FWR being trolled by a user called AidaP

We've had 3 female PMs and no black one.

Sure. That was you responding to the crowdfunding aspect.

The point Eresh was making is why was he introduced in the first place and she quoted the post to clarify.

And she is right, he was introduced as a distraction tactic based on ‘whataboutery’ and trying to portray a man who posts on here occasionally and doesn’t post abusively on threads on MN as being some kind of comparator.

Does this help you? I answered the top post of Shedmistress. (Apologies for the arrangement of posts - I wasn’t able to copy them properly. Hazelberry’s was first, Shedmistress’ was last.)

Shedmistress · Yesterday 09:24
People cant fund raise on here. Just FYI. It would very quickly get zapped.
SamphiretheTervosaur · Yesterday 09:21
I haven't been here much recently, that sort of surprises me...
hazelberry · 09/04/2026 18:05
Some on FWR were fund raising for him a few months ago.

It would suggest that, in the specific case of the US electorate choosing who to run their country, they trust black men over all women. This shouldn't be extrapolated into all situations, if only because the sample set (fortyish presidents) is too small and the situation too specific.

ETA: the sample set is actually the entire US electorate.

Second edit: "black people" is misleading, and I think you meant "black men". Black women are a subset of black people, and they are doubly-disadvantaged through race and sex.

Really? So how come there has been a black president of the USA but never a woman president? Therefore that would suggest woman have less power than black people no?

Yes, and I think I acknowledged that power imbalance between black and white people and ascribed it to social constructs.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/vulnerable
"Vulnerable (adjective): able to be easily physically or mentally hurt, influenced, or attacked."

Note: "easily physically [...] hurt". It's not about having mental decision-making capacity, but about whether someone can easily hurt you.

In a racist society, black people are vulnerable to being harmed because, as you describe from your experience, you lack social power. Institutions that should protect and serve you often don't. In a hypothetical non-racist society, that vulnerability would disappear.

By contrast, it wouldn't matter how non-sexist a society was, women would still be vulnerable to attack by men. We would still be vulnerable to forced impregnation by men. It might be rarer, and more reliably result in jail time for our attackers, but that vulnerability would still be there because we are smaller, weaker, and have ovaries and a uterus. And that's the key difference between sex and race.

You're right about there being parallels too: institutions that should protect and serve women are failing us, just as they fail black people (and in the case of black women, doubly fail as Jennifer Melle found out). If they were working, Nurse Melle, the Darlington nurses, and Sandie Peggie would not have needed to take legal action at all.

Nevertheless, the biological differences between men and women can't be reformed away and women will always be vulnerable to male assault and forced pregnancy through rape because of this.

So no.

It leaves me with less than two thirds of the social power in many situations.

That's not a rebuttal of my points. Your blackness doesn't leave you with two-thirds of the physical strength of a white person who shares your sex and age, does it?

It's this realisation that has turned me over the last decade from a chilled-out feminist who wasn't that fussed, really, into the raging and very feminist middle-aged woman you see before you today.

Well, quite.

Exactly.

One of my favourite quotes:

"The fact that society believes a man who says he's a woman, instead of a woman who says he’s not, is proof that society knows exactly who is the man and who is the woman." ---Jen Izaakson

It’s quite stark, isn’t it.

indeed.

And could anyone imagine what would be said also if feminists attempted to shut down an event aimed at supporting transpeople. Or doing anything to disrupt it such as causing

-damage to the venue to cause alarm and convince the venue to cancel.
-release any insect or substance intended to cause alarm or stop the event.
-block entry to the event.
-do any action inside the venue to halt the event.
-pressure a venue to cancel the booking.
-threaten speakers to stop them speaking.
-intimidate attendees to disrupt the event or attempt peoole to not come.
-let of smoke bombs with the intention of disrupting the event (which they did in Grenfell after the fire there).
-display messages or shout chants to threaten and intimidate attendees
-and the usual, cause so much noise and intimidation so that no one can hear.

When feminists go anywhere near an event for trans people, if it is open to anyone, they attend and listen.

There is nothing that it symmetrically ‘both sides’ in anything to do with this issue. Even the arguments aren’t symmetrical as far as being evidenced and supported by science and medical facts.

Yeah, it was introduced as some kind of gotcha by someone who seems to have an issue with glinner’s posting history.

They act as if we do, even though we don’t.

And even though they do, they don’t get called out on it. Instead it’s handwringing and ‘both sides’ bullshit.

Cast iron proof that everyone knows full well who the real women are.

Ffs.

And yes, women have never written signs with 'the only trans is a ---- trans' equivalent.

For all the reasons.

But can you imagine if we did???

There you go.

Also, it wasn’t. Read the thread. It was introduced by hazelberry without any “question” being answered.

I’ve drawn my own conclusions on that as I’m perfectly able to do.

So weird how women don’t have to wear balaclavas during their meets or protests.

The TRAs probably have to wear them because they’re so vulnerable. Particularly when hawking around death threats to women. But that’s probably just another colloquialism like the rape with the splintered rolling pin, right?

Aaah, these hilarious men with their side-splitting rape and death threats. Silly po-faced women not laughing along.