Anyone wanting to go to this; it's in 5 days!

Demo went ahead - 150 people. Julie Bindel then wrote an article in the Guardian making it all about her! http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/08/lesbianism

Here's my reply:

To the editor of the Guardian,

I confess to being very impressed by Julie Bindel's latest article, but sadly the impression it left was not a favourable one. Given that the central issue in this ongoing matter is Stonewall and not her, I would've hoped she would have had the sense to keep her head down. At the very least she could have written an article which sets out her views in a sensible, well thought-out manner. Instead she penned something which is not only the academic equivalent of throwing one's toys out of one's pram - and was about as mature as the afforementioned expulsion of toys - but also was successful in lowering the tone of her little corner of the Guardian to something more on a par with the Sun.

Aside from the way she makes this all about her, (so she has something to complain about where there was actually nothing to complain about,) her summation of queer history is so badly skewed that it makes me wonder if we are even talking about the same subject. She says: "Transsexuals, having received short shrift from heterosexual society, asked to be included in our rainbow alliance" This could not be further from the truth! Transsexuals form a small part of the trans community, a community which is inclusive of anybody who does not "do gender" in the traditional way. Considering that the Stonewall Rebellion in 1969 is famous for having been fought by drag queens and butch women then I would say the trans community has been present on the front lines of the militant queer rights struggles from day one. We never asked to be included, we ARE included. As a matter of fact it was us that started it! Boiling the transgender/genderqueer community down to the transsexual minority is the only way in which she can attempt to deny this historical fact.

Onto the events surrounding the 6th of November, then: The organisation calling itself Stonewall has, since it's inception, refused to campaign for the rights of transgendered people. The fact that they have the gall to name themselves after one of the most important battles in OUR history adds insult to injury, the injury being that the leading organisation within the LGBT movement is concerned exclusively with the issues of lesbian and gay people, pays the scantest lip service to bisexuals and does nothing for trans people. A greater insult was felt when Stonewall nominated a writer with a history of expressing transphobic opinions as journalist of the year. This insult was felt by many within the transgender community to be the straw that broke the donkey's back. The demonstration was about Stonewall, not Julie Bindel.

I would also like to reply to another thing she states in the article: "The article [Gender Benders Beware] caused uproar among some sections of the transsexual community and, despite apologising publicly three times about the tone and inappropriate humour in the column, I have never been allowed to forget it." Indeed she has apologised for causing offence, but if one apologises for causing offence without apologising for the overall gist of what one has said - which, jokes aside, is what caused the offence - then can one say they have truly apologised? I rather think not. Her apology was not an attempt to build bridges but merely an attempt to pull the rug from under any accusation of transphobia that might be made on a more formal basis. As transparent as it was shallow.

Finally: "Queer (anyone who is into "kinky" sex)" If nothing else, I can be glad that so many people have already dignified this comment with a response that I am saved from having to lower myself in order to do so.


Yours sincerely,
Joanne McKillop.
Trans Support Officer,
Queer Youth Network.

wow, i read the article..
when i read the part about going through the alphabet, it reminded me of christians commenting on same sex marriage. Something along the lines of 'if we allow people of the same sex to marry, why don't we just go ahead and let someone marry a horse or a dog' was said at a demonstration that i stumbled on whilst on youtube..

'But I for one do not wish to be lumped in with an ever-increasing list of folk defined by "odd" sexual habits or characteristics. Shall we just start with A and work our way through the alphabet? A, androgynous, b, bisexual, c, cat-fancying d, devil worshipping. Where will it ever end?'

Automatically it sounded to me as if she was comparing trans people (or intersex) to people who have a fetish with cats or people who worship the devil :P

And the constant use of the word 'transexual' ..

quoting joey below 'This could not be further from the truth! Transsexuals form a small part of the trans community, a community which is inclusive of anybody who does not "do gender" in the traditional way.'

her ignorance is a bit frustrating :P

that being said.. i havent nothing more to add lol.

:D