FWR being trolled by a user called AidaP

exactly, @Stnam

Fuck is used in all sorts of different ways and does not always mean to have sex. If I told you to fuck off, I obviously don't mean you should have sex as you leave. The splintery rolling pin is much more explicit and violent. There is no alternative meaning to 'fucking someone with a splintery rolling pin'. It isn't used as a stand in for other phrases and it isn't a commonly used phrase. I don't think people saying it are actually going to rape someone but I do think they have a casual attitude towards sexual violence and wouldn't see it as a problem when committed against people they disapprove of. I would view someone using this phrase as a low grade and unthinking person. I wouldn't ban them. I think it is far better for people to be allowed to show their true selves, warts and all.

exactly that. Males aren’t kept out of female prisons for privacy @GlovedhandsCecilia they’re kept out for very basic, understandable safeguarding reasons. As you well know and must surely understand.

No. They are not the same concept at all. Numerous posters have explained why, including me so I will leave you to your search.

And again, your insistence that safeguarding doesn’t shape the policy for segregation doesn’t mean that aspect has not been shaping policy all along.

I have read Hansard and committee reports about the formation of different laws and safeguarding for physical attack has been as important as privacy.

in fact, that privacy you refer to is part of overall safeguarding. As previously mentioned, safeguarding is not opening the door to misogyny. That is a very simplistic view. Safeguarding acknowledges that for equal opportunity, female people require equitable solutions. One of those solutions is to provide female people safety mechanisms from male people physically harming them.

You can deny safeguarding principles as much as you want, that is fine. Those creating policy and influencing policy will simply continue to do this without your agreement.

And yet you're more than happy to interact and argue with people on the FWR board that you've never interacted with before and haven't made any comments about ypu previously - vociferously so.

No it's not. Nobody who posts on here has a right to be replied to. MNHQ specifically told those of us who were posting on a political thread once that if somebody came along and was clearly posting to be antagonistic, then we didn't have to reply to them and start an argument / keep it going. This would be the same type of scenario.

Its the same concept. Yhe other is just harder to search for..I will though so you can report them all as rape threats.

No its for privacy. Not safeguarding. Women arent inherently vulnerable adults. Men have similar same sex provision.

I get that you see yourself as extremely vulnerable and in need of safeguarding by authoritative figures. I do not see women like that. I think that might be an individual thing.

I think we’re just being gaslit at this point by an Aida cheerleader. I’m torn between not wanting to give them fuel, whilst at the same time knowing that sunlight is disinfectant.

"fuck that with a"

This phrase is again referring to inanimate objects or concepts.

It is not a relevant comparator to “fuck x with a splintery rolling pin”.

Aida or any "TRA" have ever interacted with me and I dont interact with them. I haven't made a comment and come back to 30+ notifications of Aida and co accusing me of being a man, a predator, various other slights on my character, etc etc.

They just dont seem that obsessed with me and I keep away from them.

one might question their agenda really!

And yet, those spaces have always been segregated due to the need to limit the risk of physical attacks on female people or just intimidation from male people.

Whether you wanted them to be or not, that doesn’t remove one of the most significant reasons for segregated in the first place.

safeguarding has been happening around you and you don’t seem to have understood it or that it is and has been the basis of the policies that have been used for segregation from the first. While you can selectively choose why you agree with a policy, it doesn’t remove the other reasons the policies exist.

Quite.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't recall Cecelia ever arguing with Aida and his fellow TRAs on here quite so vociferously and for such a long period of time.

I think some posters here have said absolutely shocking things about women. Additionally, the things people said Aida has said seem to be taken well out of context.

I dont just blindly support any group of women. Women can be wrong too. In this case, I think you all have let your emotions override your rationality when it comes to this subject. You act as barmy as any trans person I've ever encountered on this topic.

wow, @GlovedhandsCecilia seems over invested in supporting a poster who has a track record of saying absolutely shocking things about women. In the words of Maya Angelou: when someone shows you who they are, believe them.

Here are some examples of people using that colloqualism here. Its hard to find ones where they speak about a person because you have to search specifically for an exact quote, but i will actually do that later.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5305842-boyfriends-living-together-conditions?reply=143230709&utm_campaign=reply&utm_medium=share

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3185452-wwyd-cake-delivered-too-late?reply=76113977&utm_campaign=reply&utm_medium=share

I'm currently searching "fuck that with a" site:mumsnet.com.

So whatever the thread was, was it on here? If so, how is that comparable to a post on a different site?

Yep.

I think she fell victim to auto correct

What amusement park thread @GlovedhandsCecilia ? Betty was talking about amusing but fake parking threads

Women arent inherently vulnerable beings who need safeguarding. I get that you want women to be seen that way, most women do not. We want to be viewed as people with full capacity and the ability to choose things for ourselves. We don't want it to be easier for authority figures to remove our choice on the basis that we are vulnerable and need protection.

I get that some women have been raised to embrace that role - the fragile feminine. Many of us reject it though.

Did the amusement park thread occur on this site?

I mean, you all see what's going on. To extend a little on what a PP said, literally nobody carefully and honestly considers "both sides" of "do women have knobs" and "should women have single sex changing rooms and rape centres" and concludes that women aren't inherently vulnerable. The existence of such spaces was never a mystery before. It's a trope designed to suggest that the person making the risible claim has come at it from a position of perfect objectivity (and is therefore definitely right) and, as the only fully rational person in the room, has totally impartially concluded that... women aren't inherently vulnerable. Honestly, you do have to laugh.

Anyway, as another PP said, it is all just time wasting and deflection at this point.

IOC, FINNISH STUDY