In defence of deadnaming

I do about as well ignoring a derailer as I do ignoring the five boxes of chocolates I got for christmas

Gah. I only got four. What am I doing wrong?

Cake to ice?

I fear there will be an entire bakery of cakes that have needed icing before we see the end of this particular Sisyphean effort.

I know, olenna, I know!

I do about as well ignoring a derailer as I do ignoring the five boxes of chocolates I got for christmas

Remember what the worst thing we can do to a de-railer is?

Ignore, folks, ignore!

you'll have to amuse yourselves

It is impossible to engage respectfully with someone who posts like this. You know that, right, nonexistent? I'm just checking my understanding of your posts on this thread, as my conclusion is that you really just want to thumb your nose at us, rather than engage in anything approaching debate. But hey, you do you. If you need to believe that you've totally bossed this thread with your killer debating skills, to the wild applause of a fiercely approving but inexplicably silent audience, then knock yourself out.

“Relax with Indiana Jones”
You do realise Indiana Jones is fiction and not a physical reality, rather like the other fiction you are so keen to pontificate about on here. You’ll never find Indiana Jones to relax with and you’ll never find a man who has actually become a woman ( even the ones that call themselves lesbians ☹️).
Foxy, you need the reality vs dreams poster from Father Ted.

And yet you think the problem is us?
You know the simplest answer is probably the right answer.

I do consider that possibility, which is the reason why I refer back to third parties when you pull this tactic.

Especially when what I'm talking about is you not understanding what I'm talking about.

Yeah, not without recourse to actually understanding what any of us
is saying, though.

So you on your own, we can't understand it?
You and an implied 1000 other people, and we can't understand it?
And yet you think the problem is us?
You know the simplest answer is probably the right answer.

Cake to ice? I think the point is that lawsuits are ge really brought in such cases to intimidate, threaten or punish an individual or to have a ‘chilling’ effect on a group or wider society.

Lawsuits aren't usually about criminal offences...

OK, then why are you all talking about criminalisation? I'm going to relax with Indiana Jones now, you'll have to amuse yourselves.

I don't think it's anything to do with plain stupidity

What's with the name-calling, then? Why don't you stop making up invisible supporters, stop being disingenuous and comparing feminists to Nick Griffin, stop pretending you find all of this so frightfully amusing, and articulate your position clearly, using words as they are commonly understood?

Surely it can't be that hard as you're so much the intellectual heavyweight round these parts?

I must have had half a dozen Christmas cards addressed to Mrs (DH’s initial and surname). I’m not even Mrs!
But thankfully I’ve managed to struggle through the pain it elicits and get over it.

Ah but you're just a 'Cis-woman' so have no rights or feelings.

How can it be right that a 'person' with penis can have their birth certificate canged to 'female' and a new name? I haven't really felt the risk of 1984 before, but now I do.

Beat me to it Vicky

Given that deadnaming's not actually a crime it can't be what Linehan's getting sued for, can it?

Lawsuits aren't usually about criminal offences...

Given that deadnaming's not actually a crime it can't be what Linehan's getting sued for, can it?

what other movement or ideology seeks to criminalise deadnaming? No other common name change does.

If someone changes their name on marriage they dont ban any mention of their maiden name. Rather the opposite; I see plenty of ‘Jane Smith née jones’ On Facebook, as well as women double barrelling, or having a maiden name as a middle name.

There isn’t another group of people trying g to do this that I can think of.

Yeah, not without recourse to actually understanding what any of us is saying, though.

Which is? Not seen any point made yet beyond "ur so mean".

Of course it wasn't. It was merely part of a reply to Bowl. I completely believe you.

The "yourselves" in there might help.

You could line up a 1000 people to agree with you, and I would still be able to refute them. Without recourse to mythical backup teams.

Yeah, not without recourse to actually understanding what any of us is saying, though.

And no, SophoclesTheFox, I don't think it's anything to do with plain stupidity.

That wasn't specifically aimed at Bowl, it was a plural you, notwithstanding your individualities and complexities etc of course.

Of course it wasn't. It was merely part of a reply to Bowl. I completely believe you.

It was haxxor , erish (now banned as so many have been in targeted attacks.) her analogy with systems design and Swiss cheese was excellent.

You’ll notice I haven’t called you thick, nonexistantfox. However you can call me what you like, it doesn’t bother me and I don’t feel the need to request people be banned from platforms, or censored, or deleted for annoying me or disagreeing with me. (Hmmm... maybe I should go sign up at KF..?)

I would find anyone attempting to conceal their criminal past a problem. The point here is that i can’t think of another example of anything that would allow such widespread use of a loophole/process/ideology to allow people to delete their past. can you?

Just musing here, as I cant' yet work out the best search terms to try to put some more flesh on the bones...

It occurs to me that, according to the press reporting of certain transwomen criminals, some are serial name changers. Before they change their name to a female name, they have already changed their name to something other than the one that they were given at birth. Often both surname AND first name

For example, Ian Huntley changed his name to Ian Nixon to facilitate his move to Soham (and now, allegedly, he has changed it to Lian or Nicola Huntley)

Peter Syme became Andrew McWilliam before then changing his name to Jacqui McWilliam

I wonder if there's a whole re-invention thing going on, with transitioning appearing to offer a more complete route to becoming someone new?

Also on name changing... It's been mentioned before, but it's striking looking at the names of trans prisoners convicted of sexual crimes how many of them have more, um, unlikely names for a woman of their age. Eg Skye, Krsytle, Melody Maelstrom, Tiffany Aching.... It's like the worst game of "find out your porn star name from your first pet and the place you lived when you were five"

No, I don't. My issue is that none of these things are an issue or as big of an issue for you until trans women do them. That's the point I stop being amused by you

Um, dead naming isn't a thing for anyone other than trans people, though. Neither is misgendering. Neither is access to women's prisons.

No one other than trans people are trying to make it illegal.

No, I'm sorry, Datun, unless you can give me at least a feeble indication that you understand what I'm talking about I'm not going further on that. Especially when what I'm talking about is you not understanding what I'm talking about.

Ok. As I said, you're not the best communicator.

The difference is that you have to invoke a whole bunch people who agree with you - lesbians, friends (who think you're mad to talk about this, but nonetheless entirely agree with you!), other posters secretly PM-ing you, in order to bolster your argument, etc.

You could line up a 1000 people to agree with you, and I would still be able to refute them. Without recourse to mythical backup teams.

So your frustration is that nobody here understand you, and you suspect it's because we are all (including scientists, lawyers, teachers, academics, senior women in all sorts of industries, public and private) just too thick to get what you're on about? all of us?

It's one possible explanation, but is it the most likely one?

Melanippe That wasn't specifically aimed at Bowl, it was a plural you, notwithstanding your individualities and complexities etc of course.