the men and boys are innocent too.
we cry "the innocent women and children" to appeal to the masses, to try and force their sympathy, but the men and boys are innocent too.
I have seen sons crying out for their mothers, their fathers, their siblings. I have seen them break down at the loss of their families. I have seen them cling to their dead and grieve.
I have seen fathers cradle their dead children, seen them kiss their faces and hold their little hands. I have seen them faint with grief when asked to identify the dead. I have seen them carry their sons and daughters. I have seen them fasting to provide what little they can for their families.
I have seen men and boys digging through the rubble with just their bare hands, I have seen them comforting strangers, playing with children, rocking them, hushing them, even if the face of such imminent danger. I have seen them cry, seen them grieve, seen them break down into each other's arms, seen them be selfless, beyond selfless, becoming something I don't have a word for.
I have seen the men who are doctors refuse to leave their patients, even when they have no medicine or supplies to give them, even when they're threatened with bombings. I have seen fathers who have lost all their children pick orphans up into their arms and proclaim them their child so they are not alone. I have seen men and boys digging pets out of the rubble.
the men are innocent too. the men and boys are being hurt and killed too. the men and boys are grieving too. the men and boys are scared too. the men and boys are fighting to save their people too. the men and boys deserve to be fought for too.
69K notes
·
View notes
i dont really care for 'the women and children' as a cohesive group because i believe we primarily invoke it to suggest an ontology of essential vulnerability and inability to resist that is mirrored in the adult mans supposed essential invulnerability and inability not to resist. that is, they are always resisting, they are always a threat, and in the case of arab men murdered by american drones, to name one example, they are always "enemy combatants".
it suggests no woman or child could ever pose more of a threat than the least threatening adult man, could ever accomplish anything meaningful in any armed struggle, and epistemologically relegates these groups to support roles.
it also suggests no adult man could ever put down their arms, be disarmed, or lose their status as the same threat women and children are said to fundamentally lack. to become a non-combatant.
we try to talk about non-combatants to make points about their greater relative innocence but cannot extend this grace to adult men under this racialized and gendered ontology because it is precisely the guilt of combatants (adult men) that gives (counter)weight to the innocence of the women and children (non-combatants) and makes it relative.
all palestinian men are innocent of the "crime" of being palestinian men! they are not all combatants! all combatants are innocent of the "crime" (un recognized right) of resisting occupation! the women and children of palestine can and are resisting genocide! the ones who rely on the ability of others to resist for them are not guilty of "holding back" just as much as they are not "more innocent" for not participating in this struggle, regardless of whether they are children, women, or men.
all palestinians are innocent and anyone can resist.
2K notes
·
View notes
The tide is turning for the TQ+. And they have no one to blame but themselves
Wes Streeting last night admitted he had been wrong to say that “trans women are women” amid a major Labour row over the Cass review into NHS gender care.
The shadow health secretary said the controversial LGBT rights group Stonewall – where he used to work – had got it wrong with its slogan.
In a major about-turn for the party, he told The Sun that he now admitted “there are lots of complexities” on the trans issue but that he was prepared to take criticism “on the chin”.
It came as Labour became embroiled in another trans row after Mr Streeting welcomed the review and pledged to implement it in full.
The shadow health secretary said the report raised “some serious concerns that are pretty scandalous”.
But Rosie Duffield, a Labour MP placed under investigation by the party last year for campaigning against gender ideology, pointed out that women who had exposed the scandal had been “blanked, sidelined and dismissed” by male leaders simply for speaking up.
Last night Mr Streeting was asked on The Sun’s Never Mind The Ballots programme whether he stood by Stonewall’s claim that “trans women are women, get over it”, he admitted: “No.”
He added: “To the extent that – and I say this with some self-criticism and reflection – if you’d asked me a few years ago, on this topic, I would have said trans men are men, trans women are women. Some people are trans, get over it. Let’s move on. This is all blown out of proportion.
“And now I sort of sit and reflect and think actually, there are lots of complexities.”
He went on: “I take the criticism on the chin. And at the same time, I also think that there’s been some absolutely ugly rhetoric directed towards trans people who are at the wrong end of all of statistics on hate crime, on self harm, suicide, mental health.”
Labour has long been divided on trans issues and has been accused of flip-flopping on its stance in recent years.
The party no longer has plans to bring in self-ID for trans people, and Sir Keir Starmer, the Labour leader, has rowed back from saying “trans women are women”, and now states that a woman is an “adult female” and that 99.9 per cent of them do not have a penis.
Mr Streeting’s comments angered the Labour Left. The Corbynite group Momentum tweeted: “The Cass review ignored dozens of scientific studies, coming to a harmful conclusion of limiting access to gender-affirming care for trans youth.
“Anti-trans campaigners have celebrated it. So it’s highly disappointing that Labour’s leadership is welcoming it unreservedly.”
Yesterday, feminist Julie Bindel demanded an apology from Mr Streeting for failing to support her gender-critical views when he was president of the National Union of Students.
Earlier this year, the party dropped a year-long investigation into a complaint that Ms Duffield had been transphobic for liking a tweet by Father Ted creator Graham Linehan, who is now a gender-critical campaigner.
However, despite the changes, critics of the Labour leadership say gender-critical women in the party continue to be sidelined or not selected.
Wes Streeting says the Cass report raised 'some serious concerns that are pretty scandalous' CREDIT: Jay Williams
The Cass review, published on Wednesday, said much of the evidence for gender medicine was flimsy and that drugs such as puberty blockers should be used with extreme caution as children who think they are trans may have mental health problems.
Dr Hilary Cass, the paediatrician behind the report, said some NHS gender clinics refused to comment on requests for information.
On Never Mind the Ballots, Mr Streeting said: “I think we’ve got to ask ourselves why is it that we’ve seen medical interventions that have been given on the basis of very weak evidence?
“How is it that clinicians have been silenced or afraid to come forward? Why is it that a group of young people who are extremely vulnerable are waiting years to access treatment?
“I think there’s plenty of blame to go around. I’m pretty angry actually that despite this review having been commissioned there are some NHS trusts that refused to co-operate.
“And I want to send a clear message to them that under a Labour government there’ll be accountability for that, you’re not going to get away with it. And I want to work constructively with the Government to try to get this right.”
Earlier, he had tweeted: “Children’s healthcare should always be led by evidence and children’s welfare, free from culture wars…
“The Government must now immediately act, but if they do not, the next Labour government will work to implement the expert recommendations of the Cass review, to ensure that young people are receiving appropriate and high-quality care.”
This prompted Ms Duffield to retweet the statement, with the message: “To the many women blanked, sidelined, dismissed by male leaders when speaking up and exposing this for years.”
And Ms Bindel, a former Labour Party member, wrote: “Glad to see you are now openly critical of the gender ideology that led to the atrocities against children outlined in the Cass report.
“I am open to accepting an apology from you. In 2008, when you were NUS president, I was no-platformed alongside five fascist groups for ‘transphobia’.
“I contacted you and asked for your help. You gave none. I asked you to condemn those that had orchestrated the no-platforming, and you refused.
“Have you any idea of the reputational damage this caused me? How it gave others permission to no-platform, denounce and defame me?
“How it meant that I could be slandered by other organisations, and so many, many universities around the UK and elsewhere? If this sounds bitter then good, because I am.”
To this message, Ms Duffield said: “Thank you for leading us all here Julie. Without you, most of us wouldn’t have had a clue what had been happening to children who were far too young to have the critical faculties or agency to consent.”
Addressing Ms Bindel’s accusation, Mr Streeting replied: “From memory (16 years on, so correct me if I’m wrong!) I replied to confirm that you weren’t on NUS’ no platform policy and as this was in relation to a motion passed by the autonomous women’s campaign I was not empowered to overturn it (not least as a male president!).”
90 notes
·
View notes