Twitter and where to begin with comments about "terfs"

Miffer

The prevalence of trans-people in both IT and gaming is extraordinary.

It must have something to do with one's persona in gaming being an identity, rather than the real you. The fact that you can inhabit different identities, etc.

I wonder if there are far more people who would consider themselves trans, if they had the gamers' outlook. Or whether it's just attracts those types.

Co-morbid mental health issues are also prevalent in trans people, particularly narcissism.

Which might well account for the person in your example thinking that others would be as interested in their posing selfies, as they were in their gaming prowess.

I have to admit, it never ceases to amaze me how transwomen particularly, will post the most ridiculous photos yet fondly imagine that they look wonderful.

One of the characteristics of AGP is the feeling that donning sexy clothing will make one look incredibly sensual and alluring. There seems to be no critical filter.

And I completely agree. The delusion is all encompassing.

You do occasionally get transactivists online who don't sound completely bonkers, but it doesn't take long for the mask to slip. And if you then google them, their other profiles are often completely delusional and batty. They seem just restrained enough to engage in online discourse outside their comfort bubble.

I am becoming seriously concerned that the trans thing is massively fucking detrimental to people who need significant psychiatric help.

I am a gamer and recently came across something rather disturbing. A famous (in gaming circles) gamer used to have a host of media dedicated to his gaming stuff (mainly videos of him playing games very well). He then transitioned and replaced his output with videos of themselves posing. Literally. Not speaking, certainly no video games it was just posing, or making odd facial expressions or cuddling inanimate objects.

They then made a series of social media statements bemoaning people being transphobic because followers and donations dropped massively. This may sound narcissistic and entitled but more than anything it is heartbreakingly sad because this person clearly needs some sort of help but instead is propped up by their new (smaller but vocal) legion of followers who are encouraging the behaviour and validating the delusional beliefs*.

*And I don't even mean belief about their gender/sex, I mean the belief that somebody who enjoys and pays to watch somebody play video games should automatically enjoy and pay to watch the same person
sit on a chair pulling faces at a camera.

One good reason to get onto Twitter is to make other people realise they are not alone.

I'm debating getting into Twitter (my personal circumstances at the moment mean I'm protected from the threat of RL violence), but not sure if it will just be bad for my blood pressure (and another way to waste my time)

I'm not on Twitter myself, but given the intransigence of people's attitudes on MN I just can't see how that would happen in 140 characters

All the intelligent arguments on MN changed my mind.

Most people still think transgender people are all harmless gay guys/delightfully camp drag queens and have absolutely no clue about autogynephilia, violent threats etc. TRAs have been very clever in making gay male teenagers the poster children for 'bathroom rights' because they are non-threatening. Then there is the incredulity factor: most people, especially anyone over 30, think of this all as a ridiculous fad and have no clue how close women are to losing their fundamental rights. They refuse to believe that anyone is really going to recategorise men as women simply because they claim to feel female.

Also if - like me - you know 'old school' trans people in real life in the UK, the chances are they are nothing like the TRAs. My views on trans rights would be totally different if they were based only on the trans people I actually know - I still wouldn't think that TW should use women's changing rooms etc - but I would feel far less threatened. None of the trans people I know personally has ever come out with any TRA stuff (though of course I don't know what they may think in private) so I wouldn't know about it.

The TRAs have played this ignorance to their advantage and co-opted many people who are 'pro-trans' just because it is the latest feel-good liberal cause. But these people's minds can be changed. I find that pictures of Danielle Muscato are a useful response to, "Trans women are women". Andraya Yearwood winning a girls' race despite being a boy on no hormone treatment also makes people question the fairness - link here.

shiny

Yes, that's true. I have managed to have a couple of rl conversations with my similarly lefty friends that have not left them completely hating me.

"If you feel like being cheeky, ask them to define 'woman' (they won't be able to)."

I definitely think this is worth doing. The attempts really highlight the craziness of it. I also think a fair few women would have an issue with the banning of words like 'breast feeding' and the way 'pregnant people' and 'womb owners' are being pushed, if they knew about them.
I also think it's worth pointing out you've nothing against men wearing dresses and makeup and crying over RSPCA ads. But they're still men and to say otherwise is regressive.

Did anyone really change anyone's mind on Twitter?

You cannot change a TRA's mind. But they are a tiny minority. The people we should try to reach are those who are blindly pro-trans rights without considering their impact on women. It is really important that those of us who are GC don't withdraw from social media and leave the TRA madness unchallenged - especially as our voices are censored in most conventional media.

.... and that being said, I just think that I'd spend my time feeling depressed or full of rage. I like the idea of engaging in order to address lurkers though.

Did anyone really change anyone's mind on Twitter?

I'm not on Twitter myself, but given the intransigence of people's attitudes on MN I just can't see how that would happen in 140 characters

these are the kind of people who turned up at a peaceful women's march, calling themselves trans-dykes and wielding baseball bats - so they're not the most aware or balanced of individuals.

This is an important point. Some of the males who are now 'identifying as women' are very unbalanced and scary, which means they are as dangerous as any other unhinged, misogynist man. Some have actual records of violence against women and children. The blog Gendertrender.com has documented instances of this:

gendertrender.wordpress.com/2015/01/08/terf-tracker-allison-woolbert-outed-as-violent-sex-offender-resigns-citing-his-unconscionable-behavior-as-a-human-being/).

They are really no different to the MRAs who sit around in basements fantasising about legalising rape and wife beating, except that you could say they are one level further removed from reality. There is no point in engaging with men of this sort on any level - just block.

I'm not on Twitter, but I've found that the most effective way to argue with genderists online is to calmly state your disagreement with their beliefs and your commitment to material reality. E.g., 'Gender identity doctrine is sexist and incoherent. A woman is an adult human female, not a feeling in a man's head.'

The most important thing is not to be defensive. Do not try to disprove their claims about how you are a hateful person who causes the deaths of millions of trans people with your evil critical thinking skills. Do not argue on their terms or use their language (e.g, use 'trans-identified males', or 'men' instead of 'trans women'). Just keep calmly calling out gender identity ideology for the sexist and nonsensical bullshit it is. If you feel like being cheeky, ask them to define 'woman' (they won't be able to). It's also worthwhile to point out the concrete harm that the movement is doing women and children.

I agree with Datun that engaging with gender true believers, whether they are trans or not, should be done strictly for the purpose of exposing the misogyny and illogic of their movement for the benefit of lurkers. I also agree with the posters who mentioned that you should be careful about any personal details on your account. 'Gender identity' is a religious belief system, and its followers frequently engage in all sorts of unethical behaviour to enforce it, including doxxing, smearing and stalking women they deem heretics.

Just unfollow or block. You cant fix people who use hate speech, and not in 140 words. They have very strong beliefs. They will either change their mind eventually, or they wont.

I'm not on Twitter either but I can imagine the response to that being something like"but they've committed violence against us by questioning our identity/misgendering us."

Put your parental hat on and remind them that "two wrongs don't make a right". If they're going to argue like toddlers, argue back like a toddler's parent.

Although, as everyone says, not under your own name - these are the kind of people who turned up at a peaceful women's march, calling themselves trans-dykes and wielding baseball bats - so they're not the most aware or balanced of individuals.

The purpose of transactivists is to bully, abuse, insult and confuse.

There is no other option.

Only possible positive to emerge from engaging with them is to expose the misogyny. To lurkers.

That's it.

I'm not on Twitter either but I can imagine the response to that being something like"but they've committed violence against us by questioning our identity/misgendering us."

I think "Bollocks, you biological ignoramus" would just about cover it.

Using my real name, I would not at all disagree with the trans group. They see even polite disagreement as reason to threaten violence.

Safest to engage them under a pseudonym that you use nowhere else, and for nothing else they could identify you by.

"In your case i would maybe just reply that you disagree that violence against women and girls will solve this issue"

I'm not on Twitter either but I can imagine the response to that being something like, "but they've committed violence against us by questioning our identity/misgendering us." And then what do you say to that? You either accept their use of the term violence and go with "two wrongs don't make a right" -which I imagine is unthinkable to most of us. Or you challenge them on what violence means, and then you're in the territory of arguing about what words mean. In trans town, the answer to that is usually "nothing" or "whatever I want it to."

It's infuriating. Trans activists don't just jump through linguistic hoops to promote their agenda. They get the hoops, smash them, jump up and down on them, and then take a piss on them for good measure.

Oh, never use your real name on twitter to interact with the trans idiots. Never. They are violent misogynists. Make sure they do not have access to any of your data.

If you are using twitter in your own name be very careful about interacting on threads about trans/terfs op. Especially if any of the post or rt's involve people with lots of followers, lefty men seem to get a real kick out of using suspected terfdom as a free pass to indulge in some good old fashioned misogyny.
In your case i would maybe just reply that you disagree that violence against women and girls will solve this issue & unfollow.
Looks like glosswitch has deleted her account, the abuse that she and Helen Lewis etc get when they discuss this stuff is frightening.

And I just openly resolved on another thread to always name it as such... Oh, it is okay, I saw that as you quoting what they say, anyway.

Just wanted to point out who is doing the killing.

In terms of sex workers what exactly would the john say? Would feminists have been able to influence him? If five of them ran in and said that's a woman, fool, would he change his mind?

Even more interesting, how do they think the john even knowns what feminists have to say on the matter?

Do they believe johns reglarly browse radfem blogs on the internet? Meet for a drink with the local radfem group?

I dunno, I was never consulted by a john on whether or not he should beat up transwomen prostitutes.

Indeed, never even once did a man ask my opinion on what kind of male violence he should perpetrate against anyone.

They also don't call me before murdering prostitutes! The cheek!
As a sex-negative radfem, I am clearly the local authority on that!
You'd think they'd ask me to reassure them that prostituted women are poor victims of trafficking, because if I told them the women they plan to kill were empowerfulized "sex workers", I am sure they'd say: "Oh, okay, then murdering them is not okay? Okay then, I will just be nice and respectful and tip generously."

This makes no sense at all, but considering that the whole trans ideology is built on believing things that make no sense, that's no surprise.

No person who really fears "terfs" would ever want to go somewhere there he's guaranteed to be surrounded by lots of lesbians and feminists most of whom don't buy his gender identity nonsense

Brilliant point.They don't 'fear' us because they regard us a meek, mild women deep down. Easy to stamp on regardless what we say to them. Patriarchy!

VestalVirgin

Totally agree. It's male violence.

And I just openly resolved on another thread to always name it as such...

I really would like to hear how the conversation would go though re feminists saying transwomen are men and so causing their deaths.

In terms of sex workers what exactly would the john say? Would feminists have been able to influence him? If five of them ran in and said that's a woman, fool, would he change his mind?

Probably is easy. But whenever I look at a twitter link it 'jumps' within the conversation whenever I try to see more of it and I can never find out how to see a whole conversation in a linear fashion.

I must be missing something obvious...