I am writing this on my phone so please excuse any spelling, grammatical, and formatting errors as my uncoordinated fingers fight with my shitty touch screen phone.
Nugent is, again, embroiled in a debate where his name is being smeared. It seems to be the go to tactic nowadays and we have seen it with Maryam Namazie being labelled Islamophobic and Peter Tatchell being called a racist. It’s not a new tactic but it’s one that is growing rapidly among the left. But Nugent is well capable of taking care of himself so I won’t discuss that here.
The claims made about Michael are patently ridiculous but I do think he mischaracterised transphobic comments in his comments section.
So Micheal believes Cindy is merely discussing the idea that cis men might abuse laws intended for trans people in order to assault women in their spaces. Firstly, this doesn’t mean that this is transphobic. It is possible that this is simply dog whistling. The idea of women being assaulted by men thanks to laws enacted to protect the rights of trans people is a well known right wing trope. They use this fear, an utter invention, in order to deny trans women access to women’s spaces and even to try to eliminate trans women’s identity.
If a person raises these concerns and wants to find a solution that protects both women and trans women then I don’t see a problem. Is that what Cindy is doing? I don’t know, I am not a mind reader but nobody who knows who Cathy Brennan is and cares about trans people would ever link to her favourably. The manner in which Cindy discusses trans issues just reaks of TERFism. In my opinion, Cindy’s comments about cis men entering women’s spaces amounts to nothing but dog whistling transphobia.
We see the same tactic being used against marriage equality. The story of two gay men adopting and abusing a young child is often cited. They feign concern for child safety and tighter controls on adoption laws but their objective is to ban LGBT people for marrying or adoption. So you can quite easily replace Cindy’s concern for women with anti marriage equality concern for child welfare: it’s not what they actually care about.
This is further solidified by her others comments which are directed at trans women and not just deceitful cis men as Michael mistakenly thinks.
The above comment is about trans women, not cis men. Cindy is clearly referring to trans women who haven’t surgically transitioned yet. And insinuates that they will leering at women and girls. This is, again, the hateful “transexuals will assault women” trope. Sure, Cindy does mention cis men who may intend on abusing the laws but much of it is about “be-penised” trans women.
Again this comment is about trans women, not cis men. As you can see in the parenthesis Cindy distinguishes the deceitful cis men from the rest of the comment. So the rest of the comment is clearly referencing trans women. In fact, “or in some cases” suggests the deceitful cis men are a minority of those that commit the rapes which Cindy mentions. Also saying “based on nothing but ‘feelz’” denigrates trans people and their indentity.
Again, this was on my phone so I apologize for any errors or if my thought process was a bit scattered. But the TL;DR is Cindy was clearly referencing trans women when talking about women being attacked. This is a well known hate trope. And in the instances where she wasn’t taking about trans women, it appears to be nothing but dog whistling.
And as grand as it is for me to ponder whether or not Cindy and others are dog whistling, or if she is referring to trans women or cis men in this or that paragraph, I doubt it’s fun for trans people who have to put up with this constantly. And have laws enacted to erase their indentity based on these lies.
Now I don’t think Michael is a transphobe, supporting transphobia, materially or otherwise. Or is dog whistling or any other of the ridiculous labels thrown about. He is a good person who has been an LGBT advocate for over 30 years and I just think he is mistaken in mischaracterising Cindy’s comments. And 30 years of advocacy shouldn’t be whitewashed because somebody is mistaken. The left needs to stop tearing itself apart by attacking anyone who appears the slightest bit impure. If you think a person is wrong it doesn’t mean they are Hitler incarnate.
However, I can confirm, Michael, is an actual Leeds fan and for that there is no redemption