Nick Cohen suspended over trans rights row

Anyway, this is way off the original point of the thread but just to add that the original meaning (as cited in the Urban Dictionary) of gathering up skirts and petticoats and leaving with exaggerated, impatient, dramatic movements may have been misogynistic but today it is applied to people of both sexes and all genders and sexualities.

The Urban Dictionary gives one definition of flounce as “to leave an internet group or thread with exaggerated drama”, no mention of the sex/gender of said internet flouncers.

When i googled the first page was full of dictionary definitions which all said the same thing 🤷🏻

Is it because only ladies and gays wear flounces or sashay out of the room in a strop?

So it is actually the people saying it is sexist or homophobic are the ones that are sexist or homophobic.

What are the chances?

I can’t find anything saying flounced is sexist

i was told it was homophobic a while back as well….that was news to MNHQ as well

Ah poster didn't like me.

I must change my ways to suit you!
I'll get on it right now!

Not.

Unhelpful, I know but I'm highlighting a difference in the standards I'm being held to as opposed to how you'd like to be treated.

And I'm not expecting replies. It's a forum. It's the Internet. I promise I won't disintegrate without your special attention.

@Helleofabore I salute your patience. It's genuinely difficult to debate with self-righteous people, and you're showing an excellent example of how to do it!

OK.

I have to leave now. Have a good day all

Yes, we differ

neither of us is going to change our minds

neither of us needs to be cancelled or tone policed

you are objecting to very standard language here

have you ever heard the phrase ‘when in Rome’?

Just because a term is widely used it doesn’t mean that it isn’t sexist. I won’t take it up with MNHQ because frankly I don’t have time. I will take it up with posters who pupport to support women but the first thing out of peoples mouths when people genuinely have to leave a thread is some kind of sexist insult. It really doesn’t support your narrative and makes arguments of keeping women and girls safe from harm look weak. It seems here that if you support trans rights you are a plopper or a flouncer. Can you not just be a human being who has a life and doesn’t spend 24 hours a day on mumsnet nor takes mumsnet posts and puts them on Twitter.

Sure. And expect that people will push back at your insistence that it is sexist. I suspect that most posters here will feel quite comfortable in using it while also working actively to make the world a better place for all females. You think it weakens people's attempts, that really is your prerogative. Go for it.

No. There are certain behaviours that relate to ploppers and flouncers. A plopper is someone who doesn't engage with the topic, pops a couple of posts admonishing women who disagree with them and leaves the thread. A flouncer - well, maybe go to Flouncer's corner to understand the behaviours.

Can you not just be a human being who has a life and doesn’t spend 24 hours a day on mumsnet nor takes mumsnet posts and puts them on Twitter.

See, this is hyperbole. We are ALL humans who have lives. I am sure that you can see the negative generalisations and polarised thought in that sentence. I am assuming you wrote it to be polarising. But in doing so, you have made the implication that regular posters are not human and spend 24 hours a day on MN and have 'no life'.

Why do you think any one of us should respond positively to that?

Lastly, I would really like to see posters who support some gender critical views to hold themselves more accountable.

So, do you go onto other forums and tell them this? Do you go on other forums and tell users that they should be holding other users accountable for what you consider major transgressions, and others, including the forum's owner does not consider major? Do you go on twitter and tell extreme activists to modify their behaviour? Why do you expect women to be policing other women's behaviour?

You say it is not an echo chamber, yet trans rights supporters are shouted down.

And you did not do the equivalent of 'shouting' or because you believe that your is righteous it is ok? As I have said, there are people on these boards who disagree. If they produce evidence to substantiate their claims, and not use emotive language and hyperbole, they generally get along fine.

I appreciate your response to my questions, I also know for a fact that things I have highlighted in post are reasonable and true, otherwise I doubt you would be responding.

I don't find your posts reasonable. I have said that and I hope I have explained why.

And attributing doubt that I would respond to you unless they were reasonable actually is quite incorrect. It is actually the opposite. Although, I am quite well known for talking to anyone, about anything. Usually, I am asking people to back up their claims with evidence.

@BernardBlacksWineIcelolly that is your view. I find it sexist, it is my view. Please refer to google for multiple sources that will help you understand my point of view.

@BernardBlacksWineIcelolly thank you for your advice - I will consider it when responding. So far, even when I have engaged nicely and believe me I have, I have found that the response is
evidence, sources, #bekindgeneration, but I will try again.

@Helleofabore Yes…we covered this.

@AlisonDonut as I haven’t found your post helpful today, I won’t be responding to them.

Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude

’flouncing’ is not sexist

seriously

If you find policing others behaviour on an anonymous forum unwelcome then why did you say my use of GC was dehumanising but then didn’t pull that up.

Was I not supposed to give a full answer? Ok. I will try again.

There is also continued hypocrisy for example, posters are allowed to dehumanise trans people, or people that are not trans by referring to them as TRA and I’m told to get a thicker skin, but then points like referring to people as GC are pulled up as dehumanising. Why are you allowed to use the term TRA and I can’t use the term GC? I referred to someone as a GC because it is easier than typing out “a gender critical poster” but if you are offended by that then I can refer to you as gender critical posters.

Using the phrase 'A GC' or 'The GCs' is dehumanising.

I will continue to engage on other threads that I believe contain untrue assertions and/or transphobia too.

perhaps you could consider engaging in good faith on threads where you find the subject interesting, and being prepared to talk about your opinions on the subject and how you reached them?

you’d probably find people engage with you in a way that feels much more pleasant if you do this

starting from a self appointed position of policing threads is likely to put people’s backs up and will only make you feel stressed and anxious in the long term as nothing about that approach will persuade people to change their thinking

It's.all.about.me appears to be back telling everyone how it's not all about them.

@Mysterioso as I haven’t found your comments helpful today I will not be responding to them. Thank you

@Helleofabore to respond to your points before I have to go (not flounce) but leave as I have other things to attend to today.

I believe that I have engaged with content - it is hard not to refer back to the previous post but I truly believe the first posts I wrote were related to the point, gave the OP advice (attend the training before you judge) and also highlighted problematic behaviour (don’t purposefully misgender people and use the equality act across all of its legal definitions). I was told - “and what makes you think the equality act applies here”…um because we are talking about a work situation.

Of course I understand the difference, I used GC as I assumed the use of acronyms was allowed due to the use of TRA. If you find policing others behaviour on an anonymous forum unwelcome then why did you say my use of GC was dehumanising but then didn’t pull that up.
Why also are people who support trans rights told they are slurring women etc. throwing people under the bus etc. or personally attacking people. It is very hard not to see the hypocrisy in these statements when the same doesn’t seem to apply the other way round.

Secondly, I don’t consider myself an activist - I consider myself a human, with an interesting in politics, society and ensuring that people are able to exist in all spaces as they are, especially when they are not in rooms to defend themselves. Because I am also human, I will also respond to inflammatory statements
such as the term “penis sisters”, being called a handmaiden, told I can’t debate, called a five year old, accused of flouncing, called a plopper, called a TRA (across multiple posts) I was even berated when I highlighted that some of your ideology was in fact agreed with by the trainer and told “noo that’s transphobic apparently” - again, it is hard to see where gender critical posters want to engage when this happens.

Just because a term is widely used it doesn’t mean that it isn’t sexist. I won’t take it up with MNHQ because frankly I don’t have time. I will take it up with posters who pupport to support women but the first thing out of peoples mouths when people genuinely have to leave a thread is some kind of sexist insult. It really doesn’t support your narrative and makes
arguments of keeping women and girls safe from harm look weak. It seems here that if you support trans rights you are a plopper or a flouncer. Can you not just be a human being who has a life and doesn’t spend 24 hours a day on mumsnet nor takes mumsnet posts and puts them on Twitter.

Lastly, I would really like to see posters who support some gender critical views to hold themselves more accountable. You say it is not an echo chamber, yet trans rights supporters are shouted down. I appreciate your response to my questions, I also know for a fact that things I have highlighted in post are reasonable and true, otherwise I doubt you would be responding.

Holding people to standards...

Start by hounding all the sex pests, not just those who don't agree with your creed.

Absolute hypocrisy.

I hope that posters will first look towards their own behaviour on threads and refrain from using sexist language, hyperbole, hounding and also hope that gender critical posters will hold their own allies to the same standards.

I generally find policing people's interactions on an anonymous forum to be unwelcome, whatever the forum. And I find 'holding people' to 'standards' to at times be coercive and controlling, generally it also is never welcome.

It isn’t hyperbole to state that I am allowed to exist on the thread without being hounded for my views - it is truth.

It is hyperbole to take the view that you are not 'allowed to exist on the thread'. If you engage with the content instead of merely policing what is posted, discussion may be had. It may not be a discussion that you feel is fruitful, but it will generally run smoothly if points are backed up with evidence where needed. For instance, making an accusation towards an organisation is actually based on a thought out interpretation of what has been said or done and evidence is produced to support it.

You're right though. There is little more than basic respect given to posters who simply monitor the threads and post things that are simply repeats of what is said on twitter. But as long as those posters are abiding by the guidelines, they will either have their points discussed or they may well be ignored if it is a poster with a history. And yes, those type of posts are generally 'plopped' down, and sometimes they are plopped for screenshots to be used elsewhere. It is a well used tactic.

Why are you allowed to use the term TRA and I can’t use the term GC? I referred to someone as a GC because it is easier than typing out “a gender critical poster” but if you are offended by that then I can refer to you as gender critical posters.

Do you see the difference between 'a GC' and a GC poster?

Personally, I don't call my self gender critical. I am certainly critical of 'gender identity theory' as I believe it is very harmful to females of all ages. But, whatever. However. There really has been a history of posters coming onto the threads and referring to 'the GCs' and this is dehumanising language. And by dehumanising people, it means they are easier to dismiss, and sadly, all too often, posters who refer to posters as 'the GCs' also go on to monster and demonise in their posts.

I also tend not to use the term 'TRA' also sometimes I will. I instead use the term 'extreme activist' or extreme trans activists for two reasons.

Firstly, there are, of course, trans activists that are genuinely working towards finding solutions and are very respectful in the way they activate to find those solutions. Of course, there is.

Secondly, it widely known that many of those pushing for solutions that only benefit one group are not necessarily trans people themselves. We see these posters often and sometimes trans people themselves will pop onto threads and clarify that not all trans people agree with those posters.

But, others do use that term, and frankly, if someone used 'the TRA' in the same way you used 'a GC', then by all means pick them up on it. But you need to articulate exactly what your issue is with that term. General use of the term TRA is widely used and frankly, I am not about to police others for using it.

If people are merely suggesting you are a TRA, well, are you? As I have said, there are all points of view on these threads, are you using the tactics an extreme activist uses? Does the accusation have merit? That is for you to refute and articulate your reasons.

And 'flouncing' is a term widely used on MN. There is even a 'Flouncer's Corner' if I remember correctly. I disagree that it is sexist. It is another staple of MN like the biscuit emoji (which tends to earn a deletion in FWR which also is an indication that MNHQ are trying to make sure that discussions are had), and the phrase 'are you on glue' (likewise. I have rarely seen it used here or seen a post that has not been deleted with it).

Each to their own. If you think 'flouncing' is sexist, then take it up with MNHQ. Make your argument to them to change the guidelines. We already pretzel our language enough to fit the guidelines, one more term will not matter a jot.

@OldCrone irony. Which I was also accused of not knowing.

I’m not sure if you have read but it has been agreed that I will be starting my own thread to discuss points relating to gender criticism and trans rights and people will feel free to critically engage rather than derailing the thread. Ofc I will be happy to answer questions on this thread if they keep coming.

I don’t play to get threads deleted, I comment on threads I believe should be deleted due to the nature of the post.

So why did you post this @itsabouttimetoo ?

I would stay but my point has been proven - flounces off having achieved mission of getting transphobic threads deleted.

That's great. If I have anything I feel I want to contribute to your thread, I will do so.

@Ereshkigalangcleg great, I will start another thread. Please feel free to critically engage and answer my points.

FWIW, this thread wasn’t a personal hobby horse but as other posters have stated it has nothing to do with trans rights and was simply another post I believed contained untrue assertions. Maybe not by you, but by other posters.

I will continue to engage on other threads that I believe contain untrue assertions and/or transphobia too. Just an FYI lest I be accused of being a plopper - you have said yourselves that this is not an echo chamber. I hope that posters will first look towards their own behaviour on threads and refrain from using sexist language, hyperbole, hounding and also hope that gender critical posters will hold their own allies to the same standards.