Questions from a liberal feminist to the rad fems

The power dynamic is MNHQ - can delete comments, ban people. Commenters - fuck all power really.

Having unpopular opinions on a forum where nobody is actually making you comment is not like being an abuse victim.

Right, off to try out being upright...

Lots of ground covered, it's been lovely as ever.

I can't get up, this is all I can manage to do :/

PS totally not trying to spin myself as a victim (as you can imagine, that's not my preferred style). I've never thrown DARVO around; however I think the power dynamic should be a consideration for those who do.

Nobody here is in any position of power over you, Rat. Trying to spin things to make yourself look like a poor bullied victim just isn't going to work.

Also, who argues with people on the internet with a hangover? Go eat something, take some headache pills, take a nap like a normal human.

And anyone throwing DARVO around would do well to consider who's views hold the majority of the power on this site.

MNHQ? The Twitter reporting crew?

Thanks @merrymouse I understand what you mean now

Again Angry, I'll leave that open to a broader range of interpretations if it's all the same to you.

And anyone throwing DARVO around would do well to consider who's views hold the majority of the power on this site. I understand that appreciating the balance of power is important in abuser situations.

You realize that you're making a bit of a fool of yourself at the moment, right, Rat? It's obvious that you've lost the argument, failed to make a single convincing point, and alienated a whole lot of women in the process. Trying to DARVO it isn't going to work, it just makes you look desperate.

But Rat despises women who want privacy and dignity. It's weak.

For heaven's sake Ereshkigal, I can't even... Perhaps if I wasn't so hungover it might be worth it.

Entire population = all humans.

I need some rights and services because I am human.

I need some rights and services specifically because I am female. I don’t see where the overlap is between the rights I need because I am female and the rights somebody needs because they are trans.

I can only see an overlap where we need the same rights because we are human - but that group includes everyone.

Describing women's desire for single sex spaces as a coping mechanism is many thing, but feminist it most definitely as not

Please recall that I DIDN'T lobby your comment the other way, I simply asked you to consider that in the wider debate it could be.

And let's be very, very clear here Angry that the only person to describe anything as a coping mechanism was you. And what you described as a coping mechanism was my desire for women to see themselves as strong.

I leave you to decide whether that's feminist or not, because I frankly don't have an opinion.

I'm half expecting the next derail to be about how we wouldn't be so weak and scared if we'd all just take up kung fu, and then we'd be fine with sharing changing rooms with men.

Women also have safety concerns, but even if those were resolved the privacy issue would remain.

Exactly. But Rat despises women who want privacy and dignity. It's weak.

And you already know my answer to that, Rat. Wanting single sex spaces is not a coping mechanism, at its most basis it's a desire for privacy that most humans have (most men too when it comes down to it). Women also have safety concerns, but even if those were resolved the privacy issue would remain.

Describing women's desire for single sex spaces as a coping mechanism is many thing, but feminist it most definitely as not, however much it makes you feel good to pat yourself on the back about being stronger than other women.

(You're not, you're just more selfish.)

*if, not in

Well we all need food, shelter, healthcare. All of the stuff that I need specifically because I'm female trans women don't need, on account of not being female. In some cases they may need separate provision for themselves.

Angry when I said "in the context of the wider debate" I really did mean just that.

I meant for you to consider what your response would be in your comment was lobbied in the other direction - the other direction in the debate - not the other direction between you and i.

@merrymouse

I can’t think of any right or service that both I and a trans woman would need that wouldn’t be common to the entire population.

I don't understand what you mean. Can you explain?

No, Rat, because you're the only person here who appears to be using your political argument - in your case "I used to be weak but now I'm Strong!" - as a coping mechanism. Notice that I've never said that I personally feel afraid in any of the situations in which you're constantly touting your own strength and bravery? The difference is that unlike you I have empathy for other women and care about how things impact them.

Maybe try being less selfish?

I can’t think of any right or service that both I and a trans woman would need that wouldn’t be common to the entire population.

When your coping mechanism/recovery mantra is alienating the other women you keep trying to impose it on maybe it's time to realize that just because it was helpful for you that doesn't mean that trying to force it on them is a good plan.

Angry can you not see how your comment could equally be lobbied the other way?

Seriously, in the context of this broader debate, please do think about that.

You talk about their rights (women) and our rights as two things.

I say "their" because I'm referring to the specific women in the example. I then say "our" because I am referring to the rights of women in general.

And yes these questions are very loaded. How about:

Do you think female spaces should be open to any man who says he identifies as a woman?

Do you see any potential pitfalls with that approach?

So of a full quote including this line;

"What furthers us in the world won't help women elsewhere."

Yes, full quote - still means you are alright Jack and fuck the rest of them.

And on me saying I had never derided anyone for "dismissing" my views...

You just said to me: That's either bad faith on your part, or poor comprehension.'

So it is poor comprehension then.

because although undoubtedly women would be very, very safe with this arrangement, their right to be protected in the world has gone too far to obliterate our right to be a part of it.

It's quite hard to read this kind of paragraph and not think that you are categorizing yourself s3perately to women, rat. You talk about their rights (women) and our rights as two things.
This maybe why posters like juells think you are male. It is odd