. The ONLY grounds that I think would be taken seriously, are any ACTIONS that relate directly to students and teaching — like publishing student essays online or whatever it was.

    Cos anything else (like academics having EXTREMELY objectionable opinions), no one will do anything. To give an example:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4785574.stm

    He said black people had lower average IQs, university said his views were abhorent, BUT that is as much as they can say, unless someone has PROOF that he has discriminated against black students. Because:

    its staff had “freedom within the law to question and test received wisdom, put forward new ideas, controversial and unpopular opinions without placing themselves in jeopardy of losing their jobs”.

    Which ain’t ALL bad, because that theoretically protects feminist academics with extremely unpopular views as well (supposing that we can scale the sexism obstacle course in the first place and get appointed).

    Sorry, but I just think that writing to anyone about this idiot and his objectionable views is pointless.

    Like

    Reply
  14. BadDyke

    Just to add, given the campaigns against Sheila Jeffreys, if another university (as opposed to some outside organisation) invited her to speak, then ‘academic freedom’ would be the response you’d (hopefully) get if someone tried to protest against that.

    Indeed, if you look at this recent article about attempts to gag her:

    http://www.tasmaniantimes.com.au/index.php/article/scarlett-alliance-fails-in-bid-to-gag-professor

    and one comment in particular:
    “It is very unfortunate that Sheila Jeffreys is allowed to hide behind her academic credentials rather than the truth that she is a reactionary who belongs to extreme Radfem group which is locked in the thinking of the second way of feminism.”

    So, her opponents realise that ‘academic freedom’ WILL be used by universities to allow her to speak.

    But the point about academic freedom is even when it allows someone to speak, it DOESN’T absolve them from having to argue their points. Sheila Jeffreys, I’m more than sure, can back-up whatever she has to say, however much the sex-pos libfems may howl. Whereas JRR? He has very little academic reputation as far as I can see. He has no arguments, and just seems to repeat that radfems are scum ad infinitum.

    “girlhood experiences are ridiculous myth” Unless you talk to any woman, who knows that is crap. O dear, his claims derailed by incovenient facts.

    “death threats to radfems are myth” O dear, we’ve got the proof. Another inconvenient fact.

    Let’s hope that the young women who mistakenly wander into his Intro womens studies course can see what crap he is coming out with, even if they have to vomit it back at him to get the grade. (sorry, that one became a little TOO graphic!).

    Sorry for wibbling on, but I do really think that if we want Sheila Jeffreys and feminist academics like her to have SOME protection, then we just have to put up with gadflies like JRR as well.

    Doesn’t mean you can’t do the usual stuff as regards the internet and complaints, but complaining to his university is a non-starter.

    Like

    Reply
  15. DaveSquirrel Post author

    Whilst you have a point on the ‘academic freedom’ angle, the case of JRR is clear – he makes lots of anti-female and misogynist remarks, and is a lecturer in that specialty area. The universities would not tolerate a lecturer teaching say, African American studies who publicly went around making racist remarks. That is the key element, in teaching those students who are the targets of his misogyny (or racism etc).

    Like

    Reply
  16. BadDyke

    I think the problem is that the remarks he makes online are just going to be judged as ‘robust debate’, and a different matter, say, to a direct act such as a sexist remark aimed at a student, or behaving in a sexist manner towards a student. Just trying to add what I’ve seen as regards the way universities behave, I’m not for a MINUTE saying that I don’t think he is sexist and misogynistic, just saying that what is publically available isn’t going to influence the university. Most university disciplinary procedures are worded in a rather pragmatic fashion, they’re aimed directly at what someone says and does to students and other staff members, not whatever objectionable (or indeed even abhorent) opinions or comments that some one makes elsewhere.

    Although I should add that the example I used earlier, he was eventually suspended amd disciplinary action started, but then ‘early retirement’ happened (i.e. they did a deal rather than drag him through the whole disciplinary process):

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Ellis_%28lecturer%29

    “However, in bringing forward the retirement a year sooner than Dr Ellis wanted, the university agreed to pay him a year’s salary and to make a contribution towards his legal costs.”

    So, they paid him off. And this was for someone who openly and repeatedly claimed that blacks and women were genetically inferior.

    Like

    Reply
  17. magicpoppy

    http://www.sfbaytimes.com/index.php?sec=article&article_id=6947

    “To me, trying to promote radical change in society is my reason for living. Gender is much more about power, privilege and oppression than hormones, genitals or chromosomes. “

    Ryan, like most trans women activists, is obsessed with erasing sex-based oppression of females. I think this obsession springs from the deep-down understanding that they are not now and will never be truly female, and deep rage against women over this incontestable fact.

    Like

    Reply
  18. DaveSquirrel Post author

    Thanks for the link magicpoppy, amusing!
    Given the title “A TransAmazon Takes on The Man”, and the way they go after radfems, does that make radfems ‘the man’? They also mention J. Michael Bailey who was on the receiving end of a massive campaign against him (and his children – such are the gutless bullies that are twanzjacktivists).

    Alice Dreger called his work “laden with factual errors and misrepresentations”, mwahahah. He strikes back with “Clearly, Dreger has used her considerable power as a tenured professor at a prestigious university, as a guest on The Oprah Winfrey Show, as well as her privilege as a middle-class, white, cisgendered woman to bear on someone with less cultural and institutional power than her. Such actions are appalling and unethical and absolutely anathema to feminist principles.” But I guess gloating that a small radfem conference got moved (and mocking his student’s essays on FB) are the height of feminist principles? He is just pissy he didn’t get on Oprah. LOL

    As a side note, joellerubyryan.com is up for sale. I guess his laydeebwain forgot to renew it. Some bits of the self-promoting, self-indulgent crap are on the wayback. *boredom warning*
    http://web.archive.org/web/20080327074335/http://www.joellerubyryan.com/

    Like

    Reply
  19. Sugarpuss

    Male privilege oozes from every crevice of this fucktard.

    Like most dudes, he posts extremely unflattering photos of himself online, without so much as a second thought. You’d think that if he’s really trying to pass as a woman, he’d at least bother to wash that fucking nasty, greasy bird nest that sits upon his fat, oddly shaped head (and put a hairbrush through that shit too). But you see…Ugly Privilege (something that only biological men possess) is what allows him to coast through life looking like a goddamn vagabond from planet Crystal Meth. Lulz. If he were a biological female, nobody would even know his fucking name. He would be a social pariah; an outcast. He would only be allowed entry into mainstream society on the condition that he agrees to undergo massive facial reconstructive surgery and a 12 week liquid diet.

    Yep…he aint trying very hard, but then he doesn’t have to. Being trans means escaping all the drudgery (AKA Women’s work) involved in the elaborate beautification process. Just like every other biological male, he fully expects to be accepted just the way he is, and his wish is granted. Meanwhile, biological females are still under the microscope, and still being told that we are inherently flawed from birth; makeup & fashion industries say “Ca-ching!”. Plastic surgeons making a killing too. All of this money is made off the backs of women (real women, not trannies). Smug asswipes like JRR hang on to the trans label vehemently; they don’t really want to be women because that would mean being treated like an actual, biological female….and NOBODY likes that. So… transwoman is simply a *wink wink* *nudge nudge* codeword for “Chill dudes. I may be dressed like a split-tail, but I was born with a big, manly cock. I’m still part of the brotherhood!”.

    This fraud, this cheap imitation of womanhood is nothing more than a manic-depressive emo knob who spent the majority of his teen years listening to Marilyn Manson CDs, and painting his bunghole with a tube of dollar store lipstick (Wet-N-Wild Cherries Jubilee, to be exact 😉 ).

    Unless the vast majority of these con artists are “trans-lesbians”, I can’t imagine the alliance with MRAs lasting for very long. I mean, as soon as JRR demands that Paul Elam give him a good finger-banging, the shit is gonna hit the fan (LMAO Literally).

    Like

    Reply
  20. DaveSquirrel Post author

    You are so spot on with the ‘ugly man privilege’ and the reason why they will always cling to the trans label and never want to be regarded as exactly like born-females (but still insist that they do). The reason being, even though they may be lower on the male hierarchy, they will always occupy a position higher on that hierarchy than born-females. This is why all the tranz protection legislations have been brought in with relative ease – when was there ever in the history of anywhere, a massive street demonstration of 1,000s of TWs protesting for their rights like FABs had to do? Never is when. Males are automatically accorded human rights, females are not.

    As for Joe, at 6’6″, there is no way in hell he would ever pass as female.
    He is also a “fat woman” now, another social leper category if one is born female – but as a male, nope, doesn’t affect him at all.

    Like

    Reply
  21. survivorthriver

    Unbelievable! I took Women’s Studies in the 1970’s when it was about giving voice to herstory. It was about learning about the female story from our own voices telling our own stories and reading female primary resources for information on our shared condition.

    I did not favor establishing free-standing Women’s Studies programs, as I thought budget cuts would make those easy targets for future axing. I favored inserting herstory into all coursework. But, this Women’s Studies travesty at the University of New Hampshire is an equally appalling outcome which I never in a million years foresaw. A surgically modified male lecturing to females on our stories? Harumph.

    Just today a very dear 65 year old butch dyke and I were having cause to notice a F2T in the larger circle is really suffering premature aging and much ugliness. She used to be an impressive powerful looking woman, now looks like a bizarre and overwhelmingly unhealthy creature. Sad. One of our other mutual friends long ago escaped the frankendokters at university in the 1960’s who wanted to “T” her up for double mastectomy and more of their mischief. She saw right through it – that society had a very hard time stomaching her 450 lb. Harley riding, studded collar wearing musician totality. She became quite an amazing person in her life, and I’m so glad the frankendokters did not prematurely destroy her.

    I did not know whether to cry or laugh while reading this post – but the bottom line is he should not be teaching Women’s History. What a farce.

    Like

    Reply
  22. BadDyke

    “– but the bottom line is he should not be teaching Women’s History. What a farce.”

    Perhaps the real bottom line is that ‘women’s studies’ or ‘gender studies’ at uni is just a failed experiment. The menz were never going to let women do their own stuff, so made it just yet another boring piece of academia fodder — I’m not saying that individual feminist academics don’t so there thing in academia, but once it comes to teaching undergrads and the usual academic degree-mill, the men were never going to leave it alone.

    Also fosters the attitude that you can LEARN to be a proper feminist by doing a womens studies course, or that having a degree in such makes you a ‘better’ feminist that one who hasn’t.

    “You are so spot on with the ‘ugly man privilege’”
    O YES! I like that one. As some have noted from older women who transition, an older woman is invisible (unless they go down the surgery and botox route and try to keep playing the beauty game until they expire), whereas an older male, even though he may be as ugly as the back end of a bus, can still be seen as powerful and distinguished.

    Like

    Reply
  23. Sugarpuss

    BadDyke said:

    As some have noted from older women who transition, an older woman is invisible (unless they go down the surgery and botox route and try to keep playing the beauty game until they expire), whereas an older male, even though he may be as ugly as the back end of a bus, can still be seen as powerful and distinguished.

    Yes, and the pathetic excuse given for this disparity is that post-menopausal women are no longer reproductively viable. However, what I find most interesting, is how the low quality of sperm produced by older men is conveniently pushed under the rug. Nobody wants to talk about the fact that some Viagra-chomping, perverted grampa is more likely to sire mentally retarded children. You’ll never see this factoid discussed on the evening news.

    Like

    Reply
  24. survivorthriver

    BadDyke, you are right. The incidence of autism and Downs and other birth defects increases significantly in fathers who are over 50 years of age. You are right, that is never discussed.

    Like

    Reply
  25. biodyke

    The only thing men in dresses are qualified to teach is how men like to dress up as women. Altho even they might have a bit of trouble seeing this dude as a role model seeing he gets his hair and beauty tips from Ronald McDonald in the 1940’s.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a rilly rilly twanzphobic reply, go on, dares ya!

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s