26 thoughts on “On Contact: Female Erasure with Maya Dillard Smith and Mary Lou Singleton

  1. 1. Mary Lou Singleton’s precise language on this subject is the best model I have heard so far.
    2. Maya Dillard Smith’s crique of the Obama Title IX directive is well presented. Like most Civil Rights lawyers, she needs to be reminded that the 14th Amendment deliberately excluded women as a class and does so to this day. The result is to allow courts to violate anti-sex discrimination statutes like Title IX that are intended to protect women because they do not rest, like race, on a strong constitutional basis.
    3. Chris Hedges’ efforts to bring out the elements and rationalizations of patriarchy and misogyny are important and commendable.
    Twiss Butler

    1. I don’t think Maya Dillard Smith is unaware of who the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments were meant to protect. Of course, their protections have been extended to a broad range of people who were deliberately excluded by the specific intent of its drafters, creating a legally … interesting situation, in which those whom the Amendments were specifically intended to protect find their claims subject to greater judicial scrutiny and dismissal than those who allegedly suffer from the lack of a strong constitutinal basis for their claims. Perhaps it just depends on how you look at it.

  2. Holy Shit!!!!! This was dead on…Maya and Mary for the win.
    How or rather WHY the hell is this not being circulated and on loops? For crying out loud, use the old ‘bicycle network’ if need be. The case is made here, in detail…without hype or lies, as to what the brigade agenda has done, is doing and will do, if not kept in check.
    Thanks GallusMag…..this made the morning. Logic rules….bullshit drools.

    1. this actually isn’t the first time Maya spoke out and it was swept under the rug by the media. I only knew about what happened to Dillard being pushed out for speaking out about the bathroom issue because someone on Instagram posted about it- only one person out of all the pages I follow. It really should’ve been part of the mainstream “conversation” (though, it’s not a conversation). Each and every time women speak up on this matter, no matter how respectful or understanding they try to be 1) it goes completely ignored or 2) they’re crucified.

      1. I remember that after she made her statement about the misguided Obama advisory, Maya mentioned the threats she had gotten online. Says a lot about that when the brigade comes across those who see through their bullshit, they act like street punks.
        Makes one wonder if she was a typical handmaid for the community and the type of person of color that the community admires at that, if she would not have pilloried as she has. Honest debates are dismissed outright by the brigade, if they are from an educated POC, sadly even more so.

    2. I agree. The two speakers set out our case so simply that even the brigade and its followers wouldn’t have a comeback. I was particularly impressed with the link to consumerism and all that that entails.

      1. That they did on multiple accounts….
        Now, will this stop the bullying and threats on the part of the brigade? Not likely, seeing that when one acts like a bully, they are unlikely to change, barring punishment/imprisonment. Until then, cooler or more logical minds will face opposition.
        Sad but true….

  3. This Chris Hedges dialogue is really worth a listen. Mary Lou Singleton’s language is the best model I’ve found so far.

  4. Thinking maybe women should stop using the terms ‘Feminists’ or ‘Activists’ while keeping the same principles. Because whenever there is discussion about our rights as women and lesbians that is named, women are always shut down and called derogatory names by males and their female collaborators.
    I suggest we as lesbians when periodically working with female allies and other allies when there are issues that affect all women say ::::: We are biologically born women which includes lesbians, bisexual female allies, hetero female allies. We specifically focus on the equal rights for all biologically born women which includes protection from violence, career and educational opportunities, private space, health care rights, womens’ history, sexual identity, race, religion, personal beliefs, social class, financial class, mental and physical disability etc etc.

    1. Anti-feminists aren’t shutting down the voices or discourses of women because we use the word ‘feminist.’ They’re doing it because of sexism and misogyny and patriarchy. There’s nothing women can do to make men or a patriarchal society “want” true (radical) feminism. It is antithetical to their values of male supremacy, control/exploitation, and hierarchy leading to God the Father.
      Personally, I prefer the term “Women’s Liberation.” For me this does not stop at “equal rights for biologically born women.” I don’t want to merely be “as men are.” As men currently are is repugnant, mainly because they are willing participants in and architects of earth-, culture-, and female-hating globalized industrial capitalism. If we had true “sex equality,” we would still have melting ice caps, holes in the ozone, dying indigenous languages and cultures, and masses of millions of third world people who are made to do the bulk of the labor and suffering in payment for this imbalance and abuse of the earth.

  5. these women are on point and they rock. And I am so, so, so glad to see Maya Dillard speak up on the bathroom point and how people used it to try to make a Civil Rights connection. It was like the Pavlov’s dog experiment. I raised the similar point previously in the comments section here and it feels really awesome to see I am not alone on being critical of that comparison. I am so proud to see these awesome women speaking up. I hope they are heard and protected, especially by women, and not attacked and have their words spun totally out of context. And thank you to Gallus for this blog and all the other women who have been courageous enough to speak up on this and keep folks informed.

    1. Pavlovian, yes. That rings a bell (!) Because–as you demonstrate over and over here GM–the global gender project is a massive speculative psych experiment about humans and the planet. Flood the internet with propaganda. Go into schools and fuck with kids. Destabilise people’s understanding of their own selves and their relationships with others. Tear everything down and capitalise on people’s confusion. Get young people hooked on violent porn whilst parroting sayings like ‘hearts not parts’ I’m encountering more young lesbians who’ve been harrassed and called ‘festishists’ by male transpeople, for not being into males.
      It’s the scale of the projection and reversal that’s so flooring. I used to think it was mainly profit-based, a drive by manufacturers of x-sex hormones. But we’re starting to understand how much bigger it is. It will ENGENDER a level of control over people we can only guess at. Obviously mainly girls and women. Frustrating how few people are willing to say anything, but some of us are doing what we can… Thanks as ever for what you do, GM.

  6. I also want to add that I am super irritated with right wing conservatives pretending like it wasn’t one of their own (Jenner) who popularized and validated biological men as being women and they love putting this solely in the laps of feminists/left (not that they don’t deserve their lion’s share of the blame either) but the truth is no on was discussing this until a wealthy, conservative, white able-bodied MAN put on a corset and said “for all intents and purposes I am a woman”. That one statement alone completely turned then country’s views on gender/biology on its head practically overnight but they want to put it all on “feminists” (which at this point is code for “women”) No. To heck with that. They need to own their own.

  7. They were both astonishingly coherent and concise, especially in their description of the connection between patriarchy and the trans narrative.
    By the way, Gallus Mag, I read the post from 2012 about Julia Serrano’s Ms. essay that appears under the “Related” header, since it was one I hadn’t seen before. In addition to showing the absurdity of Serrano’s thinking, you happen to foretell the Rachel Dolezal controversy:
    ‘What next? “Strands” of racial justice that “move away from viewing racism as an overly simplistic unilateral form of oppression, where whites are oppressors and people of color are the oppressed’? Because “cis-ethnic” people oppress the whites donchaknow!’

      1. I know. It’s beginning to seem as if no matter how funny or sarcastic we try to be, nothing is too absurd to end up true..

  8. What a great vid. Aside: Some years ago a prominent indigenous feminist, when interviewed about white rights and indigenous rights, said this:
    “Their rights end at the beginning of my nose.”
    Works for me in this context.

  9. Speaking of more erasure: this one came across this evening. Again, when those who support the destruction of a group they aspire to be like, are in charge of one media organ of said group….it is a matter of time before the targeted group will no longer have a voice.
    [Also notice the background of the original editor of the magazine. How is it that the mantle for this publication is being turned over to someone, who is from a place where the majority see nothing wrong with abuse, trafficking, etc????]

    1. Great to see this getting more coverage. Too bad that Snow job’s contentions about science, statistics, and outcome studies were totally made up but not challenged. I also noticed that Snow job immediately discounted the transracial analogy as false equivalence and then went on to compare trans exclusion from women’s spaces to racial segregation again and again. I also do not like the racial analogies thrown into this discussion, but either you embrace them or you disavow them. Transactivists try to argue both ways. Maya Dillard was consistent in her analysis. I hope that came across to those new to the discussion.

      1. “Snow job immediately discounted the transracial analogy as false equivalence and then went on to compare trans exclusion from women’s spaces to racial segregation again and again.”
        LMAO!!!! Good catch.

    2. Just read the article and one question comes to mind, when reading the comments of Snow the activist:
      Was she high or just a rather special kind of stupid??????
      The latter part of the question is not meant as a joke. What was spewed by the brigade member, points to a dishonest, as well as truncated view of how the world. Let alone a dismissive POV of the lives of women and minorities. Typical of way too many in the community, more virulent among those who are in civil service or want to be.

  10. OT/ or FYI:
    There are no less than four columns in the National Post slamming identity politics, in the broadest sense (sexual, ethnic, religious). It has their particular sauce on it, (we may disagree here and there) but, geez it’s being questioned.

Comments are closed.