I used to like him too. I met him when I was in the Labour Party and spent an interesting afternoon out canvassing with him. I thought he was really nice and got on well with him. He was a really good communicator who got on well with everyone. That was many years ago. BUT his recent actions and statements put him in the category of opportunist and despicable character as far as I'm concerned now.
I feel for you and Petal or anyone who liked an respected this thoroughly self indulgent arsehole. He is exploiting and mocking women from a positiin of extraordinary male privilege. So much so that he feels able to alternate between male and female and have that acknowledged, whereby he's treated accordingly. But that's what he's getting.
Izzard the well paid 'boy mode' actor, and Izzard the brave 'girl mode' garish freak show who does whatever else. Fuck him, he's an obnoxious prick.
you liked the part of himself he was showing to us. The light whimsical comedy, the charity marathon runner. Now he's revealing his other side and motivations. I used to like him too.
I never liked or trusted him. When I first became aware of him, I felt very uncomfortable with how he presented himself. I couldn't explain it at the time - I was too young. But now I see it exactly as it is - blatant misogyny to women from a very self centred, selfish, narcissistic male.
I gave Twitter no information beyond my e-mail address. I gave a false date of birth, I think. Certainly no phone number. No photo, no background artwork, nothing.
It’s a rather flattering (airbrushed?) picture of him. Play acting being a woman while REAL women killed for *being* women are on the same front page could not be more stark.
Thats what I find most shocking here. The man in the top left, opts in and out as his sex drive moves him. The women in the centre had not that privilege and were killed because because they were women.
“It’s an honour to be acknowledged as a woman, ‘promoted’ even, although — and this is important — I still think women are second class, and need to ‘share’ everything (if not give over completely) with fetishistic men like me who pretend to be women.”
I think Eddie is deluded if he thinks that, in five hundred years' time, future anthropologists will not dig up his skeleton, take one look at his hip structure, which is not conducive to childbearing, see that his Q angle is less than 22 degrees, take in the tell-tale signs of his more robust bones and joint surfaces, witness his narrower sciatic notch, and his less outwardly flared hip bones, rub their chins and go, "We can confirm without fear of contradiction that he was a complete fucking idiot. In a complete fucking idiot's body."
Rather depressing the extent to which people can delude themselves -- and get quite "thuggish", at best, when disabused of their delusions.
Somewhat apropos of which, a rather brilliant and quite self-aware, though remarkably atypical, essay from one of the more rational transwomen I've run across -- few and far between:
It's from transwoman "Helen Highwater" who, in the following particularly relevant passage, is referring to a table of "gender stereotypes" -- those typical of women on the left, those typical of men on the right:
"So, what does it mean to identify as a woman? I think for many of us [transwomen, males] it is that the personality traits that we identify with are on the wrong side of the line. They are the ones that we associate with being female. So this further supports our belief that we are actually female.
But this is a lie, it’s a vicious lie that is as dangerous for transwomen as it is for women. It’s a lie that sets us up to be triggered every time we are called he, or “guys” or somebody dares to suggest that we have male biology. Even a cursory glance from a stranger can cut to our very core. The very foundations of our self-worth are fragile.
You see, males don’t naturally all fit on the right hand side of the line, and females don’t naturally fit on the left hand side of the line."
Amen to that; a rather bizarre phenomenon, from square one.
Though I think it -- as something of a silver lining to a very dark cloud -- provides some illumination on how we all develop our senses of self. Bit of a precarious process with many a slip twixt cup and lip.
Someone else here on Substack -- a mother of a transwoman, I think ("StillTish"?) -- had something of a cogent insight that part of the phenomenon was due to what she called a "bizarre form of empathy" -- echoing "Highwater's" comment about "supports our belief ..."
I've often argued or suggested that part and parcel of the issue is imprinting, a fairly durable psychological concept:
"Lorenz demonstrated how incubator-hatched geese would imprint on the first suitable moving stimulus they saw within what he called a "critical period" between 13 and 16 hours shortly after hatching. For example, the goslings would imprint on Lorenz himself (to be more specific, on his wading boots), and he is often depicted being followed by a gaggle of geese who had imprinted on him."
A phenomenon with much broader manifestations than just transgenderism, the studies on which may provide some useful illumination on much wider issues.
This is interesting. Also, archetypes must come into this somehow. We all have both masculine and feminine archetypes and the ones for the opposite sex tend to be more unconscious.
Indeed and I am very much a Jungian although I have to say mostly second-hand; but I have found archetypes such a useful way of our understanding ourselves on a deeper level; and there are certainly deep unconscious forces driving this cross-sex identification, which are comparable to romantic love. I suppose that applies more to autogynephilia than the younger trans-identifying ones? I don't know. But how does a cult have any power when it isn't ostensibly spiritual/religious?
So, in other words: "gender" is a load of rubbish.
And people should just have the personalities that they, yanno, actually HAVE. Rather than be subjected to personality-assignment based on sex. Which is as absurd, cruel, and stupid as assigning it based on blood type, or what day of the week you were born on, or ethnicity. I mean, why assign personality at ALL? "Here, you're female, so THIS is who you must be, and what you must feel, and the things which you must like (and dislike)-- or else! Doesn't fit you? Well, then, PRETEND! Live a lie!" What a waste of time, not to mention human potential! Stunting and confusing people, making them strangers to themselves... over NOTHING.
This is one of the reasons that some suggest autistic women form such a proportion of the trans community. We tend to bypass the 'standard' gender expectations, which in a hypersexualised society funnels girls who don't 'present' as feminine enough towards this crazy cult. It's the same with what used to be called tomboys. The options for girls now in terms of just being what and who they are are more restricted than in my childhood for sure and it's surely down to porn.
Quite a bit of justification for "a load of rubbish" -- being charitable ... 😉
And, of course, job security for all the denizens of the all the "gender studies" programs all across the world. For which "feminism" itself bears a significant responsibility. Can't say that I've ever read this book -- "Professing Feminism" -- by a couple of women, including a philosopher of science, but this review of it underlines their damning indictment of much of the field:
"The authors wrote of the isolationist attitude that dominates many of the [Women Studies] programs, along with a virulent anti-science, anti-intellectual sentiment driving many of the professors, staff and students."
Kathleen Stock and Helen Dale have been a couple of other women (philosopher, lawyer) who have likewise been critical of much of feminism -- with some justification:
However, for all of those criticisms, I think, Stock thinks in that second one of hers, that there is SOME merit in the concept of gender. Just that the worst of it has been "trans-mogrified" -- so to speak 😉 -- by transactivists and their "useful idiots" into something that is hell on wheels.
Going to take some effort to separate wheat and chaff; my preliminary kick at that kitty ... 😉
Here's the thing, though: if gender were legit... why is it so relentlessly enforced?
If something is a genuine sex-linked trait, there's no need to enforce it. Nobody threatens girls that they'd better start menstruating at adolescence, or boys that they'd better deepen their voices.
But people are most definitely threatened with ridicule, bullying, and outright violence if they fail to adhere to their gender-role.
Why's that, if it's just (as the old song goes) "Doin' What Comes Natur'lly"?
Good question. The thing is that, as Stock argues, there are SOME good "gender stereotypes", and some bad or less than flattering ones. We should "accentuate the positive" and "eliminate the negative" ... 😉
FTBYM: "genuine sex-linked trait, there's no need to enforce it."
One might argue that rape by men is a "genuine sex-linked trait", but generally one we anathematize -- with justification.
FTBYM: "But people are most definitely threatened with ridicule, bullying, and outright violence if they fail to adhere to their gender-role."
Exactly. Largely the point that transwoman "Helen Highwater" was getting at.
There is SOME merit in the concept of gender, but some rather toxic and quite unscientific aspects to it as well. Why there's some urgent necessity to try and separate wheat and chaff -- to coin a phrase ... 🙂
Izzard is a grifter, nothing more, nothing less. He was happy be a transvestite before the gender cart rolled into town and he hopped aboard. He's seems to think that by making empty statement like he's been 'promoted' to being a woman will make real women forget that he is shitting all over us.
Sorry Eddie. Even if you change your name to Edwina, we do not invite you into our sisterhood. You do not have labia, clitoris, vagina, ovaries. You weren't socialized to shut up & sit down. You weren't told to keep it secret that Uncle Dude exposed himself to you.
What you are doing Eddie, is you are encouraging mother erasure. You tear families apart and help bankrupt the health care system. For more, visit
Yeah, it's a 'promotion' from manhood to womanhood. That would explain why women are paid less than men, are excluded from positions of power by men, are beaten, raped and murdered by men with next to no punishment. Condescending, male-privileged prick.
I keep reading (on Twitter right enough) that Eddie’s been trans for 3 decades bla bla bla. Well I first came across Eddie in 1989 when he was compère at the Raging Bull and there was no ‘girl mode’). I thought he was great so saw him again in the 90s as his career developed. The media referred to him as a ‘cross-dresser’ but honestly it was a nail varnish, sometimes heels and a sparkly jacket. Compared to 80s New Romantics it was just no big deal at all. He’s only gone full AGP mode since all this TRA stuff kicked off. He’s an utter sell-out.
Yep. He was a transvestite for 3 decades and still is, but that word isn't fashionable anymore. Grayson Perry doesn't pretend, and neither should Eddie.
Surely him suddenly saying that he's transgender has peaked some people? To me, it just shows what a non-entity transgender is. I could say I'm trans tomorrow. It's anyone's game.
Well it's just not special enough to wear gender sex-stereotype clothing anymore, everyone and his hamster does it these days. So he opts for celebrity trans instead.
Izzard is STILL, and will forever, be no more than a guy in drag -- a male transvestite -- at least if he still has his nuts in working order, and a sexless eunuch if he doesn't. About time we all started calling a spade a fucking shovel; much of the transgender clusterfuck is because too many have been ready and willing to put "feelinz" before facts.
Somewhat apropos of that -- and of Graham's forthcoming reinstatement by Twitter 😉, one hopes and applicable to a great many of us, myself included -- there's a recent post on that point from Pamela Paresky:
"I Criticized Twitter — And Then Twitter Locked Me Out"
Seems that she had, quite reasonably, criticized Twitter for allowing tweets of "self-harm", mostly by adolescents, and had been "locked out" for her troubles. But what is kind of amusing -- and/or encouraging -- is that Twitter has now apparently, and quite quietly, "unlocked" her account with no communication at all from Twitter -- no, "OOPS, sorry about that Chief", no abject apologizes for thuggish and quite psychotic behaviour by the "Tranish Inquisition" which seems to have buried themselves like ticks in Twitter Support.
Maybe some people there in Twitter Support have had the fear of God put into them? Or the fear of Elon Musk? 😉 New brooms and all that ...
'I've been promoted to black. It's an honour.'
Absolute and utter fucking twat , I’m ashamed I used to like HIM
From HIM to TIM.
On form tonight, KFP!
He's always on fire Kay, I can't keep up with him 😁
You're right, LongDrink! 👍🥳
I used to like him too. I met him when I was in the Labour Party and spent an interesting afternoon out canvassing with him. I thought he was really nice and got on well with him. He was a really good communicator who got on well with everyone. That was many years ago. BUT his recent actions and statements put him in the category of opportunist and despicable character as far as I'm concerned now.
I feel for you and Petal or anyone who liked an respected this thoroughly self indulgent arsehole. He is exploiting and mocking women from a positiin of extraordinary male privilege. So much so that he feels able to alternate between male and female and have that acknowledged, whereby he's treated accordingly. But that's what he's getting.
Izzard the well paid 'boy mode' actor, and Izzard the brave 'girl mode' garish freak show who does whatever else. Fuck him, he's an obnoxious prick.
I used to like him too but that was when he was adamant he was a man
Putting the man in adamant.
you liked the part of himself he was showing to us. The light whimsical comedy, the charity marathon runner. Now he's revealing his other side and motivations. I used to like him too.
There was another male who was a charity marathon runner who I utterly disliked even as a very small child.
Those defending Izzard keep bringing up his great charity work.
I never liked or trusted him. When I first became aware of him, I felt very uncomfortable with how he presented himself. I couldn't explain it at the time - I was too young. But now I see it exactly as it is - blatant misogyny to women from a very self centred, selfish, narcissistic male.
When he was just a transvestite I didn’t question his mental health, live and let live. Now it’s beyond question. I’m not indulging his power play.
Exactly, K S. What a pisstaker.
Please read Prof Sheila Jeffreys' "The Insult of Transgenderism" and then hand it out as a "quick reference". It is a PDF of 6 double-sided pages, here: http://sheila-jeffreys.com/the-insult-of-transgenderism-wdi-talk-12-february-2022/
He's no more a woman than I am, and he never will be.
Right I’m off to try join twatter
Wish me luck as I’m clueless
Then you're two steps ahead of the game in that realm.
Nah they want my phone number , I shall remain twatterless
Sensible decision
I gave Twitter no information beyond my e-mail address. I gave a false date of birth, I think. Certainly no phone number. No photo, no background artwork, nothing.
The Genderdian.
It’s a rather flattering (airbrushed?) picture of him. Play acting being a woman while REAL women killed for *being* women are on the same front page could not be more stark.
Thats what I find most shocking here. The man in the top left, opts in and out as his sex drive moves him. The women in the centre had not that privilege and were killed because because they were women.
“It’s an honour to be acknowledged as a woman, ‘promoted’ even, although — and this is important — I still think women are second class, and need to ‘share’ everything (if not give over completely) with fetishistic men like me who pretend to be women.”
Acknowledged by whom? Certainly not by anyone using their brain.
That word "acknowledged" is a big tell isn't it? What is it that AGP men want again?
Spot on.
Who promoted him, and why didn't I get a vote?
I think Eddie is deluded if he thinks that, in five hundred years' time, future anthropologists will not dig up his skeleton, take one look at his hip structure, which is not conducive to childbearing, see that his Q angle is less than 22 degrees, take in the tell-tale signs of his more robust bones and joint surfaces, witness his narrower sciatic notch, and his less outwardly flared hip bones, rub their chins and go, "We can confirm without fear of contradiction that he was a complete fucking idiot. In a complete fucking idiot's body."
But his tombstone will say She/Her. 😄
I think that, in five hundred years time, he'll still be radiating enough narcissistic entitlement that they won't even have to check anything else.
ROFL!
Izzard is a savage. I find him frightening. Always have done. My instincts are usually correct.
Rather depressing the extent to which people can delude themselves -- and get quite "thuggish", at best, when disabused of their delusions.
Somewhat apropos of which, a rather brilliant and quite self-aware, though remarkably atypical, essay from one of the more rational transwomen I've run across -- few and far between:
http://genderapostates.com/trans-women-are-women-is-a-lie/
It's from transwoman "Helen Highwater" who, in the following particularly relevant passage, is referring to a table of "gender stereotypes" -- those typical of women on the left, those typical of men on the right:
"So, what does it mean to identify as a woman? I think for many of us [transwomen, males] it is that the personality traits that we identify with are on the wrong side of the line. They are the ones that we associate with being female. So this further supports our belief that we are actually female.
But this is a lie, it’s a vicious lie that is as dangerous for transwomen as it is for women. It’s a lie that sets us up to be triggered every time we are called he, or “guys” or somebody dares to suggest that we have male biology. Even a cursory glance from a stranger can cut to our very core. The very foundations of our self-worth are fragile.
You see, males don’t naturally all fit on the right hand side of the line, and females don’t naturally fit on the left hand side of the line."
The very foundations of their self-worth are extremely fragile. How they ever hope to get through life like that I have no idea.
Amen to that; a rather bizarre phenomenon, from square one.
Though I think it -- as something of a silver lining to a very dark cloud -- provides some illumination on how we all develop our senses of self. Bit of a precarious process with many a slip twixt cup and lip.
Someone else here on Substack -- a mother of a transwoman, I think ("StillTish"?) -- had something of a cogent insight that part of the phenomenon was due to what she called a "bizarre form of empathy" -- echoing "Highwater's" comment about "supports our belief ..."
I've often argued or suggested that part and parcel of the issue is imprinting, a fairly durable psychological concept:
"Lorenz demonstrated how incubator-hatched geese would imprint on the first suitable moving stimulus they saw within what he called a "critical period" between 13 and 16 hours shortly after hatching. For example, the goslings would imprint on Lorenz himself (to be more specific, on his wading boots), and he is often depicted being followed by a gaggle of geese who had imprinted on him."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imprinting_(psychology)
You might also be interested in Woody Allen's Zelig - "The Chameleon Man":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zelig
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUW8JsLDsNo
A phenomenon with much broader manifestations than just transgenderism, the studies on which may provide some useful illumination on much wider issues.
This is interesting. Also, archetypes must come into this somehow. We all have both masculine and feminine archetypes and the ones for the opposite sex tend to be more unconscious.
Indeed -- "archetypes" is a rather durable and useful concept.
Never did read much of these books on mythology, but even the titles & summaries are illuminating:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hero_with_a_Thousand_Faces
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Golden_Bough
And seem to recollect that that was part and parcel of Carl Jung's claim to fame and fortune, though there again I really haven't read much of him:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_and_His_Symbols
Indeed and I am very much a Jungian although I have to say mostly second-hand; but I have found archetypes such a useful way of our understanding ourselves on a deeper level; and there are certainly deep unconscious forces driving this cross-sex identification, which are comparable to romantic love. I suppose that applies more to autogynephilia than the younger trans-identifying ones? I don't know. But how does a cult have any power when it isn't ostensibly spiritual/religious?
So, in other words: "gender" is a load of rubbish.
And people should just have the personalities that they, yanno, actually HAVE. Rather than be subjected to personality-assignment based on sex. Which is as absurd, cruel, and stupid as assigning it based on blood type, or what day of the week you were born on, or ethnicity. I mean, why assign personality at ALL? "Here, you're female, so THIS is who you must be, and what you must feel, and the things which you must like (and dislike)-- or else! Doesn't fit you? Well, then, PRETEND! Live a lie!" What a waste of time, not to mention human potential! Stunting and confusing people, making them strangers to themselves... over NOTHING.
This is one of the reasons that some suggest autistic women form such a proportion of the trans community. We tend to bypass the 'standard' gender expectations, which in a hypersexualised society funnels girls who don't 'present' as feminine enough towards this crazy cult. It's the same with what used to be called tomboys. The options for girls now in terms of just being what and who they are are more restricted than in my childhood for sure and it's surely down to porn.
Quite a bit of justification for "a load of rubbish" -- being charitable ... 😉
And, of course, job security for all the denizens of the all the "gender studies" programs all across the world. For which "feminism" itself bears a significant responsibility. Can't say that I've ever read this book -- "Professing Feminism" -- by a couple of women, including a philosopher of science, but this review of it underlines their damning indictment of much of the field:
"The authors wrote of the isolationist attitude that dominates many of the [Women Studies] programs, along with a virulent anti-science, anti-intellectual sentiment driving many of the professors, staff and students."
https://www.feministcritics.org/blog/2009/07/27/professing-feminism-noh/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noretta_Koertge
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daphne_Patai
Kathleen Stock and Helen Dale have been a couple of other women (philosopher, lawyer) who have likewise been critical of much of feminism -- with some justification:
https://helendale.substack.com/p/around-the-traps-ii/comment/9517083
https://kathleenstock.substack.com/p/feminist-reboot-camp
https://kathleenstock.substack.com/p/lets-abolish-the-dream-of-gender
However, for all of those criticisms, I think, Stock thinks in that second one of hers, that there is SOME merit in the concept of gender. Just that the worst of it has been "trans-mogrified" -- so to speak 😉 -- by transactivists and their "useful idiots" into something that is hell on wheels.
Going to take some effort to separate wheat and chaff; my preliminary kick at that kitty ... 😉
https://humanuseofhumanbeings.substack.com/i/64264079/rationalized-gender
Here's the thing, though: if gender were legit... why is it so relentlessly enforced?
If something is a genuine sex-linked trait, there's no need to enforce it. Nobody threatens girls that they'd better start menstruating at adolescence, or boys that they'd better deepen their voices.
But people are most definitely threatened with ridicule, bullying, and outright violence if they fail to adhere to their gender-role.
Why's that, if it's just (as the old song goes) "Doin' What Comes Natur'lly"?
FTBYM: "... why is it so relentlessly enforced?"
Good question. The thing is that, as Stock argues, there are SOME good "gender stereotypes", and some bad or less than flattering ones. We should "accentuate the positive" and "eliminate the negative" ... 😉
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3jdbFOidds
FTBYM: "genuine sex-linked trait, there's no need to enforce it."
One might argue that rape by men is a "genuine sex-linked trait", but generally one we anathematize -- with justification.
FTBYM: "But people are most definitely threatened with ridicule, bullying, and outright violence if they fail to adhere to their gender-role."
Exactly. Largely the point that transwoman "Helen Highwater" was getting at.
There is SOME merit in the concept of gender, but some rather toxic and quite unscientific aspects to it as well. Why there's some urgent necessity to try and separate wheat and chaff -- to coin a phrase ... 🙂
Is he in pyjamas - was he just at a sleepover, having pillow fights, doing faces masks, and drinking cocktails like girls do!?
Izzard is a grifter, nothing more, nothing less. He was happy be a transvestite before the gender cart rolled into town and he hopped aboard. He's seems to think that by making empty statement like he's been 'promoted' to being a woman will make real women forget that he is shitting all over us.
Sorry Eddie. Even if you change your name to Edwina, we do not invite you into our sisterhood. You do not have labia, clitoris, vagina, ovaries. You weren't socialized to shut up & sit down. You weren't told to keep it secret that Uncle Dude exposed himself to you.
What you are doing Eddie, is you are encouraging mother erasure. You tear families apart and help bankrupt the health care system. For more, visit
uteheggengrasswidow.wordpress.com
Yeah, it's a 'promotion' from manhood to womanhood. That would explain why women are paid less than men, are excluded from positions of power by men, are beaten, raped and murdered by men with next to no punishment. Condescending, male-privileged prick.
I keep reading (on Twitter right enough) that Eddie’s been trans for 3 decades bla bla bla. Well I first came across Eddie in 1989 when he was compère at the Raging Bull and there was no ‘girl mode’). I thought he was great so saw him again in the 90s as his career developed. The media referred to him as a ‘cross-dresser’ but honestly it was a nail varnish, sometimes heels and a sparkly jacket. Compared to 80s New Romantics it was just no big deal at all. He’s only gone full AGP mode since all this TRA stuff kicked off. He’s an utter sell-out.
Yep. He was a transvestite for 3 decades and still is, but that word isn't fashionable anymore. Grayson Perry doesn't pretend, and neither should Eddie.
Surely him suddenly saying that he's transgender has peaked some people? To me, it just shows what a non-entity transgender is. I could say I'm trans tomorrow. It's anyone's game.
Well it's just not special enough to wear gender sex-stereotype clothing anymore, everyone and his hamster does it these days. So he opts for celebrity trans instead.
Izzard is STILL, and will forever, be no more than a guy in drag -- a male transvestite -- at least if he still has his nuts in working order, and a sexless eunuch if he doesn't. About time we all started calling a spade a fucking shovel; much of the transgender clusterfuck is because too many have been ready and willing to put "feelinz" before facts.
Somewhat apropos of that -- and of Graham's forthcoming reinstatement by Twitter 😉, one hopes and applicable to a great many of us, myself included -- there's a recent post on that point from Pamela Paresky:
"I Criticized Twitter — And Then Twitter Locked Me Out"
https://paresky.substack.com/p/i-criticized-twitter-and-then-twitter
Seems that she had, quite reasonably, criticized Twitter for allowing tweets of "self-harm", mostly by adolescents, and had been "locked out" for her troubles. But what is kind of amusing -- and/or encouraging -- is that Twitter has now apparently, and quite quietly, "unlocked" her account with no communication at all from Twitter -- no, "OOPS, sorry about that Chief", no abject apologizes for thuggish and quite psychotic behaviour by the "Tranish Inquisition" which seems to have buried themselves like ticks in Twitter Support.
Maybe some people there in Twitter Support have had the fear of God put into them? Or the fear of Elon Musk? 😉 New brooms and all that ...