Langcleg is vindicated

I think it may just be part of the awkward reality of political activism in this climate.

People will distrust each other, and feelings will get hurt along the way.

The one thing that really unites us - and that we need to keep asserting - is the biological fact that sex exists, and the impact that has.

If this happens, how do "accusations" shut you down though? You can post. Make more robust/defensible arguments and not so many claims of victimhood.

This is quite typical of victim-blaming that goes on here. It's your fault if you are discouraged by accusations of having posted in bad faith, because you're too fond of playing the victim.

I forgot about the weetabix.

I think banana is a worthy addition but without the weetabix

Langcleg kept me sane in a world where others tried to gaslight me for my refusal to believe that my child was born in the wrong body.

To go back to the start of this thread. The effect that Lang has on women here is shown by the number of times she is still referenced. I know she probably made life hard for the moderators but only because as a society we have given far too much power to those who don't care about safeguarding children.

When even the NSPCC guidance is obviously dodgy, something has gone badly wrong.

Hopefully the Keira case will start the pushback.

Weetabix box shrine with Compo style saggy titted idol

I think it would properly honour her.

This has a long history.

And there is a feeling that mnhq has failed to address this adequately at times (some of this is unfair criticism).

That does come from this being the only place where women are central in political thought. It has a target on its head.

Until there is more open spaces where women are central it will always be a problem.

If you cant define a woman then you aren't grounded in any sort of reality.

Most people here start from the stance that the sexes are easily defined. And we should just operate on that basis and take it from there.

TRA/MRA/troll accusations are flung about far too readily as an 'easy' shutdown for posters who dare to put their heads above the parapet and disagree with the prevailing narratives.

If this happens, how do "accusations" shut you down though? You can post. Make more robust/defensible arguments and not so many claims of victimhood.

I will say i have been alarmed by the rise of extreme right wing views exploiting fwr atm and targeting people here.

That's about ideology not identification of safeguarding though.

I find it fairly easy to tell the difference and is one reason i have not posted so much lately. I warned it was likely if there wasn't recognition of said aforementioned problems...

Errol is right
Surely it's much more sensible to critique posts based on their content - so, rather than 'style', are they prioritising women or men, for instance?

I try to always stick to arguing about content. I find that's what most people do here.

Any personal attacks or troll hunting comments are quickly deleted.

I have to say, I'm a fairly bog standard GC homeless lefty and yet I've been on the wrong side of the recipe treatment, and also been accused of posting in bad faith. I understand that we're operating in a climate that makes everyone suspicious but I don't think it's healthy.

Weetabix box shrine with Compo style saggy titted idol

TRA/MRA/troll accusations are flung about far too readily as an 'easy' shutdown for posters who dare to put their heads above the parapet and disagree with the prevailing narratives.

One of the themes of our current age which is true across a number of subject is the destruction of the truth - sometimes unwitting and sometimes deliberate.

This isnt restricted to the politics of trans issues. This could only arise now because of the wider political earthquakes.

Its the rise of ideology and belief against rationality and science.

The problem with suppression of reality is it doesn't stop happening. It just creates scenarios in which reality eventually collides with the ideology and you get a lot of people harmed in the process.

You only minimise this by refinding the public recognition of the truth.

Conspiracy theories tend to arise in times of political instability as people exploit lack of unity to try and gain more power.

Also people buy into conspiracy theories and ideology when they feel vulnerable and at risk. They find comfort in them. Sometimes because reality is harder to face up to.

Someone on a completely different thread just reminded me of the importance of this:

I read an article about conspiracy theorists, it suggests that when an event is just too traumatic for an individual they find extreme comfort in conspiracy theories, which I totally understand, but my god... how dangerous. I wish it wasn’t real!

If you cant define a woman then you aren't grounded in any sort of reality. You are into none defined shapeless clouds of ideology which wont recognise reality. Nor the issues which arise out of reality colliding with ideology.

Thats your basic problem.

Fwr is populated by those who value rationality, science and recognition techniques. There is always going to be a problem for anyone valuing fluffy clouds of feelings over and above that.

We can make a shrine for her out of weetabix boxes.

Got one

Maybe we should fashion a saggy titted idol

Do not google this 😳

It really does. "Be nice/kind" is a poor message for girls on a number of levels

True
On here, though, if you express a different opinion as a female on here that doesn't always work though - if you're "forthright" it's OK if you're GC as women don't have to be nice.
If you're forthright and not GC though you're being an angry man or a TRA.
How does that work, then?

I don't like the 'Male posting style' thing.

Surely it's much more sensible to critique posts based on their content - so, rather than 'style', are they prioritising women or men, for instance?

Having said that, there are certain distinctive combinations of style and content - the man who demands education or 'mansplains' for instance.