It was never about the Butch lesbians – and yet it is.

clovenhooves The Personal Is Political Lesbian & Bisexual Rights Article It was never about the Butch lesbians – and yet it is.

Article It was never about the Butch lesbians – and yet it is.

Article It was never about the Butch lesbians – and yet it is.

Clover
Kozlik's regular account 🍀🐐

899

Apr 23 2025, 10:52 PM

#1

The Other Side of Politics Substack, April 23 2025.

https://faikaelnagashi.substack.com/p/it-was-never-about-the-butch-lesbians

Quote:When I thought the trans debate couldn’t get any more absurd, the arguments thrown around by trans rights activists after the UK Supreme Court ruling last week proved me wrong. What about the Butch lesbians? they ask – as if it was ever about us. But then again, it always was. That’s the quiet part. And even now, as some of the more self-righteous start to say our names, it happens in the same tokenising tone that got us into this mess in the first place: we’re only relevant if we can be framed as some sort of non-woman, a convenient loophole that justifies letting men into women’s and lesbian spaces.

Kozlik's regular member account. 🍀🐐

Clover

Kozlik's regular account 🍀🐐

Apr 23 2025, 10:52 PM #1

The Other Side of Politics Substack, April 23 2025.

https://faikaelnagashi.substack.com/p/it-was-never-about-the-butch-lesbians

Quote:When I thought the trans debate couldn’t get any more absurd, the arguments thrown around by trans rights activists after the UK Supreme Court ruling last week proved me wrong. What about the Butch lesbians? they ask – as if it was ever about us. But then again, it always was. That’s the quiet part. And even now, as some of the more self-righteous start to say our names, it happens in the same tokenising tone that got us into this mess in the first place: we’re only relevant if we can be framed as some sort of non-woman, a convenient loophole that justifies letting men into women’s and lesbian spaces.

Kozlik's regular member account. 🍀🐐

Berry

32

Apr 24 2025, 5:40 AM

#2

Well written article. Thanks for sharing

Berry

Apr 24 2025, 5:40 AM #2

Well written article. Thanks for sharing

Myrth
Fiesty Crone 🧙‍♀️

66

May 7 2025, 7:59 AM

#3

(Apr 23 2025, 10:52 PM)Clover The Other Side of Politics Substack, April 23 2025.

https://faikaelnagashi.substack.com/p/it-was-never-about-the-butch-lesbians

Quote:When I thought the trans debate couldn’t get any more absurd, the arguments thrown around by trans rights activists after the UK Supreme Court ruling last week proved me wrong. What about the Butch lesbians? they ask – as if it was ever about us. But then again, it always was. That’s the quiet part. And even now, as some of the more self-righteous start to say our names, it happens in the same tokenising tone that got us into this mess in the first place: we’re only relevant if we can be framed as some sort of non-woman, a convenient loophole that justifies letting men into women’s and lesbian spaces.

Dear goddess. “Non-woman.” 🤬

Myrth

Fiesty Crone 🧙‍♀️

May 7 2025, 7:59 AM #3

(Apr 23 2025, 10:52 PM)Clover The Other Side of Politics Substack, April 23 2025.

https://faikaelnagashi.substack.com/p/it-was-never-about-the-butch-lesbians

Quote:When I thought the trans debate couldn’t get any more absurd, the arguments thrown around by trans rights activists after the UK Supreme Court ruling last week proved me wrong. What about the Butch lesbians? they ask – as if it was ever about us. But then again, it always was. That’s the quiet part. And even now, as some of the more self-righteous start to say our names, it happens in the same tokenising tone that got us into this mess in the first place: we’re only relevant if we can be framed as some sort of non-woman, a convenient loophole that justifies letting men into women’s and lesbian spaces.

Dear goddess. “Non-woman.” 🤬

nina from canada eh

18

May 9 2025, 12:35 PM

#4

it is discriminatory to define a person or demographic in terms of another - such as nonman

it is derogatory to define a person by body parts like cervix haver

woman is a word that all the meaning is there

gender ideology denies ordinary human senses, abuses language and its origins are pornography

men are not their best marketing

nina from canada eh

May 9 2025, 12:35 PM #4

it is discriminatory to define a person or demographic in terms of another - such as nonman

it is derogatory to define a person by body parts like cervix haver

woman is a word that all the meaning is there

gender ideology denies ordinary human senses, abuses language and its origins are pornography

men are not their best marketing

YesYourNigel

190

May 9 2025, 1:45 PM

#5

(May 9 2025, 12:35 PM)nina from canada eh it is discriminatory to define a person or demographic in terms of another - such as nonman

That only really applies when there is one group compared to a single other group, and instead of that group having their own term, being refered to as non-DefaultGroup. Though even then I don't think it's necessarily discriminatory, depending on context. Like if you're talking about pets, saying "non-pet owners" makes sense. The question is if the group has its own identity that needs to be acknowledged or is only relevant in terms of not being or participating in something.

Trans activists say non-men because they believe there are many genders, and the only thing that ties them together is the lack of male privileges (which is ofc bullshit - men who identify as non-men are still privileged af). The real problem is in the denial of male abuse of women, and trying to redirect it into some vague notion of everyone and their mother's dog being victimised by misogyny, so long as they don't get Elon Musk levels of money and worship.

Quote:gender ideology denies ordinary human senses, abuses language and its origins are pornography

Many people say the first two points about feminism - that it's blatantly obvious that women are inferior and pretending otherwise goes against common sense. Common sense is not automatically correct and in fact many people think TIFs are male because they pass better, but they're still women.

They also like to claim that things like "humankind" instead of "mankind", or using singular "they" abuses language. Language is not some independent thing, and should be modify to keep up with human needs and changing ethics.

Edited May 9 2025, 1:50 PM by YesYourNigel.

I refuse to debate two obvious facts: 1. the patriarchy exists 2. and that's a bad thing

YesYourNigel

May 9 2025, 1:45 PM #5

(May 9 2025, 12:35 PM)nina from canada eh it is discriminatory to define a person or demographic in terms of another - such as nonman

That only really applies when there is one group compared to a single other group, and instead of that group having their own term, being refered to as non-DefaultGroup. Though even then I don't think it's necessarily discriminatory, depending on context. Like if you're talking about pets, saying "non-pet owners" makes sense. The question is if the group has its own identity that needs to be acknowledged or is only relevant in terms of not being or participating in something.

Trans activists say non-men because they believe there are many genders, and the only thing that ties them together is the lack of male privileges (which is ofc bullshit - men who identify as non-men are still privileged af). The real problem is in the denial of male abuse of women, and trying to redirect it into some vague notion of everyone and their mother's dog being victimised by misogyny, so long as they don't get Elon Musk levels of money and worship.

Quote:gender ideology denies ordinary human senses, abuses language and its origins are pornography

Many people say the first two points about feminism - that it's blatantly obvious that women are inferior and pretending otherwise goes against common sense. Common sense is not automatically correct and in fact many people think TIFs are male because they pass better, but they're still women.

They also like to claim that things like "humankind" instead of "mankind", or using singular "they" abuses language. Language is not some independent thing, and should be modify to keep up with human needs and changing ethics.

I refuse to debate two obvious facts: 1. the patriarchy exists 2. and that's a bad thing

Recently Browsing
1 Guest(s)

Recently Browsing
1 Guest(s)