Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

"We" can always tell

313 replies

PollyNomial · 14/10/2026 20:07

Except when "we" can't:
https://x.com/CountDeadWomen/status/2110284296388739454

Note the weasel words of the thread don't actually apologise for allowing terrible people to decide the victim wasn't female because she wasn't sufficiently meeting a stereotypical view of how women should look in their bigoted opinions. The fault for behaving in a bigoted fashion is only that of the bigots and no-one else.

OP posts:
Differentforgirls · 15/10/2026 17:31

MarieDeGournay · 15/10/2026 17:27

AND SHE IS ON THE LIST NOW.

Where she should always have been, as everybody here agrees.
So maybe let her, and the topic, rest in peace?

The main thing I have witnessed on here about GC woman and men, is the need to tell people who aren't transphobic, to shut up.

MarieDeGournay · 15/10/2026 17:27

Differentforgirls · 15/10/2026 14:29

SHE WAS A WOMAN.

AND SHE IS ON THE LIST NOW.

Where she should always have been, as everybody here agrees.
So maybe let her, and the topic, rest in peace?

Differentforgirls · 15/10/2026 17:07

murasaki · 15/10/2026 16:56

And have you condemned Watson, Hayden et al? I think not.

Edited

I have no clue who you're talking about.

FlirtsWithRhinos · 15/10/2026 17:02

FinchiePink · 15/10/2026 12:51

No, I was responding to a post (not yours, another poster) that said "if men weren't pretending to be women, this wouldn't have happened".

I disagree with that statement for reasons I have explained.

You have taken issue with it and decided I am applying my response to every single poster on FWR (which would of course include myself) with a basis that remains a mystery to me.

Yes, I responded to your statement to another poster. Your statement was

"Look what you made me do" is straight out of the abusers charter and it's not something we should be debasing ourselves to.

In response to PP pointing out that the reason women now do question when they read news about a woman whether that person was actually male is because it is a known fact that sometimes people are reported as women when they are actually male. Hence, that question is now on the radar as a possibility when previously it was not.

You said that is an abuser's logic.

I agree with the PPs point and disagree with your framing it as abusers' logic. Hence my replying to you.

And l referred to "women on FWR noting the reason people now question whether a woman in the news is in fact female is that people reported as women are not always now female", Ie not all women on FWR but specifically the subset of women on FWR making that point to which you were objecting.

Seems entirely fair of me to comment on your post given it was framing something I agree with in what I consider a manipulative and ad hom way.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 15/10/2026 16:57

nicepotoftea · 15/10/2026 15:22

Anyone genuinely concerned about errors would be campaigning for accurate, robust reporting on sex by the courts, police and media.

Quite.

AccidentallyWesAnderson · 15/10/2026 16:57

Why hang about and constantly post on topics that don’t align with your beliefs or you don’t agree with?

It’s like constantly going onto threads about say, Christianity, and disagreeing with everyone who believes in and wants to discuss, Christianity. Over and over. What a way to spend your time. I wish I had that much time to waste 😟.

murasaki · 15/10/2026 16:56

Differentforgirls · 15/10/2026 16:49

No point. They are fully entrenched.

And have you condemned Watson, Hayden et al? I think not.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 15/10/2026 16:56

Shocked face to see which posters are so invested in making hay with this unfortunate mistake.

JustEatThePizza · 15/10/2026 16:53

The reality is that it's easy to be mistaken with one still photograph, but I real life you can always tell.

Differentforgirls · 15/10/2026 16:49

alcovecupboards · 15/10/2026 14:32

They don't care. She wasn't feminine enough to pass their bizarre standards so she was fair game. It's utterly disgusting. Unless I've missed it but not a single GC person here has condemned the GC people who harassed the woman who posts the list because they had decided this woman was trans. It speaks volumes about their true motives.

No point. They are fully entrenched.

AccidentallyWesAnderson · 15/10/2026 16:43

Tears0fTheMushroom · 15/10/2026 16:39

And there we have it ladies. Gender Critical Feminists don’t believe transwomen are women because their boobs are too small. Therefore, women with small boobs are actually men.

I mean really?
Do you remotely understand what being Gender Critical means?
This is definitely up there with the top ten stupidest things I've ever read or heard anywhere.

For the avoidance of doubt, Gender Critical Feminists don't believe transwomen are women because transwomen are MEN. Even the ones with absolutely ENORMOUS boobs.

I’d say top 5.

Tears0fTheMushroom · 15/10/2026 16:39

Lexibletheflexible · 15/10/2026 07:40

No it wasnt. It was people who think their GC views mean they can do things like this and get away with it. All because a woman didn't have big enough boobs or something.

And there we have it ladies. Gender Critical Feminists don’t believe transwomen are women because their boobs are too small. Therefore, women with small boobs are actually men.

I mean really?
Do you remotely understand what being Gender Critical means?
This is definitely up there with the top ten stupidest things I've ever read or heard anywhere.

For the avoidance of doubt, Gender Critical Feminists don't believe transwomen are women because transwomen are MEN. Even the ones with absolutely ENORMOUS boobs.

akkakk · 15/10/2026 16:19

FlirtsWithRhinos · 15/10/2026 15:47

Great post, thank you.

I'll also add that women, having tended to find that what we consider important may not be visible to or recorded by the official authorities, have tended to collect and collate information on our own behalf. It is a Feminist response to women do often being told we are imaging it, or we are obsessed, or we are getting things out of proportion.

Thank you - I think you are right - and we shouldn't forget that:

...being told we are imaging it, or we are obsessed, or we are getting things out of proportion

isn't because those telling think that it is being imagined / is obsession / is out of proportion - it is simply a way of using words to try and win an unwinnable argument - there is rarely honesty in such claims... it is in effect bullying.

murasaki · 15/10/2026 16:00

FlirtsWithRhinos · 15/10/2026 15:47

Great post, thank you.

I'll also add that women, having tended to find that what we consider important may not be visible to or recorded by the official authorities, have tended to collect and collate information on our own behalf. It is a Feminist response to women do often being told we are imaging it, or we are obsessed, or we are getting things out of proportion.

True, the book 'invisible women' is a good example of that.

FlirtsWithRhinos · 15/10/2026 15:47

akkakk · 15/10/2026 13:15

I think it might be more frustration that not everyone is submissive and does what they are told 🤔

one of the issues we have in society at present is that people personalise everything...

they take their situation and extrapolate upwards to the general - of course individual situations are terribly sad - a child who is run over / a person who gets cancer / someone who loses their job - all terrible for the individuals and those around them - but we still need to also understand patterns at a national level - is a child being run over every day all over the country, or was it a one-off - changes traffic policy / only one person with cancer, or an increasing % nationally - changes NHS policy / just one job loss, or the start of entering a recession - might change government policy...

we can not as a society allow those who are close to someone who has suffered to effectively bully society in other areas - it is terribly sad, but we still need to understand national stats...

and when a woman is injured or killed by a man - that is a pattern we need to understand nationally - conceptually a simple statistic, made tricky by the insistance by a tiny minority that anyone can be a man or woman as they choose - this adds layers of complexity to understanding accurate stats, and it means that occasionally a mistake might be made...

the apology was issued, and details corrected, but we can't allow emotion at that one scenario to get out of hand and damage what we also need to understand nationally - and knowing these stats is important (more important would of course be to do something about it!).

So, yes it is sad for the family concerned, but it was an understandable mistake which only happened because of the cultural confusion instigated by those promote an alternative reality in which sex is changeable -so we must:

  • not make these mistakes where possible (and apologise if they happen)
  • continue to record violence against women
  • fight back for clarity and truth around sex being natal and immutable.
Edited

Great post, thank you.

I'll also add that women, having tended to find that what we consider important may not be visible to or recorded by the official authorities, have tended to collect and collate information on our own behalf. It is a Feminist response to women do often being told we are imaging it, or we are obsessed, or we are getting things out of proportion.

nicepotoftea · 15/10/2026 15:22

Anyone genuinely concerned about errors would be campaigning for accurate, robust reporting on sex by the courts, police and media.

Mapletree1985 · 15/10/2026 15:11

Differentforgirls · 15/10/2026 14:27

Whose interests are served by people having a very unhealthy view on the sex of a dead person? They are dead! They have a mother. Imagine being that mother whose daughter has died and is being called a man on social media?

You can all say, "we didn't engage", "we reported it" , sounds nice, then you continue to double down ranting about statistics, media and blaming everyone but the people who caused this, plus insulting women who disagree with you.

GCs caused it. And continue to perpetuate it.

People question whether the victim of a crime has been correctly identified, and you call that "having a very unhealthy view on the sex of a dead person". What is unhealthy about asking if the data has been truthfully and accurately recorded?

FlirtsWithRhinos · 15/10/2026 15:03

Presumably some people also think umbrellas cause rain because places with no rain have no umbrellas.

StealthTroublemaker · 15/10/2026 15:02

BackToLurk · 15/10/2026 14:43

Still waiting for the condemnation of the OP for starting this thread, presumably intended to direct abuse and harassment at Karen Ingala Smith and the Counting Dead Women account.

Oh I’m condemning. And judging. The OP needs to find Jesus as they say round here

FlirtsWithRhinos · 15/10/2026 14:55

Differentforgirls · 15/10/2026 14:27

Whose interests are served by people having a very unhealthy view on the sex of a dead person? They are dead! They have a mother. Imagine being that mother whose daughter has died and is being called a man on social media?

You can all say, "we didn't engage", "we reported it" , sounds nice, then you continue to double down ranting about statistics, media and blaming everyone but the people who caused this, plus insulting women who disagree with you.

GCs caused it. And continue to perpetuate it.

With respect (as much respect as you offer me, anyway), the person most perpetuating this and making this personal to the murder victim on FWR is you. Here.

But again:

I totally agree in front of greiving relatives, or in a nasty way, of course not.

But Never? Why not?

And for how long is that prohibition in place?

Whose interests are served by making sex unsayable?

Any other meaningful questions one can no longer ask?

GreyskySexRealistsky · 15/10/2026 14:54

we do know that it wasn't MN because the people on MN objected to the post on here and had it removed...

a bit of logical thinking wouldn't have gone amiss here, that's for sure...

akkakk · 15/10/2026 14:51

alcovecupboards · 15/10/2026 14:32

They don't care. She wasn't feminine enough to pass their bizarre standards so she was fair game. It's utterly disgusting. Unless I've missed it but not a single GC person here has condemned the GC people who harassed the woman who posts the list because they had decided this woman was trans. It speaks volumes about their true motives.

yup - you did indeed miss it - many times!

and we have no idea who those people were who commented on Twitter... they could be anyone - but we do know that it wasn't MN because the people on MN objected to the post on here and had it removed...

and if these people you seem to know about were gender critical - why would they decide someone was 'trans'? Surely the whole foundation of being Gender Critical is the belief that sex is immutable and therefore no-one can ever be trans! - The only people who believe that someone can change sex are the TRAs - so was it them?

murasaki · 15/10/2026 14:49

Scuzzy, despicable and visible from outer space.

BackToLurk · 15/10/2026 14:47

murasaki · 15/10/2026 14:45

There has been a glut of these threads recently, weaponising stories/individual's experiences to vilify women.

Shitty behaviour.

Pretending to give a shit about murdered women, while gleefully joining in the abuse of an organisation that is dedicated to recording male violence against women.

murasaki · 15/10/2026 14:45

There has been a glut of these threads recently, weaponising stories/individual's experiences to vilify women.

Shitty behaviour.