Inside the mind of a non-binary woman

After reading this thread and others with a certain poster all I can say is that on the internet, nobody knows you're a dog.

They also can't just represent things as they are because it might sound too reasonable. "TERFs believe that you're born a particular sex but you can do anything you want, have any personality, hobbies etc." - it sounds progressive.

I think as well there's an Orwellian element where even if they can conceive it they won't allow it to be said.

No, I think they're still missing the point.

They seem to be saying we believe that everyone has a gender and it definitely aligns with their sex (which they helpfully point out is indicated by genitals observed at birth, so not 'randomly assigned' then 🙄)

They are so wedded to the gender dogma that they cannot conceive that some people, eg TERFs, just don't believe everyone has a gender identity.

I can't tell someone else that they don't have a gender identity. But I can say for sure that I don't, and I can't see what theirs is based on apart from stereotypes.

I’d wondered if he was Butters, but he says not.

From trans Reddit:
TERFs believe there is some unalterable male, or female essence all people have, identical with what was between their legs at birth

In other words (I think) they’re saying we believe that sex is observed at birth & you can’t change it. How unreasonable of us.

I think he thinks he's showing us up to be dull unimaginative types that can't see beyond the dull fact of sex to envision the more expansive less deterministic possibilities offered by gender identities.

Which is all well and good, but since female people nevertheless do still exist and do experience significant physical, social and economic consequences because of our sex, any expansive less deterministic identities based on gender have to be positioned as legally, socially and linguisticly alongside and separate from sex not treated like a replacement or overwriting of it.

Any trans-inclusive poster who does not accept that very simple and fair statement is outing themselves as someone who, regardless of what they may claim in terms of feminism and women's value, ultimately does not value female people enough to support our right to exist in our own right and under our own name.

It was the use of ‘sex realist’ that made me realise it was the same poster. He’s the only one that uses that term and I’m not sure if he thinks it’s slightly derogatory, but it just makes me think ‘durr, obviously sex is real’ 🙄

To be fair I: not sure the lift goes to the penthouse with that one.

The poster frequently uses it like a slur, a smear. Doesn't seem to grasp that it's actually a compliment. It's the most unsuccessful insult ever!

gravity realists

What are "sex realists"? Are they like "round earthers", in that they believe something that is unambigously true?
"Sky bluers"? "Pope wood shitters?"

I am not tying strings. I am pointing out to people who use an abusive, recently invented word, where that word comes from and why it is so offensive.

I know. How dull and lonely must his life be? If he was in the U.K ,I’d suggest Andy’s Man Club. Or maybe joining a debating club to hone his skills when trying to put points across.

sad times.

Does anyone else find it a bit pathetic that the best use of his time a bloke can think of is to come on a feminist board and try to lecture women about womanhood. It just comes cross as a bit .,well, sad really.

I changed it yesterday morning, but didn't participate in a new thread until today.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5527840-town-vs-country-and-believing-in-gi?page=5&reply=152282143

Got it - thank you.

And glad to hear it - the onepost name had become a bit silly given your prolific contributions 😂 FWR big yay for accurate nomenclature.

(Genuinely not sarcam BTW. The misnaming was becoming more and more funny but the engagement is appreciated.)

I am onepostwonder. It was time for a name change.

So what? You are tying strings between people and ideologies to represent relationships that do not exist.

Same person

@polypostwonder I'm guessing your name is a reference to @onepostwonder ... did he get banned, or did his onepost identity get so far from observed reality it was just comical?

(For avoidance of doubt, I am in no way trollhunting or trying to out name changing, in fact the absolute opposite. I am assuming that such an obvious reference implies the poster actively wants the connection to be made so that some meaning behind the reference can be understood. I'm just a bit dim so I'm not sure what it is and need to ask).

The relevance of the legacy of PIE is that, far from my trying to create a fake link between the roots of the language of gender ideology and those who invented it, and promote it, I'm pointing out that link to very naive people who adopt fashions without thinking.

Gender ideology harms young people, particularly young women. People who switch their brains off are a danger to themselves and others.

"I always knew I wasn’t cisgender. As a child, I enjoyed both boys’ and girls’ toys, clothes and activities. I would wrestle with my dad before going to dance class with my mum. I wore Disney princess dresses with Timberland hiking boots underneath. "

So incredibly special and unique, not like us boring women who universally LOVE all things pink and glittery and perfectly fit the feminine stereotypes of our particular time and place.

There's a public written record of his originating it. If you have evidence of your alleged trans people, independently using it, produce that.

And note, he was not trans. He was more allied to PIE (which didn't die). The techniques of detaching vulnerable young people from their families and from mainstream society which are showing up around the gender narrative now were central to PIE's activities in the early 1970s.

Yep, this is also my reading of TransParent's posts. There is zero self-awareness.

Well observed and articulated. I totally agree. The child has been created in the shadows of her parental expectation.