JULIE BINDEL loves conspiracy theories, cults, quack medicine, bogus science and fake history

For sometime now one for the magazine will end you being a suker.
 
and one for them was standpoint so far so mess up from 2 for dumb-o one is JULIE BINDEL. We her bad news.
 
and this made then gone mad.
 
 
so they can spEak Ther bRanes out.
 
 I’m scratching the subscription to Standpoint off my Christmas list for printing this pathetic drivel.
Audrey

November 2nd, 2009
9:11 PM
Kathryn

November 1st, 2009
3:11 PM
It’s amazing that you ignore data and history predating the 1950’s. There are a multitude of examples predating modern culture, in which biological men lived in female gender roles and were accepted by society. Back then, there were no options for medical interventions, so there was no allignment of the body with the mind. I would encourage your to educate yourself more about the issues. You, unfortunatley, have chosen only to acknowledge the research that supports your conclusion. That is not research. Transsexual women do not present overtly steretypical over the top presentations of the gender role with which they identify. Yes, many early transitioners may present overly "feminine" but they are going through the same process that many teenage girls do, of experimenting with makeup, hair, and fashion, until eventually settling into a more middle of the road presentation. I, myslef, have never run around in a over the top presentation. I wear pants almost exclusively, my hair and makeup are relatively simple, I am a woman I do not need to prove it with over the top presentation. You complain about this being a reinforcement of gender stereotypes and say that in a world where men and women were equal there would be no transsexuals. I would argue that we would still exist. My gender dysphoria is something that goes to a core of who I am. Even in an equal society there would still be a difference between men and women. You wish this were not the case, but there is a biological basis to the difference between boys and girls. IN your perfect world, biology would be ignored. A truely equal society would allow boy and girls to be boys and girls, and still be equal. You prefer to masculinize women and feminize men to the point where they act and present the same way, ignoring the biological drive that is built into each of us. Unfortunately, readical feminisim is more about putting down those who are overtly feminine or masculine rather than celebrating each individual, it seeks conformity to an specific ideal. We have to stop forcing conformity, we will never experience true equality until we do. I know that I cannot change your mind about your views of transsexuals, but I do hope that you will one day open your mind enough to change your own mind and except differences rather than seeking conformity to how you see the world.
 
Zoe Brain

October 31st, 2009
12:10 PM
You know you could just as well have said "There is a handful of radicals in the world today who have dared to challenge the lie of the Holocaust. Those who do are called "antisemites" and treated with staggering vitriol. There is a form of cultural relativism at play here." // Sorry, Ms Bindel, your victim card has been revoked. // You forget that with the Internet, anyone can access the pictures taken at the time of the Stonewall awards, and read how instead of bravely standing up to the Great And Powerful Aggressive Transsexual Lobby, you furtively crept through a back door to avoid a good-natured group well behind a crowd-control fence literally singing "Kumbaya". // Your claims of being victimised by possibly the most oppressed and powerless group in the country aren’t credible any more. Rather, they sound like the ancient regime in South Africa, bewailing how terribly oppressed the White minority was by the tyrannous Blacks they ruled. // Your ideological statement that "In a world where equality between men and women was reality, transsexualism would not exist" has become laughably irrelevant, given that researchers can reliably induce it in animals by the appropriate administration of hormones during gestation. You dogmatically remain anchored in the past, like someone still claiming that the Earth is Flat because philosophically, it has to be, while others are refining satellite navigation systems. Still, you have the attention you crave.
 
Tessa Hauke

October 31st, 2009
11:10 AM
Last night at the vigil held in Trafalgar Square, Government Minister, Chris Bryant condemned Jan Moir and all people who attack LGBT people. He said, “Every single time somebody writes an article like that or preaches a sermon or makes a speech like that, what that does is put a little bit more poison into society and that’s what leads to the death of people like Ian Baynham and those people should be ashamed of themselves.” You, Ms Bindel, are one of those who inject poison into society and you should be ashamed of yourself.
 
you know we not make it up. this form standpoint.
 
Trisha Dee

October 30th, 2009
9:10 PM
Sigh….. The ‘huge’ demonstration consisted of between 100-150 people. We were well behaved and the principal target of the demonstration was to protest against Stonewall and the fact that their nomination of Bindell for Journalist of the Year underlined the fact that that particular ‘Powerful Lobby’ had continued to fail to support the rights of the Transgendered whether or not we were gay, bi, or straight. The principal chant was not ‘Bindel the Bigot’, it was ‘Where’s the T in LGB?’ And Julie didnt walk ‘past us’, she came in through the back door. Most of the stuff in this article regarding gender roles is total misrepresentation. The concept that gender roles are to an extent biologically determined is widely recognised as true by psychologists, those who specialise in child care, and many feminists. The concept that gender roles are entirely determined by social conditioning is held to be true only by hard core ‘second wave’ feminists represented in this debate by Germaine Greer and Julie herself. Regarding the 2004 article, there is a legitimate debate regarding whether the appointment of a transsexual woman as a counsellor within a Rape Crisis Centre is appropriate. The case raises a genuine ethical question regarding whether one individual’s right supersedes the rights of others. But Julie didn’t choose chose to engage in that debate – she chose the path of ridicule and when called on it played the victim as she’s doing now The problem with this article, apart from the fact that its basic premise is nonsense, is the repeated self-contradiction and weak logic. At one moment she’s arguing that its unfair that TSs are being treated on the NHS because there’s nothing medically wrong with them and the next moment they’re apparently all mentally ill. Hope you never suffer from depression, Julie because by your logic it would be unethical for the NHS to treat you. However I do have to thank her for giving me one genuine laugh….‘Gender Dysphoria was invented in the 1950s’…. Did you know that before Isaac Newton invented gravity, we all had to tie the cutlery to the table for fear of it floating away? Transgendered people have always existed and its been recognised as a legitimate expression of self – Google ‘Hejira’, ‘Winkte’, ‘Katoey’ for evidence. We existed in matriarchal societies as well as male-dominated ones. Get over it Julie. Most transgendered people believe passionately in womens’ rights. Go find another enemy because we’re not it…..
 
Jane

October 30th, 2009
12:10 PM
Ms Bindel finally the Guardian and other maainstream papers have seen the light and seen through your acdemic writing as the bigoted transphobic rubbish they really are. This great publicity for Standpoint a organ I have never heard of until today.
 
come on standpoint don’t give in to dumb-o like JULIE BINDEL or Michael Nazir-Ali.
 
update
 
it seen like evertime JULIE BINDEL open big 0 with this.

In her reply to a man who wrote in asking for advice on his "addiction" to brothel sex, Pamela Stephenson Connolly failed to challenge any of his beliefs about prostitution or the sex industry. Her reply gave the impression that paying for sex is as unproblematic as buying a car or eating in a restaurant. She did not question his obvious belief that sex is a right – something that all men are automatically entitled to. She did not challenge him on his use of the word "hooked" as a justification for his continued use of women in prostitution, even though it looks to me very much like a choice rather than an addiction (he says he is "unlikely to give it up because [he has] great sex").

Stephenson could have mentioned the grim realities of the sex trade. Instead, she portrayed it as a job like any other, when she wrote, "Many sex workers are very good at their job." The reality is that more often than not the women would rather do any job than give blowjobs for money. Aside from a few exceptions, those involved in prostitution are treated as disposable, often coming from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds involving sexual abuse and social exclusion. Normalisation of prostitution results in a general view that men can’t help what they do and somehow "need" sex.

In giving such advice, Stephenson Connolly has betrayed the women in prostitution. I am not sure whether she would identify as a feminist but she surely realises that prostitution is both the cause and consequence of inequality between men and women. As long as men can buy women’s bodies we can never be equal. Instead she perpetuates the view of prostitution as a service industry by writing, "Some like to engage in a financial contract rather than negotiate via ‘dinner’ or ‘a movie’."

Prostitutes are routinely seen as different from other women and Stephenson did not challenge this prejudice. A punter told me when I asked him why he paid for sex, rather than finding a girlfriend: "They are girls no one else wants to marry. So they work for sex. No one wants their wife to be a prostitute." Charming.

Surely readers find the sex industry’s terrible treatment of its "workers" and the fact that women in brothels are marketed like any other merchandise abhorrent? Those of us who believe in social equality need to ask why so many of us defend prostitution and the rights of individual men to pay for sex.

One argument increasingly used by pimps and sex industry apologists is that a number of punters are disabled and unable to have sex the usual way. TLC Trust, a pro-sex industry campaigning organisation, is demanding one wheelchair-accessible brothel in every city "to meet the demand", and that hospice wards should have provision for visiting sex workers. TLC even uses the example of wounded soldiers to call for an "NHS" approach to the sex industry. "It would be a sad injustice," its website reads, "if service personnel such as soldiers badly wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan were banned from the help they receive from sex workers." When one punter told me he believed, "If men could get it [prostitution] on the NHS, if they are disabled, it would prevent them from raping," I found myself wondering how on earth men such as him came to believe that all men are potential rapists, when it was supposed to be radical feminists such as myself who propagate this? The majority of men do not pay for sex. And it’s offensive to people with disabilities to assume they cannot find a partner. Those who do pay for sex need to be educated about the harm it is causing the women, and society in general.

"Next time you’re with a sex worker, ask her for some pointers," concludes Stephenson Connolly. Does she really think women having to service punters for a living concern themselves with teaching men how to give pleasure to women? They want to get it over with as quickly as possible and learn how to fake enjoyment rather than actually achieving it. Prostitution is a nasty business.

she see love to

 

 
 
 
 

Advertisements

About heydj48

I am xbox live player. and a gaming. I bolg on msn space in 2006-2010. like outing playing game and doing some jumping other world.
This entry was posted in counterknowledge. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

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

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