Why is Mumsnet so GC?

Wakes up to creased sheets and socks everywhere...

Fine I'll double your pay to 20p an hour and increase your holidays to a day every other year.

Now can you come and help me find a pair of socks!

Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeease.

Yes and if men wish that women didn't need to talk amongst themselves about male behaviour and male bodies, the most effective thing men could do would be to stop dominating, stop abusing and stop raping.

Transwomen have something women don't have: experience of being a man. I wish they'd use that privilege to influence men to treat women better. Rather than leveraging same old structural and physical inequalities against the very group they purport to identify with.

Apparently recognising and accurately describing male behaviour is anti-feminist! It is fucking hilarious.

It's very easy for women to spot men. I think Butters genuinely doesn't comprehend how easy it is for us to correctly sex Buttersself, just from theys posting style.

absolutely.

When a person cannot accept that people can correctly identify their sex, they cannot accept that those who recognise their sex, or who know that the person is male, will react to that person as a male. The reality must be shit to acknowledge. All those past and future interactions that they simply will never know if the person is reacting to them as a 'woman' or as male. Particularly if they cannot recognise the fawning reaction.

They cannot comprehend that the brain takes all this sexist behaviour from birth. The pattern is started then and continued.

Nor that it isn't just how they feel "inside" - but how society reacts to them in their very visibly sexed bodies.

Society treats males and females differently based on their sex - society can't read the inner essence of the gendered soul (whatever the hell that might be), even if the male is wearing "female" clothing - he will still be treated (even if he is judged) as a male.

It's very easy to spot men, on an online forum, whatever names they give themselves.

Yes. I have seen that denial used myself. They cannot comprehend that the brain takes all this sexist behaviour from birth. The pattern is started then and continued.

What is hilarious is just how much has come through over time on posts and how obvious it is, yet it is denied over and over.

I think that's quite a common claim.

@Helleofabore I remember a TW, probably on MN, insisting that they hadn’t been socialised as male because they had of course always been female (a womanly essence had been present from birth but not discovered until later) and therefore the male socialisation hadn’t ‘worked’ on them because on some level, they always knew they weren’t really male.

In fact that Y chromosome is just 100% pure "masculinium"

@AmaryllisNightAndDay - I was going to post Mr Menno and yu beat me to it! 😄

It is quite amazing to see, isn't it? Those first years as a male when a developing brain takes in all that stimulus and processes behavioural cues, have a life long impact. So many male people protest they can't have it, and try and deflect and distract, but the reality is, that is exactly part of the behaviour.

No, it's a process that one is likely to experience if raised as a boy, influenced by sexist stereotypes. Childhood experiences can have a huge impact on our behaviour.

Because feminists recognise male entitlement when they see it.

Or haven't you ever listened to a feminist? Oh... that's right. I think we established that you can't hear their shrill voices.

Oh is male socialisation also stored in the DNA? I thought it was stored in the balls. Silly me!

Quite. It’s something I have often noticed, that people are very good at attempting to turn an argument around by reframing their opponents’ points. But there has to be some logic, some grounding in truth and reality. The sexes are not defined in terms of an “essence”. They are verifiable by means of repeatable tests. Quite the opposite of genders, which are apparently entirely the choice of the person who chooses one of two binary genders, or a third “non-binary” gender, or any of a growing range of genders invented or described in recent years. None of these genders appears to be defined in a testable manner; it is absolutely a matter of self-id, and can be changed on a whim, because no-one can argue against it.

Male socialisation often produces.certain behavoral patterns that are quite easy to spot. Have you ever heard of 'mansplaining? It's things like that. This isn't a scientific observation, it's a social skill - a perception that women tend to be quite adept at. Because we are often better at spotting risks and patterns of behaviour. Because we are more vulnerable when compared to males.

But seriously, isn't this part of the answer to why mn is so GC? It's the only place where TRAs are asked to explain what they're on about. No fawning, just 'what do you actually mean by that?'. And everyone can see they've got nothing. They make less than no sense. Lots of people who've been assuming there must be something in all this, that it's backed up by some sort of medical or scientific something, suddenly realize it ain't.

The words ‘magical essence’ have often appeared on these boards when the clever women of MN have asked visitors ‘what is it that women and transwomen have in common?’ ‘What is this magical womanly essence that we all share?’ And now those same terms are being used to refer to something which is not an essence at all but a biological fact. This is really not subtle at all. 😂

For all I know you are a little old lady in Ulaanbaatar who has given birth to 14 children.

However you still haven’t presented an argument to explain why women (or men for that matter) shouldn’t

1. object to being defined by gender identity
2. insist on sex based rights and protections.

With the added advantage from the TRA position that they’ve turned any discussion of biological sex into a ridiculous way of describing ejaculate.

but maybe the magical sex essence

This seems to be a new way of framing it for TRAs, to pretend that it's biological sex which needs a metaphysical, pseudoscientific "essence", rather than their sex stereotype based "genders".

Yeah mate if you try giving the wins of FWR some kind of biology lecture, you better know your onions. I've a BSc Hons in Anatomy after studying physiology neuroscience and pharmacology at degree level. That's a fact not a brag, there are wims here that know a fuckton more than me, and I'm regularly learning from them often subsequent to some dumb dumb attempting to Do A Science.

What could be more aligned with feminist principles than telling someone they have a magic sex essence because of their writing style?

Proudly GC from the US. I love this site.