It’s like being on the Titanic. But you are in the hold, and have been scraping ice into your drink for quite a while while measuring and studying the rip letting icy water in. Twitter allows us to see that the first class passengers and the crew are slowly deciding if they can skip past their desert and start debating the possible existence of icebergs and are wondering if there was possibly any reason they might need some more diversity in the dining room…
So Rudd has gone from government. May’s strategy, and it was May’s strategy of making the lives of immigrants as uncomfortable as possible has, like the same strategy through benefits resulted in a collapsing institution and a political crisis. Brexit, our suicide leap driven by the same impulses is being decided by our response to this crisis. We have no government, we have one of a number ofnot very good Tory candidates and the Labour Party are in chaos. We have government, we have no opposition and our reflex to blame has left us Rudderless.
So the @guardian’s position now that Windrush and our benefit catastrophe is in full swing, that the distinction between the deserving and undeserving poor is not a sound basis for policy. This editorial is noteworthy, very.
So we already know this, have known this for decades, it’s the Guardian who did not know this. As a consequence of the establishment of the institutions of the welfare state we learned this. We learned about the links between poverty, abuse, violence, inequality, we developed equality legislation, safeguarding frameworks, people within a system designed to evolve established systems dealing with abuse and violence and we learned about how we have to treat the baseline of the rule law. We learned what happens when you dont reflect on this already and the Guardian just gave us a demonstration for eight years of what we already know. For my generation of care leavers, we know fine well why the deserving and undeserving is not a basis for policy, because we would not exist if it was. This is established knowledge. The Guardian represent a class who existed before World War 2, whose legacy identity shapes what they do, and not the evolution of institutions I represent. Its why they didnt know austerity would roll equality back for working class women and undermine relationship between children and the state, they didn’t think the enfranchisement of the working class was permanent or that the law should apply to those people. They thought those people existed to ask them for pity. That the financial crisis was just us reverting inevitably to a system where they were our only mediator.
We have known that unless you reflect on the power of institutions, the power of the state, and the impact of it, you will cause harm.We know that if you believe your intentions are good and you have this power, terrible things can happen. THis is a history written in the bodies of children and dead women, much of it being revisited by a child abuse enquiry already highlighting how easy it is for political need to dictate decision making. An attempt was made after the financial crisis to roll back the state and the @guardian and the Observer felt it was their job to tell the nation that we never did learn this, that we had always had ‘the deserving and undeserving’ as a basis for policy/. That their identity class identity was based on the idea they were the arbiter for who was deserving. An attempt was made to roll back the state using austerity, and all that austerity has done is generated crisis which expose that evolution in the rule of law. THat we dont use ‘deserving and undeserving’ as a basis for policy anymore.
But here is the problem, the Guardian know this but they cant take responsibility for what they have done or what they are. So they want to pretend the Tories did this, and what they are not telling you is that their ignorance that we dont use the deserving/undeserving as a basis for policy is shared at elite academic level, that the reason they didnt know that we dont do that is they have no connection to the institutions which learned this, and that there are entire academic fields who have sprung up who dont know this is the case. Welfare economics which has no clue about its links with equality legislation and duties to children and other statutory responsibilities, gender studies and queer theory whih has managed to interpret intersectionality as everything intersecting with the penis or women can be abused.
It is interesting that the Guardian has come to the conclusion that ‘deserving/undeserving’ is not a sound basis for policy, but we already knew that a long time ago. The question is why didnt the Guardian, and what function do they have once they are exposed as a superfluous mediator whose only function is to decide who is deserving or undeserving. And why did they unleash Corbynism, trans violence, and the elite left, to protect their identity as mediator and arbiter of who is deserving, rather than acknowledge this before assisting in the decimation of the systems which already know this.
It is noteworthy that the Observer have made this their editorial, it is noteworthy they are still seeking to hide and obsure discuion of political consensus. It is a fair announcement that political consensus we orbit, is done, and it is an admission that the Guardian currently find themselves with no function. They have sacrificed their function as a newspaper and force for good, to create a role for themelves as arbiters of who is deserving and who is not and this is a role which does not exist in a modern democracy and if it did they have shown they would not be qualified to fill it. For thirty years a bullshit belief system, with theoretical economics, and media discussion of who is deserving and who is not, has been the axis we orbit. It is now dead. We are seeing the crisis which expose the tension between forces that shape institutions and dead belief systems. This article is an important point in that it acknowledges something its author could not reflect on if they wanted to.
The problem is this, in order for the Guardian and Labour to expose their dysfunction and failure to recognise this, they have also exposed we dont have a parliamentary opposition, direct democracy, functioning trade unions. The reflex response to austerity has generated institutional failure, including Windrush, Universal Credit, failure of our Local Authorities, we are trapped into Brexit which means the international relations that kept us stable are over, and by undermining the rule of law and weakening our domestic institutoins in the Guardian and Labour’s fantasy that they have a divine right to decide which of the poor are deserving, we are screwed.
The cost of their eight years learning ‘deserving and undeserving’ is not a basis for policy, is that we are now throwing ourselves over a cliff as a country. And they still wantto pretend this can be discussed by only looking at the Tories. It is around axis that crisis in our mediating class will grow, and those who can reflect on the tension between their identity and function, power, the baseline of rule of law and abandon their notions of themselves as a mediator to democracy, understanding ther role is to seek votes, is who will emerge. The rest will fall away. Shame about the scale of the crisis unleashed by them.
We have a public library in the US displaying art which consists of baseball bats, axes, and badges about violence against women, die cis scum, blood stained shirts. Actively celebrating violence against women. As feminism. And incel movements appearing online are using the same tactics for the same reason and it’s male terrorism. So am confused.
Yes Mr.Corbyn, it very specifically is. That’s very much the problem.
India darling, I wrote this post because I wanted to explain to you why women won’t be pandering to you. I realise I aimed a bit high, like most people I project and sometimes htis leads me to overestimate people. Regarding the Pink News meltdown…I don’t know if you are aware of the seriousness of the anti-semitism crisis we are facing, or the long history of anti-semitism. I won’t bore you with the historical pogroms, I’ll stick with the holocaust for now. 6 million people were murdered, in an industrialised slaughter made possible by centrally planned systems in an event which has created intergenerational trauma still being played out. We have a political party where jewish people do not feel safe and when they don’t feel safe, its because this is in living memory of people they know.
I don’t know if you know this, cos your womanhood is new, but women never were going to exist to validate you because identified as a woman. Let this penetrate India, to compare women not validating you in the way you hoped with a holocaust that wiped out six million people is astonishing. Crass, offensive, these words are not adequate. You have already DEMANDED that your validation(as a woman!lol) requires the end of safeguarding systems for children, of spaces of safety from male violence for women, you have demanded subordination of domestic abuse survivors, and treated their PTSD and trauma as transphobia which you feel invalidates you. You have made your identity entirely dependent on external validation, you have profited from your transition to womanhood. At 51 you went from being a little known and forgettable local tv news reporter, to making a name for yourself by making these outrageous demands of the most vulnerable women in the country, and now you want to compare women’s failure to validate you in a way you feel entitled to with a holocaust that wiped out 6 million people, while jewish people in this country face a world where the Labour Party isn’t even safe for them. You have seen the news, you have seen actual protests about anti-semitism, and how frightened and you have managed to equate THIS with your ridiculous, narcissistic, obscene demands of the most vulnerable women in the country being denied.
I don’t know what is wrong with you but I thought you might want to know your anti-semitism, your misogyny, your narcissism, they are doing great harm. Not to women, all you are doing to women is demonstrating the behaviour patterns that define the systems we are discussing, at an opportune moment, you are doing this to trans people. Every time you open your mouth another wave of people lose credulity at this situation. Women do not exist to validate you, nor do we owe you anything, nor are we required to centre you when we think about our lives, nor is your identity interesting to us. The only reason anyone is interested in you is your obscene demands that vulnerable women are subordinated to you and important services and laws undermined. We wouldn’t even notice a channel 5 ‘celebrity’ otherwise, we don’t wander round the house with our tits out, we don’t demand lesbians validate us. Let this penetrate India, the only reason you are interesting to women at all is the demands you have made of them. Which are as obscene as comparing those women to nazis and yourself to a victim of the holocaust because you didn’t quite get the validation you expected.
I think I once wrote about my hairdresser, Arthur. He died a couple of years back, and I wrote a post about him. He used to look after young people, he was gay, a raving old queen he said and he had been for a long long time. He used to tell me stories about the struggle for gay rights, he could never quite get over the transition from being gay being criminal and a guaranteed life of violence being threatened, to competitions over gay weddings..He talked often about peadophiles who hijacked this. About the convincing peadophiles who nearly managed to get being homosexual conflated with a desire for children and wanted this.
Pink News and Pride took down the story about the ‘openly gay’ 3 year old, they said it was because the person writing the post had been subject to homophobia. In fact the author of the piece had in the past written about hte need for adults to respect the horny sexuality of children and respect and be open minded about this. The post was an expression of peadophilia, projection of adult sexuality onto a toddler, with the implicit suggesting the toddler consented.
The entire focus of this current queertrender/TRA focused debate is children. They have been placed at the centre of a debate their mothers are doxxed for noticing. We are asked to directly dilute and undermine existing safeguarding because of adult identities. Told children should be encouraged to believe their sex is mutable and their body can be changed easily to match their personality, told that children should be educated to know their boundaries and privacy no longer matter, and as violent activists make debates discussing safeguarding dangerous for women with responsibility for children, we are told that this is a valid protest to get access to children’s spaces of safety from predatory behaviour. We are told children can consent to lifelong medicalisation, and not allowed to mention how savage treatment to change your sex is and why it is a last resort for those suffering severe distress, adult motivations and desires are being placed on children, and online textbook grooming seeks to tell children their families and doctors are harming them and they should embrace their ‘glitter family’. While specialists in child development, treatment of gender dysphoria, and specialists in dealing with abused children are doxxed, threatened, and abused. Men like Shaun Faye cackled about how kids should be slutty before they are ready, suck cock and get tits early, while abusing their mothers, and telling everyone his identity has no core, while defaming doctors on television and claiming himself as an authority on children who should go to schools to inspire’ them..
Violent activists have placed validation of their identity dependent on the end of safeguarding frameworks, and any objection is transphobia. And now they want to abuse women, lesbians, mothers, professionals, for knowing this utterly batshit.
The right wing press have focused on the treatment for gender dysphoria for children, lupron, grooming behaviou of activists online, sending out binders, and encouraging and facilitating children in using off label, illegally purchased drugs, which have massive long lasting consequences. They did this because they know these activists will double down,
The trans women I know have done nothing. Most I would struggle to perceive as male, several don’t even know this is occuring because they stay away from a community who behave this way, and the very dear trans friend I lost over this, would never even remotely wish to undermine safeguarding for children. They are now deemed truscum as the umbrella of ‘trans’ is widened to include the elite students who want to claim marginalisation through being a Tumblr gender trender, and paraphiliacs for whom ‘trans’ is an expression of latent desire to be validated and fucked as a woman. Conflation of a paraphilia with gender dysphoria, undermines trans women who earned acceptance over decades, but more importantly it opens the door to a rerun of the PIE disasters of the 1970s. All of a suddent the stream of stories of children being sexualised in the name of this ‘revolution’ is unmistakable.
But this is occurring at an odd time. A time when we are reviewing the history of development of child protection, the impact of peadophiles presenting themselves as marginalised, and the links between these people and the care system and the children in it. We draw a distinction between paraphilias and normal adult sexuality for a reason.
We are drifting to a situation where the word ‘trans’ is about protection for paraphilias and rich kids, with transsexuals who earned acceptance thrown under a bus as this collection of very horrible people try to use the trans term to completely undermine equality and more importantly safeguarding frameworks. Once they have conflated the word trans with harm to children, and their dominance of htis debate opened the door to the same straight peadophiles and deviants who tried to latch onto gay rights, the public will not care to make finer distinctions. It is this that could undo trans rights for a generation and the backlash could threaten gay rights.
The only rights likely to be consolidated through this are women’s and this instance I am grateful for what these people are demonstrating, but the cost of this is going to be enormous. So many institutions have allowed their survival to be dependent on this, and they do not know what is coming. They just dont.
Its worth having read about the PIE mess of the seventies, am sure venom against Patricia Hewitt and Harriet Harman should provide material. The Child Abuse Enquiry should provide an illustration. How very odd that this is happening while this culture provide a more visceral demonstration of how this occurred than I thought possible.
I must have spent my twenties in blissful ignorance. I earned what my friends did, I went oiut with who I wanted, have always had at least as many male friends as female, most of my best friends are actually male. Many of the people I trust most are male. I used to go clubbing and to after parties and think nothing of taking myself off to have a nap, safe in the knowledge that the company I kept would keep me safe, male or female.
I know about male violence, I knew about poverty but i did not know what was revealed by the internet. The hatred of women. We currently have a situation where women are being killed because communities are springing up who literally believe that women are oppressing males if they won’t fuck them. Some are trans lesbians, others are incel, there is a whole manosphere which our political cultures really want to pretend they are a lot further away from than they are.
There has been a terrible killing, Toronto. This time an Incel, and the murders he has carried out are apparently part of the basis of a declaration of war. On women,because we are not sexually available we need to be killed.
We have during the twentieth century outlawed abuse and subordination of women and we are seeing the most extraordinary thing, the tiny minority who cannot accept women’s autonomy are being exposed through the net and they are dangerous.
Women’s words have always been treated as violence, with a violent response to them justified, we have always known the most dangerous moment in your life is when you leave an abusive male or say no to an abusive male, this is the water in which we swim. It used to be we swam in it and didn’t notice, the internet changed that.
THis is going to get worse. Much. Feminism itself is concerned with abusing lesbians cos they won’t do dick. How did I get to this age and not know this was the case? How did I make it through my twenties feeling safe enough to explore my sexuality when this was always the case? And how the fuck do I prepare an 11 year old girl on the cusp of learning who she is, who will spend the next 8 years going through adolescence, that this is the case?
In 2010 I spoke at Oxford University. It’s where I met the Novara Brats, Laurie Penny and how I got sucked into observing how the left manufactured consensus on austerity. Interestingly the speech I made was called ‘While we are discussing feminism, what happened to equality?’. Anyway, 8 years down the line, this is Wadham College defaming Women’s Place and We Need to Talk meetings. Here’s hoping this cohort of overprivileged vacuous morons aren’t quite so keen on actual intimidation of women and kids, but judging by this state that is a vain hope.