GC Ultra / GC Lite?

I have agreed with a lot of what Colin posts in the past. However, Christina seems to have a mistaken view of radical feminists. So if he honestly think that her current tweets about radical feminists will ‘reach left wing people’ he is going to be sadly disappointed. But I guess he will learn through the experience.

It’s a series of tweets where he is purporting to describe Christine’s position or his position that she shares. As I understand it anyway. There are screenshots of it in prions post from a couple of days ago.

I’m not on xtwitter and have no idea who these people are.

It seems to me that by coining her “GC ultra” term, JT has lobbed a massive hand grenade that has done a lot of harm and only benefits i) those who’ve consistently been defaming and denigrating any women standing up for women’s rights and ii) those political party activists who’ve been deploying the “extreme positions on both sides” misrepresentation to excuse their own male sexual entitlement campaigning.

It’s pretty depressing.

Considering what I have seen Christina post, is he talking about him and Christina ? Or someone else? Because Christina’s interactions don’t reflect this at all.

The xtweet where he says that “our main priority is reaching people on the left” and therefore choosing language carefully “is everything”

I wouldn't mind if that worked. But it doesn't! The left are nowhere, other than some women have penises.

When is it gonna work???

Thanks for the screenshot Prion. The xtweet where he says that “our main priority is reaching people on the left” and therefore choosing language carefully “is everything” is revelatory.

I wonder if he considers that coining pejorative expressions like “GC ultra” constitutes careful choice of language.

“not making a distinction between what Hayton is actually campaigning for and what they themselves are ostensibly campaigning for”

I can’t remember who or which thread but someone observed that JT et al’s position could be the result of them failing to spot that Hayton is not GC. I found that an insightful comment.

That is intetesting. Especially when compared with an xtweet quoted later in the thread.

It was.

I was wondering if it's possible to do something like that on a thread, "Mumsnet Thread Epistemology", if you will, but it would take a sort of Boghossian discussion leader that doesn't seem practical in text form.

That would be the next big Christmas 'how to start a family row' game. A virtual game in which we have avatars, the spots on which to stand, and we have to answer, switch positions, argue for other sides etc.

There'd be blood on the floor in many households but Peter B manages it with what he manages to make look like effortless grace and equanimity.

Have now watched, really good discussion .

everyone can choose for themselves without castigation?

Not on Mumsnet. Here if we use third person pronouns to refer to an individual we ARE compelled through censorship and removal from the platform.

Oh yes. But that's not where we're at.

I do think that if people make a particular choice, and discuss it in the public sphere on a place like X, people will obviously have opinions on that choice. Some of those may take the form of castigation, but that is still not compulsion.

But then does it follow that you are just compelling language in the opposite way?
Surely jane has it right, everyone can choose for themselves without castigation?

Thoroughly enjoyed that video Rethinking, thanks for posting the link 👍 Very interesting contrasts in the views of Menno and Stella, as well as some areas were they were more aligned. My initial feeling after one watch, is that Menno is firmly in the mode of protect women, children, lesbians from male imposition and inappropriate behaviour and Stella is coming from the understand/accommodate 'Trans' feelings (AGP included) side of the argument. Very useful to see both views in contrast with explanations and exploration.

I wonder what that would even look like?

Because anyone writing about this issue simply cannot unsee eg J. K. Rowling saying she's had enough threats to re-paper her entire house (and you just know it's a big one), or Maria McLachlan being told by her judge that her compensation is now to be reduced because she wouldn't lie in court, or the fact that Maya Forstater had to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds clarifying that it's not actually a crime!

And even then, hordes of militant, threatening, motivated transactivists said she could think it but not say it.

I can't even imagine what total neutrality over pronouns would ever look like.

OK, here is my compromise:

If nobody gives me shit for using sex based pronouns, I won't give anybody shit for using preferred pronouns.

I think it's up for question how much choice you really have, when you're perfectly aware of what can happen when you pick the wrong one.

I mean it's the entire reason for this schism.

If it was genuinely a matter of each person's individual choice and there were no implications, no one would care and this thread wouldn't exist.

Yes I agree datun but that's not what saffron was saying. She was implying another poster was compelled to use pronouns even though that poster said she was doing it out of choice.

Well this is all getting a bit meta!
When I'm walking the dog and another dog walker greets me, so I say morning back even though it's pissing it down and I don't want to speak, is that "compelled speech"?

No, but if you had been reading for years about other people who didn't say hello to fellow dog walkers, who were then ostracised, or arrested, or taken to a tribunal, or threatened, or had their family threatened, then you might think otherwise.

Adults don't get to say exactly what they want all the time.

Quite. Speech is rarely ‘free’. How often on Mumsnet do women have to be told that they can say ‘no’ and that ‘no is a complete sentence’ because they have always felt compelled to say ‘yes’?

Well this is all getting a bit meta!
When I'm walking the dog and another dog walker greets me, so I say morning back even though it's pissing it down and I don't want to speak, is that "compelled speech"?
When I'm polite to the dickhead at work, despite wanting to call him a dickhead, is that "compelled speech"?

Adults don't get to say exactly what they want all the time.

You don’t need to have a gun to your head in order to feel compelled to ‘choose’ a certain course of action. Most of the time that compelling force is much more subtle eg societal opprobrium or, especially for women and girls, being taught that you must ‘be kind’. Rarely are people’s choices completely free.

How did you take that from what she said? I read it as she is happy to use people's preferred pronouns because she's relaxed with trans identities and trans people. That's not the same as compelled speech at all. She's choosing to do it.

Thank you Brainworm. So basically you are using wrong sex pronouns because you feel compelled to and don’t feel you have a strong enough argument to object? I see you say you use wrong sex pronouns because you don’t feel you have a reason not to even though it is not natural for you so you may slip into natural speech when not attending to your words. You mention aggression and putting people at ease - fear and fawn.

I don’t mean this in a nasty way. Most people are using wrong-sex pronouns for the same way.

I use people's preferred pronouns, when I do, because I have been asked to don't have a reason not to. When at work, I rarely accidentally 'misgendering/use sex based pronouns' with service users, but I do tend to slip a bit otherwise. This is because/when I am not attending to my words in the same way as I do with clients.

Slip ups haven't, to date, been met with hostility or aggression. The minority haven't said anything, and I tend to let it pass, and switch back, rather than correct myself in the moment.

My general manner/style is one that puts people at ease. Unintentional misgendering is evidence that I too am at ease. If my slip up is noted or corrected this doesn't stress me out. I think this may be a contributory factor in me not finding it difficult to meet the request in the first place. If it made me anxious I think I would be reluctant to try.

In general, gender non conformity and people having trans identities doesn't make me feel ill at ease - which is why I slip up if I stop paying conscious attention. I don't feel at ease around people who are agitated or dysregulated, and I tend to go in to 'work mode' on these occasions, and become more vigilant about my behaviour, including the words I choose- not just pronouns.

I typically encounter people with trans identities a couple of days a week at work and, maybe, once or twice in work-adjacent contexts. In my private life, a couple of my wider circle have relatives who have trans identities and very poor quality of life. It is very rare for me to see these relatives, but the friends talk to me a lot about them.

I rarely encounter trans activists IRL