This is bullshit thread #3

Seems timely and relevant for a new Spartacus thread:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/2722081-I-am-still-Spartacus

Micro and Prawn. Yep, totally agree.

Prawn , are you actually my alter ego? I've had literally almost the same experience. I started to realise exactly what Germaine Greer was talking about when she said that women don't understand how much men really hate them - once my eyes were opened by the trans debate, things unravelled before my eyes.

I too have started to see the hypocrisy on the left we have on leaving Muslim women to hideous oppression and abuse just because they are brown and we don't want to be accused of "cultural imperialism". Oh fuck off with your cowardly white guilt. If it's cultural imperialism to say that women and girls should be equal to men and boys, that females shouldn't have to face honour violence, controlling behaviour, and policing of their "modesty" and "purity" then I am a cultural imperialist. Most people however are much more afraid to be called racist than they are to call out misogyny. It's pathetic, and like the trans issue, it shows that women will always be at the bottom of the heap when it comes to the left's priorities.

I've stopped bothering with the guardian too, partly because of Owen Jones et al and particularly after the thousand tedious chin-stroking thinkpieces that were launched in the wake of burkini-gate. I'm no fan of stripping middle-aged women on beaches but I found some of the opinions from these liberal masochists claiming that bikinis are just as oppressive (oh get bent) and that burkinis are "empowering" and "feminist" so ludicrous that I had to unsubscribe. I read a great piece by an ex-Muslim on how all these false equivalences people are making completely deny and erase the coercion, oppression and control that Muslim women are subjected to. I'll link it in a bit.

Sorry to derail a bit, will stick to the subject in hand for all further posts!

Oh, and micro, sorry! How very awkward that you now have a surprise transrelative, Micro.

I agree with the above comments about earnestly unquestioning "leftiness" but am still in fight mode. I've got to believe there are intelligent people on all sides of every debate. It feels to me that some important issues are reaching critical levels (fight to the death kind of thing.) I'm only a small voice but these are conditions in which I won't shut up.

Thanks, Jed and Prawn! There've been some good comments, including this from Helen:

I'm perfectly happy with the concept of "queering gender" and "expanding the bandwidth of what is to be a woman". But let's let women do that. Alex join me in expanding the bandwidth of what it is to be a man.

Think I might asphyxiate if I hold my breath ;)

Micro having been a lifelong lefty I'm getting more and more disillusioned. The hard left is profoundly misogynistic and once you've seen that examples just keep coming.

It's not just that they fall uncritically for all the trans bullshit. They also support Islamists against the "Zios" (ugly word) despite the fact that the people they're supporting oppress women hideously under sharia. For years Labour councils refused to examine hundreds of allegations of child rape because they were more concerned about being accused of racism, and the Guardian shut down debate about the Cologne New Year attacks on women for the same reason.

I took part in debates on the Guardian's Comment is Free for years. Their proud boast is "Comment is free, but facts are sacred."

This is no longer true. In the past couple of years any dissension from the trans narrative is met with deletion. When I was told that from now on my posts were being pre-modded for this reason, I emailed telling them that what they were doing was anti-factual and censorship. Then I flounced.

I don't post there any more, and won't again unless they change their policy. The left has become an unhealthy place for me, and the demand that we are submissive to trans ideology has destroyed my faith in the Guardian as a worthwhile place to spend my time. I very, very much hope that the same won't happen here.

there is so much now that you're not allowed to talk critically about, everyone has just become so submissive to ideology

Oh amen.

On another thread I asked for an explanation of how something was intolerant this morning and the answer I got was that I was too batshit to be bothered with and the poster flounced.

It seriously is 'if you question the ideology you are revolting'.

And it's usually pushed by people who pride themselves on their tolerance, liberality and equality.

Micro, what you said really resonated with me too. And it is apparent on these threads. People are consistently and politely being asked for examples on these threads of hatred and bigotry, or for definitions of the words they are using, to no avail. I agree about talking critically in the left at the moment.

Lovely post, Cherry.

thanks Prawn and Plectrum :) pretty sure I've paraphrased something said by Ayaan Hirsi Ali there, so don't want to claim all the credit (female socialisation runs deep, doesn't it?) but yes I think it's a very important point. If we can't debate ideas, we can't progress, it's as simple as that.

cherry, great post, and you're very brave to put it out there. I'd share it but I have suspended my FB account because I just find the liberal echo chamber depressing. This trans issue has opened my eyes to how dogmatic and hypocritical the left really is. I'm still massively left-wing but there is so much now that you're not allowed to talk critically about, everyone has just become so submissive to ideology, everybody parrots the same bullshit. I see now how insufferably smug and self-righteous I must have seemed myself on certain issues. I can't face it anymore. And my cousin - who literally never displayed a single stereotypically feminine characteristic in his whole life - has come out as transgender, so I can't talk about any of this on FB without landing myself in hot water. Sorry to merail. I'm just so sick of this shit.

Excellent post from micro, thank you Plectrum. Yes, it should be shared as it sums up the whole issue, that we're being asked to believe nonsense and then, when we bring up science and reason, the only response is to try to shut us down.

Love your facebook post, Cherry. Please keep us posted. Rather suspect he'll ignore it. Question too difficult.

I'm interested to know what response you've had, Cherry.

So I made this post on Facebook. It's addressed to Alex Drummond and I took some care over my wording. If you like it, you're welcome to share it. It's time people started talking.

This from micro on the other thread - 'If trans ideology is robust, consistent and logical, it should stand up to rigorous challenge and debate. That is the point of free speech - good ideas will always stand, regardless of what is thown at them. Winning a debate is about getting other people to agree with you through the use of evidence, reasoning and logic. It isn't about silencing and erasing every statement that challenges your motion.'

This resonates for me. Massively.

oh dear! Bit embarrassing for MNHQ, no?

Apologies if my withdrawn post was misleading or confusing. I did indeed feel I'd overshared to the point of potentially being identifiable. It's best I don't post after I've taken my the strong painkillers to be honest!

Posted on the wrong thread, here is posies email...
(She has said I can share)

Hopefully MNHQ will read the post from a non-hypothetical parent of a kid who was being influenced to transition and realise that how important it is to be able to maintain dissenting voices against the current TA tide. Parents like her need support and its hard to find elsewhere.

We can see your point on this,and also accept that there is a fair amount of dodgy stuff on the trans side that can rightly be described as anti-feminist and regressive - but.....

But???

There are circumstances in which this is ok?

what we'd ask you to think about is the impact on the parent who's not an activist, and likely isn't even posting, but whose adult child is transitioning, or who is doing so themselves. Would they feel belittled, mocked or attacked?

Belittled women discussing and pointing out the anti woman, lesbophobic, homophobic, regressive aspects of it? MNHQ seriously want this stuff given a free pass so parents of transitioning teens can just get the antiwoman, lesbo/homophobic hate undiluted and unquestioned? And that's supposed to be a positive, supportive thing to do for those parents?

SERIOUSLY?

MNHQ this boils down to be good girls and go along with the gaslighting quietly. I'm sorry, but fuck that.

As to the 'we won't be allowed to talk about breastfeeding is all hysteria' - er, no it isn't. I don't honestly see how MNHQ can hold this position while not going the rest of the way down that road, it's just a matter of time.

About 800 women stood up, aware they might be banned for doing so, and made their views on this clear. And have been ignored. In other news, guess what bears do in the woods?

I think microferret's point about parents above is really important and hope MNHQ take note.

I've seen the email posie was sent too, I'm quite sure it was re misgendering...

Perhaps mnhq aren't keeping track of who is banned and why, and there's a rogue admin...?

I was suspended for misgendering and was told it would only be lifted if I agreed to stick within talk guidelines in future, so I don't think it's accurate to say nobody has been banned for misgendering alone.

itsatiggerday ^The recent posts have talked about conservative, homophobic, bigoted Christian views. Yet many of the posters have rejected being labelled transphobic and bigoted for their deep convictions about truth and reality.

Wouldn't there only be a contradiction if there was some sort of parallel or overlap between the two matters that someone is making a value judgment/holding a sense of what is what, on?

The two matters 'what is a man/woman' and 'is homosexuality wrong' are not two such matters surely? So can't see the contradiction in subscribing to any view on one, and any view on the other, and then going on to object to those who hold differing views in one (and using pejoratives against them) while at the same time not being happy about receiving pejoratives from others about the other matter.

There are plenty of forums available where the groups you mention above can go to have their views/opinions/feelings validated. MNHQ has always been a place for robust debate where common sense and science tend to prevail.

This, a thousand times. There are so many places, both online and offline, where parents of trans children who affirm trans ideology can easily go. There are virtually none, except 4thwavenow, where parents of trans children who are sceptical about making their child a long-term medical patient, potentially with healthy tissue irreversibly amputated and all the psychological damage that that entails, can go for sensible, critical debate on this issue. We are seeing ever more detransitioners popping up all over the western world - kids who were sold transition as a magic bullet for all their ills, and who quickly discovered that it is often not the panacea it is evangelised to be.

MNHQ, I would counter that you have a responsibility to include differing views on this subject not in spite of these parents, but specifically for their benefit. You include the pros and cons of various controversial methods such CIO and co-sleeping - why not do the same for transition? We understand that you are under pressure to conform to the orthodoxy as we all are, but if you really are by parents, for parents, you must understand that that means approaching such crucial subjects with bluntly critical reasoning, not blind submission to whatever happens to be today's cause celebre.

I'm sorry MNHQ but I will not accept that a transwoman is a "he" .

That should be "she" FFs

Just read MNs response to this, and TBH I am (MNHQ in bold)

Hello all

Thanks for all your input on this - we've been listening and thinking hard.

Couple of quick points to clear up: it's actually not the case that people have been banned solely for misgendering - it will have been part of a broader discussion here about whether that poster is able to stick to the rules generally.

Maybe not banned, but certainly deleted.

We must admit to being slightly taken aback at being cast, by some, as the evil slave-baiting Roman republic in this grin - as lots of you have pointed out, Mumsnet remains one of the few places where these issues can be discussed at all. It would have been much, much easier (both in terms of the resource and the toll on our moderators' sanity!) to shut down the debate as others have done, but instead we are working hard to find a realistic balance between free speech and being a space which welcomes everyone.

So free speech is not allowed where it may cause offence or hurt to someone? This is not consistent with how other topic are moderated where views that others may be uncomfortable with are left to stand; politics, religion, homeopathy, anti vaxxers etc

From our perspective, the whole issue is pretty much covered by our Talk Guidelines. If people are using sex-at-birth pronouns to provoke inflame, or belittle, then that's against the rules and will usually have to go. If it happens as part of an otherwise broadly respectful (even if heated) discussion, we look at it in that context and take a view.

"Sex at birth" pronouns? So MNHQ believes that sex can be changed? A belief that most on these threads (and basic science!) opposes. Furthermore people may feel inflamed or belittled when the correct pronoun was used, when the intention was to be truthful and accurate. I am however happy that you see pronouns as being used to describe sex rather than gender, even though that kind of makes misgendering an impossibility.

Some of you have pointed out a disjunct between allowing posts which mirror mainstream scientific thinking, while asking MNers not to describe a trans woman as 'he'. We can see your point on this,and also accept that there is a fair amount of dodgy stuff on the trans side that can rightly be described as anti-feminist and regressive - but what we'd ask you to think about is the impact on the parent who's not an activist, and likely isn't even posting, but whose adult child is transitioning, or who is doing so themselves. Would they feel belittled, mocked or attacked? Would they think Mumsnet was not for them? If so, we're going to have to remove it. It's a fudge, but it's the best we can do at this stage.

I'm sorry MNHQ but it is a shit fudge. There are plenty of forums available where the groups you mention above can go to have their views/opinions/feelings validated. MNHQ has always been a place for robust debate where common sense and science tend to prevail. This is again not the stance you take on other topics, I'm not quite sure why trans issues is a special case? I am also a bit that you seem to be suggestions that we should ignore mainstream scientific thinking in case we hurt someone's feelings?

In all but the most extreme headline-grabbing cases, we do think it's possible to debate the core principles without referring to individuals in a way which will cause hurt. Most of you have said that when talking to a trans person face-to-face you wouldn't insist on using birth pronouns or names - and generally, on this and other issues, we encourage people to treat others with the same courtesy they'd use in real life. For every MNer who posts on a thread there are likely to be ten who are lurking - statistically, some of those will be trans or love someone who is, and we need to take account of them too.

So we are allowed to use the correct pronouns is a headline grabbing case? I'm sorry MNHQ but I will not accept that a transwoman is a "he" .

We hope that makes our thinking a bit clearer overall. Do continue to tell us your thoughts - it's probably unrealistic to think that this issue will be quickly resolved here or across society as a whole, but it would be brilliant if MN could be part of the solution, we think.

Er no. Your policy seems to be to ignore and fudge rather than coming out clearly with a useful statement. I am interested to know what MNHQ thinks the issues are and how they can be solved though.

MNHQ also posted saying that suggesting autogynephila was a prime motivator for transitioning would be deleted - MirandaYardley replied to this over on the Spartacus thread.

Biology isn't an assumption.