#susie: castration time!!

[corpseybun]

I ended up making the one you should not have killed in my fnaf au Susie.

I projected onto that poor girl so hard, so it lowkey felt wrong to not have her get revenge on the dude who did unspeakable things to her. Might clarify later the specifics, but let's just say the second she traps William in hell, she does sm more than just spook him.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Andrew Doyle

Published: Apr 11, 2024

Get ready for the excuses. For years now, those who have sounded the alarm over the dangers of ‘gender-affirming’ paediatric treatment have been monstered as ‘bigots’, ‘hateful’, ‘transphobic’ and even ‘fascist’. Now their concerns have been entirely vindicated by the Cass Review, and those most responsible for the monstering are already attempting to wriggle their way out of accepting responsibility. We can expect much more of this as further revelations come to light.

Take Stonewall, the charity most culpable for spreading this toxic ideology. In a statement posted on X yesterday, it appeared to endorse the review’s findings, even quoting approvingly Dr Hilary Cass’s plea ‘to remember the children and young people trying to live their lives and the families / carers and clinicians doing their best to support them’. What can one say about such serpentine sleight-of-tongue? Perhaps the actor James Dreyfus – one who has felt the full wrath of gender ideologues – put it best: ‘The absolute fucking nerve of these people.’

Mermaids CEO Lauren Stoner is another in the running for the Brass Neck Award, appearing on Sky News to claim that ‘we’re not medical experts, we don’t advocate for any pathway’. Mermaids made the same claim last year in the tribunal it initiated in a failed attempt to strip the LGB Alliance of its charitable status. Yet in leaked emails it was discovered to have given advice to the now disgraced Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) at the Tavistock Clinic. Most notably, Mermaids had offered support in the drafting of an NHS service specification, including details on how ‘[puberty] blockers will now be considered for any children under 12′.

Mermaids’ website currently claims that ‘puberty blockers are an internationally recognised safe, reversible healthcare option’, even though there is mounting evidence of the dangers of these drugs. One of the findings of the Cass Review is that there is no evidence for the efficacy of puberty blockers. Rather than being a ‘pause’ in which young people can take time to figure out their ‘gender identity’, in almost all cases they lead on to cross-sex hormones and, in some cases, irreversible surgery.

During Stoner’s interview for Sky News, she was also quick to remind us that Mermaids has ‘been supporting trans young people and their families for nearly 30 years’. What she neglected to mention is that until the arrival of former CEO Susie Green – a woman who took her son to Thailand on his 16th birthday to have him castrated – Mermaids actually offered sensible advice to parents of children who were struggling with their gender. A leaflet produced by the charity in 2000 is more in line with the ‘watchful waiting’ approach favoured by many paediatric therapists. ‘Gender-identity disorders in infancy, childhood and adolescence are complex and have varied causes’, it said, before stating that ‘the majority of cases the eventual outcome will be homosexuality or bisexuality but often there will be a heterosexual outcome as some gender issues can be caused by a bereavement, a dysfunctional family life, or (rarely) by abuse. Only a small proportion of cases will result in a transsexual outcome’. That even Mermaids once held this position shows the extent to which gender-identity ideology drives well-intentioned people away from the truth. It’s also a reminder that this belief-system has taken hold remarkably quickly.

Both Mermaids and Stonewall were mentioned by Tavistock whistleblower Dr David Bell as being chiefly to blame for the current climate of making ‘people afraid even of listening to another view’. To this we might add groups such as Gendered Intelligence, the LGBT Foundation and the online Pink News, which has published defamatory pieces about those who have objected to the rise of this ideology. These groups, while claiming to advocate for LGBT rights, have tried to intimidate into silence anyone raising questions about the irreversible surgical malpractice that has left many young people sterile and eliminated their sexual function.

And what of the private practices, those who evaded the NHS’s recent ban on puberty blockers? We shouldn’t be surprised that Dr Aidan Kelly from private clinic Gender Plus appeared on Novara Media to argue that the evidence demanded by Cass is neither deliverable nor desirable. Host Michael Walker seemed to think that the figure of approximately 1,000 patients in 10 years prescribed puberty blockers was too low to merit concern and that ‘some of these issues have been politicised to a degree that they don’t need to be’. One wonders how many instances of testicular atrophy, increased risk of cancer, osteoporosis or impaired brain development in healthy children should be considered acceptable? Why are we even countenancing ruining young people’s lives through the unevidenced, experimental and ideological medicalisation of problems that almost certainly require a psychotherapeutic approach?

Novara Media might want to start preparing its own excuses too, given that it published an article in December 2021 offering advice on how to deceive medical professionals in order to be prescribed opposite sex hormones. ‘I’m not suggesting you tell any especially big fibs’, the article says, ‘but maybe finesse your story into one that’s likely to be received with the least amount of confusion (and bear that in mind with the psychiatrists too)… You’re not here to make friends, you’re here to get hormones. Don’t feel bad about it.’

This kind of duplicity has been widespread. Dr Hilary Cass has revealed to the British Medical Journal that children have been ‘coached on what to say and what not to say’ in order to be prescribed puberty blockers. ‘They’re told not to say they’re unsure about their sexuality, not to say they’ve been abused, because it’s so high stakes at that point’, she said. We have known for a long time that the overwhelming majority of children referred to the Tavistock were same-sex attracted, and that gender nonconformity in youth is a reliable predictor of homosexuality in later life. This has been confirmed in the final report by Dr Cass, which found that 89 per cent of girls and 81 per cent of boys referred to GIDS (Gender Identity Development Service) were either homosexual or bisexual. The NHS has been practising gay conversion therapy in plain sight.

We also know that those who have suffered abuse are disproportionately represented among these patients. One study cited in the final Cass report shows that at least one in five children referred to gender services have suffered sexual or physical abuse. In other words, rather than experiencing some kind of esoteric mismatch between body and gendered soul, most of these kids are simply gay or troubled. And yet they are being coached to lie about their actual problems to satisfy the expectations of ideologues. These people have an agenda, and if a few children have to suffer then so be it.

Throughout the Cass Review, the lack of evidence for all of these treatments is continually emphasised. The very notion of ‘gender medicine’ is underpinned by the belief that we each have a ‘gender identity’, what Helen Joyce has described as ‘something like a sexed soul’. In this, she is supported by trans campaigners like Julia Serano who calls it a ‘subconscious sex’, or the barrister Robin Moira White who on my show, Free Speech Nation, said it was an ‘essence of male or female’. This amounts to a faith in the supernatural, and is a key doctrine of the new state religion of gender. It goes without saying that people are entitled to their beliefs, but the idea that a metaphysical hypothesis should form the basis of NHS practice is, on reflection, extremely bizarre.

One of the reasons why this has been allowed to happen is that so many have been duped into accepting that this quasi-religion has some basis in science. This is largely down to the influence of WPATH (World Professional Association of Transgender Health), a body established in 1979. It’s recognised as the leading global authority in ‘transgender health’, and has pushed for the normalisation of the ‘gender-affirming’ approach. Its ‘Standards of Care’ have formed the basis of policies throughout the Western world, including in the NHS, and it is explicitly critiqued in the Cass Review for its ‘lack of developmental rigour’.

In early March, the credibility of WPATH was shattered when internal messages and videos, which had been leaked to journalist Michael Shellenberger, were made public. A full report was written by journalist Mia Hughes for the Environmental Progress think tank, entitled: ‘The WPATH Files: Pseudoscientific Surgical and Hormonal Experiments on Children, Adolescents, and Vulnerable Adults’. The files revealed WPATH’s general lack of ethical and professional standards. There are messages proving that surgeons and therapists are aware that a significant proportion of young people referred to gender clinicians suffer from mental-health problems. Some specialists associated with WPATH are proceeding with treatment in the knowledge that no consent has been secured from either the children or those directly responsible for their wellbeing. They have also withheld from patients details of potential lifelong complications, or continued down this path knowing that the children do not understand the implications. But then, how could a pre-pubescent or even adolescent child fully grasp the concepts of lifelong sterility or loss of sexual function?

The revelations of the WPATH files should have been the end of ‘gender-affirming’ care, but so deeply-rooted is the ideology in all our major institutions that it was always going to take a lot more. The BBC has yet to report on the WPATH files, which is perhaps to be expected from an organisation that has actively contributed to the promotion of gender-identity ideology. In one BBC film, a woman is seen telling a group of children that there are over a hundred genders. I have sent five requests to the BBC press office over a period of more than a month to find out why the WPATH Files have been ignored. I have yet to receive a response. But for those who are interested, I presented a two-hour special on the subject, which can be seen here.

The problems do not end with the BBC. Politicians on both sides of the house have been complicit in the spread of gender-identity ideology and its destructive consequences. When Liz Truss tabled a debate on her Health and Equality Acts (Amendment) Bill in March, a motion which raised concerns about the social transitioning of children in schools and how private companies are evading the NHS ban on puberty blockers, Labour and Conservative MPs spent four hours filibustering about ferrets in order to prevent the discussion. Their ignorance of this ideology has made them its cheerleaders.

We should not expect many of these people to admit that they were mistaken. The psychological consequences of accepting that one has been complicit in gay conversion therapy and the medicalisation of healthy children is perhaps too much for many to bear. Since the Cass Review was published, Scottish Green MSP Maggie Chapman – a woman who has criticised biology textbooks in schools for stating that sex is binary and who has suggested that children as young as eight should be able to transition – has already decried its contents. ‘Trans Healthcare is vital to protecting and supporting the rights and lives of trans people’, she posted on X, adding that her party ‘will oppose any moves to increase the age of accessing gender-affirming care to 25’.

Of course, the Cass Review makes no such recommendations. Rather, it says that ‘NHS England should establish follow-through services for 17- to 25-year-olds at each of the regional centres, either by extending the range of the regional children and young people’s service or through linked services, to ensure continuity of care and support at a potentially vulnerable stage in their journey’. This kind of moderate caution is certainly commendable given that the adult brain is not fully developed until the age of twenty-five. Of course, it’s too late for some. One detransitioner posted the following on X: ‘Had the recommendations from the Cass Review been implemented when I transitioned, in particular the recommendation of waiting until the age of 25, I would never have transitioned. I grew out of gender dysphoria by the age of 22, but had my genitals amputated by then.’

Although MPs sought to prevent a debate on the problem of private gender clinics, perhaps the Cass Review’s criticism of these clinics for pressurising GPs into prescribing the drugs will change all that. Not surprisingly, the practitioners are defiant. A statement from GenderGP has vowed to ignore the recommendations of the Cass Review and continue with its unevidenced ‘gender-affirming’ approach according to the WPATH Standards of Care. The revelations from the WPATH Files mean nothing to the high priests of this cult. And let’s not forget that the current version of the WPATH Standards of Care includes a chapter on ‘eunuchs’ which urges medical practitioners to perform castrations on patients who so identify.

Undoing the influence of such pseudoscience is going to be a long and arduous process. The ideas are too entrenched, which explains why even the Cass Review has adopted some of the language of the ideology (eg, ‘cisgender’, or references to sex as ‘assigned at birth’). Besides, too much is at stake for individuals who have promoted these beliefs. Already commentators like James O’Brien are blaming the ‘toxicity’ of those who have tried to warn people of the dangers over the last decade. We can expect similar revisionist attempts from others who have failed to speak out, and no doubt ‘the culture war’ will be blamed by those most responsible for waging it.

Ultimately, those responsible must be held accountable. Starting with Stonewall. Whereas the charity once fought for gay people, it now works against them. There should be an investigation into how it was allowed to maintain its influence in major institutions even after its shift away from gay rights and towards an unwittingly anti-gay agenda. Any government departments and quangos still associated with Stonewall should sever all ties immediately.

Both the Conservatives and Labour ought to ditch their commitment to a ban on ‘trans conversion therapy’ and recognise that this will effectively stymie the therapeutic efforts of medical practitioners to support gender nonconforming children. Moreover, there should be a ban on private clinics who intend to persist with WPATH guidelines in spite of Dr Cass’s recommendations. Above all, we need to ensure that the wellbeing of children is never again sacrificed on the altar of ideology.

[rosetyler42]

Ericka: If she had to, yes. It wouldn't effect her much. She used to be an assassin/monsterhuntress. The biggest thing would be fearing disappointment from the others for slipping back into old habits.

Alice: She wouldn't like it, but she'd do it without much effect. She's sort of the Sally of the Cycle and was present when Susie cut open all those toons. Plus...in the Cycle, it's kill or be killed. Susie DEFINITELY would considering SHE'S the one who killed all those toons, although she's better now.

Audrey: Already HAS, multiple times, though she'd probably have more guilt about it than the others. Hasn't had alot of time to process all that in the Cycle, though.

Ford: Most likely has, probably not much affected by this point. He was ready to blast Probabilitor with that space gun.

Mabel: If she could, She probably would be traumatized by the action considering she's supposed to be the nice one. Not to mention she's 13. Then again, she HAS fought monsters before.

Fiddleford: Possibly, if he had to. He's kinda morally grey but caries more guilt than Ford, at least before the memory gun.

Bill: He'd kill people for FUN.

Coraline: Most likely, if she could. She wouldn't like it and it might have an effect being an 11-year-old kid, but she'd probably try if need be. Though she prefers to hide or outwit than kill directly, she'd probably do it if she could and had to. Not sure if she has the strength to. Then again, she dealt with those vines well enough, launched a cat at a monster's face, and almost castrated Bobinsky.

Shego: Definitely. She generally prefers not to as it's inelegant, messy, and generally too much work, but she's not above doing it when she has to.

Lucy and Simon: Oh, definitely. Like Drac and Ericka, they definitely would both kill someone if they had to without much effect. They don't particularly LIKE killing, but they can and will if they have to to save themselves. Having been hunted for being monsters and the children of an ex-assassin will do that.

@lovelylivelyv 's Jack Nephalem: Probably already HAS without much effect. Like Bendy and Alice, he doesn't particularly LIKE doing it, but they live in a place where it's kinda "Kill or be killed." Plus, he's had to protect Henry and Audrey in his story.

This request was sent to us and we made a poll in response to it. Send any Blorbo-related question you want to our inbox and we’ll make a poll on which people can vote with their own Blorbos in minds

[wonderwomanpleasesteponme]

General fnaf headcannons, let go!! Yes this does go with my previous headcannon post about El Chip being in Security Breach.

Lefty uses they/them pronouns and presets as male.

The rockstar animatronics thought that Lefty was a cis male for the longest time till they heard Henry call Lefty his daughter durning the ending of Pizzeria Simulator.

Golden Freddy also uses they/them pronouns because that's easier to say than having to explain to everybody they met that they're two people in one animatronic body.

The Puppet/Lefty is everybody's mom.

Similarly Old Man Consequences is everybody's grandpa.

Cassidy calls OMC 'Old Man' but she also calls Henry 'Old Man' so it confuses a lot of people on who she's talking about.

After his death Evan became a mixture of Cassidy and his sister, Elizabeth, but he hides the fact that he still loves his dad alot and wants to be the good son(in William's eyes) he never was.

Gabriel is Cassidy's older brother and his soul couldn't rest till his sister's soul was able to rest but he passed on durning the Happiest Day minigame along with Susie, Jeremy and Fritz when it became apparent that she wasn't going to move on till she was satisfied with her revenge.

The other kids tried to convince Cassidy to move on with them durning the Happiest day minigame with this heart felt speech but Cassidy was just like 'no❤' and remained waiting her chance to trap William in hell with her.

Evan felt bad about leaving Cassidy alone so he also remained with her so UCN is a combination of both of their minds that's why the nightmare animatronics were there since only Evan and William knew what they were.

William freaked out very badly when he saw the nightmares because he knows there's only one other person who knows that they are and that's his dead son.

Cassidy occasionally calls OMC her therapist.

Millie from Count the Ways is the child in Funtime Freddy's chest and she posses him but she doesn't have any memory of her past life.

Bon Bon was with Molten Freddy in pizza sim but was hidden in his wires.

The springlocks in the Golden Freddy suit are permanently jammed open and can't be closed no matter hard they try to shut them.

The other animatronics had no idea what a springlock suit was so they just thought that Golden Freddy was just an empty suit so they tried to jam an endoskeleton in there in an attempt to help them.

The endoskeleton ended up getting stuck in there with no way of getting it out without having to tire the suit itself.

Because of the stuck endoskeleton Cassidy and Evan are in crippling pain 24/7 with no way of easing it.

Foxy has said the phrase 'Swidy Swoty I'm coming for ya booty' while running down the hallway to the office before.

I originally thought that Cassidy was ginger till I read the Twisted Ones and say that Cassidy had long black hair but in my heart she's a ginger.

Bonus: Facts about my fnaf animatronic human au that I castrated from my mind and I occasionally think about.

Golden Freddy, real name Dismen, is quadriplegic but is able to move his lower right arm but can't feel anything with it.

Freddy is Gold's older brother and was his primary caretaker till their parents were able to hire an aid.

Goldie and Foxy definitely did not have sex in the handicap stall no sire!

Freddy has beaten the shit out of Foxy for the above incident with Chica and Bonnie trying to break them apart even though Goldie had consented and Foxy had made sure multiple times if Gold was okay with it.

Toy Freddy or in this au Teddy is Gold and Freddy's current youngest brother since their mother is still pregnant with Glamrock Freddy

Funtime Freddy or Candy and Nightmare Freddy or Bane(if you know why I decided to call him that you know) are their weird older cousins that they hardly ever see.

Freddy doesn't like Candy and Bane because they are real bastards when they're ready and bully Teddy alot but Gold likes hanging out with them whenever they come over.

Candy and Bane have beaten the shit out of people make fun of Gold's disability.

[theycallme-thejackal]

that last prompt (handy gordon) was so good. Can you continue what happens next?

I got a lot of requests to continue this. There will be more installments.

Pairing: Lenny Bruce & Midge Maisel Rated T Warnings: Sexual Assault

Part 1 | Part 2

Mercifully she sleeps.

Even better, she sleeps tangled up with him, her leg draped over his, her hand resting over his heart.

He lies there in his undershirt and boxers with his arm wrapped around her, fingertips stroking her soft skin until he eventually drifts off.

He dreams about punching Gordon Ford in the nose.

He wakes before her, and as he tips his head to press a gentle kiss to her hair, he wonders if this is the first time she’s slept through the night since it happened.

She snuggles further into him, and he rubs her arm gently as he looks at the clock on the nightstand. It’s nearly nine. He can hear Abe and Rose and the Polish woman who hates his pants, but there’s no screaming or running, so he guesses the kids aren’t here.

Midge’s fingers start to trace circles over his shirt, letting him know she’s awake. “Why did you come?” She murmurs.

“Some guy put a bag over my head and threw me in a car,” he jokes.

“What makes you think it was a guy?” She quips.

“He had a mustache and answered to the name Abe.”

That seems to surprise her. She lifts her head, resting her chin on his chest. “Papa brought you here?”

“Yeah. He was worried about you. Said you wouldn’t talk to anyone about…well anything, really.”

Her blue eyes are watery, and he brushes her hair away from her face as she says, “I don’t know what to do.”

He wraps his other arm around her, giving her a little squeeze. “Well, it’s morning,” he points out. “Let’s have breakfast.”

---

This time he takes up the offer for a blintz, and he sits at the table with Midge as she picks at her food, only managing a few mouthfuls before putting her fork down. Lenny finishes his, and Abe was right. It’s fucking incredible.

It would all be so nice if it weren’t for the horrible circumstances.

“You need to tell Susie,” he offers gently.

Midge shakes her head, still picking at her food but not eating. “I can’t do this to Susie. That would be the fourth time I’ve tanked my career. I’m not doing that to her again.”

He wants to scream. The rage that roils in his gut is so strong, he doesn’t know how he’s going to contain it. “Midge,” he says, his voice low and stern. “None of this is your fault. You know that, right?”

She continues fiddling with her food. “I flirted with him. I...I led him on. I can understand why - ”

She startles as he suddenly jolts to his feet, his chair scraping loudly against the floor as he scrubs one hand through his hair. “No!” He retorts. “No! That’s not - Jesus, Midge, flirting does not give a man the right to...”

Lenny’s eyes fall on hers, wide and tearful, and he realizes he’s pacing and probably looking fairly manic. She looks scared. 

He takes a deep breath. “I’m sorry,” he sighs, rubbing his hand over his face. He softens his voice but remains standing. “But you are not responsible for Gordon Ford being unable to keep his hands to himself. I don’t care if you were standing in the wings in just your show corset - you didn’t want it, you didn’t ask for it.”

Midge blinks up at him, a tear falling from her beautiful blue eyes. “I...” Her voice comes out in barely a whisper. “I don’t want to let Susie down again.”

“You’re not,” he promises, moving back to his chair. He rests his hand over hers on the table. “You’re not letting her down. If anything, I think she’ll be upset you didn’t tell her sooner. I mean this is the woman who pretended to be my drug dealer and begged me to do a show for you. You don’t think she’s gonna castrate the guy on sight?”

She looks at him and brushes a tear away with her free hand. “You never told me why.”

“Why?”

“Why you did that show,” she explains. “We barely knew each other.”

“Well, I still owed you that cab fare.”

“You paid for my drinks at the Vanguard and sent me home with a joint. I think that tab was paid,” she reasons before nervously averting her gaze. “Was it...because...”

“No,” he promises, squeezing her hand. "No, I did it because I saw you that night at the Vanguard, and I just knew. You’ve got it, Midge, and I wasn’t going to let some hack take you out of the game.”

She nods her head, a gentle smile finally meeting her lips. “Thank you,” she breathes.

“Now Miami - that, I did because I wanted to sleep with you.”

The laugh that comes out of her is music to his ears.

[olderthannetfic]

Really fond of your blog. I love that the conversations are like... nuanced, chill, mature. Maybe it's just because I'm a newbie but it seems really hard to find this sort of thing.

You speak with a lot of clarity on human sexuality; or at least kink stuff. I know you have several years of experience in fandom spaces and I'm wondering if the clarity that you have is a result of this, or if you have some kind of background in psychology. Or maybe you just read a lot of books on this stuff?

No hard feelings if this question is too nosy. I'm just curious.

--

It is weirdly hard. I think a lot of the people who used to talk like this are old and tired now and feel like "public" in fandom is actually public in a way they may not have 10 years ago.

If you go listen to ancient episodes of /Report, they're more squee and less blather about human sexuality, but they give me an oldschool fandom vibe I fancy I also have. Ditto people's long-ass Livejournal posts from that same era. More of us used to sound like this in places that were more findable.

In terms of human sexuality stuff specifically, I was a little perv growing up in the Bay Area at the height of Cleis Press's 90s output. I wanted to be a sexologist when I was 14. I grew up reading Susie Bright. (Hilariously, years later, I once got Susie Bright in the LibraryThing secret santa exchange.) My actual schooling was biochem, then linguistics, then film. I just read a lot.

I think if you grew up around here in the 90s, there's a certain amount of poppsych, self help, human sexuality stuff that's just in the water too. I wouldn't say it makes everyone actually smart about psych stuff, but there's a greater degree of talking about things and knowing buzzwords than some places.

I'm only 41, but I came out at 14. I think that's another difference. I'm back in my family home right now, and the old lesbians next door are still there. Now, my across the street neighbors are these two gay guys I scream about film noir with. One of them is getting into geikomi and I'm reccing him all my favorite old nonfiction books on gay Japanese dudes and BL vs. geikomi and the history of sexuality in Japan and such.

Years of being out with a supportive family and years of knowing queer intellectuals offline, including a lot who are way older than me has had a big effect. Years of knowing intellectuals in general has as well. As a kid, we spent a lot of evenings at my stepdad's friends' restaurant where all their friends would drift in and out, Cheers-like, and conversations were about things like this one woman's painting cycle she was working on that was about castrated Greek statues.

I think plenty of people build a life like that as adults, but they don't always get there until they've had time to escape their families and hometowns. A lot of queer discourse in fandom in 2022 is coming from high school and college students who haven't been out in the world and who don't know older queer people or even many offline queer people aside from a small circle of school friends.

I do think I have some clarity, but a lot of the difference between me and people I see screaming about shit is that I like myself.

I don't need to join a mob for protection or comfort. I'm not afraid of my own impulses. I'm not afraid to look intellectual in public. And I like procrastinating by answering asks on tumblr and am not scared to leave anon on.

None of that is rare in isolation, but a large proportion of older queer people, intellectuals, etc. are worn out from all the sealioning and screaming Youths who invariably have more free time and more self righteousness in any era. (I was a very annoying 14-year-old, trust me.) A lot of younger people who aren't joining screaming dogpiles don't have the chutzpah to stand up in public and potentially make fools of themselves. And even people who do post the sorts of things I do usually have less free time than I do. My offline friends are introverts who work long hours. And if you don't post a lot, you aren't findable. I always posted a fair amount, but it wasn't enough to be really findable before. It's only the last few years when tumblr is much quieter and I've posted very regularly that I've started to be found by people far outside of my existing sphere.

We're no longer a tiny circle of a few hundred to few thousand Livejournal slash fen who like the same 5 buddy cop series and sci-fi with The Beefy One and The Science One. We don't even have a profile page where you can see who we follow, like on LJ/DW. We're thousands and millions of random geeks who lack an easy way to connect.

I'm about to go to Escapade Con at the end of April. It's an oldschool con that is all this kind of conversation, and the attendees have still spent the last few years going "Where is everybody?" Finding shit is genuinely hard.

Last year, when we were all online, we attracted a ton of old LJ fans who've been wondering where everybody is for ages. Hopefully, they come back for the online wing of the con this year too.

[ravensunday6-blog]

The new Suspiria manages to be about women's power without being feminist

From the beginning, the Suspiria remake is intent on giving us its own vision of Dario Argento's beloved 1977 horror classic. Both films revolve around a young woman named Susie—played by Jessica Harper in the original and Dakota Johnson in the remake—who has come to Berlin to study at a dance academy, but most of the similarities end there. Where Argento tended to avoid the politics of the time and focused on creating a lavish feast for the senses, Luca Guadagnino immerses us in a grittier Berlin of darker muted color tones. The city is grappling with the revolutionary spirit of its young people; hijackings and bombings are semi-regular occurrences. Both films show Susie coming to the realization that the school is run by a coven of witches with supernatural abilities. But it's the recent version that most fails to deliver the feminine, feminist vision it so clearly thinks it does. As The Love Witch director Anna Biller wrote in her essay about feminism in movies: "To be feminist, a movie has to have the express purpose of educating its audience about social inequality between men and women (and, I would argue, not take pleasure in the voyeuristic degradation or destruction of women)." Suspiria doesn't much bother with the first, and absolutely takes pleasure in the second.

Movies about witches often act as litmus tests of how comfortable we are with female power and how women choose to wield it. Argento's leaned into fear, choosing to position the older women without male companions as the ultimate threat to the young, innocent heroine who shows a shy interest in another young man at the school. Guadagnino's film could have been an indication of how far we've come in considering such matters over the last four decades. Instead, it takes what's obviously meant as a subversion and likewise leans into the very themes it seeks to transcend. Many filmmakers still haven't seemed to learn that it takes far more than a cast which consists primarily of women to make a story feminine, and that a woman becoming more sexual doesn't necessarily make her a threat.

Like most other stories about women told by men, the 2018 Suspiria is obsessed with purity, even if the innocence depicted is of a much different kind. In the original, Harper's Susie was a graceful, elegant nymph who had viewers asking why she was lugging around all that luggage in heels. But such elegance is now widely associated with seduction, rather than naivete. By contrast, Johnson's Susie arrives wearing sensible footwear, dressed in dowdy clothing that indicates her conservative religious upbringing as a Mennonite in Ohio. Right away, one of the teachers tells her she shouldn't be at the school. That's only before Susie auditions, and then we realize this movie will truly be as breathtaking as the first. Whereas Argento awed us with through set design, Guadagnino uses exquisite choreography. Johnson's body becomes less of an instrument than a revolution in itself, breaking free from repression to find freedom.

But Susie and the other women under the guidance of the school's instructors come to learn such freedom comes at a cost, especially when they get too close to the dark truth the teachers are hiding. Susie soon becomes aware of that darkness, and as she grows more confident, she also becomes more sexual. Her clothing becomes less midwestern and more European, more stylish and often showing more skin. There are no love interests, seeing as how that would sully the movie's aforementioned notions of purity, and its misguided idea of empowerment. What Susie does find is a kind of mother figure in Tilda Swinton's Madame Blanc, and her interactions with her are loaded with both queer and maternal signifiers.

Mothers are of special importance in this version of Suspiria, which is also a meta-tribute to Argento's Three Mothers trilogy, with its far darker take on female love. Here mothers are also twisted women who likewise use the power they wield over their children in horrific ways. Susie's mother physically, emotionally, and mentally abused her daughter and believed her very existence constituted a sin for reasons that are never specified. The instructors are likewise cruel to the young women under their charge when they step out of the places designated for them, or anyone else who they see as a potential threat. One student's angry outburst inspires brutal torture, her body twisted and bent in one deserted dance studio as a response to Susie's awe-inspiring dance (with some magical aid thanks to Madame Blanc) in another. It's one of the movie's most difficult scenes to watch, made even more unpleasant as we realize Susie's growing abilities come at another young woman's expense. Afterwards, Susie breathlessly says, "It felt like what it must feel like to fuck."

Then there's Patricia (Chloë Grace Moretz), another student whose initiation into the truth of the school has left her a raving mess. Women who run to male authorities ranting about conspiracies tend to be dismissed, but Dr. Josef Klemperer (also played by Swinton), the psychiatrist Patricia is assigned to, is willing to follow up. Of course he doesn't believe in her tales of witches and magic, but he is open to the idea that her stories are a coping mechanism for her suffering. It is he who encourages others, both students and police, to investigate whether there really are terrible things happening at the school, which is rather remarkable in itself. In Rosemary's Baby, another movie about a young woman coping with evil forces around her, the title character lays out her case simply, in a mostly calm and collected manner. Patricia does not. She tells her doctor, "I let her in. I thought I wanted it." And what do the women at the school want? According to Patricia, they'll "hollow her out and eat my cunt on a plate."

Klemperer is invested in trying to help the many women who come to him because he, like the rest of the older generation, suffers from a kind of survivor's guilt from the trauma they suffered during World War II. In his case, he is haunted by the wife he lost and wonders if he somehow contributed to her death. As for the academy's instructors, they created the dance Volk, with its performance serving as the movie's darkly beating heart. Its themes of power and rebirth coincide not only with the politics of the time, but the struggle for dominance in the school itself, which sees its rulers divided over which future they should embrace.

Klemperer plays a pivotal role in the film's bloody climax, which is basically an elderly Catholic man's fever dream of of female power gone awry, and the wide gulf between the movie's intentions and the messages it actually sends is especially stark. Susie comes to power as a maternal force in her own right, and it is disturbing, though not because of the graphic, violent manner in which she does it, although it certainly plays a part. Her mother's belief in her evil nature is essentially proven correct. Susie may smash the old matriarchy, but not the patriarchy. After she does, she continues to force the young women, who are unwilling pawns, to keep dancing, describing their performance as beautiful. Beautiful it may be, but the fact remains that they are still being manipulated. Afterwards, they retain no memory of it, indicating that their manipulation will most likely continue.

Klemperer is somehow needed as a witness to all this, and the women who forcibly drag him into it are also supposedly holding him accountable for dismissing the young women who come to him as delusional, which is especially rich considering they're also the ones doling out the punishment to many of them. But Klemperer also not only gets both compassion and closure, but an apology. Susie tells him how his wife died, and that in her last moments she thought only of him. His memory is then wiped, and he is allowed to go on with a clean slate. The fact that he is played by Tilda Swinton, an actress whose persona embraces androgyny, is supposed to be a subversion of the fact that the male gaze is so often still seen as a requirement even in stories about women. However, the gender fluidity of Swinton's fantastic performance is less about allowing masculine and feminine perspectives to coexist and empathize with each other than ensuring that the male filmmakers have a kind of surrogate. Klemperer is not held accountable, he is reassured that what was done to him was a cruel and unjust mistake. He then gets a fresh start, free from the traumas in his life. In short, he is one of the "good ones." Susie doesn't similarly heal the school's female victims, who have become twisted, deformed shells of themselves. They are fallen, tainted women, and the most they can hope for is to find peace through death, which Susie gently bestows like a goddess granting the kindest of favors.

In terms of how it treats female power, 2018's Suspiria has more in common with 1971's The Beguiled, whose director Don Siegel said was about "the basic desire of women to castrate men." In this vision, when women are united, it is always to achieve an evil outcome. Similarly, the "bad" women psychologically and sexually demean the men they encounter, whether it's Klemperer or the police looking for answers. When Sofia Coppola remade The Beguiled in 2017 (with a refreshingly different take), she stated, "This story had to be directed by a woman. The essence of it is feminine, it's seen from a female point of view."

The essence of Suspiria is feminine as well, and it likewise cries out for a female director. The material is rich with themes not only begging to be explored further, but through feminine eyes-especially in a film that revolves around the complicated dynamics between mothers and daughters. When Susie's mother (who is not even named in the IMDB credits) states outright that she believes Susie's very existence to be a sin, it's a truly tragic situation, with rich material to be mined. Suspiria could have ventured behind closed doors to explore the kind of trauma that stretches back generations, with vicious cycles of assault, forced childbirth, and the self-hatred so many women pass on to their children. But the movie would rather show a woman so cartoonishly repressed she would burn her child with an iron for pleasuring herself, and even Guadagnino's considerable artistic prowess can't compensate for such a lack of not only insight, but compassion. Men are not incapable of understanding a female-centric perspective. Take Practical Magic, another movie about witches with a mostly female cast which is directed by a man, and is as feminine as it is feminist. Other men have created great heroines such as Buffy Summers, Ellen Ripley, Veronica Mars, Imperator Furiosa, Dana Scully, Princess Leia, Daenerys Targaryen, and Sabrina the Teenage Witch. But Guadagnino is so intent on fulfilling his vision he doesn't seem to have room for any perspective besides his own, leaving the women in his narrative underserved in spite of his incredibly skilled efforts.

Source: https://www.chicagoreader.com/Bleader/archives/2018/10/30/the-new-suspiria-manages-to-be-about-womens-power-without-being-feminist

[screwbait71-blog]

The new Suspiria manages to be about women's power without being feminist

From the beginning, the Suspiria remake is intent on giving us its own vision of Dario Argento's beloved 1977 horror classic. Both films revolve around a young woman named Susie—played by Jessica Harper in the original and Dakota Johnson in the remake—who has come to Berlin to study at a dance academy, but most of the similarities end there. Where Argento tended to avoid the politics of the time and focused on creating a lavish feast for the senses, Luca Guadagnino immerses us in a grittier Berlin of darker muted color tones. The city is grappling with the revolutionary spirit of its young people; hijackings and bombings are semi-regular occurrences. Both films show Susie coming to the realization that the school is run by a coven of witches with supernatural abilities. But it's the recent version that most fails to deliver the feminine, feminist vision it so clearly thinks it does. As The Love Witch director Anna Biller wrote in her essay about feminism in movies: "To be feminist, a movie has to have the express purpose of educating its audience about social inequality between men and women (and, I would argue, not take pleasure in the voyeuristic degradation or destruction of women)." Suspiria doesn't much bother with the first, and absolutely takes pleasure in the second.

Movies about witches often act as litmus tests of how comfortable we are with female power and how women choose to wield it. Argento's leaned into fear, choosing to position the older women without male companions as the ultimate threat to the young, innocent heroine who shows a shy interest in another young man at the school. Guadagnino's film could have been an indication of how far we've come in considering such matters over the last four decades. Instead, it takes what's obviously meant as a subversion and likewise leans into the very themes it seeks to transcend. Many filmmakers still haven't seemed to learn that it takes far more than a cast which consists primarily of women to make a story feminine, and that a woman becoming more sexual doesn't necessarily make her a threat.

Like most other stories about women told by men, the 2018 Suspiria is obsessed with purity, even if the innocence depicted is of a much different kind. In the original, Harper's Susie was a graceful, elegant nymph who had viewers asking why she was lugging around all that luggage in heels. But such elegance is now widely associated with seduction, rather than naivete. By contrast, Johnson's Susie arrives wearing sensible footwear, dressed in dowdy clothing that indicates her conservative religious upbringing as a Mennonite in Ohio. Right away, one of the teachers tells her she shouldn't be at the school. That's only before Susie auditions, and then we realize this movie will truly be as breathtaking as the first. Whereas Argento awed us with through set design, Guadagnino uses exquisite choreography. Johnson's body becomes less of an instrument than a revolution in itself, breaking free from repression to find freedom.

But Susie and the other women under the guidance of the school's instructors come to learn such freedom comes at a cost, especially when they get too close to the dark truth the teachers are hiding. Susie soon becomes aware of that darkness, and as she grows more confident, she also becomes more sexual. Her clothing becomes less midwestern and more European, more stylish and often showing more skin. There are no love interests, seeing as how that would sully the movie's aforementioned notions of purity, and its misguided idea of empowerment. What Susie does find is a kind of mother figure in Tilda Swinton's Madame Blanc, and her interactions with her are loaded with both queer and maternal signifiers.

Mothers are of special importance in this version of Suspiria, which is also a meta-tribute to Argento's Three Mothers trilogy, with its far darker take on female love. Here mothers are also twisted women who likewise use the power they wield over their children in horrific ways. Susie's mother physically, emotionally, and mentally abused her daughter and believed her very existence constituted a sin for reasons that are never specified. The instructors are likewise cruel to the young women under their charge when they step out of the places designated for them, or anyone else who they see as a potential threat. One student's angry outburst inspires brutal torture, her body twisted and bent in one deserted dance studio as a response to Susie's awe-inspiring dance (with some magical aid thanks to Madame Blanc) in another. It's one of the movie's most difficult scenes to watch, made even more unpleasant as we realize Susie's growing abilities come at another young woman's expense. Afterwards, Susie breathlessly says, "It felt like what it must feel like to fuck."

Then there's Patricia (Chloë Grace Moretz), another student whose initiation into the truth of the school has left her a raving mess. Women who run to male authorities ranting about conspiracies tend to be dismissed, but Dr. Josef Klemperer (also played by Swinton), the psychiatrist Patricia is assigned to, is willing to follow up. Of course he doesn't believe in her tales of witches and magic, but he is open to the idea that her stories are a coping mechanism for her suffering. It is he who encourages others, both students and police, to investigate whether there really are terrible things happening at the school, which is rather remarkable in itself. In Rosemary's Baby, another movie about a young woman coping with evil forces around her, the title character lays out her case simply, in a mostly calm and collected manner. Patricia does not. She tells her doctor, "I let her in. I thought I wanted it." And what do the women at the school want? According to Patricia, they'll "hollow her out and eat my cunt on a plate."

Klemperer is invested in trying to help the many women who come to him because he, like the rest of the older generation, suffers from a kind of survivor's guilt from the trauma they suffered during World War II. In his case, he is haunted by the wife he lost and wonders if he somehow contributed to her death. As for the academy's instructors, they created the dance Volk, with its performance serving as the movie's darkly beating heart. Its themes of power and rebirth coincide not only with the politics of the time, but the struggle for dominance in the school itself, which sees its rulers divided over which future they should embrace.

Klemperer plays a pivotal role in the film's bloody climax, which is basically an elderly Catholic man's fever dream of of female power gone awry, and the wide gulf between the movie's intentions and the messages it actually sends is especially stark. Susie comes to power as a maternal force in her own right, and it is disturbing, though not because of the graphic, violent manner in which she does it, although it certainly plays a part. Her mother's belief in her evil nature is essentially proven correct. Susie may smash the old matriarchy, but not the patriarchy. After she does, she continues to force the young women, who are unwilling pawns, to keep dancing, describing their performance as beautiful. Beautiful it may be, but the fact remains that they are still being manipulated. Afterwards, they retain no memory of it, indicating that their manipulation will most likely continue.

Klemperer is somehow needed as a witness to all this, and the women who forcibly drag him into it are also supposedly holding him accountable for dismissing the young women who come to him as delusional, which is especially rich considering they're also the ones doling out the punishment to many of them. But Klemperer also not only gets both compassion and closure, but an apology. Susie tells him how his wife died, and that in her last moments she thought only of him. His memory is then wiped, and he is allowed to go on with a clean slate. The fact that he is played by Tilda Swinton, an actress whose persona embraces androgyny, is supposed to be a subversion of the fact that the male gaze is so often still seen as a requirement even in stories about women. However, the gender fluidity of Swinton's fantastic performance is less about allowing masculine and feminine perspectives to coexist and empathize with each other than ensuring that the male filmmakers have a kind of surrogate. Klemperer is not held accountable, he is reassured that what was done to him was a cruel and unjust mistake. He then gets a fresh start, free from the traumas in his life. In short, he is one of the "good ones." Susie doesn't similarly heal the school's female victims, who have become twisted, deformed shells of themselves. They are fallen, tainted women, and the most they can hope for is to find peace through death, which Susie gently bestows like a goddess granting the kindest of favors.

In terms of how it treats female power, 2018's Suspiria has more in common with 1971's The Beguiled, whose director Don Siegel said was about "the basic desire of women to castrate men." In this vision, when women are united, it is always to achieve an evil outcome. Similarly, the "bad" women psychologically and sexually demean the men they encounter, whether it's Klemperer or the police looking for answers. When Sofia Coppola remade The Beguiled in 2017 (with a refreshingly different take), she stated, "This story had to be directed by a woman. The essence of it is feminine, it's seen from a female point of view."

The essence of Suspiria is feminine as well, and it likewise cries out for a female director. The material is rich with themes not only begging to be explored further, but through feminine eyes-especially in a film that revolves around the complicated dynamics between mothers and daughters. When Susie's mother (who is not even named in the IMDB credits) states outright that she believes Susie's very existence to be a sin, it's a truly tragic situation, with rich material to be mined. Suspiria could have ventured behind closed doors to explore the kind of trauma that stretches back generations, with vicious cycles of assault, forced childbirth, and the self-hatred so many women pass on to their children. But the movie would rather show a woman so cartoonishly repressed she would burn her child with an iron for pleasuring herself, and even Guadagnino's considerable artistic prowess can't compensate for such a lack of not only insight, but compassion. Men are not incapable of understanding a female-centric perspective. Take Practical Magic, another movie about witches with a mostly female cast which is directed by a man, and is as feminine as it is feminist. Other men have created great heroines such as Buffy Summers, Ellen Ripley, Veronica Mars, Imperator Furiosa, Dana Scully, Princess Leia, Daenerys Targaryen, and Sabrina the Teenage Witch. But Guadagnino is so intent on fulfilling his vision he doesn't seem to have room for any perspective besides his own, leaving the women in his narrative underserved in spite of his incredibly skilled efforts.

Source: https://www.chicagoreader.com/Bleader/archives/2018/10/30/the-new-suspiria-manages-to-be-about-womens-power-without-being-feminist

[ruthfeiertag]

Re-Run from 2016 “To the Letter”

The following is a post I wrote back in early 2016 — a simpler, happier time — for the Month of Letters blog. While we have left Valentine's Day 2020 behind us already, I'm re-posting this piece, in part because it's amusing and, in part, because I am concerned about the U.S. Postal Service and want to remind us all how desperately important letters can be. I hope it makes you smile.

(Also, Happy May the Fourth) 

*****************

14 February, 2016 St. Valentine’s Day

My dear Ms. Bradford,

Greetings and enthusiastic wishes for a Valentine’s Day alight with loads of loving letters! I write you today not only to send greetings, but also to thank you for giving me the singular honour of writing the Valentine’s Day post — and to tell you with immense regret that I can’t possibly write such a piece.

Allow me to explain. You asked that I focus on the love-letter sections of the book I have been reading, To the Letter: A Celebration of the Lost Art of Letter Writing by Simon Garfield.* If only you had asked me for a general review of the book! In that case, I could have extolled its wit and the wide range of historical examples it provides. I would have offered up moving passages, such as the one in the introductory chapter, “The Magic of Letters,” in which Mr. Garfield writes eloquently about what we are in danger of losing:

Letters have the power to grant us a larger life. They reveal motivation and deepen understanding. They are evidential. They change lives, and they rewire history. The world used to run upon their transmission — the lubricant of human interaction and the freefall [sic] of ideas, the silent conduit of the worthy and the incidental, the time we were coming for dinner, the account of our marvelous day, the weightiest joys and sorrows of love. It must have seemed impossible that their worth would ever be taken for granted or swept aside. A world without letters would surely be a world without oxygen (p. 19),

and provided instances of the author’s humour, such as when, in an aside to his discussion of Seneca’s instructional correspondence, he gently pokes fun at academics who study epistolary matters. In this note, Mr. Garfield informs us that

Seneca’s letters were longer than the norm, ranging from 149 to 4,134 words, with an average of 955, or some 10 papyrus sheets joined on a roll. Philological scholars with time on their hands have calculated that a sheet of papyrus of approximately 9 x 11 inches contained an average of 87 words, and that a letter rarely exceeded 200 words (note, p. 55),

an observation that betrays the author’s own interest in such minutiae. He also spares not the Fathers of the Church. He points out that during the millennium when “Literacy was not encouraged among the populace” (p. 81), letter-writing declined and “theological letters are all we have.” Mr. Garfield finds these letters uninspiring and cautions his readers that we “may prefer death to the lingering torture of reading them” (p. 82).

I shall say nothing at all about Mr. Garfield’s three chapters reviewing historical advice on “How to Write the Perfect Letter,” about the heated debates regarding whether letters should mimic informal conversations, about the importance of addressing recipients as befits their stations, about where to place one’s signature, nor about how leaving wide margins was a sign of wealth and status. Epistolary silence shall envelope the fascinating descriptions of the evolution of the modern postal system; not a word will there be from my pen about the incredible fact that postage used to be paid not by the sender of a letter but by the person to whom it was addressed, nor shall I mention anything about the invention of the postage stamp, despite Mr. Garfield’s engaging description of its conception.**

But love letters! You must see how this will never do. Love letters can leave us open to terrible embarrassment. Mr. Garfield acknowledges that

Love letters catch us at a time in our lives where our marrow is jelly; but we toughen up, our souls harden, and we reread them years later with a mixture of disbelief and cringing horror, and — worst of all — level judgement. The American journalist Mignon McLaughlin had it right in 1966: ‘If you must re-read old love letters,’ she wrote in The Second Neurotics Notebook, ‘better pick a room without mirrors.’ (p. 336)

Reading the love letters of others can be almost as cheek-reddening as reading our own. Shall we really subject our LetterMo companions to such blushing?

Moreover, we all know the power of a love letter. Think how we are charmed when Hamlet, that most articulate of Shakespeare’s creations, writes awkwardly to Ophelia:

'Doubt thou the stars are fire; Doubt that the sun doth move; Doubt truth to be a liar; But never doubt I love. 'O dear Ophelia, I am ill at these numbers; I have not art to reckon my groans; but that I love thee best, O most best, believe

Adieu.

'Thine evermore, most dear lady, whilst this machine is to him, HAMLET.' (Hamlet, II. ii. 1212-20***)

And never let us forget that it is a letter, and not even an intentional love letter, but merely a letter of explanation, that finally wins Mr. Darcy the heart of Elizabeth Bennet. Do we wish to tempt our friends to deploy such power wantonly and without discretion? ****

But these are fictional examples, created strictly for our amusement or even for our edification. I really don't know whether we should intrude upon the privacy of people who actually lived — though Mr. Garfield patently feels no such compunction. He shamelessly lays out for us not only the ecstatic feelings of historical couples, he even brings up — and we’re both adults, so I’m just going to write the word straight out — SEX. I fancy you don’t believe me. Permit me, for veracity’s sake, to share some examples.

If you were to glance at page seventy-three, you would find Mr. Garfield’s account of

The letters between Marcus Aurelius and Fronto [which] track the rise and fall of a courtship from about ad 139, when Aurelius was in his late teens and his teacher in his late thirties, until about ad 148. The heart of their correspondence is ablaze with passion. ‘I am dying so for love of you,’ Aurelius writes, eliciting the response from his tutor, ‘You have made me dazed and thunderstruck by your burning love.’

All I will say is that, with all the conjugating the Romans had to learn, it’s a wonder there was time for such extra-curricular activity.

Mr. Garfield follows this Latin love affair with the tragic, even more explicit tale of Heloise and Abelard, those misfortunate, twelfth-century lovers. Theirs is another pupil-pedant passion, and Abelard writes that

‘With our lessons as our pretext we abandoned ourselves entirely to love.’ There followed ‘more kissing than teaching’ and hands that ‘strayed oftener to her bosom than the pages’ (p. 76).

The story culminates in pregnancy, a secret marriage, Abelard’s castration by Heloise’s relatives, and the retreat of both lovers into monastic life. Heloise’s love and desire for her husband remain unabated; during Mass, ‘“lewd visions of the pleasures we shared take such a hold upon my unhappy soul that my thoughts are on their wantonness instead of on my own prayers”’ (p. 78).

In a later chapter, Mr. Garfield treats us to a discussion of the romance of Napoleon and Josephine, and compares the market worth of their letters to the arguably more valuable missives of Admiral Lord Nelson. “In letters,” our author confides, “as everywhere else, sex sells: the Nelson [letter] went for Ł66,000, a fair sum but less than a quarter of a Bonaparte” (p. 192). Mr. Garfield puts before us the affaire de cœr of Emily Dickinson and her sister-in-law, Susan Gilbert. He quotes ‘a letter which echoed the steamy transactions of Abelard and Heloise …: “When [the pastor] said Our Heavenly Father,” I said “Oh Darling Sue”; when he read the 100th Psalm, I kept saying your precious letter all over to myself, and Susie, when they sang … I made up words and kept singing how I loved you”’ (p. 248). **** In another letter, Dickinson breathlessly confides to Gilbert that if they were together, “we need not talk at all, our eyes would whisper for us, and your hand fast in mine, we would not ask for language” (p. 248).

To be sure, there are genuinely moving examples of great love to be found in the book. We are reminded that passionate romances need not be defined by tragedy. Robert Browning and Elizabeth Barrett fell in love through their letters, and their correspondence describes a “swift 20-month crescendo from endearing fandom to all-consuming craving” (p. 345). The two poets eloped and lived happily for the duration of their marriage. Browning was “the man who swept her [Barrett] away and liberated her passion” (p. 347) — and married her.

While the concerns of the famous hold a particular fascination for the masses — as Shakespeare writes, “What great ones do the less will prattle of”****** — the most touching and poignant letters are those of Chris Barker and Bessie Moore. Mr. Barker was a British signalman during the Second World War, Miss Moore an acquaintance from Mr. Barker’s time working in the Post Office. When they began to write, Ms. Moore was involved with someone named Nick, but three months into their correspondence Ms. Moore has shed Nick and is trying to persuade Mr. Barker that they are friends, and not mere acquaintances. She succeeds admirably, and soon Mr. Barker is assuring her of his interest in having “fun at a later date” while warning her “not to let me break your heart in 1946 or 47” (p. 145), and stoking her interest by wondering what she’s like “in the soft, warm, yielding, panting flesh” (p. 147). But before long Miss Moore’s unwavering admiration and epistolary dedication have complicated Mr. Barker’s desire and he is writing “I WILL ALWAYS LOVE YOU” (p. 202).

Miss Moore waits for her signalman throughout the war and his time as a POW. In the epilogue, we learn that they were married in October 1945 and had two sons. It is to the elder, Bernard, that we owe thanks for the preservation of their letters. The younger Mr. Barker says of his parents that “Their love for each other was so complete, always, that it was difficult for my brother and I in childhood and adolescence to relate to each of them as a single person” (p. 425). In the last letter of the war, Mr. Barker writes his by-now wife, “I can never be as good as you deserve, but I really will try very hard … We shall be collaborators, man and woman, husband and wife, lovers” (p. 426). The Barkers’ letters cannot be read without becoming involved in their growing affection and in the history Mr. Barker includes in his letters to the steadfast woman who would become his partner. The letters are tender and grateful and passionate, and we learn a great deal from them about Mr. Barker’s experiences as a signalman, about how to lay the foundation for a lasting, loving relationship, and about how thoroughly Victorian sexual mores had been trampled into the dust.

I cannot but think that you are as shocked as I am. You have not read the book and are innocent regarding its contents. I am sure, in my heart of hearts, that you didn’t understand what you were asking me to do. But I am equally sure, Ms. Bradford, that you agree these matters ought not be laid out before the Month of Letters community, that none of our letter-writers could ever have the slightest interest in reading about affairs of the heart (and of the body) of other people. Our reputation as an Internet society devoted to promoting the respectable art of epistolary composition would suffer dreadfully, and neither of us wants to be complicit in bring such a judgement to pass.

I do hope you will find it in your heart to forgive me for letting you down so. To make up for the lack of a post, I offer you a poem to run in its place instead, one more suitable for our impeccable epistolary society, to run in place of the piece I should have given you:

But For Lust Ruth Pitter

But for lust we could be friends, On each other’s necks could weep: In each other’s arms could sleep In the calm the cradle lends:

Lends awhile, and takes away. But for hunger, but for fear, Calm could be our day and year From the yellow to the grey:

From the gold to the grey hair, But for passion we could rest, But for passion we could feast On compassion everywhere.

Even in this night I know By the awful living dead, By this craving tear I shed, Somewhere, somewhere it is so.

I trust you understand my reasons for writing you this letter and do assure you that I remain

Your honoured and admiring epistolary confederate,

Ruth E. Feiertag

* Gotham Books, Penguin Group, 2014

** Those familiar with Terry Pritchett’s Going Postal will already have an inkling of the early history of stamps.

*** Open source Shakespeare, [http://www.opensourceshakespeare.org/search/search-results.php], accessed 3 February 2016).

****Garfield irresponsibly provides no advice for the proper composition of a love letter. For that we must look to John Beguine of The Atlantic. His article, “A Modern Guide to the Love Letter,” reminds us to choose “100 percent cotton paper,” that may “suggest to your beloved those other cotton sheets you hope to share.” He also cautions us not to “succumb to the temptation to employ your own personal stationery imprinted with your name and address. Such handsome lettering makes identification appallingly easy for your lover’s attorney.” Beguine covers other topics such as Ink, Elegance (“Elegance prompts wit rather than comedy, sentiment rather than sentimentality” and “Long-winded elegance is oxymoronic. So length does matter, but in writing, less is more”), Salutation, Body (“even if you have a knack for them, no pornographic drawings”), Metaphors, Grammar, Complimentary Close, Signature (“If you can’t bring yourself to close without a signature, limit yourself to your first initial. And try to be illegible here. There’s no reason to make the job easier for a lawyer someday [sic]”), Delivery (“bribe whomever you must to have the letter placed directly upon the beloved’s pillow”), and Accepting an Answer. ([http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/02/a-modern-guide-to-the-love-letter/385370/])

***** One might also ponder Dickinson’s 1722 poem, “Her face was in a bed of hair”:

Her face was in a bed of hair, Like flowers in a plot — Her hand was whiter than the sperm That feeds the sacred light.

Her tongue more tender than the tune That totters in the leaves — Who hears may be incredulous, Who witnesses, believes.

****** Twelfth Night, I. I. 33. [http://www.shakespeare-online.com/plays/twn_1_2.html]

[gyrlversion]

How officers came knocking at the door of a devout Catholic

As a schoolgirl, Caroline Farrow relished discussing politics and current affairs around the kitchen table with her family. 

Her parents, both teachers, encouraged robust debate and Caroline and her elder sister were precociously well informed. 

‘Freedom of speech and expression was drummed into us from an early age,’ she says.

She was ten in 1984, a landmark year when George Orwell’s vision of a totalitarian future was revisited and reappraised. 

Catholic journalist Caroline Farrow, 44, was told by Surrey Police that she had to attend an interview under caution or face arrest after she used the wrong pronoun to describe a transgender woman

Her father explained the novel’s concepts of Big Brother, Newspeak and the Thought Police, and Caroline was fascinated. 

‘But I remember thinking at the time that none of it could ever come true,’ she says.

Now 44, and a trenchant Catholic journalist, priest’s wife and occasional TV commentator, Mrs Farrow was reminded of Orwellian themes last Monday when, in the middle of preparing dinner for her husband Robin and five children, a policewoman rang her at home with a startling demand.

Mrs Farrow was told she must attend an interview under caution or face arrest because she had used the wrong pronoun to describe a transgender woman.

Suddenly the dystopia described in Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four began to feel all too real. Scarcely able to absorb what she was hearing, she felt, in sharp succession, disbelief, fear and anger.

Anger because Mrs Farrow herself had been the victim of a cyber stalking campaign which, at its vile worst, made her fear for her family’s safety – but which, she says, police failed to take seriously.

‘It’s double standards. When the complaint involves the word transgender, police leap into action,’ she says. ‘Something has gone terribly wrong in this country.’

In the event, the four-month Surrey Police investigation into Mrs Farrow, which prompted much controversy last week when made public, was hastily dropped as it hurtled towards full-blown fiasco.

Following a TV debate with Susie Green, the head of trans rights charity Mermaids, Mrs Farrow later called Ms Green’s daughter Jackie (pictured) ‘him’ instead of ‘her’ on Twitter and said Mermaids promoted child abuse

Critics called the probe a waste of time and money at a time when officers are struggling with high levels of knife crime.

The roots of the sorry affair appear to lie in a TV debate. Mrs Farrow, known for her deeply held religious views, and Susie Green, the head of trans rights charity Mermaids, clashed on ITV’s Good Morning Britain about Girl Guides allowing children who have changed gender to join the organisation. 

Mrs Farrow later called Ms Green’s daughter Jackie ‘him’ instead of ‘her’ on Twitter and said Mermaids promoted child abuse.

Five weeks later, Ms Green complained to police.

One of Mrs Farrow’s tweets read: ‘What she did to her own son [the youngest person in the world to undergo transgender surgery] is illegal. 

She mutilated him by having him castrated and rendered sterile while still a child.’

Many might consider Mrs Farrow’s choice of words unpleasant but she is unapologetic. 

She says: ‘I deliberately used the words castration and mutilation to shock because what happens is shocking. I was trying to bring home the harsh reality of what she [Ms Green] did.’

Jackie Green, who was born male and was once known as Jack, began taking puberty-blockers at 12, and went to Thailand aged 16 for reassignment surgery, which is now illegal for under-18s.

Whatever one feels about the tweet’s tone, Mrs Farrow is convinced most right-minded people would agree it wasn’t criminal. 

As anger surfaced, Mrs Farrow was left facing a tirade of abuse on social media which made her fear for her family’s safety

‘Yes, it was strong language but I wanted to make people sit up. I wanted to get the country talking about this. So much is changing in our society. 

‘The notion of what it is to be a woman or a mother is being erased and rewritten by zealots. People are too scared to question what is going on. The tweets might possibly be spiteful but they were not intended to cause alarm or distress.’

Which is why Mrs Farrow was stunned to receive the phone call from the police officer on Monday as she juggled preparing a meal of gammon, roast potatoes and vegetables for her children – aged between four and 14 – with overseeing homework and music practice. 

The message left on her voicemail said: ‘Hello there, I’m calling from Guildford police station… I need to have a chat with you about some tweets that have been sent.’

Mrs Farrow says: ‘My husband said, ‘You know it’s bound to be the trans stuff, you have been talking about this a lot lately and you know the lobbyists are looking to get you.’ ‘

She spoke to the officer later that night. ‘I pointed out that ‘misgendering’ wasn’t a crime and that as a Catholic I believed that sex could not be changed. 

I explained that the country is in the middle of an ongoing national conversation about sex and gender, what it means to be male and female, and I was contributing to that in a professional capacity.’

The officer reiterated that the CPS had ‘authorised us to bring you in for a taped interview’. 

That night, managing only an hour’s sleep, Mrs Farrow tried to make sense of what was happening. Naturally she feared the worst. Who would look after the children if she went to jail? She would be destroyed. Her husband would lose his job.

The following morning, Mrs Farrow instructed a solicitor. She says: ‘My lawyer said it seemed politically motivated but thought the case would be thrown out. 

‘He warned that I was likely to face a tough interview. What was happening felt so unjust, especially as over the past few months I have endured an unimaginable campaign of harassment, targeting not only me, but my entire family.’

A very PC force’s links to trans charity 

Flying the flag: Inspector David Harland calls himself a ‘trans ally’

Susie Green’s powerful transgender lobby group has forged close links with a police force behind a series of hate crime investigations.

West Yorkshire Police launched probes into an award-winning TV writer, a mother of four and a transsexual man following complaints from Mermaids.

But The Mail on Sunday can reveal that the force received ‘training sessions’ from Mermaids, which supports medical intervention for transgender children.

West Yorkshire Police has promoted Mermaids’ work, tweeting one of its leaflets. 

Mermaids has also advised Merseyside Police, NHS staff, social workers, the Scouts and student nurses.

One West Yorkshire officer, Inspector David Harland, declared himself on social media to be a ‘trans ally’, adding that he was dedicated to ‘doing all I can for the trans community’.

In February last year, West Yorkshire sent officers to Wiltshire to investigate a mother of four following a complaint by Ms Green.

Echoing the Caroline Farrow case, Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull was questioned on suspicion of a malicious communications offence after Ms Green reported her for tweeting that Ms Green had illegally ‘castrated’ her ‘son’ by allowing him to have sex change surgery in Thailand at 16.

In April 2018, the force received another complaint, this time from Mermaid volunteer Helen Islan.

She claimed that transsexual Miranda Yardley, who has had gender reassignment surgery, had ‘outed’ Ms Islan’s transgender son by tweeting a picture of Ms Islan with her family, which included the child. West Yorkshire referred this incident to police in Essex, where Ms Yardley lives.

In a third case, West Yorkshire officers gave Graham Linehan, co-creator of the hit TV comedy Father Ted, a verbal harassment warning when transgender activist Stephanie Hayden reported him for referring to her as ‘he’ on Twitter.

A force spokeswoman said it was ‘committed to ensuring that anyone who feels targeted due to race, sexual orientation, religion, disability or gender identity is listened to’.

It should be noted that her stalkers were motivated not by her views on transgender issues but in part by the tragic case of Alfie Evans, the baby at the centre of a legal battle last year over turning off his life support. 

It was a morally fraught case that aroused fierce debate, and Mrs Farrow joined the global campaign to keep him alive.

Mrs Farrow often comments on social issues and her deeply held conservative religious views have made her many enemies on social media. 

Incensed by her intervention, opponents set up a blog solely for the purpose of attacking the journalist and her family.

On May 3 last year, five days after Alfie’s death, a Twitter account posted a link to her home address with the sinister message: ‘If anyone fancies having a chat with the illustrious Mrs Farrow…’ 

Even more distressing, someone posted a link to her children’s school.

Many of the abusive messages were sexually degrading, referencing her Catholic faith. 

At one stage, trolls warned that their ‘agents’ were on their way to her village. Some of the most upsetting attacks involved her children and comments made about their appearance. Mrs Farrow says there were even attempts at extortion.

‘I was ordered to delete all my social-media accounts and pay the LGBT lobby group Stonewall £1,000 if I wanted the blog to cease operation. 

‘They also got hold of our email addresses and set up accounts with pornographic websites in our name, and pictures. I had to cancel an order for £772 of sex toys.’

On January 8 – more than two months after Mrs Farrow made a formal complaint to police – one of the suspected trolls was questioned. But Mrs Farrow was later told no action would be taken.

‘I felt really let down. I have suffered so much with this, my mental health has deteriorated and I told the officer that this is the sort of thing that drives people to suicide. I was being hyperbolic, but then things turned nasty.

‘The policeman said he needed to report me to social services because I said I was suicidal. Social services called a few weeks later and after chatting to me said I was fine and they would not take it further. 

‘Yet Susie Green makes a spurious complaint and, bingo, the police are straight on to me.’

Surrey Police said Mrs Farrow’s claims of harassment were fully investigated but ‘we were unable to find evidence that meets the threshold for criminal proceedings’.

Last Tuesday, the Farrows’ 14-year-old daughter had a starring role in a school recital. Mrs Farrow says: ‘I knew I was going to have to tell her [about the police interview] but I waited until after her concert. 

‘She burst into tears at the idea that I could face jail, but regained composure when I said that it was highly unlikely.

‘I felt so guilty having to burden her with it and taint such a wonderful evening for her but I also knew that it wouldn’t be fair for her to find out from friends.’

The next day, Ms Green withdrew her complaint because she said she did not want to give Mrs Farrow a public ‘platform’. Instead of contacting police, she announced her decision on a television show.

Mrs Farrow believes police are only too willing to appease Ms Green and Mermaids, which she thinks is looking for a test case to codify misgendering into law. 

Hers is not the first transgender ‘hate crime’ police have pursued. So far none of them have ended with a successful prosecution.

‘Orwell’s novel was a cautionary tale and an example of why we always need to be thankful for and guard our freedoms,’ says Mrs Farrow. ‘I never once envisaged I would face jail for refusing to state that man cannot be woman.’

Surrey Police said: ‘We requested Caroline Farrow attend a voluntary interview to understand her intent in relation to the tweets. Details of this invitation were publicly shared and there has been criticism of our decision to investigate.

‘We have been in contact with both parties as we have a duty of care towards both, and there was concern for their welfare as a result of publicity. 

The victim will withdraw her allegation and has explained her reasoning. Without the support of the victim, it’s unlikely a criminal case could be brought.’

The post How officers came knocking at the door of a devout Catholic appeared first on Gyrlversion.

from WordPress https://www.gyrlversion.net/how-officers-came-knocking-at-the-door-of-a-devout-catholic/

[theycallme-thejackal]

Can we pls have a continuation of the Gordon Ford being a dickhead pls? Btw low-key liking the fact that the fandom’s already shitting on a character that we don’t even know beside from some set pics and videos.

(I really hope Gordon turns out to be a decent guy and a good friend to Midge, but I like exploring him as a bad guy, too. He's the low-rent version of Lenny Bruce, so we have to shit on him for it.)

Pairing: Lenny Bruce & Midge Maisel Rated M Warnings: Sexual Assault

(Midge talks about her assault in this chapter. Not in detail, but proceed with caution.)

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3

"What. The. Fuck?"

Susie's face has turned a bright, angry red over the course of Midge's story. Lenny had offered to wait outside the office to give her privacy, but she'd clung to his hand, silently pleading for him not to leave her.

The truth is that he didn't want to hear the details. He didn't want to hear about how Ford's hands had violently gripped where his own had once caressed in reverence.

But she asked. Silently, sure, but she asked.

He's let down too many people in his life. He won't have her be another one.

So he sits in the chair next to her, listening to her explain everything that happened that night after taping. How Gordon had come into her dressing room as his usual charming self, and when she attempted to rebuff his advances, he pressed on, refusing to take no for an answer. How he'd become violent, taking her arm in a bruising grip and prying her legs apart and...

He grips the arms of his chair angrily.

"I'm sor - "

"Don't you dare fucking apologize, Midge," Susie interrupts, lifting her hand off of her desk, and Lenny notices it shaking the slightest bit. "That asshole attacked you, and I'm not going to let you blame yourself for it."

Her voice is low, menacing, and Lenny can't even imagine the threats going through her mind. He's thought of various ways of teaching the guy a much-needed lesson, but something tells him Susie's mind is coming up with more...say, creative methods of torture.

"I'm gonna castrate him with a butter knife."

Yep, there it is.

"Susie - "

"I'm gonna tie him up, get the dullest, rustiest knife I can find, cut his dick off, and shove it in his mouth for him to choke on. And then I'm gonna stuff him in a suitcase, take him out to the dirtiest stretch of Rockaway Beach, set him on fire, and when he's nice and crispy I'll throw him into the ocean to get eaten by a shark."

"Susie - "

"He's not gonna get away with this, Midge."

"Just get me out of the contract," Midge whimpers.

Lenny watches her, and although she's petite, this is the first time he's ever seen her look small. It's as though this whole ordeal has extinguished the fire inside of her, and he would give anything to see it lit again.

Susie sighs, apparently seeing the same thing he does, and sits back in her chair. "I can probably get you paid out," she concedes. "But I gotta be able to threaten them with going to the press."

"I...no, Susie. I don't want anyone knowing about this."

"If you want your money, I've gotta tell them why you're not gonna finish the contract, Midge," Susie says gently. "It’s just a bluff. And I’m good at bluffing. I've just gotta tell his lawyer about it. Publicly we'll cite creative differences or conflicting personalities or some bullshit, and then we'll take our money and put it all behind us."

Midge nods slowly and fiddles with her fingers in her lap. He reaches for her then, unable to stop himself from putting his hand gently on her forearm. She covers it with her other hand, squeezing tightly. 

Susie looks between them. She doesn’t comment, but he’s sure he’s gonna get an earful from her at a later date.

“Can I at least sic Frank and Nicky on him?”

[coochiequeens]

Maybe police in the UK should be less “untoward” to women and investigate the pedophiles

A British women’s rights activist has revealed that she was visited by law enforcement, and had a hate crime report filed against her, for being “untoward about pedophiles.” Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull, also known by the moniker Posie Parker, posted a YouTube video on July 24 describing her exchange with Wiltshire Police officers.

In the video, Keen-Minshull stated that two young officers visited her home address, and one of the officers informed her that a formal complaint had been filed in response to comments she had made in one of the videos uploaded to her YouTube channel. She then inquired whether the officer had seen the video himself, to which he responded that he had not.

They advised Keen that the statements she made on YouTube were “untoward about pedophiles” and were being recorded as a “hate crime.” Keen-Minshull asked the officers if they meant a hate incident but they refused to clarify. Under UK law, hate incidents are recorded complaints that are not deemed criminal while hate crimes are punishable under the law.

“How can it be a hate crime to talk untoward about pedophiles?” Keen-Minshull said in a YouTube livestream, “There are people in this small town of mine who have had absolutely no police response to being burgled … there are people who go into local businesses and refuse to pay, yet the police don’t come. The police don’t care. But they’ll knock on my door?”

Keen-Minshull suspected that the officers, who were from Wiltshire Police Department, were inexperienced. Wiltshire Police was recently found to be ‘inadequate’ in three areas and ‘requires improvement’ in the other five areas.

During her livestream, Keen-Minshull also reasserted her opposition to men claiming a female identity, as she suspected the person who reported her may have taken issue with this aspect of her activism.

“To the person who reported me… if you are a man who gets your rocks off wearing women’s clothing and you don’t care about the safety, dignity, or privacy of women and girls and you use women’s spaces, I’m going to say that you’re a predatory male. And if you want to be in those women’s spaces, where women are in a state of undress, I’m going to say that that particular fetish of yours is going to make you much more likely to be a pedophile,” Keen-Minshull said.

Keen-Minshull is well-known in the United Kingdom for her campaign Standing for Women, which focuses on an effort to ensure the language surrounding female issues is clearly articulated so that women’s sex-based rights are not eroded by gender ideology.

“You tell the man that reported me that I don’t care how he identifies, he is not welcome in women’s spaces… We won’t call them women, and they’re not going to take our language.”

Keen-Minshull reported that the officers also tried to obtain the identity of her teenager daughter during the visit. The visit to her home lasted approximately three minutes. 

This is not the first time Keen-Minshull has experienced police reports related to her activism. 

In 2018, she was brought in for questioning by the West Yorkshire police for tweets targeted at Susie Green, the CEO of the trans charity Mermaids. Keen-Minshull tweeted that Green had taken her 16 year old son to Thailand for sex reassignment surgery due to it having been illegal in the United Kingdom for minors, which she called “castration.”

Another tweet by Keen-Minshull that was reported to the police stated that Green had chemically castrated her son. Green had also taken her son to America for “puberty blockers” before they were legal in the UK. Green admitted that the use of puberty blockers made his later surgery more difficult and complex. 

Keen-Minshull recounted on her Youtube channel that Green reported her to the police, who then approached Twitter to obtained her private information. The police informed her during the interview that Green felt her tweets were “threatening.” The police criticized her use of the phrase “castration” and claimed “sex reassignment surgery” does not include castration. 

The police decided not to charge her following the interview. The police passed the case over to the Crown Prosecution Service who rejected it. 

Trans activists have targeted Keen-Minshull and those who support her advocacy. Her organization Standing For Women travels around the UK hosting free speech events for women, allowing women to come to voice their views on issues affecting them. These events have been targeted by men arriving dressed in all black to intimidate women. As previously reported by Reduxx, one women was assaulted at a Speaker’s Corner event in May of this year. 

Keen-Minshull herself has faced threats of violence. Most recently, a trans-identified male called into her YouTube show to tell her that he would celebrate her death. Some have speculated whether the individual who called in may be the same one who reported her to police.

Several women in the UK have been publicly persecuted for criticizing gender ideology in recent years.

In 2019, a mother was arrested in front of her children and held in police detention for 7 hours after being reported for ‘dead-naming’ a trans-identified male online. In addition to her arrest, Kate Scottow had her electronic devices seized and held by police for months after being released from custody.

In June, a woman was convicted on charges of sending an “offensive and obscene message” after a trans-identified male complained to police about her views. 

Chinzia Ogilvie, 43, was sentenced at Portsmouth Magistrates’ Court on June 10 to community service and rehabilitation on hate-motivated charges related to a Twitter disagreement. Ogilvie was called in for questioning by police in January after engaging in an online debate with trans-identified male “Ivy” Burrows in October of 2021. 

[gyrlversion]

Second woman quizzed over transphobic posts following complaints

Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull (pictured), a women’s rights campaigner from Wiltshire, was accused of committing a hate crime by Susie Green, whose daughter Jackie, 25, transitioned after turning 16

A second woman has been questioned over ‘transphobic’ posts made on social media, following complaints from the mother of the youngest Briton to transition.

Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull, a women’s rights campaigner from Wiltshire, was accused of committing a hate crime by Susie Green, whose daughter Jackie, 25, transitioned after turning 16.    

The 44-year-old was alleged to have made a number of transphobic comments on Twitter last year, and was questioned by officers from West Yorkshire Police following a complaint from Ms Green.

And then she was later interviewed by Wiltshire Police following two You-Tube clips in which she criticised Ms Green for supporting her daughter’s transition, as revealed by The Daily Telegraph today.  

The news comes after Caroline Farrow, a broadcaster and writer for Roman Catholic newspapers, revealed on Tuesday that she was being investigated by Surrey Police after allegedly calling Ms Green’s daughter a ‘he’ on Twitter. 

The first case against Ms Keen-Minshull, who has labelled the investigations a ‘waste of time’, was closed with no further action taken. 

And speaking to The Daily Telegraph, claimed she was entitled to her comments on YouTube, saying: ‘I think it is outrageous that police are wasting valuable time investigating people because their views might not be liked. It is McCarthyist and it is terribly frightening.’ 

Jackie Green (right) formally Jack, had a sex change after turning 16. She is the daughter of Susie Green (left) who appeared on Good Morning Britain alongside Caroline Farrow

Caroline Farrow (right) had appeared alongside Susie Green (left) in September 2018 to discuss Girl Guiding policies. But tweets after their appearance sparked a row

Ms Keen-Minshull, of the charity Standing Up For Women, previously came under fire when in September last year she raised £700 for a billboard with the definition of a woman written on it to be set up in Liverpool.   

The poster, on the side of the old Gaumont cinema on Gredington Street in Toxteth, Liverpool, bore the Google definition of a woman – ‘adult human female.’

But it was removed after Dr Adrian Harrop, 31, who is not transgender, complained to billboard company Primesight that it would serve to make transgender women feel unsafe.

Ms Green today revealed that she plans to withdraw her complaint to police about Ms Farrow because she fears the row is giving the broadcaster and writer ‘a platform’. 

Feminist blogger Kellie-Jay Keen- Minshull (pictured) raised £700 for the poster to be put up in Liverpool for a fortnight

The row began over tweets posted after they appeared on TV together last year – and has since sparked a row over whether police should be spending time examining tweets rather than pumping more resources into tackling violence and theft.   

Ms Green told the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire: ‘Every day, people misgender my daughter online, that wasn’t uncommon. What was uncommon was that this was a journalist who had a public platform, who used that to send very malicious and nasty messages.

‘It’s not just the misgendering, it’s actually the context that she puts it into and that she calls me a child abuser… it’s also the stuff around mutilation and castration. It was the really damaging things she said about me.’  

Ms Green was asked whether she thought that, though upsetting, the tweets were a matter for police.

Jackie (left) and her mother Susie (right) pictured at their home in Leeds shortly after Jackie had the operation

Jackie Green (pictured above) had previously appeared on This Morning to discuss her place at the Miss England finals

She said that was up to the police and prosecutors, but as the founder of a charity which advises others to report hate crime, she felt she should report it.

Adding that she is now withdrawing her complaint, she said: ‘If I had continued my complaint then Caroline Farrow would have continued to have a platform to spread misinformation about what actually happened. Being involved in an investigation would have meant that I couldn’t talk.’ 

The original tweets posted by Ms Farrow on October 4 were read out on air yesterday.

One stated: ‘What she [Susie Green] did is illegal. She mutilated him by having him castrated and rendered sterile while still a child.’

Another tweet accused Ms Green and her charity of ‘child abuse’.

Ms Farrow tweeted on Wednesday morning: ‘All I have been told by Surrey Police that I ‘misgendered Susie Green’s daughter’.

In 2012 her daughter Jackie Green made history when she became the first transgender Miss England finalist. 

Jackie, who was born Jack and spent her childhood trying to persuade her parents she had been born in to the wrong body, said: ‘I knew from the start that I was a girl, it was just actually having the vocabulary to make people understand.

Jackie Green (left) and her mother Susie (right). Jackie had previously said that at the age of four she told her mother that she should have been born a girl

Jackie was born Jack (left as a baby) and her mother Susie  is now a transgender activist (Susie and Jackie as a baby pictured right on Susie’s wedding day)

Jackie Green pictured as a youngster before surgery. She said she always insisted on wearing girls clothing and growing her hair

Jackie (formerly Jack) is pictured above wearing a patterned dress with a fringe cut. Jackie had told her mother that she should have been born a girl 

Susie and Jackie (pictured above) the pair enjoyed a holiday to Thailand before Jackie had her operation 

‘I would have had the surgery at five years old if I could. After the surgery it felt like starting life for the first time.

‘Loads of kids go through stages, some people go down the transgender route and then change their minds, mostly because they don’t have the support of their family.

‘At primary school I dressed as a boy for the majority of the time. The kids understood and just took it in their stride.

‘But secondary school was horrible. I was being spat on, being beaten up and called so many different names. The parents were the worst.

‘I was prescribed ‘blockers’ by a doctor in Boston when was I was twelve. It basically paused puberty and it saved my life. I would have killed myself. I wouldn’t have been able to cope.’  

When Jackie was aged just four she told her mother Susan: ‘God has made a mistake, I should be a girl.’

Jackie (pictured on Instagram above) was the real life inspiration for a drama starring Anna Friel called Butterly which charted the transition of a boy to a girl

Jackie (centre) had the support of her mother Susie (right) and her father (left)

Trapped in a body she hated, Jackie first overdosed aged 11 and made six more suicide attempts before she was 15. Medicines were locked in a safe and knives had to be hidden away. She threatened to mutilate her genitals.

And so, aged 16, Jackie Green became the youngest person in the world to undergo transgender surgery. 

She said:’Without that surgery, I wouldn’t be here now.

‘I’m a girl, I always have been – there’s never been any doubt in my mind about that. It’s just that my body didn’t match because, as far as I’m concerned, I had a birth defect.’    

The post Second woman quizzed over transphobic posts following complaints appeared first on Gyrlversion.

from WordPress https://www.gyrlversion.net/second-woman-quizzed-over-transphobic-posts-following-complaints/

[gyrlversion]

Transgender womans mother hits back at Catholic facing police probe

Mother of UK’s youngest transgender patient WITHDRAWS complaint to police after devout Catholic called her daughter ‘he’ in tweet – but says she accused her of ‘castrating my child’

Caroline Farrow revealed yesterday that she was being investigated by police

The probe stems from tweets she posted online ‘misgendering’ Jackie Green

Case has sparked row over why police are spending time investigating tweets 

Miss Green’s mother says the complaint was about other ‘malicious’ claims

She is withdrawing the complaint. Police say the investigation continues

By Richard Spillett, Crime Correspondent For Mailonline

Published: 07:43 EDT, 20 March 2019 | Updated: 10:10 EDT, 20 March 2019

A mother who went to police over tweets posted by a Catholic journalist about her transgender daughter says she has now withdrawn the complaint.

Susie Green, whose daughter Jackie transitioned as a teenager, reported Caroline Farrow to Surrey Police over tweets posted online after they appeared on TV together last year.

Mrs Farrow, 44, expressed her outrage yesterday that she was the subject of a criminal investigation for ‘misgendering’ Jackie as a ‘he’ online.

The case has sparked a row over whether police should be spending time examining tweets rather than pumping more resources into tackling violence and theft.

But Mrs Green hit back today, saying her complaints to police were also about Mrs Farrow’s calling her a ‘child abuser’ who had ‘castrated’ her ‘son’ on Twitter.

She says she now plans to withdraw the complaint to police because she fears the row is giving Mrs Farrow ‘a platform’. 

Susie Green (left) went to police over tweets posted by Catholic journalist Caroline Farrow (right) about her transgender daughter, Jackie, after they appeared on TV last year 

  Mrs Green said Mrs Farrow’s tweets were not an accidental slip, but were ‘malicious’ and aimed at her. The tweets were broadcast on the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire show this morning

Mrs Green told the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire: ‘Every day, people misgender my daughter online, that wasn’t uncommon. What was uncommon was that this was a journalist who had a public platform, who used that to send very malicious and nasty messages.

‘It’s not just the misgendering, it’s actually the context that she puts it into and that she calls me a child abuser… it’s also the stuff around mutilation and castration. It was the really damaging things she said about me.’

Mrs Green was asked whether she thought that, though upsetting, the tweets were a matter for police.

She said that was up to the police and prosecutors, but as the founder of a charity which advises others to report hate crime, she felt she should report it.

She said she is now withdrawing her complaint, adding: ‘If I had continued my complaint then Caroline Farrow would have continued to have a platform to spread misinformation about what actually happened. Being involved in an investigation would have meant that I couldn’t talk.’

  Jackie Green (right) had a sex change after turning 16. She is the daughter of Susie Green (left) who appeared on Good Morning Britain alongside Caroline Farrow last year

Susie and Jackie (pictured above) the pair enjoyed a holiday to Thailand before Jackie had her operation 

What is the Malicious Communications Act?

The Malicious Communications Act prohibits the posting of material which is grossly offensive or threatening, false or believed to be false, if it is sent with the intent to cause distress or anxiety. 

Sentences for those found guilty under this act can be up to two years. 

In 2012, guidance was given to prosecutors which stated cases should not where what is posted is ‘not obviously beyond what could conceivably be tolerable or acceptable in a diverse society which upholds and respects freedom of expression’.

The guidelines stated: ‘In line with the free-speech, no prosecution should be brought unless it can be shown on its own facts and merits to be both necessary and proportionate.’

The original tweets posted by Mrs Farrow on October 4 were read out on air today.

One stated: ‘What she [Susie Green] did is illegal. She mutilated him by having him castrated and rendered sterile while still a child.’

Another tweet accused Mrs Green and her charity of ‘child abuse’.

Mrs Farrow tweeted this morning: ‘All I have been told by Surrey Police that I “misgendered Susie Green’s daughter”.

‘The investigation is still ongoing. I am very concerned about Mrs Green disclosing what the police will not tell me about my tweets on this programme & making allegations I cannot counter.’

She added: ‘This is a public witch-hunt. Whether or not I am in breach of the Malicious Communications Act or have broken the law needs to be investigated by the police & a court of law. Not the @vicderbyshire show.’

Surrey Police said the investigation currently continues.

It is understood police have yet to receive an official withdrawal statement from Mrs Green. If she decides to officially withdraw her original complaint, detectives will decide whether to end the investigation.

The police force has come under fire for mounting the investigation at a time when budgets are stretched and knife crime is on the rise. 

Surrey’s former Chief Constable Lynne Owens said in 2015 that as a result of £25million in cuts and the loss of 250 officers, minor crimes would be ignored in favour of investigation of offences against vulnerable people. 

Jackie Green (pictured above) had previously appeared on This Morning to discuss her place at the Miss England finals

Jackie (left) and her mother Susie (right) pictured at their home on Leeds shortly after Jackie had the operation

Advertisement

Share or comment on this article:

The post Transgender womans mother hits back at Catholic facing police probe appeared first on Gyrlversion.

from WordPress https://www.gyrlversion.net/transgender-womans-mother-hits-back-at-catholic-facing-police-probe/