Simone Biles attacks Riley Gaines

No. To quote FWR regulars, I can hold many views at the one time as I’m not aggressively tribal.

However, Riley Gaines has made it clear where she sits on the spectrum. She was even pictured on stage with Trump in one of those evangelical praying and group touching-of-the-leader sessions.

Do explain. A person sees a tweet she agrees with and retweets it; it appears on her timeline. This indicates a tacit agreement with the tweet (unless an accompanying comment suggests otherwise).

I’m interested to hear in the alleged differences.

So then that by your own words makes you 'anti-trans' and not just conservative, but an 'ultra'-conservative.

Then why call Gaines "anti-trans" then?

Can you quote where she has been so-called "anti-trans"? Defending fair and safe sport for women and girls doesn't count, btw.

Of course it's possible. That's why handmaidens exist. There are always women with internalised misogyny on their knees for men. Unfortunately many women really truly hate their own sex.

Exactly. 'anti-trans'? Oh ffs! I think that poster has exposed their agenda on here. And not just conservative but 'ultra' conservative! Oh my! 🙄

Of course it makes it different. You were lying when you said she tweeted it.

Um, NO. It is not 'anti-trans' activism. I think you've exposed your agenda, here. WOMENS RIGHTS is not 'anti-trans'. Unless you are admitting to us what we all know; pro-trans activism is anti-women.

The topic is womens rights. Not 'anti-trans'.

And not just conservative but 'ultra' conservative? Wow. That's exaggeration don't you think. I haven't seen anything from her that is "ultra" conservative. It seems your view is perhaps skewed by ultra left extremism?

It looks like a drawing of Simone Biles pulling a ladder up behind her.

I agree that without the face we are reliant on context to know who it is, but that's because human faces are generally more recognisable than any other part of us.

You don't seem to have answered the question about whether it should've shown her not being the size that lots of little girls are, even though she isn't? It's important you clarify this, because if you think there shouldn't be accurate portrayal of something that a person has been taunted for, that's got pretty radical implications for depicting any woman who's ever been subjected to sexist abuse, for example. Like Simone.

Maybe you don’t find it helpful. Maybe don’t find it as flattering to your personal take as you would like. I find it helpful though. On the other hand, I don’t find calling posters ‘weird’ and ‘strange’ as you have done helpful.

If a (thankfully those with such anti science views are in a minority) person claimed the earth to be flat as a pancake, would it be awfully cruel and bullying to respond that it was in fact elliptical? I would not be denying their existence, and can acknowledge they deserve respect as human beings, but not for their beliefs.

G’wan Riley Gaines. Thank you for standing up for the rights and humanity of women and girls.. As for Simone Biles; how easy it seemed for you to not give a toss about the rights and humanity of women and girls.

That you have fundamental disagreement with the main proposition is the reason you find it uncomfortable.

Plus the fact that it's not a bannable offence.

Try having a fundamental disagreement with the main proposition over on the other side, and you wouldn't have time to be uncomfortable in the brief seconds before you were permabanned.

Being able to get nicely uncomfortable over here is a positive luxury.

Why is it that you want to post on a forum which you think is inherently toxic and on which you are in an extreme minority? And why would you expect that to be a comfortable experience?

Most people post here because for years it has been just about the only place that we could discuss our concerns without censure. This forum has been the main place for discussion of the negative impacts of trans ideology on women and on children; a place of education, information, sisterhood and organisation.

This is the environment.

Why would you expect it to be something it is not, and never has been?

That you have fundamental disagreement with the main proposition is the reason you find it uncomfortable.

Ah okay

You are one? You are “anti-woman”? Right.

You may find a quick AS quite illuminating as to past form.

I'm totally confused now.

If @JessaWoo actually agrees with Riley, what has her contribution to the thread been about, why does she feel like a 'minority' on here and what is it about Hellebore's posts have made her so uncomfortable?

AIBU can be uncomfortable if you don't agree with the majority.

Is that an argument against robust discussion?

Do people with minority opinions have a right to different treatment because they have a minority opinion? Are their arguments supposed to be judged by different standards?

Rule of misogyny number 3. Women speaking for themselves are exclusionary and selfish

Crikey, posters aren’t here to help you. We’re all just passing the time, same as you

It’s very difficult to exist in this environment already.

Disagreeing with you is not a threat to your existence.

This doesn’t help,

I’m the poster in the extreme minority here. It’s very difficult to exist in this environment already. You, however, are not.

By its very nature, FWR is toxic and uncomfortable to outsiders, so I’d call nonsense on that claim.

that a very good question. I’ll be interested in the answer

That is interesting. If I said that you make the environment uncomfortable on this thread, what would you do?