Morrissey’s view on gender identity

[Malarkey]

This arcticle is about his attitude on sexuality. Which is not at all the same as modern transgender ideology. It's about how people shouldn't label themselves based on who they sleep with.

And when he says people can wear the clothes they want, that's not the same as him saying people can say they are whatever gender they want and access women's sports, etc

No - his struggles with gender are very modern.

He didn't identify with any of the gender roles that were around & that made his sexuality difficult for him.

He even made up his own labels for his gender & his sexuality.

 

[Gaetano]

No - his struggles with gender are very modern.

He didn't identify with any of the gender roles that were around & that made his sexuality difficult for him.

He even made up his own labels for his gender & his sexuality.

Firstly, he made is own labels such as "fourth gender" as a provocateur statement and a a poetic way to describe something more complex. Secondly, he did just that, make his own labels as a way to describe himself in conversation. He did not and does not expect people to refer to him as another gender. He goes by 'he/him' pronouns like a regular man and he doesn't expect access to women's spaces such as locker rooms, etc. He knows his place. Thus, this is what I mean when I say his views do not co-allign with those of the modern transgender movement.

 

[Malarkey]

Firstly, he made is own labels such as "fourth gender" as a provocateur statement and a a poetic way to describe something more complex. Secondly, he did just that, make his own labels as a way to describe himself in conversation. He did not and does not expect people to refer to him as another gender. He goes by 'he/him' pronouns like a regular man and he doesn't expect access to women's spaces such as locker rooms, etc. He knows his place. Thus, this is what I mean when I say his views do not co-allign with those of the modern transgender movement.

It wasn't a provoateur statement - he's consistently talked about his struggles with his gender & his sexuality.

The Sunday Times asked him about the modern gender movement in 2017 & he liked it - he hasn't gone into any details since - whether he knows his place or not.

 

[Gaetano]

It wasn't a provoateur statement - he's consistently talked about his struggles with his gender & his sexuality.

The Sunday Times asked him about the modern gender movement in 2017 & he liked it - he hasn't gone into any details since - whether he knows his place or not.

Once again, in that Sunday times interview you reference, he simply states positive views about sexual and gender fluidity (I.e. dressing the way you want to dress). This was his view since the 1980s. This does not signify any proof that he approves of the modern TRANSgender movement which the gender critical activists protest against. They are not protesting the "gender fluidity" that Morrissey always references, rather the idea that you are another 'gender' than your biological sex and thus can access the services attributed to people of that gender.

For those reading, here is the portion of the article that Malarkey is referring to: "Just like veganism, he insists, being sexually fluid and gender fluid is now much more accepted. “It’s extraordinary. People seem to be very relaxed by it.” But when Morrissey announced his humasexuality in 2013, he was a lonely voice. “Yes, I was. I spearheaded the movement. I know no other way, so nothing has changed for me, but the rest of the world leaps on. I am pleased because I want people to be happy. There is an expiration date on our lives on this planet. You have to be yourself and hopefully get some happiness from it. It seems everybody, in every respect of their lives, is coming out of their cupboard saying this is the person I’d like to be. I want to wear these clothes, not those that have been imposed on me. As long as nobody’s harmed, I think it’s good.” "

See how he only talks about fluidity as someone wearing the clothes they want. Gender critical thinkers are not against this.

 

[Lionel Cliffhanger]

Once again, in that Sunday times interview you reference, he simply states positive views about sexual and gender fluidity (I.e. dressing the way you want to dress). This was his view since the 1980s. This does not signify any proof that he approves of the modern TRANSgender movement which the gender critical activists protest against. They are not protesting the "gender fluidity" that Morrissey always references, rather the idea that you are another 'gender' than your biological sex and thus can access the services attributed to people of that gender.

For those reading, here is the portion of the article that Malarkey is referring to: "Just like veganism, he insists, being sexually fluid and gender fluid is now much more accepted. “It’s extraordinary. People seem to be very relaxed by it.” But when Morrissey announced his humasexuality in 2013, he was a lonely voice. “Yes, I was. I spearheaded the movement. I know no other way, so nothing has changed for me, but the rest of the world leaps on. I am pleased because I want people to be happy. There is an expiration date on our lives on this planet. You have to be yourself and hopefully get some happiness from it. It seems everybody, in every respect of their lives, is coming out of their cupboard saying this is the person I’d like to be. I want to wear these clothes, not those that have been imposed on me. As long as nobody’s harmed, I think it’s good.” "

See how he only talks about fluidity as someone wearing the clothes they want. Gender critical thinkers are not against this.

this is pretty persuasive

 

[Malarkey]

Once again, in that Sunday times interview you reference, he simply states positive views about sexual and gender fluidity (I.e. dressing the way you want to dress). This was his view since the 1980s. This does not signify any proof that he approves of the modern TRANSgender movement which the gender critical activists protest against. They are not protesting the "gender fluidity" that Morrissey always references, rather the idea that you are another 'gender' than your biological sex and thus can access the services attributed to people of that gender.

For those reading, here is the portion of the article that Malarkey is referring to: "Just like veganism, he insists, being sexually fluid and gender fluid is now much more accepted. “It’s extraordinary. People seem to be very relaxed by it.” But when Morrissey announced his humasexuality in 2013, he was a lonely voice. “Yes, I was. I spearheaded the movement. I know no other way, so nothing has changed for me, but the rest of the world leaps on. I am pleased because I want people to be happy. There is an expiration date on our lives on this planet. You have to be yourself and hopefully get some happiness from it. It seems everybody, in every respect of their lives, is coming out of their cupboard saying this is the person I’d like to be. I want to wear these clothes, not those that have been imposed on me. As long as nobody’s harmed, I think it’s good.” "

See how he only talks about fluidity as someone wearing the clothes they want. Gender critical thinkers are not against this.

He mentions 'every respect of their lives'.

It's not just clothes.

He spends a lot of time in LA - he's near some relaxed queer spaces - he loves drag queens - I don't think he needs to get himself involved in any of the current fights.

People who are obsessed will be fighting it out.

 

[Gaetano]

He mentions 'every respect of their lives'.

It's not just clothes.

He spends a lot of time in LA - he's near some relaxed queer spaces - he loves drag queens - I don't think he needs to get himself involved in any of the current fights.

People who are obsessed will be fighting it out.

Once again, whenever Morrissey has referenced drag queens or anything of the like, it was always in the old British sense of absurdist, yet witty humour, such as Mrs. Shufflewick and David Hoyle (Divine David, who appeared in his Spent the Day In Bed video). This lineage of British drag is very much about poking fun at stereotypes about women, this is not them claiming to be women. It is done in humour, like when Boz would dress in drag in some shows around 2012. This is much more radical, in my opinion, than the modern American-based drag movement which is more about body positivity, being who you want to be, etc.

That being said, I agree that Morrissey has nothing against people being who they want to be. Just as gender critical thinkers don't either. It's about when they try to push their ideology and force themselves into women's spaces where they are not welcome. This is why he recently spoke about the cancel vultures pecking away at Rowling and Greer. I did not think this was controversial. Morrissey is all for people expressing themselves how they see fit. No one is disagreeing with this. however, it is naive to think that this is what the modern "queer" or transgender movement is about. They are making false biological claims and using that as a basis to access women's services and there is no proof out there that morrissey approves of this. In fact, the evidence leads us in the opposite direction with all the sources I referenced in this thread from the feminist writers he's interested in to his recent defence against Rowling and Greer being cancelled.

 

[Lionel Cliffhanger]

Once again, whenever Morrissey has referenced drag queens or anything of the like, it was always in the old British sense of absurdist, yet witty humour, such as Mrs. Shufflewick and David Hoyle (Divine David, who appeared in his Spent the Day In Bed video). This lineage of British drag is very much about poking fun at stereotypes about women, this is not them claiming to be women. It is done in humour, like when Boz would dress in drag in some shows around 2012. This is much more radical, in my opinion, than the modern American-based drag movement which is more about body positivity, being who you want to be, etc.

That being said, I agree that Morrissey has nothing against people being who they want to be. Just as gender critical thinkers don't either. It's about when they try to push their ideology and force themselves into women's spaces where they are not welcome. This is why he recently spoke about the cancel vultures pecking away at Rowling and Greer. I did not think this was controversial. Morrissey is all for people expressing themselves how they see fit. No one is disagreeing with this. however, it is naive to think that this is what the modern "queer" or transgender movement is about. They are making false biological claims and using that as a basis to access women's services and there is no proof out there that morrissey approves of this. In fact, the evidence leads us in the opposite direction with all the sources I referenced in this thread from the feminist writers he's interested in to his recent defence of Rowling and Greer being cancelled.

He mentions 'every respect of their lives'.

It's not just clothes.

He spends a lot of time in LA - he's near some relaxed queer spaces - he loves drag queens - I don't think he needs to get himself involved in any of the current fights.

People who are obsessed will be fighting it out.

I am again going to point out that you seemed really against me even starting the thread on this and yet you are constantly posting on it. I kind of feel that what you are really against are people taking the opposite view from yourself.

I suppose Morrissey might also not be inclined support this ‘trans ideology’ because of it’s racist, homophobic and misogynistic nature?

 

[Malarkey]

Once again, whenever Morrissey has referenced drag queens or anything of the like, it was always in the old British sense of absurdist, yet witty humour, such as Mrs. Shufflewick and David Hoyle (Divine David, who appeared in his Spent the Day In Bed video). This lineage of British drag is very much about poking fun at stereotypes about women, this is not them claiming to be women. It is done in humour, like when Boz would dress in drag in some shows around 2012. This is much more radical, in my opinion, than the modern American-based drag movement which is more about body positivity, being who you want to be, etc.

That being said, I agree that Morrissey has nothing against people being who they want to be. Just as gender critical thinkers don't either. It's about when they try to push their ideology and force themselves into women's spaces where they are not welcome. This is why he recently spoke about the cancel vultures pecking away at Rowling and Greer. I did not think this was controversial. Morrissey is all for people expressing themselves how they see fit. No one is disagreeing with this. however, it is naive to think that this is what the modern "queer" or transgender movement is about. They are making false biological claims and using that as a basis to access women's services and there is no proof out there that morrissey approves of this. In fact, the evidence leads us in the opposite direction with all the sources I referenced in this thread from the feminist writers he's interested in to his recent defence of Rowling and Greer being cancelled.

Bollocks. David Hoyle is part of the queer community that hangs around the Vauxhall - he's surrounded by trans people.

You can't say 'this is why' he mentioned JK or Greer - because he didn't say it.

 

[Gaetano]

I am again going to point out that you seemed really against me even starting the thread on this and yet you are constantly posting on it. I kind of feel that what you are really against are people taking the opposite view from yourself.

I suppose Morrissey might also not be inclined support this ‘trans ideology’ because of it’s racist, homophobic and misogynistic nature?

I whole-heartedly agree. Morrissey is obviously well-read and is quite aware of the history of these things and he's seen a lot in his life, especially with all the travelling he's done. I think it's obvious he understands the backward thinking behind the transgender movement and their ideology.

 

[Malarkey]

I am again going to point out that you seemed really against me even starting the thread on this and yet you are constantly posting on it. I kind of feel that what you are really against are people taking the opposite view from yourself.

I suppose Morrissey might also not be inclined support this ‘trans ideology’ because of it’s racist, homophobic and misogynistic nature?

Or you could just speak for yourself Lionel.

 

[Gaetano]

Bollocks. David Hoyle is part of the queer community that hangs around the Vauxhall - he's surrounded by trans people.

He can't say 'this is why' he mentioned JK or Greer - because he didn't say it.

Being 'surrounded' by trans people means nothing. That's just guilt by association. Also, it is not hard to see how David Hoyle talked about gender especially in the early 200s in that he didn't believe anyone really had a gender that you can change around. He understood that everyone had masculine and feminine qualities. Simple as.

Also he defended Greer and Rowling in his most recent interview. You're right, he didn't clarify what about, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see why those two people in particular are being cancelled. It's because of their views on transgenderism. Morrissey is not stupid.

 

[Malarkey]

Being 'surrounded' by trans people means nothing. That's just guilt by association. Also, it is not hard to see how David Hoyle talked about gender especially in the early 200s in that he didn't believe anyone really had a gender that you can change around. He understood that everyone had masculine and feminine qualities. Simple as.

Also he defended Greer and Rowling in his most recent interview. You're right, he didn't clarify what about, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see why those two people in particular are being cancelled. It's because of their views on transgenderism. Morrissey is not stupid.

You can be against people being cancelled without agreeing with them.

Also David has changed his ideas:

In fact, younger people championing non-binary identities have helped Hoyle put his finger on his own identity as non-binary, something he had been struggling with since he was a child “I’ve never felt like a boy. I had no interest in traditional boy things like football and sports. I’ve always been more artistic,” he says. “But we didn’t have the words when I was younger. I’m very proud of all the different phrases people are now using. And it’s not just members of the LGBTQ+ community who are using these new ideas to define who they are. It’s for everybody. You have people who would have fallen into the heteronormative—what’s the word?—demographic thinking how heteronormative are they really. That’s very interesting.”

Has British iconoclast David Hoyle unwittingly turned himself into an icon? | Xtra Magazine

At the edge of 60, performance artist and rabid anti-capitalist David Hoyle has been connecting with younger and younger audiences

xtramagazine.com

 

[Gaetano]

You can be against people being cancelled without agreeing with them.

Also David has changed his ideas:

In fact, younger people championing non-binary identities have helped Hoyle put his finger on his own identity as non-binary, something he had been struggling with since he was a child “I’ve never felt like a boy. I had no interest in traditional boy things like football and sports. I’ve always been more artistic,” he says. “But we didn’t have the words when I was younger. I’m very proud of all the different phrases people are now using. And it’s not just members of the LGBTQ+ community who are using these new ideas to define who they are. It’s for everybody. You have people who would have fallen into the heteronormative—what’s the word?—demographic thinking how heteronormative are they really. That’s very interesting.”

Has British iconoclast David Hoyle unwittingly turned himself into an icon? | Xtra Magazine

At the edge of 60, performance artist and rabid anti-capitalist David Hoyle has been connecting with younger and younger audiences

xtramagazine.com

Maybe it's the case that David Hoyle changed his views. I haven't followed him much recently. However, it doesn't change the fact that his most important work was not done with this opinion in mind. In fact it was the opposite. That is the point.

And, yes, I agree about defending Greer and Rowling doesn't mean he agrees with them per se. However, in the context of everything else I've referenced, it seems pretty likely that he does agree with them, since there are multiple instances in his life that lead to that path. That is why everything must be understood in context. Each example I gave all come together to show a bigger picture of his views.

I appreciate this discussion, but I can see we're going in circles, so I think we can agree to disagree. It's for others to see the sources and decide themselves. You kept me on my toes that's for sure

 

[T. H. Auden]

Why are people in England and USA suddenly so obsessed with «gender identity» and so on? Is it to ensure that the working class/middle class/masses don’t unite in class struggle against the 0,1% who continue to enrich themselves and consolidate their powers? Let’s distract the masses with identity politics and woke/anti-woke so that they can fight with each other and leave us alone. The left used to be about class fight and system critique, now they’re busy discussing if there’s 2 or 16 or 19 genders. It’s ridiculous.

 

[Anonymous]

This arcticle is about his attitude on sexuality. Which is not at all the same as modern transgender ideology. It's about how people shouldn't label themselves based on who they sleep with.

And when he says people can wear the clothes they want, that's not the same as him saying people can say they are whatever gender they want and access women's sports, etc

It's not an ideaology. for activists, the media and teachers, maybe. but its not ideaology and in reality not seeped in politics. People who have no experience of it have made it 'alien' and transgender people seem less than human. Not targeting you in paticular - Leave people alone. Doctors and psychologists that treat this in the UK are constantly asking questions on ethics and good practice, I know this because I know someone who worked very hard and carefully in that department, through the 80s, 90s and recently retired, it was a very hard job and she was very honest and got constant backlash, but she studied ethics, philosophy as well as psychology, biology, before she worked with eating disorders and then decided to move areas. I don't know much since she never talked about details but She helped and listened to a lot of people. She said most of her job was about careful listening and talking, most didn't need medical treatment, and some did.

Morrissey has been aware of this topic of gender and the body in his songs, I'm moving my way through his catalouge and have listened to him speak in interviews and he is very direct and says it how it is.

'Your body is your only home, not your house or apartment'

 

[ZOOM FROM GLOOM]

It was in the 1980 Mackie letters that Morrissey wrote …

“I am presently forming a group, in fact have done so. We are called Angels Are Genderless and are rehearsing as soon as my jet-lag subsides”

Page29

www.morrissey-solo.com

Btw, Morrissey is actually referencing a lyric
from a 1979 Wayne (Jayne) County song ….

 

[TheSmiths_1985]

I'm convinced that artists shouldn't be co-opted into things that impact their career.

Unless it involves declaring they are supporters of the IRA... But that’s ok, because it kind of fits in with your anti-Unionist views.
Silly, silly person.

 

[Amy]

You started a thread connecting him to this issue.

I didn't.

It's a thoughtful and intelligent thread with some excellent posts and insights from the OP and others. Stop trying to shut down debate under the guise of 'protecting' Morrissey - not only is it against the entire purpose of this forum, it's absurd coming from someone who has no qualms at all about re-posting and distorting content from here on Twitter for another online audience to pile in on - shameless shit-stirring. It's not lack of debate you want, it's total control of the narrative and it's not going to happen. If you dislike the thread so much and think it's disgusting then you don't need to contribute, just get out of it.

 

[Malarkey]

It's a thoughtful and intelligent thread with some excellent posts and insights from the OP and others. Stop trying to shut down debate under the guise of 'protecting' Morrissey - not only is it against the entire purpose of this forum, it's absurd coming from someone who has no qualms at all about re-posting and distorting content from here on Twitter for another online audience to pile in on - shameless shit-stirring. It's not lack of debate you want, it's total control of the narrative and it's not going to happen. If you dislike the thread so much and think it's disgusting then you don't need to contribute, just get out of it.

It's not a debate - it's asserting that he believes things that he's never actually said.

I don't know what you think is 'distorted' you would have to say.