Marks & Spencer protest

For what it is worth and in general, claims like being attacked or pilloried when all that happened was someone argued with you about something make you look foolish in my eyes.

" Italiangreyhound : What I think is partly at issue is men's inability to see women's oppression is linked to our sex.

Some men are also oppressed, but it seems to be rarely linked to their sex. So women could experience all the same oppression as men (pretty much) and then some more."

Oh god thank you for saying, so simply, what I've been trying to say.

At this point I'm pretty much assuming that I'm going to get this same reaction from Susan every time I disagree with anything that she says. Such is life.

Please don't think that. It is not my intention at all. As I have said in my last post, I have apologised for using an OTT term. I also apologised on the other thread for coming across as sealioning.

Well, to be fair when I used the word pilloried it was in a slightly different context. I meant that although some on here might see me as [insert chosen word here], you should meet some of my colleagues! It wasn't actually a complaint over my treatment. But I do accept it was an OTT word to use and I apologise if anyone was offended by it.

No worries, Rufus, not your circus not your monkeys! At this point I'm pretty much assuming that I'm going to get this same reaction from Susan every time I disagree with anything that she says. Such is life.

No problem, Rufus, I know you were only trying to help.

Apparently not, Rufus! I've been being as polite as possible in disagreeing with Susan while still making it clear that I strongly disagree with what she's arguing. I guess diligently policing women's language for niceness is a time-honored way of controlling what we are and are not able to object to.

Of course people disagree, Angry, but what might seem like mild pushback from your end doesn't always feel like it from my end, believe me. I think it's the nature of forums though- words can look innocuous when written, but they are perceived very differently by the person who reads them.... And that goes both ways, I am sure. Anyway, as I said, I think enraged falls in the same camp as pilloried so maybe we can agree to disagree?

Oh god

How the fuck did i end up in the middle of this

Me and my (trying to be helpful) big mouth

Actually i think i may have answered my own question

I am not sure how we share spaces when biology doesn't matter to half the population and does matter but can't be acknowledged by the other half?

I think it does matter to men too, though it's more about privacy and less about fear, it's just that so far they haven't experienced the same degree of intrusion that women have, nor have they been accused of bigotry for not being happy about it in the way women have. If this issue starts inconveniencing men on a regular basis I'm guessing that they'll complain too.

(And be more likely to have their complaints taken seriously than us, because they're men.)

Ooopsie sorry

I obviously missed the bit where susan said she felt pilloried

And yes eye rolling is deffo allowed!!

I dont think she was talking about you

She was, sadly (and I am sure she will confirm it). I used the word pilloried in one of my posts. I was told I was completely lacking in empathy for vulnerable women and that me working in academia explained a lot because I had clearly never been challenged on this issue before.

It might be because about a week ago, I do admit I flounced from a thread. By way of explanation, I was having a tough time offline (not that it's a justification or whatever, just an explanation). Since then, I have not reacted with any anger or rage so surely if 'pilloried' is OTT, so is 'enraged'.

I was most definitely saying that one is being pilloried was an over the top reaction to the relatively mild pushback that Susan has received.

People disagree on forums, and this is a particularly contentious issue. Everyone of course has the right to not like being disagreed with much, but others also have the right to roll their eyes at what seems like a bit of an overreaction on their part.

"I would personally be surprised if the findings came out in favour of biology-based definitions."

Just that sentence makes me think education is fucked!

Although with university fees what they are I wonder if universities will retain their influence.

I wonder if women need to start more things on their own.

I am not sure how we share spaces when biology doesn't matter to half the population and does matter but can't be acknowledged by the other half?

How do we reconcile those positions? Genuine question.

susan

I dont think she was talking about you

I might have that wrong

@MadBadDaddy I don't want to derail but you started that portion before with men fighting dragons and then say..."Sorry I meant the 'collective', historical problems of violence, supression, etc. by men."

I'm not sure I see evidence that men have solved the problem of the 'collective', historical problems of violence, supression, etc. by men either.

I am just as fearful for my son as my daughter but then I do live in the west (of the world, minority world etc).

"We only do simple problems." I don't necessarily agree. Some men have done amazing things. I'm not anti man.

I just think a few thousand years of men running the world their way has left us in a bit of a pickle. It has actually caused men huge problems too. They can't always see if. Toxic masculinity is not nice for men either.

What I think is partly at issue is men's inability to see women's oppression is linked to our sex.

Some men are also oppressed, but it seems to be rarely linked to their sex. So women could experience all the same oppression as men (pretty much) and then some more.

Trans people may also be oppressed and feel oppressed. I don't want anyone to feel like that or experience that.

Maybe we need those third unisex spaces so all (and the non-binary people) can feel OK too. But don't take away females spaces in the process.

The 'cost' of additional safe spaces must be born by the shops/society as a whole etc, not by individual women.

You know, Susan, most people can cope with being disagreed with without getting quite so enraged or accusing others of having "pilloried" them

I have not got enraged.

The money came from the Economic and Social Research Council. I am not saying it's a foregone conclusion at all (and this is all guesswork), but given the current climate, I would personally be surprised if the findings came out in favour of biology-based definitions.

You know, Susan, most people can cope with being disagreed with without getting quite so enraged or accusing others of having "pilloried" them.

Even if this space was to be shut down, which I and many others hope it won't be, the debates would not stop. The genie isn't going back in the bottle no matter how much some may hope that it would.

Perhaps, but the moment Justine gets a sniff that ad revenue might be drying up or if the pressure on her to censure gets too much, the space to discuss this will be zapped. Then nobody will be having any debates.

Susan I wonder where they got all that money? Just to reinforce what they believed at the start?

Thanks for the friendly noises.

"Well that is so interesting. I am not sure all women have failed to solve their problems." Sorry I meant the 'collective', historical problems of violence, supression, etc. by men. If these had have been resolved somehow, feminism wouldn't even be needed. Reading these boards (and knowing my wife), its clear that many women do solve these individually, are strong, organised, proud, outspoken, and all of that. But there is always supportive and protective consideration for those who aren't as forthright and who still suffer, and of a continuing struggle: No woman truly wins until every woman wins. I don't think us blokes find that easy to appreciate or bear in mind. We only do simple problems.

Of course they are. That isn't evidence that the women here aren't being as naice as some would like us to be, it's evidence of the fact that some would prefer if we didn't speak at all.

Oh and predictably and sadly, extracts from this thread are now on twitter as evidence of hysteria/transphobia....

I'm the nicest possible way I hope you are. But care to explain why you think that? No need of you would rather not and thanks for the link. Will explore! (Ps are you named after Ross's ex wife's lesbian wife from Friends? Nosy-faced emotion!)

Yes, I am

Well, let's just say gender-critical views aren't too popular in academia. There are a few lone voices but not many and largely it goes un-discussed. I know I have been pilloried on here for some of my comments and told I lack empathy, but compared to some others in academia, I am positively terfy for wanting natal sex spaces in some settings (prisons, refuges, rape centres etc). I seriously doubt that these researchers would come back with findings that pleased the GC contingent. As I say, I could be wrong and obviously the project is only at the beginning. I know the article says they will be speaking to activists, but I am not sure if that includes GC activists or just ones from the trans side.

Also, the grant is very large. I think it's likely to be quite influential, despite the view that academics just sit in ivory towers and don't live in the real world.