Open Letter to the University of Illinois

February 28, 2019

In July of 2018, Arcadia, a cafe in Urbana, announced on Facebook an “Art Salon” at which my new film would be screened. The next day, Professor Mimi Thi Nguyen commented on Arcadia’s event page: “She’s a transphobe. I will never attend your events now.”

My crime was, months earlier, sharing on Facebook the following lyric: “If a person has a penis he’s a man.” At various times I have also shared such contentious views as, “women don’t have penises,” “sex is not gender,” “woman means adult human female,” and “everyone is free to identify however they wish, but not to force me to identify them the same way.” Nonetheless, “If a person has a penis he’s a man” is continually quoted as my greatest hit of so-called ‘hate speech.’ It is also a fact.

When asked by other commenters why my stating biological facts was ‘transphobic’ and grounds for no-platforming, Ms. Nguyen replied “I’m the chair of Gender and Women’s Studies. I know what I’m talking about.” Speaking not merely as an individual, but in her capacity as a UIUC faculty member, Ms. Nguyen threatened a local business and libeled a community member and encouraged others to join in.

Arcadia promptly cancelled the event.

That October, my film, Seder-Masochism, screened to enthusiastic audiences at the Vancouver International Film Festival. In attendance were film scholars Kristin Thompson and David Bordwell, frequent speakers at past Ebertfests, who loved the film and emailed Ebertfest director Nate Kohn to recommend it. Kohn replied they already knew about Seder-Masochism, and it was at the top of their list. Which makes sense, since it’s by an Urbana filmmaker (me) whose last film was a star at the festival (Sita Sings the Blues) and contains my late father’s voice, which is known to much of the festival’s audience (Hiram Paley used to be Mayor of Urbana, as well as a math professor at the U of I).

Later that Fall, I turned down an invitation to judge a major film festival in Buenos Aires, because its dates overlapped with Ebertfest. Since Seder-Masochism was “at the top of (their) list,” I didn’t want to miss it. In January, I emailed Nate Kohn and Chaz Ebert to ask if in fact Seder-Masochism would screen. For over a week, they didn’t respond. That same week, I was attacked by a Twitter mob accusing me of ‘hate speech,’ once again for having said “If a person has a penis he’s a man.” Then all trace of my film was removed from the website of a women’s film festival in Belgium, after they were bullied by a Belgian transactivist.

Still awaiting a response, at the end of January I emailed Ebertfest again. They replied: “Sorry, we don’t have room for it.” (Update 3-28-2019: Chaz Ebert confirms Ebertfest’s decisions had nothing to do with my no-platforming in Urbana and Beligium, and they were unaware of any controversy. )

I’m not entitled to be at any film festival, and the decisions of Ebertfest – a special event of the University of Illinois College of Media – are made behind closed doors, preventing any hope of accountability. But going from the top of Ebertfest’s list to “sorry there’s no room” in the midst of libel campaigns is consistent with the blacklisting and no-platforming of feminists at universities nationally and internationally. From the banishing of noted feminist speakers like Sheila Jeffreys and Julie Bindel; to the suppression of ‘politically incorrect’ research at Bath Spa University and Brown University; to secret blacklists of female academics uncovered at Goldsmiths University, the speech-suppressing behavior at the University of Illinois is consistent with unsavory developments around the world.

In 2017, the U of I adopted “Guiding Principles” on Freedom of Speech and Civic Engagement. I list some ways they are failing to uphold these principles:

    • “We have a duty to vigorously and even-handedly protect community members against conduct that falls outside the First Amendment – including true threats, pervasive harassment, incitement to imminent lawless action, and libel…” Ms. Nguyen’s accusation, “she is a transphobe,” is libel. I do not fear or hate trans people. Although it shouldn’t be anyone’s business, I have had trans friends and lovers, and stood for the human rights of trans people, since before Ms. Nguyen entered college.
    • ”We will create conditions for a safe and robust exchange of viewpoints.” This has not happened at the U of I. While one-sided policies of “preferred pronouns” dominate, no voice is given to those who use English sex-based pronouns over newly imposed “gender identity” rules.
    • “In all matters involving freedom of speech, the University of Illinois system will endeavor to maintain a high level of transparency.” I am confident anti-feminist blacklisting occurs here, as it does on many other campuses. Blacklisting is by its nature non-transparent and unaccountable, but its effects are devastating.
    • “We will not condone shouting down or physically obstructing or threatening a speaker or the speaker’s audience.” Does this include on Social Media? Because Facebook is where Ms. Nguyen did just that, and got my event shut down.
    • “We must always strive to be valued local partners, learning from and collaborating with the communities that are home to our universities and programs.” Bullying a local venue into shutting down a screening by a local artist achieves the opposite of that mission.
  • “We owe our students opportunities for substantive civic engagement so that they graduate not only prepared for personal success but also knowing what is expected of them as productive global citizens.” Certainly the University has already failed its students and faculty by refusing any open discussion of genderist ideology and policies. This failure to foster free speech has spilled beyond campus and into the surrounding cities of Urbana-Champaign, harming the community.

HARMS

Many local residents were looking forward to the event at Arcadia. Due to the bullying by Ms. Nguyen, representing the University of Illinois, and her associates, the event was cancelled. Many more locals hoped Seder-Masochism would screen at Ebertfest this year. Now, they will not see it.

Many in this college town are afraid to voice support for me, or express any gender-critical thought, for fear of being branded “transphobic.” Academics who even question ‘gender identity’ have been disciplined or denounced in open letters; those who express fully gender critical views have lost their jobs. Between that and the imposition of ‘preferred pronouns,’ requiring the speaker to suppress their correct recognition of biological sex in favor of compelled speech – that is, lying – University employees, their spouses, and friends, feel compelled to keep quiet.

So, instead of the “opportunities for substantive civic engagement” promised in the University’s Principles, the University instead fosters a climate of fear and silence in the wider community.

Beyond this harm to our community, I have been harmed personally as well. I can’t calculate the cost this has had on my professional reputation, career, and livelihood. I have certainly suffered psychological harm: being falsely accused and shut down in my hometown, with no accountability for the accusers, evokes a despair I had previously only read about in books like “The Crucible” and histories of witch trials.

REMEDIES

The University needs to protect speech.

I acknowledge the University is in a bind. Recent State interpretations of Title IX have – perhaps unwittingly – redefined ‘sex’ to include ‘gender identity.’ As long as Title IX fails to uphold its original purpose – protections based on sex – and instead protects incoherent, ill-defined, and fundamentally sexist concepts of ‘gender identity,’ it is at odds with the First Amendment – and with itself.

The University’s Student Affairs web page states:

We will continue to protect and treat all students according to their gender identities and gender expressions, honoring chosen names, pronouns, and restroom access, as is current campus policy.”

‘Preferred pronouns’ are compelled speech, forcing the speaker to contradict their own recognition of another’s sex. This compulsion violates the First Amendment. But ‘preferred pronouns’ also violate Title IX itself, insofar as it still protects sex. Although trans activists vehemently deny this, there is ample evidence that some trans-identified males are autogynephiles – that is, fetishists who are sexually aroused by imagining themselves as women. Being forced to call such men “she” is forced participation in sexual activity without consent. That is just one way privileging ‘gender identity’ over sex is institutionalized sexual coercion.

‘Sex’ and ‘gender identity’ are fundamentally mutually exclusive; you cannot protect one without delegitimizing the other. The University considers failure to use ‘preferred pronouns’ harassment against the individual who imposes them. But ‘preferred pronouns’ themselves are harassment, including sexual harassment, against individuals compelled to use them.

My plea to the University is to reaffirm its commitment to Free Speech and acknowledge the untenable and inconsistent demands added to Title IX by the redefinition of sex. It is tragic that the former integrity of Title IX, which has been instrumental in providing sex-based protections and opportunities for women and girls, is now in opposition to the First Amendment. Free Speech is important. Sex-based protections are important. Redefining ‘sex’ to include ‘gender identity’ is an assault on both.

On an immediate and practical level, the University should:

Assure the right of all employees and students to use whatever pronouns they see fit;

Assure the right of all students and employees to question and discuss current “gender identity” politics without fear of libel or punishment, and;

Host meaningful discussion on this subject. Feminist Journalist Meghan Murphy is available to debate anyone on the topic, “Does Trans Activism Negatively Impact Women’s Rights?” The University would do well to host such a debate here.

Finally, having lost two screening opportunities in my hometown because of the University’s negligence, I would like the University to sponsor a screening of my film Seder-Masochism for the community.

Sincerely,

—Nina Paley

Director, Seder-Masochism and Sita Sings the Blues

Urbana, IL

ninapaley.com

Mimi_Nguyen1

Mimi_Nguyen2

Author: Nina Paley

Animator. Director. Artist. Scapegoat.

44 thoughts on “Open Letter to the University of Illinois”

  1. Good on you, Nina, for doing this and I’m so sorry this happened to you.
    Having taught wimmins studies in the 80s at UIC and having worked there and been discriminated against without them caring one iota, even though they had affirmative action, I know how they ignore their own rules.
    I might have some ideas to help you get a foothold with them. Please feel free to contact me if you are interested.

  2. Thank you for having the courage to speak it. Just one minor nitpick: the correct spelling is “autogynephiles.”

  3. Correction to the previous comment: I meant to write “thank you for having the courage to speak out,” but autocomplete got me.

  4. Nina, this is the email I just sent: subject: accountability for de-platforming and harm of Nina Paley
    Thu, 28 Feb 2019 18:02:21 -0800

    To: Timotjy L. Killeen , ethicsofficer@uillinois.edu
    infosource@uillinois.edu, Mimi Thi Nguyen

    Dear President Killeen, Ethics Officer and Others To Whom It May Concern,

    I am outraged at the irresponsibility and negligence of Illinois U in failing to uphold its “Guiding Principles” on Freedom of Speech and Civic Engagement. This failure has caused professional and economic damage and psychological harm to artist Nina Paley.

    Ms. Paley delineates the issue and harm in detail in her Feb 28, 2019 Open Letter to the University of Illinois:
    https://blog.ninapaley.com/2019/02/28/open-letter-to-the-university-of-illinois/?fbclid=IwAR108ebnVRuFGP_LAC76bKzH0vJrUIv8ge0h-rcfY-5jfVm5Mq-qS127Hv8

    In addition, I deplore the callous abuse of power that your own professor Mimi Thi Nguyen has displayed.

    I ardently urge you to rectify this egregious violation of your purported principles and of Ms. Paley’s rights.

    You can do this by implementing what Ms. Paley has called you to do:

    Assure the right of all employees and students to use whatever pronouns they see fit;

    Assure the right of all students and employees to question and discuss current “gender identity” politics without fear of libel or punishment, and;

    Host meaningful discussion on this subject. Feminist Journalist Meghan Murphy is available to debate anyone on the topic, “Does Trans Activism Negatively Impact Women’s Rights?” The University would do well to host such a debate here.

    Finally, having lost two screening opportunities in [her] hometown because of the University’s negligence, I would like the University to sponsor a screening of [her] film Seder-Masochism for the community.

    Please do your part in restoring and protecting our fundamental democratic rights, rights which are quickly being eroded in an increasingly Orewellian and McCarthyist social contagion. Uphold your Guiding Principles!

    Thank you,

    Vajra Ma
    Sunny Valley/Wolf Creek, Oregon 97497

  5. You always write with such care and mindful of facts. Maybe you missed your call to be a journalist!
    Keep up the good work.

  6. Hi, Nina! So many things I would like to say… I am very sorry this happened to you. Patriarchy never ends, just changes his clothes (literally). Transgenderism is patriarchy in glitter, someone said. Here in Brasil it´s the same bullshit. Women are kicked off feminism, left places, black places, lgbttttttttt movement… I was detplatformed of an event at a federal University (UFF) in which I was supposed to speak about the transing kids issue. And people hate me cause I am the spokesperson of a campaing against transing kids. Hope many people read your article and I will watch your movie. You can write us if you wish. Best regards <3

  7. One person or a few can ruin good things for everyone, and it’s sad when people miss out. However, https://xkcd.com/1357/

    Still, I believe your choosing to create free culture amplifies your free speech, as does censorship (the Streisand Effect). Long after me and your critics and even a university are gone, your art can be free and live in people’s minds. Nobody needs miss out now or ever, and anything suppressed is irresistible. Internet is available on tap in all fine establishments.

    Please don’t despair. A wider community hears you, and loves your work and you. Continue, but you’ve already won.

  8. NotOtty, that xkcd is ludicrous.

    Free speech goes both ways – one person is free to speak, everyone else is free to choose whether to listen. This nonsense that Nina (and many others) is experiencing removes that freedom from the listener.

    It does not mean the people who are listening think you’re an asshole, it’s that a tiny, tiny minority wants to shut you up and does not want others (the actual listeners) to have the right to hear what you have to say and make the asshole judgement for themselves.

  9. The far left it seems have become ‘brown shirts’ it wouldn’t surprise me if they started throwing bricks through ‘offenders’ windows etc. They are throwing books on the fire. Free thought and expression doesn’t fit the bill ? Yours Concerned.

  10. Here to show my support as a fellow animator and artist.

    You’re incredibly brave and have my utmost respect. I feel I shouldn’t say anything remotely political on any social media platform, I keep that to the private ones, or to conversations between family members. (Starting to sound a bit Iron Curtain aren’t we?) But I too have seen this lunacy seep into my own circles, and it disturbs me greatly.

    I studied animation to to express my creativity, my life and my world. We should all have the right to do that. Now, I’m seeing people I really look up to losing their ability to express themselves, having digital tape plastered over their mouths and kicked off their platform. Sometimes just for expressing scientifically proven FACTS! They’re even starting to censor and take accolades of historical writers because their viewpoints back in the day don’t match the current ones.

    So, when does the book burning start?

    To say I’m a bit unsettled by this is an understatement. I now have to question, when I write a story, or game, whether I have enough INCLUSIVE characters in it. Is it ‘phobic’ to someone out there? I need to second-guess my own integrity as a story teller now. But SHOULD I even need to do that? I see movie scripts now written just to pander to ideologies. They’re hollow, obvious and the characters are like a stale piece of bread, and I’m a little happy to see them failing. Are they even proud of their work? I don’t want to end up like that.

    Thanks for your bravery.

  11. NotOtty, one of my more popular blog posts (Google says 15116 views) is a refutation of that XKCD piece: https://shetterly.blogspot.com/2014/04/xkcd-doesnt-understand-free-speechor.html

    Nina, one does not have to agree with you on this issue to agree that you more than deserve the right to have your work shown and your views debated. In this case, it’s especially ridiculous because Seder-Masochism has nothing to do with trans issues and is only likely to offend fans of Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians.

  12. If a Fascist wears joyfuylly coloured clothes instead of a brown shirt, this does not make him less of a Fascist. These vengeful domineering persons usually win small batlles but with great costs since people get to see how hateful they themselves actually are with their readiness to supress the voice of people they don t like. Stay strong!

  13. Hoping that you can build a constructive community outside of FB and hoping that becomes a trend 😉

  14. What a hill to die on.

    It sounds like Nguyen was being silly. But so are you. That autogynephilia argument is nasty rubbish. If a person is not being sexual at you (which would be sexual harassment), then it’s none of your business how much they do/do not enjoy their current sexual identity.

    And where Nguyen chose to go after your professional career, you have… chosen to go after her professional career, by making a complaint to her employer.

    The idea of even wanting to choose sides between two such ugly examples of viciousness over small stakes is horrifying. I hope you rise above it, because your animations look great.

  15. Just read your notebook pages on Fbook; commenting here as requested. Thanks for the update! (I don’t have anything useful to say, just consider this a thumbs up.) Good luck on the hiatus, whether it be temporary or permanent.

  16. Who is the intended audience for this letter? Was it intended to persuade UIUC?

    If so, bringing up fetishism in this context was a mistake. It gives credence to the accusation that the author has transphobic attitudes.

  17. Just saw your scanned note on fecebook. What a fantastic idea! Yes time away from fecebook is valid, specially if you live in a context where there are plenty of real humans to be found.
    I’ve shared your blog to plenty of people in the past, and will continue doing so.
    You remain a beacon of integrity.

  18. I think you made your case quite clearly. I hope the intended recipients read it in full before reacting!

  19. Dear brave Nina, just a little note to encourage you. So glad to see there are many others here with you! I myself don’t want to leave FB, for there I can meet exactly the people who will appreciate my (also free) classic graphic novels. I would be very sad if you choose to leave it, for your work and ideas fascinate me always. But I am glad I at least came to know you and your awesome art.

  20. Was very tempted to comment to the post on Facebook that directed me here, simply because the more comments, the more widely the post is seen, but I settled on merely liking it there so that I can be a good doobie who follows directions.

    Most blogs don’t make it easy to comment. They require you to make a new account with a new password, that you have to remember or save in a file or something, and you most often have to reset it every time you come back to that particular blog. Making your commenting system easy to use is the number one way people can encourage people to use Facebook less and blogs more. So thanks for that.

    I most recently took the bait on this issue from a digital rights email list I followed. A new member (a man I assume; 95% of these digital rights activists are male) of the list kept bringing up Meghan Murphy’s ban, Graham Linehan’s police interrogation, and other TG vs free speech news, so I posted an Afterellen article that explained what was going on.

    Of course the ubiquitous transwoman activist spoke up to call feminists “repugnant TERFs” so I took the opportunity to name him a male engaging in the typical male behavior of disrespecting feminists.

    Of course *I* was the one who was banned from the list.

    The point of transwomen being male is central to understanding the cases being discussed, but that’s grounds for immediate banishment. So discussion of digital rights are being completely hobbled as well. One is only entitled to digital rights if one complies with the dictates of male hegemony, clearly.

    Today I saw a post about a former women’s swimming star whose name I’ve forgotten and Google is NO USE because it’s curated and pushes pro trans stories first above all others, spoke out against males in women’s sport. Because Martina Navratilova was brave enough to speak up in the weeks prior. I spoke up because you were brave enough to speak up. Courage is contagious. This is why the trans lobby uses all the power at its disposal to silence us. Because so many people object to this trend and the only thing keeping those people from speaking up is fear from intimidation. The trans lobby makes examples of as many resistors as it can, to send a chilling message to the rest of us. It is like a witch hunt only you pay with your livelihood rather than with your life. So rather like a New McCarthyism. “Are you now, or have you ever been a TERF?”

    You’re suffering, I know, but you are doing the right thing. And I am grateful for it. Thank you.

    And because I spoke up I am suffering. The stress of it all hampered my recovery from cancer and Lyme, very likely taking years off my life. But now other women in my Facebook feed who never thought to speak up against this trend are also speaking up for the human rights of women, too. Courage is contagious, so pass it on, y’all.

  21. I’m sorry you have come to the attention of the feces flingers.

    Good wishes and hugs for your head.

  22. Hi Nina! I’ve been following you and your work on and off for years, and very much appreciate your work on copyright (or rather copywrong) issues. You’re a kind person at heart, so please don’t let these intolerant inquisitors make you bitter at the world.

    Your battle is our battle, the battle for freedom of speech. It is important for anyone who cares about living in a free society. If you lose we all lose.

    Besides words of support, I am sure you need a bit of materialistic support too, so I have sent you a small donation (via Bitcoin).

  23. Hi Nina,

    I can completely understand wanting to take a break (possibly permanent) from Facebook. I’ve taken breaks several times when things get really heated, most recently after that ridiculous Covington Catholic brouhaha when people whom I otherwise agree with about a lot of things thought that a 16-year-old kid deserved a social media pile-on because he “smirked” at a Native American elder. I unfriended a number of people over that. But I get drawn back because it really is a good platform for finding events and organizing real life get togethers.

    As someone who came of age in the late 80s / early 90s (and who has been reading your work since “Nina’s Adventures”), I thought that we liberals had figured out that offensive art (Robert Mapplethorpe, Andre Serrano) shouldn’t be censored, and that private institutions are just as capable of censorship as the government. But as it turns out, the new rule seems to be that when an artist says something that offends you, you try to censor ALL their art, whether or not the art is at all related to what they said that you found offensive. It’s like trying to get an exhibit of Mapplethorpe’s flower photos taken down because you’re offended his S&M photos.

  24. Thanks everyone for commenting here! Except the two of you who are idiots, whose comments I approved because maybe I’m an idiot too, or at least not sure what to do in these cases. But everyone else – THANK YOU!!

  25. Love the handwritten letter Nina – I’ve saved it & might just print & post it as a reminder-to-self to consciously stayTF off of FB more often and replace my SM-time* with more productive material endeavours (probably also a good reminder to write my 94yo grandma more often). Hope you’re enjoying the wagon ride so far! xo

    *That’s Social Media-time, although sado-masochism applies there too.

  26. I see this issue has been in the news recently. Maybe if it gets more mainstream exposure instead of being confined to online forums, more people will become aware of the problem.

  27. Thank you for not falling into the approval trap. Your art and your voice are all the more effective, meaningful, and important because you will not sell out to those who would control your creative output and your thoughts. You freely give your art to everyone but you maintain strict ownership of your mind, your true intellectual property, all rights reserved. If you have chosen a hill to die on, that is it. But I don’t believe that it will kill you. It will make you stronger.

  28. The film looks amazing — maybe we could bring it to the U of Alberta? If you are interested write me at
    klowrey at ualberta.ca

  29. Hello Nina – Of course you’re aware you’re not alone in this latest academic witch hunt, but others should know how bad it’s gotten lately. You know it’s bad when a Pagan feminist like Max Dashu is actually banned from a formerly Goddess-worshipping inclusive convention like Pantheacon because of this issue;

    For what it’s worth, this is the letter I sent to their headquarters, run by people I like, respect, & understand that their arms were being twisted:

    “I’ve read your statements in regard to de-platforming Max Dashu (from Pantheacon), which I find extremely sad, as it’s been my experience in her workshops that Max Dashu was among the first to support intersectional feminism and address the full range of womanhood, however it may be defined.

    Personally, I found the so-called “anti-Terfers” who attacked the small group of feminist lesbian elders @ S.F.’s “Pride” March to exhibit really disgusting, thuggish behavior. I’m sorry you & Starhawk felt forced to buckle under such hateful pressure. Whoever they are, they certainly have succeeded in pre-poisoning the atmosphere of Pantheacon that formerly welcomed full diversity for the Goddess community.

    Pantheacon will simply not be the same without Max Dashu, whose entire life has been spent researching & preserving an enormous Goddess archival that is second-to-none. I am truly saddened how disrespected she’s been lately simply for being an old school radical feminist. Are such truly no longer welcome at Pantheacon, when radical feminism in part helped build the Goddess Movement, so now they are to be ignored & swept aside, all their previous contributions to Paganism no longer honored?

    What a true travesty of events – Heather”

  30. When something’s true, you don’t need to go around silencing dissent. You don’t find people on the street shouting out that the grass is green and forcibly silencing anyone that says otherwise. But, that’s because there’s no threat there. Reality speaks for itself against dissenters. It’s only when something isn’t true that dissent becomes a threat. Because in that case — in the case that something isn’t true — its only existence is in the minds and words of people. Since reality itself can’t be silenced, those speaking about it must be.

    The irony in all this, of course, is that the very behavior of transgender activists betrays them right from the start. If transgender males really were women and transgender females really were men, then there would be no need to try to silence anyone saying otherwise. If it were true, someone saying otherwise would be met with the same confused look they’d get if they proclaimed that the grass isn’t green, water isn’t wet, or the sun isn’t bright. But, that’s not the case. They sense the threat of dissent, react with doxxing, de-platforming, banning, harassment, etc., and in those very acts, they reveal that they know on some level that they don’t have the weight of reality behind them. If they did, what would be the point? It would make no more sense than arguing that water is wet with someone insisting that it’s dry.

    The problem is, reality itself will always have the last word. You can shout out some claimed identity for your entire life and the instant you go silent, reality will still be there, being what it is. No person has the energy to fight that. That’s why these people break down, that’s why depression and suicide are so prevalent within this population — this is a Sisyphean ordeal. They can mold language, they can bend it, or break it. But in the end, all they will be left with is a linguistic transition, not a biological one. — Reality has not moved one inch, only the words they’ve used to describe it.

    Who knew that the “contemplation of one’s navel” of yesteryear would become the contemplation of one’s genitals today. But, it won’t last. It can’t. Reality isn’t on their side.

    You’re not alone, Ms. Paley. Remember that. Not all of us may have the freedom to speak openly, but you have more support than you know. My sincere admiration for your talents and bravery.

  31. When someone has truth on their side they have no worry about dissenting views, in fact they seek them out to better form their own understanding of things. The opposite of what they are doing to you Nina Paley.

    There are far more people that agree with you then you know, it is just these loud radical people that can not handle dissent that some people listen to.

    If you get the opportunity, ask them to substantiate their claims with proof and that mere accusation doesnt in fact prove anything either way.

  32. Hi Nina,
    I found you thru Benjamin Boyce and I’m so glad I did. The situation with the Trans-activists SJWs here in B.C. Canada is Orwellian. As a feminist natal woman, I feel I’m going mad, but finding you makes me feel less alone. Since Bill C16 was enshrined into “human rights” law, freedom of speech has suffered and transgender activism has gained political power & influence.

    Please watch this video: BILL C-16 and COMPELLED SPEECH: One Year Later as I’m sure you will find especially enlightening:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PPXwcYtHn0

  33. Hey Nina, I loved the idea of free culture and Copyright and I remember following this, but however I don’t agree with every view. The most surprising argument was this (but without the link thing):
    “there is ample evidence that some trans-identified males are autogynephiles – that is, fetishists who are sexually aroused by imagining themselves as women. Being forced to call such men “she” is forced participation in sexual activity without consent.”
    I honestly have to strongly disagree with this. First of all it makes no sense to start arguing flat out that being “forced” to call a men a “she” as if all “male transgenders” had such a fetish, and second, to say it’s “forced” participation in sexual activity without consent makes no sense unless it’s clearly a form of sexual harassment. So some transgenders who has the fetish might get aroused, but that wouldn’t automatically be reason. The idea that one can’t be called a “female/male” just because a person has such a fetish is insane. If the person was obviously wanting to be called that just for the purpose of it, then I’m not so sure, especially since “fetish” is a lose label. Is merely being aroused even enough in this kind of case?

    Another criticism I would put is that while it might be bad to be forced called the opposite of gender, the same goes for telling a transgender that “he’s a he.” based off the opinion that “Penis = male.”. Which comes to my other argument pointing out that the idea that one genital defines a gender when there is evidence (if any) that a person with a male penis for example might be more with a female like brain. If that’s true, then it’s hard to justify that a genital is the only way to define someone’s gender.
    If you’re forcing that view down others who wishes to be identify as another gender, especially with the brain thing, then it does feel very transphobic.

    That being said, I don’t think it’s transphobic to merely believe and say “Hey, I argue that if someone is born with a penis, that means the person is males.”. However that might depend, and to to force such a view like it’s part of some agenda for example might be an example of transphobic. And it’s worse to accuse a typical transgender who wishes to be identified as a certain gender as someone who is “forcing” when it’s merely a wish, especially if you’re one of those people who force the opinion that they are not what they identify with.
    I won’t expect change but if you’re open to any criticism then I’m curious. XD If you would like to disagree with me and give out your take of trying to criticize, I am alright as long as it’s legal protected speech.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *