Fws latest campaign

Thanks. So ding ding, the top score to Chris! Congrats, bro

What number on the misogynist list is that? The ol' "women are responsible for men's bad behaviour" crap. Is it number 5? I've mislaid my copy.

It's number 1! https://4w.pub/the-rules-of-misogyny/

Oh, are women here responsible for the potential behaviour of men on a completely different forum?

What number on the misogynist list is that? The ol' "women are responsible for men's bad behaviour" crap. Is it number 5? I've mislaid my copy.

"and pretends to be frightened that the names of trans-identifying men might be made public?
I mean, what does he think women are going to do? Storm over to their houses and tut at them disapprovingly?"

Men from kiwifarms (racist and gender critical violent stalking site) might be interested in finding out where they live, and do more than "tut" at them.

@Igmum I've only just seen your post. Very kind but probably (definitely!) undeserved.

I just got sick of the twaddle and preaching.

I'd say it is more of a warlock hunt?

My bold from @Christinapplepost today 13:54 “Yeah, this is a witch hunt.”

“….this campaign is to catalogue members of a vulnerable minority in particular participating in women's sport in general.
A few days ago on October 1st, Mara Yamauchi said “do you know of males competing in the female category in sport?”

Are you agreeing with equating ‘vulnerable’ and ‘minority’ with men?

Why are you going to bat for men? Or are you saying that TW are men?

You might want to report yourself for rank transphobia if you are recognising that TW aren’t in fact W but are men.

Or maybe you’ve finally seen the light and agree with FWR that TWAM so welcome

OK @Christinapple I guess that there is no such Act and you were talking as usual out of your fundament.

Is that a promise?

Beautifully put.👌🏼

I'm a woman on this board and I'm asking you not to post.

BTW, here is just one example of a great many as to how "known" and fundamental it is scientifically that facial recognition of which sex people are is incredibly easy to spot. From the abstract of one particular study on facial recognition:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0361923004001017

"Human faces are ecologically-salient stimuli. Face sex is particularly relevant for human interactions and face gender (here they mean it interchangeably with "sex" ) recognition is an extremely efficient cognitive process that is acquired early during childhood."

"The human face presents a clear sexual dimorphism 7., 10., 11., 18., 19.. Face gender (sex) recognition is an extremely efficient and fast cognitive process [6]. Even when images are cropped to remove all cultural cues to gendersuch as hairstyle and make-up, gender (sex) classification is correct in almost 100% of the cases in adult subjects [6], whereas 7-years-old children already reach 80% accuracy in the same task [21]. These data clearly indicate that biological cues in facial anatomy are sufficient for a very efficient gender (sex) recognition and this ability is acquired early during childhood."

(Note as an aside also WHY it is really important to distinguish between "gender" and "sex" here and why I really wish people like the scientists who wrote this paper wouldn't use the word "gender" interchangeably with the word "sex". It is clear from the rest of their language they are talking about biological sex only, but using the term "gender" in science allows for obfuscation and misrepresentation by transactivists and the great many "allies" who are not scientifically aware.)

😂😂😂

Does anyone remember the TV show You Bet!? Contestants would bet that they could do stuff like identifying The Bill cast members just from seeing any small part of their face. If it ever made (another) comeback I'd be up for a bet that I could correctly identify the sex of any adult just by looking at them for say 5s

Hi @Christinapple I see that you are active on this thread again. Did I miss where you told us which Act of Parliament makes revealing the fact that someone is trans an illegal act?

Keep going, as I said earlier, excellent work.

Oh this old chestnut again. Because, believe it or not, Christina, it's extremely easy to tell. At a glance. The vast majority of TW do not remotely "pass".

Spotting what sex people are is one of the first cognitions we develop in life. It's so easy that even small children can do it. Animals, with even greater sensitivity, can do it without any difficulty whatsoever. Adult women also tend to be extremely good at spotting males, which we have to do, for our own safety. It's usually glaringly obvious, I'm afraid. Yes, even if a woman doesn't overtly stare at you or say anything. Even if she panders to you. (Usually, the women who do that are doing that BECAUSE they know all too well what sex you actually are and believe it's their "job" to look after you).

It's also a constant and tedious refrain by fantasist TRAs that we couldn't possibly tell. Often based on the lie that if a woman doesn't say so (for instance, when she's in a supposedly single sex space with a TW in there) she both "hasn't noticed which means the TW must pass" and "is totally fine with the TW being there." Both these assumptions are false. I sincerely wish men who id'd as trans would just admit the truth to themselves becaue mostly, no, they don't pass. Your actual sex is obvious. Neither do most of us "gender critical" feminists (women who don't believe in "pink" sex stereotypes about womanhood ) mistake women, regardless of their level of so-called "femininity", for men. Another myth that is often bandied about.

Because, unlike gender ideologists and, WE don't see "femaleness" or "womanhood" as being anything to do with the limited male-eye view of "femininity" so beloved by TRAs and other patriarchal misogynists.

How can you say for certain what someone's biological sex is from a photo? Especially if taken from at least a short distance, presuming it will be taken from the spectator seats?

Are you going to go into "transvestigation" mode and show measurements of their body shape and angles?

I reckon you’ve called it there

So, let's see. Male people who respect female people and don't put female people's safety, their ability to access fair competition ahead of their own are 'vulnerable'?

And which group is 'marginalising' which group?

A men's rights activist would consider the male people in the above scenario as being the group who are 'marginalised'. This is why extreme transgender rights activists are so determined to force usage of the words 'women' for these male people.

Because using 'woman' for any male person who is accessing female sporting events as a 'female' distracts some people from the reality of the situation. It evokes an emotional response.

A prediction:

Dadjoke, as promised and as a man of his word regretfully cedes the field. But not to worry... a few days later another poster - Jokesfromadad who is completely different but has a surprisingly similar posting smile emerges to take his place to bring moderate, compassionate logical male reasoning to the cesspit that is the FWR board.

Sorry can't edit, should say Christinapple of course on both counts.

Indeed. And a reason why so many women coming across these threads become sex realists/gender critical/whatever you call it, in very short order. Excellent work, christinapple!