Talk

Advanced search

Rational Wiki bizarre page on TERFs

(33 Posts)
Wanderabout Fri 25-May-18 08:40:13

What is this site?

It has some very odd views:

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Trans-exclusionary_radical_feminism

Wanderabout Fri 25-May-18 08:40:28

rationalwiki.org/wiki/Trans-exclusionary_radical_feminism

NotTerfNorCis Fri 25-May-18 08:42:45

It's left wing and usually quite amusing, but it's way off the page on this one.

TERFragetteCity Fri 25-May-18 08:44:07

Lol...those crazy feminists thinking women and girls are people are born with a vagina.

Wanderabout Fri 25-May-18 08:44:28

Is it supposed to be a joke site?

UpstartCrow Fri 25-May-18 08:44:50

The Rational Wiki on feminism is the future for women under the hierarchy of trans activists.

ErrolTheDragon Fri 25-May-18 08:46:45

That's odd ... I thought I'd quite recently read something entirely different on rational wiki ...ie balanced and rational. But I may have got it confused with some other 'rational' site. That entry appears to be dated May 6th... just wondering if someone's done a hatchet job on it?confused

TerfsUp Fri 25-May-18 08:48:52

Eh. I've never heard of the site before but given the quality of the page I'm not surprised.

TheCountessofFitzdotterel Fri 25-May-18 08:50:31

We're pretty big for a Westboro Baptist Church.

Wanderabout Fri 25-May-18 08:51:58

It reminds me of the equally bizarre NUS presentation about TERFs.

FermatsTheorem Fri 25-May-18 09:01:12

Batshit but not surprising. I've stumbled across the site before and it's always given me the impression of a bunch of lefty dude bros who're convinced they possess the testicles of objectivity but are in fact the living proof of the maximum "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing."

ErrolTheDragon Fri 25-May-18 09:09:39

Yes... self-appointed experts. It can sometimes serve as a quick counterpoint to 'answers in Genesis' if you want to trade c&ps with a creationist, I suppose.

But on feminism etc.... well, I would really like to know what the male/female split of contributors to this site (and editors/mods if they have them) is in general and on articles relating to feminism in particular.

nauticant Fri 25-May-18 09:13:24

As a general rule, never listen to a man on the left who is telling you what feminism is and what it is not.

ErrolTheDragon Fri 25-May-18 09:16:05

OTOH, They may be better qualified to pronounce in the area of men's rights...

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Manosphere_glossary

ErrolTheDragon Fri 25-May-18 09:28:48

The section on 'The term TERF' in proper grownup wiki https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feministviewss_ontransgenderr_topics is much closer to the truth.

ElenOfTheWays Fri 25-May-18 09:30:56

That was nothing rational about that. It was all bollocks as far as I could tell.

I have come to the conclusion that there's no such thing as a TERF. It's an entirely made up creature. A figment.

At least I've never come across any.

Gender critical does not =Trans Exclusionary.

R0wantrees Fri 25-May-18 09:47:39

It reminds me of the equally bizarre NUS presentation about TERFs.

discussed here:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3222263-Slide-show-on-How-to-Deal-with-TERFs

Wanderabout the Rational Wiki page seemed to have a lot in common with the site theterfs.com. This was recommended by the authors of the NUS Womens 18 slideshow as "a really good guide that outlines common TERF arguments" at the end of the workshop (?) as part of the 'where to go for more info' final slide.

Tanith Fri 25-May-18 10:55:02

It was my understanding that you can edit these pages, as well as the wikipedia ones, by creating a log in and editing the page to correct the misinformation.

MRAs often do this to wikipedia pages that annoy them: they trashed Penelope Leach's page in 2014.

RatRolyPoly Fri 25-May-18 11:58:48

A really enjoyable read, thanks for posting.

flowersonthepiano Fri 25-May-18 11:59:24

This bit seems particulary problematic,

"Similarly, in New Statesman, Sarah Ditum suggested that the TERF label encouraged pro-trans feminists to "think it is OK — more than OK, laudable — to hit a 60-year-old woman if she thinks the wrong thing, because thinking the wrong thing is understood to be an act of aggression in itself."[32]

The 60-year-old woman in question was punched in retaliation for choking a teen at Speakers' Corner, Hyde Park, London by three protesters while she was waiting to hear about the venue for a meeting to discuss proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act."

Choking a teen?!

TerfsUp Fri 25-May-18 12:47:27

The 60-year-old woman in question was punched in retaliation for choking a teen at Speakers' Corner, Hyde Park, London by three protesters while she was waiting to hear about the venue for a meeting to discuss proposed changes to the Gender Recognition Act."

Try as I might, I cannot follow the syntax of that statement.

Tanith Fri 25-May-18 12:51:19

They appear to encourage challenge and debate, though.

rationalwiki.org/wiki/RationalWiki

smithsinarazz Fri 25-May-18 12:57:44

Haha @FermatsTheorem - "the testicles of objectivity!"
Or: "it's men's bollocks, you wouldn't understand."

NotTerfNorCis Fri 25-May-18 13:01:27

Wow just read it. Absolutely toxic. Seems to have been repeat-edited by a small group of people such as 'Yisfidri'.

Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g Fri 25-May-18 13:02:35

That is libellous on Maria Maclachlan, I'd say, as police reviewed all the video footage and only brought charges against Tara Wolf, not against Maria. There was no suggestion in any of the coverage I saw of the trial that Maria was considered to have assaulted anyone.

Maria herself has written about that site. www.skepticat.org/2018/03/truth-is-the-new-hate-speech/#more-3140

Join the discussion

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

Get started »