Suzanne Moore and Harry Styles

“I have left the Guardian. I will very much miss SOME of the people there. For now that’s all I can say.” So tweeted Suzanne Moore, a transphobe. Is Catherine Bennett considering her position there? “Gutted” tweeted Jess Phillips, who is not a transphobe.

This is a transphobia row. The Guardian welcomes transphobia, but also has articles standing up for trans rights. Moore published the names of employees of the Guardian who complained about her transphobia. Obsessive transphobes started abusing them.

In replies to Jess Phillips’ tweet, there is a lot of abuse. Some of it is from the Left, attacking her as a right-winger. Some of it is from transphobes, such as this from Loulabelle:

I don’t believe you. Prove it! Be brave and fight for women and little girls. We need more voices otherwise we won’t have any. Our speech, words, experience, rights will be gone. Then remember the part you played.

That would be heartrending, if it were related to reality. She imagines trans rights means the end of women’s rights. But some calls Phillips out on transphobia:

For someone who continually claims they are pro LGBT rights, why are you yet again, tweeting in support of a transphobe?

Then there are little squabbles about the different tweets. I wondered if Phillips could use them as a poll- count up the tweets and the Likes, and decide which side was stronger. Unfortunately, the replies seem mostly from phobes. Phobes are energised by such tweets. They get to shout their hatred. Trans people will be discouraged. It’s personal for us, our lives are afflicted by transphobia. We will retreat first. We need allies to stand up for us. And nuance is impossible in a tweet reply.

I would rather Moore had ceased her transphobia. She wrote other stuff as well. She never said anything original about trans rights, just repeating the same old boring lies arguing that trans rights in any way conflict with women’s rights. She can always go back to the Daily Mail, she never seemed uncomfortable there, writing for the “Femail” pages. The Daily Mail will allow her to write transphobia in every column if she likes.

Moore’s second-last article in The Guardian could be read as transphobic, but I read as confused. She tells her miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy stories, as these things should be generally known, not kept private and shameful. She writes,

It is not transphobic for women to name our experiences as females and mothers. To insist our bodies matter and our losses are real. It is a matter of life and death.

Well, I would not object- unless you name them specifically to score a transphobic point. Yet she also says, “Women and trans men have periods. Why not just say that?” Indeed. “Women and trans men” is one way of doing inclusive language, an alternative to “pregnant people” or “people with cervixes”. She seems to be expecting to be called transphobic, and railing against anyone calling anyone transphobic, and only being transphobic in that she is expecting people calling out transphobia to be completely unreasonable. Or, she is writing about something she does not understand.

Meanwhile Harry Styles wore a dress on the cover of Vogue, and the mad Right got angry.

There is no society that can survive without strong men. The East knows this. In the west, the steady feminization of our men at the same time that Marxism is being taught to our children is not a coincidence. It is an outright attack. Bring back manly men.

These right wing commentators seem to have an idea of a masculinity, proper to men, which can be taught, and can be subverted. All men must fit that narrow masculinity. Women must be feminine. But such masculinity is under threat, such that a singer on a magazine cover can damage it.

I love masculinity. I read the Letter from a Birmingham Jail yesterday, and it is beautifully masculine. Following the example of St Paul, Martin Luther King writes simply, “I am in Birmingham because injustice is here”. He will stand up and oppose it. And I want men to be able to say, with Styles, that “real friendship stems from being vulnerable with someone”- being your true self, without masks, including the imposed mask of permitted masculinity. Meditation has helped him be more present. It changed his life, subtly. He wants to evolve, and finds the fearlessness (a good masculine quality) of David Bowie (in presenting nonbinary gender). Such fearlessness is anathema to the Right- fearless of its incomprehension, hatred and ridiculous rules- but Vogue’s male photographer observes of Styles, “It’s a good thing to be nice”. “He’s really in touch with his feminine side because it’s something natural,” says a friend.

Trans women are women. Harry Styles is a man. Ben Shapiro shows his ignorance on Twitter again, gets owned, and Vogue gets more publicity. Suzanne Moore gets into a nasty war with colleagues, loses her job, and all the transphobes erupt, whining and hating. We don’t fit gender roles, and we cope as best we may.

23 thoughts on “Suzanne Moore and Harry Styles

    • She is not one of the obsessives who campaign on nothing else, but she is a dismissive transphobe, thinking trans people are a suitable subject for humour- the “Brazilian Transsexual” remark was throwaway- and not deserving of respect or consideration. Then feminist women deplatformed a transphobe, and her response was that women must be able to organise. Her sympathies are with the extreme transphobes, even if she is not yet one of them. She published the names of 336 Guardian employees who complained about transphobia in the Guardian after that article. It’s reassuring to read them– many are bylines I know, they have responsible jobs, it’s good to see how many will stand up for us. But this last article is just silly, whining about inclusive language then using perfectly acceptable inclusive language. I know she would demand inclusive language for women- “police officer” rather than “policeman”- but she seems not to see how important inclusive language can be to others. She does not think we deserve respect in general, so she does not think we deserve respect on this particular issue.

      The Press Gazette reported she has had rape and death threats after her transphobic articles. I am appalled- and that has nothing to do with her transphobia. People who issue such threats will, anyway.

      Liked by 2 people

  1. So anyone who thinks homo sapiens is a sexually dimorphic species is now a “transphobe.” Got it. Kids, as someone who has been gay for 50 or so years, and who remembers where things were and where they are, including all the struggles, I am just blown away by the utter nastiness of the transgendered. To my experienced eye, I find it hard to conjure up any group of people who are uglier and quicker to offense and anger than today’s transgenders

    There are three realities that you refuse to accept.

    You cannot change your sex. You can take hormones to alter your body and (somewhat) your psychology, but the operations are, in the end, extensive cosmetic surgery. Have at it, at least if you’re an adult, but that will not change your sex, only your outward presentation of gender.
    Most of the MtFs are autogynephiliacs, i.e. heterosexual men who have a kink that makes them excited to imagine themselves as women. Most MtFs wind up as lesbians, which makes sense given their autogynehiliac history. Have at that too, at least if you’re an adult, but it’s not a civil rights issue to me.
    Gender expression has a significant cultural component, but a much larger biological one.

    Time was, and not too long ago, when trans people could have conversations about all of this without flying off the handle and seeking to destroy the lives of those who don’t cater to illusion. That’s no longer the case. The utter self-righteousness and nastiness of the transgender lobby is phenomenal, but no matter how angry you become, you will not change biology.

    By the way, Ts, you have nothing in common with LGB. You’re not gay, and you never were.


    • “the transgendered”? Is that akin to my grandfather speaking of “the gays”? Your experienced eye needs an optometrist, and your literal eye needs to catch up on its reading.,

      I’m not particularly happy being slapped at the butt-end of LGB, myself, but I am not nearly as angry as you seem to be about it.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Ah yes, the usual: Use the wrong terms, which change every six hours, and God help you.

        By the way, no anger here. That’s your specialty. I’m intact, and you are not.


        • Apparently, you are attempting to anger me, but name-calling without any basis does not prove you’re intact – or in possession of any tact at all, for that matter. I have been a transgender person longer than you have been a gay person, and was one long before there was a transgender lobby. No, I never was gay, and I wouldn’t presume to characterize or define you, because I can’t totally relate. Nor does your sexuality give you the ability to analyze and define my gender identity. One would think, though, that “someone who has been gay for 50 or so years, and who remembers where things were and where they are, including all the struggles” would have some empathy for people who are struggling for acceptance, themselves.

          Seeking happiness and joy in my life is my specialty. Anger is but an inconvenient sideline.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Welcome, John. Thank you for commenting.

          “Gender expression has a significant cultural component, but a much larger biological one.” What a bizarre opinion! You’ve come to the right place, John. You might learn something.


  2. “All comments welcome,” unless you should post a link that the transgenders don’t like. Then you’ll be censored, because trans-fragility. LOL


    • On the contrary, I welcome your comments because they show you up for what you are. But you may be confused. This is not a hate propaganda site where you can post any old rubbish. The entertainment that may be derived from your nastiness is strictly limited. I don’t want to bore my readers with worthless content.


      • When you have no ideas, you turn to personal attacks and censorship. The trans lobby is one of the most fragile and hateful out there. So be it, but your opinions won’t change the tragic realities.


        • The only “tragic realities” here are that there are people who think it’s necessary to point out how anyone else is supposed to think and feel about themselves, and to do so in such an insulting manner (all the while claiming how nasty and angry “the transgenders” are). Although I would never presume to analyze it as such, there’s a possibility that this all stems from an internalized homophobia. Nevertheless, it is no more a concern of mine than it should be yours of me. I am under no obligation to explain who I am to anybody, much less obliged to accept someone else’s explanation of who I am – especially when every comment is made with a personal attack, itself.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Exactly where did I point out how you are supposed to think and feel? All you and others here have done is deflect, attack, and censor. That’s what people do when they are afraid. Given the realities of the transgender condition, this is understandable, and maybe even inevitable. That, by itself, isn’t a huge problem. The problem is that the transgender lobby has hoodwinked the media and many politicians into endorsing their manifest illusions, and worse yet, has gone all out to destroy anyone who isn’t “supportive” on your terms.

            We’ll live, but roughly 40% of you will not. That’s sad enough, but the ultimate sadness is that you’re drawing kids into your disorder and calling it good, with all the nastiness and obvious contradictions. Oh well, but no matter how much fluff you publish, you cannot change your sex or your gender. The most you can do is change your presentation, and usually not too effectively.


            • “Hoodwink… illusions… destroy… you will not survive.” That’s the last whining stupidity you get to post here. Call it censorship if you like. Rather, it is editing. You are too boring to be worth the space, and too detached from reality to be worth considering.

              Liked by 1 person

            • It could be funny, if it weren’t so sad. He can’t even see that most everything he says is a contradiction. Talk about an ineffective presentation! 🙂

              Liked by 1 person

            • Your comment disappeared. John Jay said some deluded, insulting, repetitive nonsense, and you replied,

              “LOL all you like. I won’t hear it, because there’s nothing coming from you of which I think is worth listening. I’ve already googled everything in your repertoire, and I remain unconvinced by it. I was aware of my gender identity before I could be aroused by it – when Ray Blanchard was still in grade school. I didn’t make it this far by being fragile, either.”

              But I deleted his gibberings, and your comment vanished too. Sorry about that. If anyone wants to learn about “autogynephilia”, here is a good place to start.

              Liked by 1 person

            • LOL all you like. I won’t hear it, because there’s nothing coming from you of which I think is worth listening. I’ve already googled everything in your repertoire, and I remain unconvinced by it. I was aware of my gender identity before I could be aroused by it – when Ray Blanchard was still in grade school. I didn’t make it this far by being fragile, either.


All comments welcome.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.