The Fretting Middlings

how on earth for a non-zealot to respond to being so very, deeply, wrong?

It has been quite a week since the Supreme Court’s Lord Hodge said the magical words, “The unanimous decision of this court is that the terms ‘woman’ and ‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010 refer to a biological woman and biological sex.”

As I wrote for The Daily Mail last week, I was in an Edinburgh auditorium with about 100 other women, waiting to hear the judgement. And we were terrified it would go the wrong way.

Unlike the fretting people (some more genuinely fretting than others) who are the subject of this week’s piece? We were all women who have really been paying attention to all of this.

We knew what was at stake from the judgement was far more important than “but, but, where do people pee if they are out for a night at the thea-aaat-re, like my lovely trans woman friend, Mildred?’

Not that toilets are unimportant, but by GOD, they were the least of our worries…

The room was electrified by Lord Hodge’s simple, clear words. They proved not only that we had been quite ‘valid’ in arguing that this surely should be what the law meant for all these years, but that we always bloody well had been correct.

Through our multiple and varied houndings, some more high-profile than others; through the loss of friends, income, health and sanity; the loss of lesbian-only dating apps and social nights; in the face of screaming violence, death and rape threats, stalkers, and even supposedly nice people turning a blind eye to it; in the face of the British state’s shrugging complicity, the Scottish GOVERNMENT’S opposition; the Scottish Parliament’s ‘cross-party’ support of our witch-hunts, women branded ‘TERF’ had been proven emphatically right.

Ah, the dulcet tones of Lord Hodge!

(Fun Fact: I made a late-night joke that I wanted that sentence as my daily alarm-call. The magnificent daughter of a magnificent Terven saw the post on X and I have now received one, haha!)

Of course, the almost instant backlash was inevitable, though most of us attempted to give ourselves at least a few hours to celebrate.

As predicted, even celebrating a victory was responded to wailingly and frettingly. As with other seismic victories for our side in the ‘gender wars’, notably Maya Forstater’s magnificent win in 2021, I think some thought that women should just quietly nod, zip their mouths, and sit and have a little cup of Earl Grey. No selfies! No triumph! No smiling! Never mind champagne!?

A CIGAR!??

How uncouth and villanous, these terven ladies be!!

Other responses have been so disgusting and unhinged that I’m not going to mention them, though they were on full display at the Saturday 19th April protests. I expected this response from one part of the genderist movement, because fundamentalist genderists are, or appear, deeply unwell and utterly furious, whether they are trans or ‘cis ally’ identifying.

But there have been other noted responses that don’t feature calls for ‘wombs’ and ‘titties’ or ‘piss protests.’

First, there’s the dismissiveness of the importance of all of this. I have mainly seen this from a particular type of man, both those who have been involved in propping up the genderist project, and those who think it’s bonkers, but just jibe at it rather than do much about changing it.

Let’s first zoom in on the snooty Scottish leftie bro contingent, who I see regularly on X calling the women who’ve cared about this arseholes for not putting their energies elsewhere. Causes these men believe we should have been focused on instead range from Gaza, to disability rights, to whatever cause these men think most important.

But the main thing such men want us to know is that they think we’re fucking stupid for having spent so long on this.

Thanks, lads.

Largely, this is because they have no empathy for women’s needs and think their definition in life and law is of no importance. It isn’t to them, after-all! Must be of no consequence. Sure, these ladies might’ve lost their ability to access rape crisis services without guys there, but that’s nothing compared to the plight of other women globally, (who, of course, they honestly do care about and don’t just use that as an excuse for online misogyny) so they should just have sucked it up, the selfish bitches, and certainly shouldn’t be ‘smugly’ ‘gloating’ about their victory.

Then there’s the wholly disingenuous wailing activists of both the male and female genderist contingent who bemoan the cost to For Women Scotland and the interveners financially. As if they give two hoots for the state of the Terven’s finances! But they want us to know that all of our individual donations combined, plus the one large one from JK Rowling that contributed to FWS’s costs, could have been spent on so many other things!!

In response to this nonsense, Victoria Smith pointed out, on X:

“Women could have funded rape crisis centres instead" is so weird. Like men's disposable income is ringfenced for holidays and stuff, while women's functions as some sort of Victim of the Patriarchy Tax.”

Both of these broad responses are contemptuous of women and what we have done here. It irritates the shit out of certain men in particular when women - particularly ones they do not wish to have sex with - manage to win seismic victories.

If you’re a type of self-styled ‘rebel’ man who wangs on endlessly about taking on the state, or ‘fighting the power’ too, it must burn something awful to see three middle-aged women who met on MUMSNET, supported by an army of fellow women-of-a-certain-age, be the ones to actually get something concrete done here, when your ‘activism’ is limited to slagging people off on social media…

What I do agree with such men about, though, is that women should have been doing absolutely anything else with their time and lives rather than having to fight for legal confirmation of something your average toddler knows.

But unlike these dismissive arseholes, I will never, ever call what women have done a ‘waste of time and money’, because securing women’s rights, alongside others, is a funda-fucken-mentally important thing, lads.

It proved that organisations, activists, and any individual arguing otherwise was either breaking the law if they happen to be a service provider or employer who failed to provide single-sex spaces where necessary; or were an individual who, for either ignorant or ideological reasons, has been hounding and berating any woman who was wholly correct on the law all along.

The purpose of this post is to look at the response not of the deranged fundamentalists, or the irritants above, but the majority of opponents, who I have long referred to as ‘The Fretting Middlings.’

They are the - mostly women, I cannot fail to point out - who have felt very icky about ‘TERFS’ for some time, though they do still claim to support feminism and women’s rights in a sort of vague ‘you go girl’ manner.

Some do appear to be rooted in genuine compassion for what they take to be a marginalised minority. Others are verging to the zealous side of things, though not quite reaching the stage of Maggie Chapman MSP, whose all-in-on-this-madness has been quite a sight to see this last decade.

Quick clarification: if you are someone who is still intending to break the law, or will assist people to do so, or who is in charge of an organisation that has stated publicly that you believe trans women are women, trans men are men, and that you will be continuing to operate on this basis: you are a zealot, and you will be breaking the law.

A Fretting Middling, on the other hand, generally accepts the ruling, recognises that the Supreme Court were clarifiying existing law, but finds it wrong that it means ‘blanket bans’ on ‘trans women’ in all spaces, and is often confused on what the judgement was even about.

Such women have been going along with genderism rather unthinkingly for years now. Some have friends with a non-binary identifying child. “And they’re a lovely kid!” Etcetera. Again, insinuating that how ‘lovely’ anyone may or may not be is in any way a part of this. That is not a criterion for being part of a legal category definition, folks. And thank fuck for that.

But thinking about a rape crisis service or a prison? Well, that’s all a bit far away from their experience and not something to worry about! What’s important is kindness for the aforementioned Mildred, and making sure anyone trans-identifying knows “You are safe with me!”

A Fretting Middling would post an image like this on Instagram with the caption “Just had to come to the sea to escape all the hatred. Please, my trans and non-binary siblings, this cis woman wants you to know that you are loved, you are strong, you are beautiful, I have a gender-neutral loo in my home, the TERFS are evil bitches, I love you, you are strong, you are beautiful, love wins, you are safe, we got this, we’ll get through this together, I, a cis woman, am an ally, and I love you, you are safe and strong Peace xx

Insisting this judgement, or that any of the thousands of women who celebrate it, want to make anyone ‘unsafe’ is an absolutely horrendous message to give potentially confused trans-identifying people, particularly young ones. It’s also a fucking horrific thing to see written about yourself endlessly, including by people you really actually like and thought didn’t support your hounding, of which posts like this massively contribute to.

But that seems to sail right past these people.

They are very kind, you see.

Regardless of the general confusion of a Fretting Middling, who is really oh-so-terribly worried about the ‘tone’ of all of this, they will see no problem with writing massive Facebook posts about their ‘solidarity’ with trans people, and insinuating that the Supreme Court was making judgements about, amongst the other infuriating things I have seen (and sometimes tried to correct, against my better judgement): how women should look, how women should live their lives, whether or not anyone can identify as trans or not, whether to encourage street harassment of gender non-conforming people, and much else besides.

Of course, the judgement - which is easy to read even for any non-legal mind, does nothing of the sort. You can read it here.

In some ways, you may ask, why bother with people who don’t seem to have been paying any attention? Does it matter if they insist on spreading misinformation?

Well, there are two reasons I think it matter a great deal, both of which relate to the fact that, while this is a legislative battle, it is also undeniably a cultural one too.

The first reason is that for many, I do believe, they are struggling with having been wrong. In many ways, that’s their cross to bear, but the unbearable way such people think their ignorance is somehow kindness, or even seem to think it is admirable rips my knitting something dreadful. Ok, ok, Jen, you’re annoyed, you may say, but that’s hardly justification for being angry at these people, eh? I disagree, and, in fact, I have more ire for them than for the ‘true believers’ in many ways.

Because, the zealots who brandish placards saying “No Good TERF But A Dead TERF”? Who have stalked women at events, sent them abuse, got them fired, destroyed their careers, upended their lives? Ie, who have unleashed an almighty psychological, social and economic tirade against the women who were absolutely correct all along?

These women, the Fretting Middlings, have been propping them up.

They are the polite, non-zealous cupcake makers of the genderist movement, giving cover for its wilder wing to claim the entire project is based in kindness. This is an exploitation of people’s general sense of wanting to be good, kind people, something shared by a majority of my own very Terven side too, ye know.

They’re usually not particularly up to speed on the law, nor do Fretting Middlings have any kind of feminist analysis, other than assertions that they are ‘intersectional,’ misusing the term entirely in the process.

Oh, they’d never brandish such placards themselves, they’ve never been to an anti-TERF protest. If they’re a pal of yours they might tell you they hate YOUR hounding, but they quite agree that those other Terfies are awful people. Ye know. Those terfies that you actually know and absolutely adore and are your friends…

And, though said Terven hold views these fretters cannot quite articulate, the cruellest amongst these ‘kindness cliques’ have seemingly had absolutely no problem with making them up as they go along.

They may even have signed a few Open Letters against Terfies a few times. They can’t quite remember which ones, nor what they had supposedly done to deserve that. But, they did it because they’re LOVELY and they will ALWAYS be kind, and because darling, lovely Mildred asked them to, and she’s awesome.

The second reason I want to briefly fire out some of my fury about this, in what I am resolving will be my one and only post about all of the appalling madness of this week, may be harder to understand for those who haven’t been hounded in the gender wars. (NB: there is a specificity to it being over these issues that is not shared in other arenas where disagreement occurs…)

I appreciate that not everyone is even up to speed on the reality behind the headlines of what has been done to women like me, and some seriously downplay it anyway, but let me try…

These doily-minded nonsensicals, from the zealots to the #BeKind middlings, have forced intelligent women to engage - FOR AN ENTIRE DECADE OR MORE - with minds that say "humans can't tell which sex anyone is by looking!” or “It's bigotry to want female only rape crisis centres!” or “If that dog-rapist says (s)he's a woman she is one!"

And they’ve called themselves nuanced and kind in the process.

It is not kind to be so ignorant, to be so blithe about women’s rights, and about our foremothers who fought for them. To call rape victims bigots. This is not kindness. None of it has been kind.

And then we come to the broadcasters and commentators. The ones who’ve called for ‘nuance’ but whose first act is to ask deeply traumatised women, who have been treated like absolute dog shit by these activists, to centre everyone elses needs but their own since the judgement.

That so many such women’s very first thought is ‘Oh, but what about Mildred!!’ is appalling.

What about him? What about who the judgement was for? For the lesbians who came within an inch of having their entire legal definition scrapped in an act of supreme homophobia? The women who’ve been forced to share prisons with violent male prisoners? Where’s your bloody empathy for them?

“Oh, but I know Mildred, and (s)he is lovely!”

THIS ISN’T ABOUT YOUR NICE PAL.

And he’s not lovely, is he, if he has been using women’s single-sex services, even if he thought he had a right to. He never did, and has been duped by lobby groups who told him that. He’s not nice if he’s been calling lesbians bigots for not considering dating him, or signing Open Letters saying women with perfectly legal views should never be permitted to work, or should be banished from polite society.

For example, Rosie Duffield MP was interviewed on Newsnight this week, and asked if she “takes any responsibility” for the hurt and anger of trans women since the Supreme Court judgement.

I cannot believe it needs to be said, but NO woman is responsible for the hurty feelings of the screaming mobs of the weekend who have for years already being very loudly demonstrating how much they want to harm women like us.

One of Rosie’s hounders threatened to shoot her in a bar and kill JK Rowling with a hammer for fuck’s sake.

And he escaped jail.

Do not ask women to centre the feelings of the men who did this to us. And if you are finding we hounded Terven a ‘bit much’ this past week, then consider this:

We're being newly re-traumatised by the reaction to us winning in law, because what has been happening has been abusive since the start. None of us should have ever have been targeted like this, because we were always correct that trans women were never legally women, and our rights, needs and concerns were fucking valid.

To be told, by the Fretting Middlings, that due to our ‘tone’, or to see it so regularly asserted that this has been ‘toxic on both sides,’ is to say that we're somehow on parity with our own abusers.

All women have done is get clarity in the law. And we did it via the grassroots, via meetings, writing petitions, meeting influencers, writing blogs, writing reports. We have never once been violent. We have never once given out even an inch of what we have been subjected to by these activists.

For my own part, I spent SIX FUCKING YEARS not even naming any of my own hounders. That’s how bloody kind I am, despite my absolute fury at all of this. All of my own hounders were propped up by an entire arts culture that allowed them to get away with it, and now some of them have radicalised more, while getting the ‘TERF’ label has me in the sights of some seriously dangerous individuals. THANKS, GUYS.

It is utterly morally repugnant to ‘both sides’ this issue. If you’re of Fretting Middling inclinations, you need to understand that. Oh, you still disagree with my views do, you?

That’s besides the point in the face of undeniable, grotesque abuse. So, if you’re still Fretting, cool, make it clear you oppose our houndings at least, before saying that you still think the judgement is wrong.

Do so in the awareness that our houndings could never have happened without your silence or complicity, though.

I am hoping the discourse improves as things settle and as the cases keep being won, as surely they all will be now. All we - all I! - ever wanted was to get back to a place of peace and sanity. It was not the women who fought back who deserved all of this ire, but the massive guns that were cocked at our rights in the first place.

Let’s hope those weapons will start to be slowly lowered. Because they haven’t been this past week. They’ve very much kept firing.