Is this really a feminist board?

How about 'Gender Plastic" vs "Gender Elastic?"

I am paid to play with "Wicked Problems" and prefer a pencil, but i respect your choice of media.

Sharpen the crayons first ;)

I'm much better at communicating with pictures.

Maybe give it a go? There was a great 'guess the film from emojis' recently, maybe you could start a fun thread like that, could do with some jollity. Extra points if you use MN specials like , or . (The last is the pub sign from The Archers, but could double as meaning 'bull')

Thank you errol I knew we’d have someone somewhere

Stagnant as a descriptor of biology? snort.

We literally have more data than we can handle right now - bring us our quantum computers so we can make the leaps we want.

(This is where a brilliant feminist quantum computing expert steps from the shadows and I fall in love with mumsnet all over again...)

"But then again who are we to even have an opinion?" How can you even type that with a straight face? - You are The Mumsnet Feminists, that's who you are, and I am everyone's blank canvas. My views are purely personal, and therefore, irrelevant in even more ways than usual. [italian trout-face shrug gesture]

The sheer self absorption of someone who can take two women who probably didn’t even notice they were there having a chat while pushing prams, and turn it into a part of their persecution narrative andvthen call on them to modify their behaviour is mind boggling.

As is barging into a feminist community, hurling insults at all the members, making unfounded and offensive remarks about alt-right politics, displaying endless entitlement - and then perceiving any response that isn't hair shirt fawning as a personal attack.

But hey ho - it's not as though we don't have decades of knowledge about the utter predictability of male pattern abusive behaviour, is it?

I don't think calling women who believe in biology 'stagnant' is particularly playful. But then again who are we to even have an opinion?

Words are not my friends, but I like playing with them. 'stagnant' was blunt, but playful. I've had worse....

I'm much better at communicating with pictures.

No, just a couple of chemistry degrees and a liking for accurate use of words, and sometimes an interest in their derivation.('stagnant' is a pretty foul one, BTW!)

You must have a brain like an elastic band to even get that much sense out of the issue.

@ErrolTheDragon - This is why I prefer questions to answers.

I’m not a stereochemist so I won’t risk getting the definition wrong but if anyone is and would like to step in there please do.

Of course MN has chemists...

In chemistry, cis and trans refer to pairs of compounds which have all the same functional groups, but arranged differently. This can give rise to significantly different properties. I can't see any analogy at all with the 'trans' which arose from 'transsexual' . Surely that was derived similarly to transplant, transfer - 'trans' signifying a change from one state or place to another. Of course, there is no such thing as 'cisplant' or 'cisfer'.

'Cis woman' is a deceptively sciencey-sounding false back-derivation.

Sorry, should have added "What a pathetic, selfish pile of shit that person is, and then went and cried to the world on Twitter."

I have no problem with anyone being a pathetic, selfish pile of shit in the privacy of their own homes.

Told not to, because we know transwomen can't conceive. And called "non-men".

And they were probably just chatting, wrapped up in the conversation and hadn’t even seen the transwoman. And they the transwoman not only assumed that two perfect strangers were talking ‘at’ them but also directing deliberately abusive behaviour at them.

When people start something like CBT one of the early question types is along the lines of ‘you see someone you know walking along and they don’t wave back at you. How do you feel?’

The healthy answer is ‘well I assume they didn’t see me/were wrapped up in thought/or did that walking past them realising ‘oh shit that was thingy from the gym I should have waved.’

The answer that gets noted as an unhealthy though is that they ignored you deliberately/they’re stuck up/blah blah.

The sheer self absorption of someone who can take two women who probably didn’t even notice they were there having a chat while pushing prams, and turn it into a part of their persecution narrative andvthen call on them to modify their behaviour is mind boggling.

That person who tweeted that wants to shut down Mumsnet - they've been on the MN timeline.

"This is very much what I assume angryresister was talking about when she said "our very existence and identity as women is threatened" - just one example."

I wasn't challenging that in any way (honest) I was bringing up an earlier post about 'unchallenged ignorance' towards Trans-people.

I'm a parent, so I don't need to be female to be sickened by that clip. What a pathetic, selfish pile of shit that person is.

MadBad - they were mothers pushing those prams - biological females, with babies, talking about motherhood.

Told not to, because we know transwomen can't conceive. And called "non-men".

This is very much what I assume angryresister was talking about when she said "our very existence and identity as women is threatened" - just one example.

Damnthatonestakentryanother2 As this is a women's feminism board it's going to be many/most women sharing the same view. If one or two of us went to a trans site our views would be as popular as yours are here. If you don't want to be part of robust debate and questioned on your views another site might be preferable? Your choice of course but pointless squealing when women do challenge you.

You mean like "putting her down" "calling her name's" "making her think she's crazy" "humiliating her', "making her feel guilty"
""making light of the abuse" "saying the abuse did not happen" ?

TERF
CIS
Don't talk about being a mother
This never happens, there will be no difference, just an administrative change
Yada Yada...

AngryAttackKittens
Duluth wheel behaviour does not a woman make.
You mean like "putting her down" "calling her name's" "making her think she's crazy" "humiliating her', "making her feel guilty"
""making light of the abuse" "saying the abuse did not happen" ?
Sounds like a pretty accurate description of typical anti-trans behaviour -- plenty of examples on this forum.

At this point I think the options are...
Or C: it's the only way a single target can respond to a mob pile-on.

The answer, in this case, is C.

The question I thought I was asking doesn't seem relatable to the horror story you posted. (If they were Dads, or it was me pushing the trusty old Phil&TED [memories of simpler times] they'd never have been so shitty.)

First you might want to clarify what the question was, you have a weird way of writing words that do not actually make any sense.

They won't, because although it happened in full view of lots of people, no-one saw anything! But she has fully recovered, apart from some broken teeth, thank you.
The perpetrators were a mixed group, and they weren't attacking a man they were attacking a 50-something post-op transwoman her "male" muscle mass and testosterone aggression are both long gone.

If they were attacking a woman, it is no surprise that nobody saw anything and there will be no stats recoding crimes against trans people so it will all be lumped in with the other crimes against women. that's what is wanted isn't it? Or is it only ok when it is crimes against women?

We can't record crimes committed by trans people as crimes in the gender of choosing, whilst simultaneously recording crimes against trans people as against trans people. That is the problem with conflating the two groups - they are not the same and unless we accurately record it we can't report against it.

By going down the trans women are women route, you risk there never being reports of trans anything. Because it doesn't exist. See the dilemma?

Oh god...I give up. We are all like that and I'm going home.