Paris Lee talking at MN - thread 2

(269 Posts)
shinynewusername Fri 11-Nov-16 07:49:03

1st thread here

MN has invited Paris Lee to speak at its Blogging event.

Meanwhile, actual women are being silenced.

Mozfan1 Fri 11-Nov-16 07:50:41

Place marking

Along with reporting transphobic and terf, how about good old bigot which regularly gets thrown as a personal attack.

spottyswat Fri 11-Nov-16 08:00:56

I'm so sad that this is happening. It feels like a kick in the teeth.

RiverTam Fri 11-Nov-16 08:10:23

Thanks for starting this thread, shiny.

Having had a bit of a think overnight, and going to bed feeling very jangled and angry (not just about this), I've decided to take a break from social media, including MN, for a while. Got a lot of stuff going on in RL and I'm not sure my blood pressure can deal with it all right now.

I'd just like to say that this board in particular has been the most amazing place to learn from and debate with other posters. And the board is doing really good work, despite the efforts of others to derail, demean and shut down debates. Every week more people like me come along, dip into a thread and come out with their whole mindset changed. I've learned more from the amazing wimmin here than I've learned from anyone in a long time, and I thank you all for that.

Final thoughts for Justine - I strongly urge you to read Miranda Yardley's post yesterday at 20.58. It's a perfect, succinct summing up from someone who knows as to exactly why PL is such an appalling choice for any MN event. Right now, I don't think I can really express how angry I am with you and your sneering dismissal of women on this issue.

Cheery bye y'all.

YonicProbe Fri 11-Nov-16 08:13:54

I hear you, Tam. Hope you find some Serenity x

YonicProbe Fri 11-Nov-16 08:14:53

Good idea re bigot Stat

AltheaThoon Fri 11-Nov-16 08:20:51

We'll miss you Tam, but it's important to do what's right for you. I hope you'll be back.

I agree re Miranda Yardley's post. And also the video she posted earlier where Lees and another mtt laughed about fucking a 'crazy bitch' stalker.

VincentVL Fri 11-Nov-16 08:38:40

i keep thinking, the stuff we see Lees has said is the sanitised version put out there with Lees public image in mind. So

1) Lees and anyone who gives Lees a platform is fine with the disgusting stuff PL says about women and being a woman
and
2) what does Paris Lees say about us off the record? If PL is fine calling us bitches and all that in public, how much worse are they uncensored? Especially given that PL seems to be sheltered from accountability?

BeyondTellingEveryoneRealFacts Fri 11-Nov-16 08:41:02

I've reported use of transphobic before (recently, after something but can't remember what), I was told it is definitely not a personal attack hmm

BertrandRussell Fri 11-Nov-16 08:42:06

So sorry you're going, Tam. I can see why you are. I wish I had the strength of will to do the same.

shinynewusername Fri 11-Nov-16 08:46:08

Sorry to see you go, Tam. Like you, I am incredibly grateful to the MNetters on this board for opening my eyes to the TA movement and for the support that you all provide when it feels like we are the only people in the world who can see through this madness.

ErrolTheDragon Fri 11-Nov-16 08:46:38

Stat - yes, except those attacks so often occur applied to a whole group ('wow so much transphobia on this thread' whine and run) rather than specifically aimed at one poster. And therefore not a 'personal attack'. While generally the talk guidelines give a good balance between free speech and curtailment of aggression, it can lead to this strange situation where a sniper is judged more harshly than a machine gun approach.

So - is it within talk guidelines for a poster to effectively say 'all you gender critical feminists are transphobic' but not within guidelines to say something like 'We'd really appreciate someone like Miranda to be invited, we'd love a constructive discussion with trans people, but we really don't think that inviting a misogynist like XX would be helpful.' Because, not being transphobic we want to be clear that it is specific people who might be problematic and therefore it has to be 'personal'. In the second case, do we have to be very circumspect about how we express disapproval of an individual, 'XX who IMO displays misogynistic attitudes' maybe?

BeyondReasonablyDoubts Fri 11-Nov-16 08:46:52

From my email

I reported (part of a long post, but this was the bit specifically aimed at me)- "Transgender rights don't take anything away from anyone else either... unless of course you are transphobic"

I got back - "Thanks for the report, we don't think that this post is a personal attack. It sounds like the poster has put a lot of thought into her post and has given her opinion on what you and others have written."

To which I replied - "I am happy for the rest of the post to remain, I would just like the sentence saying that my post is transphobic amended as it is clearly intended as a personal attack (Ie "you are a bigot") and not an opinion.
Unless it is okay to give opinions that someone is ? Because that looks like a sly way of getting around talk guidelines that wouldn't stand with other statements?
Of course it is ultimately your decision, but I thought the rule on what is offensive is what the person in the firing line of the comment finds offensive"

No reply to that email.

BeyondReasonablyDoubts Fri 11-Nov-16 08:47:32

Oh and tam, I hope you feel mentally up to returning soon flowers

YetAnotherSpartacus Fri 11-Nov-16 09:00:26

Sorry to see you go Tam ... that does indicate that MN has become a site that is stressful for you, instead of providing the kind of support and solace that you (and other women) need in a sexist world. I have enjoyed your posts - all the best and I hope that RL sorts itself out in a good way.

I also just wanted to add to Miranda Yardley's post that PL and others similar hold a mirror up to men. They reflect the kinds of views that (many) men hold dear - that women like being humiliated, seen as sex objects (indeed they get off on this) and they loathe feminists who challenge this. This is the ultimate sexist male fantasy - women are there for their pleasure, to be fucked as they wish and that women get off on this. This is why her message, in blogging and elsewhere, is so strong. It does nothing to challenge male power or the status quo. In fact, it reinforces it. (but I can't sum that up in one succinct sentence).

CaesiumTime Fri 11-Nov-16 09:06:54

This bears reposting here:

Yesterday 20:58 mirandayardley:

"The Paris Lees guide to campaigning:

1. Define woman as a broken man.
2. Attack actual women as a group with misogyny and reductive arguments to convert an unaware public.
3. Attack by name those actual women who disagree with you using sexist language and arguments that would not seem out of place in a 1970s working men's club.
4. Don't turn up for debates with those who call you on your bullshit.
5. Sell young people an idea of 'woman' as being something that exists solely for the entertainment of men.
6. Call women 'crazy bitch', 'wanker' and 'TERF'.
7. Bank the £££s."

CaesiumTime Fri 11-Nov-16 09:09:15

And the above person is sitting with Shami Chakrabarti on a "serious" discussion panel.

This was not well thought out.

BeyondReasonablyDoubts Fri 11-Nov-16 09:12:44

Just one issue... 'arguments rooted in sexism' rather than sexist. Sexist would be a personal attack...

Bullshit is probably a personal attack too in the lala land that I feel like I've landed in

BeyondReasonablyDoubts Fri 11-Nov-16 09:14:23

Don't want mirandas post deleted for being a personal attack!

Datun Fri 11-Nov-16 09:15:58

I've also had my eyes opened about the trans issues. I was frankly, shocked and disbelieving. So I read and read, dozens of sites. Pro and against.

I spent time reading the pro sites and they were the REAL eye opener.

The aggression, delusion and woman hating was confined to those. It becomes more and more difficult to see the trans activists (and I deliberately separate those from people like Miranda and Helen who I consider nothing like them) as nothing more than raging men who, whilst may well have something of an identity crisis, are not only nothing like women, they have no affinity with, or empathy for them.

I believe that their particular visciousness is reserved for feminists because we don't fit their ideal of the sexualised, victimised version of the woman they yearn to be.

Insisting on correct pronouns using threats of suicide for non compliance is NOT normal behaviour.

Sorry to see you go Tam. Please come back soon. We need you.

Datun Fri 11-Nov-16 09:17:15

YetAnotherSpartacus

Same thoughts - x posted

Twogoats Fri 11-Nov-16 09:20:00

Will the transcripts/ recordings be made available?

frikadela01 Fri 11-Nov-16 09:21:53

Just checking in.
Still pissed off. Still think Justine has drunk the kool aid.

Still Spartacus.

I'm pretty darned sure that even if it was aimed at one single poster, bigot would not be deleted. There have been several times when someone has said that or similar and then when challenged has highlighted specific posts - therefore calling the authors of those posts bigots - and it never gets deleted. You see racist and disablist aimed directly at specific posters too, and never deleted. If one -ist accusation is a pa and unacceptable then they all are. And I don't think just cos you pa a group makes it less of a pa, really. If it did them that would open the doors to all sorts of derogatory stereotyping...so long as it's not aimed at just one person.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now