Full audio of the Wednesday March 14 “Transgenderism and the War on Women” event at the House of Commons, London, UK.
The audio on the first few minutes is a bit rough, but this is otherwise an incendiary listen. Enjoy!
Dan Hogan, Labour Party Governance and Legal, Official Interrogator (twitter)
Those of us who try to stay abreast of trends in gender will likely be aware of the current controversy in the UK Labour Party over men who “Self-ID” as female taking spaces on All-Women Shortlists and Women’s Officer positions. What you might not know is that Labour Party officials are also conducting formal investigations into members they suspect of holding feminist thoughts around “gender”, based on their social media postings.
File this one under “you wouldn’t believe it if you didn’t read it with your own eyes“.
In that spirit, what follows is an actual complete transcript of a literal Labour Party interrogation, conducted by two Labour Party officials: a woman who remained silent and took notes, and a man named Dan Hogan. Dan Hogan works for the Labour Party’s Governance and Legal Unit where he has been employed since 2016. Prior to that, Dan Hogan worked at Labour Party headquarters on the Policy Team starting in 2013, after having worked for various Labour MPs since 2009.
Dan Hogan, second from left, with the Vincent Square Action Team
The individual being interrogated is Venice Allen, a Lesbian Feminist campaigner and Labour Party member who was literally called in to Labour Headquarters on a matter most urgent! Did she now, or had she ever, believed that – Oh, never mind. Read it for yourself.
Venice Allen, left, with feminist campaigner Jennifer James
D: Obviously I will be going through the evidence as I said to you previously; a few other questions as well. I’ll ask you about the social media posts, your intention behind them and other conduct. I imagine you’ll probably have some questions as well. I will allow you to ask those at the beginning and end. Following this investigation I’ll be making a report to the National Executive Committee Disputes Panel along with the recommendations to further action. They make a decision on whether to take further action in your case. At its most serious that can take the form of a referral to the National Constitutional Committee and a hearing there. That can result in expulsion from the Labour Party at its most serious. However, if my recommendation is that the investigation is closed and your suspension is lifted that’ll happen immediately and that will simply be noted at the next meeting of the NEC Disputes Panel. Like I say, I’ll allow you an opportunity to ask your questions at the end of the interview but in the meantime do you have any questions for me right now?
V: When you say immediately would it be like in a couple of days, or…?
D: Well, as soon as I’ve had a chance to reflect on all the evidence and reach a conclusion.
V: My other question is that in the initial letter I was accused of breaching the Labour Party Rules on social media and in person, but I didn’t see any…
D: Well, it’s hard to provide evidence of something that’s happened in person. We’ve had…
V: So we’ll be talking about that too?
D: We will be talking about that as well. First of all, you’ve seen the evidence that I sent you. I did make one error in it so I do apologise. There was a post which was repeated twice instead when it was actually supposed to be included in this as well. You can see, Item…
A: But they’re the same thing.
D: Yeah, where’s my pack? There it is. Yes, I believe I put in A3 twice instead of including A2, but I don’t think that’s too different for you to [s.l. take that instructions 0:02:03].
V: That’s fine.
D: So can you confirm that all the items in the evidence pack including the ones here, that you were responsible for posting them?
V: I am, yeah.
D: In Items A1, A2, A3, can you tell me what you meant by that?
V: It’s my belief that you can’t change sex. As far as I’m concerned a transwoman is actually a man so I think all these posts are just saying that. Lily Madigan here is saying that “select group of women”, so he says he’s describing transwomen. I think that transwomen are men which is why [unclear 0:02:46].
D: Just for clarity, so I understand all of your comments. When you say ‘male’, which you have in some of these, do you mean something distinct from men, man, bloke, etc. or do you use the words interchangeably?
V: Where have I said ‘males’? Oh, [unclear 0:03:08] saying males are males. Well, male doesn’t just cover humans does it? Whereas men and blokes are also just exclusively humans, but I guess here I’m just using it interchangeably.
D: But in this context you have used it interchangeably?
D: How would you expect a transwoman to respond to being told that they’re a man?
V: I don’t expect that they’d be happy to be called a man, but I think it’s politically essential that we name them as men at this point when the law is about to be changed, or it’s proposed to be changed to allow any man to self-identify legally as a woman. So for me it isn’t about personality, it’s about changing the law which I protest.
D: Did you believe anybody could be offended by your comments?
V: [Unclear 0:04:54] basically. I don’t think we have the right not to be offended.
D: You don’t think people have the right not to be offended?
D: What would you say to anybody who had been offended by these comments?
V: I’d say that, “I’m sorry to offend you, but there’s a change in the law which is being proposed which is effectively going to erase women’s rights and that’s more important to me than your personal offence.” I find a lot of things offensive that are directed at women. They’re are going to twist that and then [unclear 0:05:54].
D: What would you say in response to somebody who said that by deliberately misgendering transwomen in general these posts demonstrate a hostility or prejudice based upon gender reassignment or identity?
V: Firstly I’d like to question that word ‘misgendering’ because I think actually these pronouns based on sex and this notion of mis-gendering is kind of Orwellian because, actually, it’s them who are mis-gendering themselves. Can you repeat the rest of the question to make sure I am [unclear 0:07:01]?
D: I’ll repeat the whole thing. What would you say in response to somebody who said that by deliberately misgendering transwomen in general these posts demonstrate a hostility or prejudice based upon gender reassignment or identity?
V: I can see how someone would feel that but I don’t think that’s an accurate reflection of me, and I’m not hostile to transwomen. Perhaps I got the defensive transwomen, but I feel that with these proposed changes in legislation we’re in a sex war situation.
D: Just to go back to the previous thing, you say that the notion of misgendering is Orwellian and that people calling themselves women or men but if they’re not are misgendering themselves. Is that correct?
V: Hmm-hmm. [Unclear 00:08:31] if someone had used the preferred pronoun. I’d like to say that in my personal life I’ve always treated transwomen as honorary women on a case by case basis, but when we’re being forced by the law to use somebody’s preferred pronouns it’s really important that we don’t, that we stick by what actual pronouns relate to their biological sex.
D: So it’s the context of the proposed legislation that means that…
D: …you’ve changed the way you talk to transpeople.
V: I still use preferred pronouns in real life on a case by case basis, but on Twitter I think it’s really important that we name men as men.
D: You refer a lot to transwomen. What do you believe transmen are?
V: Transmen are trans-identifying females.
D: I refer you to Item B. Do you want a copy as well?
A: If you wouldn’t mind that’d be very kind, thank you. I think the copy that I have doesn’t have letters on, the one you originally sent. No, this one does but the one you were sent by email doesn’t have letters.
D: Oh, I do apologise. Can you tell me who Heather Peto is?
V: I believe that he’s the Trans-Inclusion Officer of the Labour Party.
D: And can you tell me what’s meant by your post?
V: What’s meant by the post is that I’m highlighting that Heather Peto…
[coughing] feels entitled to be on all-women shortlists [coughing] and I’m sickened by that, hence the emoji ‘cause of all-women shortlists are in place to help women to do…what’s the word?…balance the divide between men and women, balance the number of men and women in Parliament to represent the people and I think that these should be only available to women.
D: The post obviously refers explicitly to an individual who, as far as I understand, identifies as a woman. How do you believe Heather Peto would respond to being described as a trans-identified male?
V: I don’t know. That’s what Heather Peto is, a trans-identifying male, so I can’t really say how Heather would react to that one.
D: Do you believe that, in common parlance not in terms of biology, specifically describing someone as male when they identify as a woman is to deliberately misgender them?
V: I don’t know how to say it. I don’t agree with this notion of misgendering so I can’t really comment on that. I don’t mind how people identify. It has never bothered me until I heard of these proposals to streamline as Theresa May says the Gender Recognition Act.
D: But Heather Peto as a male may not be a supporter of that notion, but she’s not responsible for it. You’ve mentioned before that the change to the legislation is the context in which you are describing men as men. What does Heather Peto have to do with that?
V: Heather Peto is using all-women shortlists to further his career in politics and to stand as an MP. As far as I know he’s stood and failed as an MP before as a man and I believe that he’s taking advantage of all-women shortlists to…well, he was, he didn’t get elected. But I don’t think it’s fair for men to use up these places which are designed to address the imbalance of men and women in Parliament. I have absolutely no problem with transgender people standing for MPs or Councillors.
D: Specifically, what about describing Heather Peto as a trans-identifying male?
V: That’s what Heather Peto is, a trans-identifying male.
D: Do you think Heather Peto might be offended by your post?
V: Quite possibly.
D: Do you believe that matters?
V: I think if you choose a career in politics or media you have to accept that there might be criticism.
D: Should that criticism extend to questioning what somebody is?
V: If they are, in my opinion, misusing particular programmes and systems that have been in place to help women, yeah I do feel that it’s just criticism. It’s not a personal criticism against Heather, it’s a criticism against this process. This self-ID that the Labour Party is endorsing.
D: Heather Peto’s Twitter profile, you’re just demonstrating you know that she is a Labour Party member. Does it bother you that your posts may specifically offend another member of the Labour Party?
V: Sorry, can you repeat the question?
D: Does it bother you that your comments here may specifically offend another member of the Labour Party?
V: My intention is not to personally offend anybody. I’m just highlighting to my followers that programmes in place to help women are being abused by trans-identifying men in my opinion.
D: What effect do you expect your post and other ones like it might have upon the Labour Party in terms of it being a welcoming environment for people with different backgrounds?
V: I’m not finding the Labour Party a very welcoming environment for women right now as are a lot of women as this reflected in your latest poling.
D: And in respect to my actual question.
V: Sorry, can you repeat the question?
D: What effect do you expect your post and ones like it might have upon the Labour Party in terms of it being a welcoming environment for people from different backgrounds, such as transpeople?
V: What effect? I expect this particular post to have very little effect because it’s just my Twitter and I’m not an Officer of the Labour Party. I’m just a member of the Labour Party and I think we should be able to discuss these issues without being suspended or investigated.
D: What effect do you believe this post and posts like it may have upon public perception of the Labour Party?
V: I don’t think any. I don’t think Labour members discussing Labour policy, I think it shows a Labour Party that is willing to engage in debate. I don’t think women should be silenced for the feelings of trans-identifying men. If you look at Heather Peto’s own Twitter profile I don’t think he’s particularly bothered about my feelings either. Other Labour members including Heather Peto who have elected, official roles in the Labour Party, not just members like myself, some of the things that they’re saying about women have the potential to discredit the Labour Party far more widely than my posts.
D: In Item C1 you reply to a post by Paris Lees. She says, “If it isn’t intersectional it isn’t feminism” and you replied, “If it has a penis it isn’t female”. What do you mean by ‘it’?
V: Just copying the words that are written in Paris’ post. So I’m just changing as little as I can to make my point. I’m not referring to Paris Lees. When I talk about male and female I’m not just talking about humans, I’m talking about all species of the animal kingdom. If it has a penis it isn’t female and that applies to a human or a cat, or any such creature. Paris’ is a general point and so’s mine.
D: So are you or are you not referring to Paris Lees as ‘it’?
V: I’m not referring to Paris Lees as ‘it’. I don’t think you’ll find any evidence on my social media where I’m calling people ‘it’.
D: Do you believe that a reasonable person looking
[at?] this post might assume that you were describing Paris Lees as ‘it’?
V: No, I don’t think so. I don’t think that’s a reasonable assumption to make from that post I’m afraid. I think I said, “If it has a penis it isn’t a woman” I would be talking about a particular person, but as I say that male and female can be used to describe humans but they can also be described generally of any creature.
D: Is feminism a notion that exists in the animal kingdom?
V: No, I’m not talking about feminism. I’m talking about male and female.
D: Yes. My point is…
V: [Overspeaking] Feminism, obviously no. As far as I know is not a belief system amongst animals other than humans.
D: So this is a conversation about feminism?
V: No, this is Paris Lees’ pinned Tweet. Paris Lees says, “If it isn’t intersectional it isn’t female”. I’m not talking about feminism, I’m talking about male and female. If it has a penis it isn’t female. I think it’d be a misunderstanding that post to say that I was referring to Paris or any other person in that way. If you look at my social media profile you can see that I have never described any person as ‘it’.
D: Later in C2 you say, “Paris Lees is a man that’s why we say he. He looks like Michael Jackson ffs” which I take to mean ‘for fuck’s sake’. “Plastic surgery is disgusting on anyone.” Do you believe that is abusive or offensive?
V: I think it could be offensive. I don’t think it’s abusive. Paris Lees is an extremely famous media person and I’m an unknown woman and I think people talk about media celebrities’ appearances all the time. It may be offensive but I don’t believe it’s abusive. As I say, I don’t think anyone has the right not to be offended.
D: Would you say that to Paris Lees if she were here now? That she looks like Michael Jackson?
V: No, I wouldn’t say that because that’s not the kind of person I am to say to somebody face-to-face that they look ugly, but I think what you say about celebrities on Twitter is very different to what you would say to a real person in real life. I find Paris Lees an extremely offensive commentator and a lot of the things that he says are extremely offensive about women, but I don’t have the legal right not to be offended and Vice and The Guardian can publish what they like.
D: Is Paris Lees’ appearance relevant to her views?
V: No. And I do think he looks like Michael Jackson.
D: What do you think about that comment now?
V: What do you mean what do I think about it?
D: In hindsight.
V: Well, that was in November so it was about a month and a half after I started this Dr Radfem Twitter account. I didn’t have maybe such a large platform that I have now. Would I say it now? I’m not sure with the platform that I have. It wasn’t a post, it’s a comment as you can see that I’m replying to somebody. It’s not something that I would’ve posted as a main post ‘cause it’s not really relevant. I’d like to also point out that if this goes further to the next stage, I’ll bring a whole file of all the abuse that I’ve had; probably about half of it is about the way I look.
D: Item D1. I understand this is a photo of Lily Madigan which has been doctored to give her red eyes and superimpose the word ‘dicksplash’ across her forehead. Are you responsible for creating or sharing the image?
D: Can you explain what you think the image is trying to convey?
V: I think it’s just trying to convey that he’s an idiot. I think that’s what dicksplash is synonymous for. And maybe the red eyes are trying to convey that he’s unpleasant. I’d just like to ask why are we using this piece of evidence ‘cause all the other posts that you’ve used are public posts, but this was a private post that was taken from a secret Facebook group which was infiltrated by trans activists and then shared on Twitter.
D: We’ll come to that in a moment. Do you share the sentiment expressed by [s.l. Davidge 0:06:31]?
V: Do I share it? That he’s an idiot and he’s unpleasant? Yes, I do.
D: Are you responsible for the comment below?
D: What do you mean by that?
V: I meant, I guess, that the whole meaning of that would be..
Some courageous women marched in Auckland New Zealand’s Pride March yesterday, representing for lesbian, gay, and gender non-conforming youth and protesting against the medicalization of sex-roles in these children.
In order to avoid the wrath of violent transwoman or triggered non-binaries who support the medical “correction” of gender and seek to silence critics by any means necessary, the feminists cleverly stepped into the parade at the last moment just behind the traditional ‘Dykes On Bikes’ contingent.
Watch closely on the right side of the screen (timestamp):
Auckland Pride Parade 2018 | TVNZ - YouTube
“Straight cis chick” isn’t pleased.
More displeased heteros.
Men discuss lesbian visibility (they don’t like it).
Trans women are women. Say that over and over. And over.
What is a woman? A woman is anyone who identifies as a woman. What are they identifying “as”? That is different for each person. Woman is defined in a unique way by every self-identified woman, as long as those definitions do not include the reproductive biology of sexual dimorphism, which is a social construct. Women are not female, because some people classified as female are men, who are male.
But Trans women are female and Trans men are male. Because women are female, and men are male. Female and male are not biological categories denoting reproductive specificity because there are no such stable categories. And if there were, it would be wrong to name them, because identifying any category of humans with a term based on a physical characteristic they all share (tall, diabetic, brunette) erases their humanity and reduces them to nothing but that characteristic. Also categorizing people based on sex is salacious and untoward because you’re referring to their genitals. Which you shouldn’t do. How rude! What is wrong with you? Female and male have a unique meaning for everyone who identifies as such, one that is unrelated to lowly and salacious mammalian sexual categories, which don’t exist outside our wrongful attempt to create them. There are no does and bucks. Only deer. Some with front holes, others with rape sticks.
Trans women are women. Trans women are female. Trans men are men. Trans men are male. Repeat that a few times.
Woman is defined in a unique way by every person who identifies as such, except never in relation to reproductive biology, and never in relation to coercively imposed sex stereotypical behaviors such as elaborate grooming regimes, impractical clothing, and shoes which handicap the wearer. These are optional expressions of womanhood, not a defining feature of women, which is a category of person with no universally coherent definition.
Woman is also never defined by “femininity”, a cluster of trained social behaviors that are enforced upon uterus-havers from birth based on reproductive biology: compulsory emotional labor, showing teeth, feigned incompetence, deference to males. This conduct is quite literally compelled under force of violence upon uterus-having people from birth, in order to ritualize their perpetual submission to the penis-havers and maintain the social order of male supremacy over females. But for people with penises they may be optional self-expressions of what woman, which has no universal or objective traits, is.
To recap: Trans Women Are Women! Trans Women Are Female! Woman has no particular characteristic or definition beyond identification with an unspecified state of being, which is also called female, which is also lacking in defined meaning. Sex stereotypes enforced on people who gestate offspring in order to ritualize their subordination to the people who cannot, are optional forms of expression of this state.
There is only one form of womanhood that exists as a clearly defined class of people with shared embodiment and experience, and unless you are a fucking TERF you know for damn sure it ain’t the lowly gestating front-hole havers.
Trans Women Are Women and Trans Women Are Female but Female Women Can Not Be Trans Women.
All people can be women. All women are female. All women, including penis-havers and uterus owners are female and can be trans. Woman, Female, and Trans, are self-defined categories with no universal meaning or definition and no shared experience or embodiment. People who identify as women can also identify as trans. But only women born with dick and balls form a cohesive class of women whose shared biology and cultural experience must be named and respected.
You will respect the terms as defined by your penis-having overlords!
Sex matters, but only for those people whose humanity really counts: Men.
Gatekeeping Exclusionary Radical Trans!
Sure out sucks that you will be erased
Uterus owners must not speak over the penis havers for any reason!
A gender-conforming heterosexual vagina haver weighs in
Irony! Man who claims “female” and “woman” have no meaning demands exclusionary assignation.
Lesbians oppressing males by inventing the term “femme” for gay female experience decades ago.
Related: Women who perform in drag is “cultural appropriation” of the men who impersonate them: