On Trump: the predictable hyperbole post-Trump win is annoying, as is the failure to learn anything by the Dems and Left. But Trump has a reported history of racism during his business career, and then there is his labelling of ethnic groups, spreading harmful tropes (eating dogs and cats). Above all, Trump is a narcissist. He used to be pro abortion too, so it doesn't matter what he has said about gay marriage in the past. He doesn't have any real principles or ideology. The people around him do, and many of them are Christian right warriors with the Project 2025 agenda. Why would Trump stop the evangelical Christians? They're his biggest supporters. Trump values loyalty to him above everything. Self interest and getting revenge against his enemies are his only guiding principles. Hoping I'm wrong, but I think he will let the ideologues do what they want if it doesn't conflict with his self-interest or threaten his ego. If any of his appointments get too big for their boots, he'll cut them down - but it's all about him.
Anyway, this is way too serious for Friday... Goats: I know someone who does research on goats and apparently they are highly intelligent (the goats that is). No wonder they resisted the queer artist. Here's an academic article of the week for you on human-goat interaction (no queering): https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8944699/
Particularly like the sentence starting "From the goat’s point of view..."
Anyway, I, for one, welcome our new goat overlords.
I think it's important to consider Trump's first-term appointments of three conservative justices to the U.S. Supreme Court, which gave conservatives their present 5-4 majority. Of course, one of the results of this ideological shift was the Court's 2022 decision (5-4) to overturn national abortion rights. Included in the conservatives' majority opinion of that case is a clearly-stated intention to "reconsider" (through future cases) previous Court decisions that involve the legal principle of substantive due process - the basis of many civil rights decisions and a favorite target of conservative legal activists in the U.S.
Three such previous decisions mentioned by name are:
Obergefell (gay marriage),
Lawrence (criminalization of homosexual sex), and
Griswold (married couples' right to contraception)
Whether the Court's reconsideration of these decisions results in the overturning of them, thereby leaving each to the will of individual states, remains to be seen, but the threat is certainly there.
The point I'm making is that Trump's feelings about gay marriage, however we might perceive them, is neither here nor there; he doesn't need to have the intention to damage gay civil rights in order to damage them. I have no doubt that his Court appointments were not motivated by some nefarious desire to overturn gay marriage rights, nor any other civil rights for that matter - the appointments were simply politically expedient for him. However, the potential result of his appointments could see the U.S. gay civil rights movement set back more than 20 years.
If I may, it sometimes seems as though you both (my beloved lesbian moms) take a rather dismissive stance towards the anxieties expressed by people in the U.S. about the future of gay civil rights, as though there is nothing of importance to worry about. If that is the case, I would have to respectfully, and emphatically, disagree. As you surely know, there's a rather influential, well-organized, and well-funded conservative evangelical movement in the U.S., and I'm very sad to report that they and their political agendas are not likely to disappear any time in the foreseeable future. They spent 50 years diligently working to dismantle national abortion protections and were ultimately victorious; I expect the very same diligent, long-term work from them as regards gay civil rights. So, you know, go easy on the gay Yanks. We've clearly got ALL kinds of problems right now. <3
I was going to say something similar - it's not up to Trump, it's the courts. Maybe, god-willing, Congress could pass some marriage protections in 2026, but really, Democrats couldn't pass voter protections when they had the trifecta in 2020. I'm slipping into conspiracy territory and thinking "they" want to keep us divided, becuse none of this is benefitting anyone except the elite. (Apologies for using marks that aren't quoting.)
Agreed, hand wringing does nothing. It's like reading a teenager's diary. Time to grow up.
Yeah, it's the Court's game at this point - had Harris won, it wouldn't make a difference in this regard.
Not sure if you know, but the Dems did get legislation passed the same year Dobbs was decided, which offers some protections for gay marriage in the event of Obergefell's repeal. (The Dems obviously viewed the Court's eagerness to "reconsider" Obergefell a credible threat.) However, I fully expect those protections to be immediately challenged once Obergefell is overturned, and the Court is almost certain to be friendly to that challenge, so they're not likely to survive.
I have to say, I'm far more concerned about the Lawrence decision. There are still 12 states that have sodomy laws on their books, and those laws will be ready to enforce the day Lawrence is overturned. And, of course, there would be nothing to prohibit other states from re-adopting sodomy laws through new legislation. Dems in Texas are now trying to get their state's sodomy law repealed because they know the clock is ticking. I hope they can do it.
No, I didn't know there were legislative protections behind Obergefell. Thank you for that. I don't see a constitutional basis for the Supreme Court to overturn that legislation. Are you thinking it will be sent back to the states? I'm not sure they have the authority to do that either, if federal legislation is in place.
The sodomy part is interesting, I'm not sure it's specific to male participation, it may also affect online porn, and it sounds like you might know that answer. Suburbanites could get exercised enough about that to actually vote, seeing that access to abortion didn't make the cut a few weeks ago. At some point, suburbanites are going to want the government to stop telling them what to do.
I'm starting to see the benefits of compulsory voting. The politicians are out of line with the populace.
I have older American women friends (not lesbian) who were shattered by Trump's victory. I've watched with interest but detachment. Age helps this. I hope you are well connected to others, not only LGB folk.
BTW, I am delighting in all things Rachel Carson right now. I think lesbian women can claim her as one of our own. The US always comes up with inspirational women.
Much appreciated! I do expect a rather powerful response by many US women to the political turbulence that's sure to continue through the rest of this decade. Interested to see the new faces that come to prominence.
Rachel Carson (Silent Spring) is long gone but she was a brilliant scientist & environmentalist who fought quietly against big business and government. Because of her work, DDT was banned. She wrote about the power and beauty of the sea also. Beautiful books.
Belated Happy Birthday kathleen, I hope the crab linguine was delicious and also the cake !. Thank you both for yet another great episode, and your ingenuity and persistence to create these podcasts no matter where you are, or what is happening in your world. Just terrific. Thank you
Fantastic goat-queering technique, Julie. Brilliant. Also, just a comment from an Australian here: fairly often I have no idea who you're talking about when you skip over their names so quickly. Maya Forstater--no problemo, but several others--?? I know there's no point telling a whole back story when most of the subscribers know but I wonder if maybe you could just slow down a bit when you say the names of those not quite so well known, outside the UK, for example. Okay if that's not an option, though. It's just great to listen to the podcasts. Also #2, I like "sex realist" instead of "gender critical" (I hope I caught that okay).
I once had the misfortune to work with a billy goat whose violent anti-social behaviour, combined with a personal odour that would make you gag at 100 yards, was legendary. His party trick was to find a small hillock or shed roof, ideally within view of multiple picnicking families, and then proceed to lick his extended penis. After the show, he would lift his upper lip and bare his teeth in a grotesque smile of self-satisfaction. There was absolutely nothing queer about this - he was just a total dickhead. Thanks for another great episode both!
I’m not sure why you wasted so much time debating who would play Lesbian James Bond when the answer is right in-front of you in the form of Kathleen Stock.
Belated Happy Birthday, KS! And Julie, may your friend pass peacefully, feeling the love of good friends all around. It's wonderful you're there for her.
You are spot on: The notion that Trump's election means ANYTHING negative for gay Americans is absurd, and another aspect of the "LGBTQIA2s+++" nonsense people finally seem to be seeing through. In fact, his election is a clear gain for any of us who reject the forced teaming of gay rights with gender ideology. Unlike Harris, Trump distinguishes between the two, as any ideologically uncaptured person would. He has no history of being anti-gay, and no mandate from his supporters to become so. Like him, their concern is gender woo, not sexual orientation.
I hope Trump undoes the gutting of Title IX and other Biden/Harris-supported efforts to supplant sex with gender identity, putting males in female sports and spaces. I hope he ends federal embrace of so-called "gender-affirming care," which of course disproportionately affects and harms gay kids. These are realistic hopes, given his statements.
Whatever you think of Trump on other grounds, his election is a win for gay people sick and tired of seeing our movement hijacked by trans activists.
Would love to hear more what Kathleen and Julie’s beef is with the Guardian? Any chance they can have someone from the guardian on podcast to address these? As a many-years subscriber to Guardian i’m feeling bit protective about the paper and the regular bashing it seems to receive. It’s not perfect by any means but the quality of journalism and its independent funding model puts the paper way above its rivals - in my opinion. And what about the Greens Julie? In scheme of things why does this party get called out too? That all said love the podcast - hilarious and informative - and keep the disagreements up as all adds to a good bit of spice!
The Guardian has been captured by gender ideologues. I read the Guardian for 30 years, and so since all this nonsense started circa 2011. I was not alerted by their reporting that there is a big problem. They are biased toward promoting trans ideology. I should have been aware sooner, and they can’t be relied upon for subjective reporting. And they effectively got rid of Suzanne Moore and Hadley Freeman who wanted to write about this from a standpoint of women’s and children’s rights and safety.
Chiming in as a lesbian with (pray for me) a Gender Studies Major!!!
Lauren Berlant, along with Eve Sedgwick and Judith Butler and all those idiots, is another gender studies / queer theory scholar who writes a bunch of useless unscientific and anti-human nonsense! She’s another one of those scholars who finds “queerness” and “anti-queer discrimination” and “cis het normativity” in everything from unruly goats, to her morning bowl of oats. 🙄
Happy birthday Kathleen!
Looking forward to your pod interviewing Lee, Julie.
By the way sisters I have recommendations for podcast guests. I reckon you should invite Jen and Hannah from the podcast RedFem, and Carole Ann (whom I know you guys know) who is the amazing Aussie lesbian at the forefront of the Lesbian Action Group’s challenge of the Australian federal prohibition of lesbians to meet and run events and organisations without men! I believe the decision is due in two weeks time.
In Australia, by the way, things are only continuing to get WORSE with gender identity ideology; “conversion therapy” bans; sex self ID; men in prisons; gender ideology in schools; capture of the media and medicine; discrimination and dismissal of people who speak up; and the medicalisation of minors.
Australia is far behind and due to being a federation with autonomous states (like America), it can be much harder to change things in terms of rowing back sex self ID, unisex bathrooms, prohibitions on proper psychotherapy for sex stereotype nonconforming kids, etc.
Side note I could have saved $30,000 in tuition if only I’d heard Julie explain how to “queer” something. To use queer as a verb, which is the entire object of a gender studies degree, you simply look at something with a “queer lens” and now it’s queer! 🙃
Stonewall did the "find a vigil" thing at the end on their instagram. still a lot less posts, and their main focus is posting their Rainbow Laces stuff.
Belated happy birthday Kathleen!
On Trump: the predictable hyperbole post-Trump win is annoying, as is the failure to learn anything by the Dems and Left. But Trump has a reported history of racism during his business career, and then there is his labelling of ethnic groups, spreading harmful tropes (eating dogs and cats). Above all, Trump is a narcissist. He used to be pro abortion too, so it doesn't matter what he has said about gay marriage in the past. He doesn't have any real principles or ideology. The people around him do, and many of them are Christian right warriors with the Project 2025 agenda. Why would Trump stop the evangelical Christians? They're his biggest supporters. Trump values loyalty to him above everything. Self interest and getting revenge against his enemies are his only guiding principles. Hoping I'm wrong, but I think he will let the ideologues do what they want if it doesn't conflict with his self-interest or threaten his ego. If any of his appointments get too big for their boots, he'll cut them down - but it's all about him.
Anyway, this is way too serious for Friday... Goats: I know someone who does research on goats and apparently they are highly intelligent (the goats that is). No wonder they resisted the queer artist. Here's an academic article of the week for you on human-goat interaction (no queering): https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8944699/
Particularly like the sentence starting "From the goat’s point of view..."
Anyway, I, for one, welcome our new goat overlords.
Regarding Trump and gay marriage in the U.S.:
I think it's important to consider Trump's first-term appointments of three conservative justices to the U.S. Supreme Court, which gave conservatives their present 5-4 majority. Of course, one of the results of this ideological shift was the Court's 2022 decision (5-4) to overturn national abortion rights. Included in the conservatives' majority opinion of that case is a clearly-stated intention to "reconsider" (through future cases) previous Court decisions that involve the legal principle of substantive due process - the basis of many civil rights decisions and a favorite target of conservative legal activists in the U.S.
Three such previous decisions mentioned by name are:
Obergefell (gay marriage),
Lawrence (criminalization of homosexual sex), and
Griswold (married couples' right to contraception)
Whether the Court's reconsideration of these decisions results in the overturning of them, thereby leaving each to the will of individual states, remains to be seen, but the threat is certainly there.
The point I'm making is that Trump's feelings about gay marriage, however we might perceive them, is neither here nor there; he doesn't need to have the intention to damage gay civil rights in order to damage them. I have no doubt that his Court appointments were not motivated by some nefarious desire to overturn gay marriage rights, nor any other civil rights for that matter - the appointments were simply politically expedient for him. However, the potential result of his appointments could see the U.S. gay civil rights movement set back more than 20 years.
If I may, it sometimes seems as though you both (my beloved lesbian moms) take a rather dismissive stance towards the anxieties expressed by people in the U.S. about the future of gay civil rights, as though there is nothing of importance to worry about. If that is the case, I would have to respectfully, and emphatically, disagree. As you surely know, there's a rather influential, well-organized, and well-funded conservative evangelical movement in the U.S., and I'm very sad to report that they and their political agendas are not likely to disappear any time in the foreseeable future. They spent 50 years diligently working to dismantle national abortion protections and were ultimately victorious; I expect the very same diligent, long-term work from them as regards gay civil rights. So, you know, go easy on the gay Yanks. We've clearly got ALL kinds of problems right now. <3
I was going to say something similar - it's not up to Trump, it's the courts. Maybe, god-willing, Congress could pass some marriage protections in 2026, but really, Democrats couldn't pass voter protections when they had the trifecta in 2020. I'm slipping into conspiracy territory and thinking "they" want to keep us divided, becuse none of this is benefitting anyone except the elite. (Apologies for using marks that aren't quoting.)
Agreed, hand wringing does nothing. It's like reading a teenager's diary. Time to grow up.
Yeah, it's the Court's game at this point - had Harris won, it wouldn't make a difference in this regard.
Not sure if you know, but the Dems did get legislation passed the same year Dobbs was decided, which offers some protections for gay marriage in the event of Obergefell's repeal. (The Dems obviously viewed the Court's eagerness to "reconsider" Obergefell a credible threat.) However, I fully expect those protections to be immediately challenged once Obergefell is overturned, and the Court is almost certain to be friendly to that challenge, so they're not likely to survive.
I have to say, I'm far more concerned about the Lawrence decision. There are still 12 states that have sodomy laws on their books, and those laws will be ready to enforce the day Lawrence is overturned. And, of course, there would be nothing to prohibit other states from re-adopting sodomy laws through new legislation. Dems in Texas are now trying to get their state's sodomy law repealed because they know the clock is ticking. I hope they can do it.
No, I didn't know there were legislative protections behind Obergefell. Thank you for that. I don't see a constitutional basis for the Supreme Court to overturn that legislation. Are you thinking it will be sent back to the states? I'm not sure they have the authority to do that either, if federal legislation is in place.
The sodomy part is interesting, I'm not sure it's specific to male participation, it may also affect online porn, and it sounds like you might know that answer. Suburbanites could get exercised enough about that to actually vote, seeing that access to abortion didn't make the cut a few weeks ago. At some point, suburbanites are going to want the government to stop telling them what to do.
I'm starting to see the benefits of compulsory voting. The politicians are out of line with the populace.
Keep going!
I have older American women friends (not lesbian) who were shattered by Trump's victory. I've watched with interest but detachment. Age helps this. I hope you are well connected to others, not only LGB folk.
BTW, I am delighting in all things Rachel Carson right now. I think lesbian women can claim her as one of our own. The US always comes up with inspirational women.
Much appreciated! I do expect a rather powerful response by many US women to the political turbulence that's sure to continue through the rest of this decade. Interested to see the new faces that come to prominence.
Rachel Carson (Silent Spring) is long gone but she was a brilliant scientist & environmentalist who fought quietly against big business and government. Because of her work, DDT was banned. She wrote about the power and beauty of the sea also. Beautiful books.
I think you’re wrong on Trump being racist!!!
Belated Happy Birthday kathleen, I hope the crab linguine was delicious and also the cake !. Thank you both for yet another great episode, and your ingenuity and persistence to create these podcasts no matter where you are, or what is happening in your world. Just terrific. Thank you
On the very serious matter of who should be the lesbian James Bond - surely it’s obviously Kathleen??
Fantastic goat-queering technique, Julie. Brilliant. Also, just a comment from an Australian here: fairly often I have no idea who you're talking about when you skip over their names so quickly. Maya Forstater--no problemo, but several others--?? I know there's no point telling a whole back story when most of the subscribers know but I wonder if maybe you could just slow down a bit when you say the names of those not quite so well known, outside the UK, for example. Okay if that's not an option, though. It's just great to listen to the podcasts. Also #2, I like "sex realist" instead of "gender critical" (I hope I caught that okay).
Yes, belated feliz cumpleaños to Kathleen!
Thanks for yet another interesting and funny pod. 😏
I once had the misfortune to work with a billy goat whose violent anti-social behaviour, combined with a personal odour that would make you gag at 100 yards, was legendary. His party trick was to find a small hillock or shed roof, ideally within view of multiple picnicking families, and then proceed to lick his extended penis. After the show, he would lift his upper lip and bare his teeth in a grotesque smile of self-satisfaction. There was absolutely nothing queer about this - he was just a total dickhead. Thanks for another great episode both!
Did you say lesbian-adjacent James Bond?? 😀https://youtu.be/jLMDrnZezg4?si=89dv-fSvewRB3nyw
I’m not sure why you wasted so much time debating who would play Lesbian James Bond when the answer is right in-front of you in the form of Kathleen Stock.
exactly!
Belated Happy Birthday, KS! And Julie, may your friend pass peacefully, feeling the love of good friends all around. It's wonderful you're there for her.
You are spot on: The notion that Trump's election means ANYTHING negative for gay Americans is absurd, and another aspect of the "LGBTQIA2s+++" nonsense people finally seem to be seeing through. In fact, his election is a clear gain for any of us who reject the forced teaming of gay rights with gender ideology. Unlike Harris, Trump distinguishes between the two, as any ideologically uncaptured person would. He has no history of being anti-gay, and no mandate from his supporters to become so. Like him, their concern is gender woo, not sexual orientation.
I hope Trump undoes the gutting of Title IX and other Biden/Harris-supported efforts to supplant sex with gender identity, putting males in female sports and spaces. I hope he ends federal embrace of so-called "gender-affirming care," which of course disproportionately affects and harms gay kids. These are realistic hopes, given his statements.
Whatever you think of Trump on other grounds, his election is a win for gay people sick and tired of seeing our movement hijacked by trans activists.
Would love to hear more what Kathleen and Julie’s beef is with the Guardian? Any chance they can have someone from the guardian on podcast to address these? As a many-years subscriber to Guardian i’m feeling bit protective about the paper and the regular bashing it seems to receive. It’s not perfect by any means but the quality of journalism and its independent funding model puts the paper way above its rivals - in my opinion. And what about the Greens Julie? In scheme of things why does this party get called out too? That all said love the podcast - hilarious and informative - and keep the disagreements up as all adds to a good bit of spice!
The Guardian has been captured by gender ideologues. I read the Guardian for 30 years, and so since all this nonsense started circa 2011. I was not alerted by their reporting that there is a big problem. They are biased toward promoting trans ideology. I should have been aware sooner, and they can’t be relied upon for subjective reporting. And they effectively got rid of Suzanne Moore and Hadley Freeman who wanted to write about this from a standpoint of women’s and children’s rights and safety.
Chiming in as a lesbian with (pray for me) a Gender Studies Major!!!
Lauren Berlant, along with Eve Sedgwick and Judith Butler and all those idiots, is another gender studies / queer theory scholar who writes a bunch of useless unscientific and anti-human nonsense! She’s another one of those scholars who finds “queerness” and “anti-queer discrimination” and “cis het normativity” in everything from unruly goats, to her morning bowl of oats. 🙄
Happy birthday Kathleen!
Looking forward to your pod interviewing Lee, Julie.
By the way sisters I have recommendations for podcast guests. I reckon you should invite Jen and Hannah from the podcast RedFem, and Carole Ann (whom I know you guys know) who is the amazing Aussie lesbian at the forefront of the Lesbian Action Group’s challenge of the Australian federal prohibition of lesbians to meet and run events and organisations without men! I believe the decision is due in two weeks time.
In Australia, by the way, things are only continuing to get WORSE with gender identity ideology; “conversion therapy” bans; sex self ID; men in prisons; gender ideology in schools; capture of the media and medicine; discrimination and dismissal of people who speak up; and the medicalisation of minors.
Australia is far behind and due to being a federation with autonomous states (like America), it can be much harder to change things in terms of rowing back sex self ID, unisex bathrooms, prohibitions on proper psychotherapy for sex stereotype nonconforming kids, etc.
Side note I could have saved $30,000 in tuition if only I’d heard Julie explain how to “queer” something. To use queer as a verb, which is the entire object of a gender studies degree, you simply look at something with a “queer lens” and now it’s queer! 🙃
Lesbian Bond? Ellen Page.
Would love to see 'him' standing next to an average Bond Girl in their heels.
In a badly fitting suit like the one she wore at the Met Gala. I would so go and watch that and I don't even like Bond films very much.
Im trying hard to envision Ellen seducing straight women. 🤔 Not working for me….
Stonewall did the "find a vigil" thing at the end on their instagram. still a lot less posts, and their main focus is posting their Rainbow Laces stuff.
happy belated birthday, Kathleen! when exactly is your birthday btw? it seems like we were born on the same day :D