to not want to sign off my emails with preferred pronouns?

[AlphaBites]

We've had an email do the rounds today at work saying in the next few weeks all staff are expected to sign off with their preferred pronouns, to save any embarrassment for any staff.

I don't want to.

Can I fight this somehow?

I mean many people will be coming at this with a can't you be kind, of sort of attitude. Which is admirable. Albeit a little dangerous.

But when you say what about rapists in women's prisons, they'll say oh no not that. Or getting disadvantaged woman to wax the testicles of a middle-class white man, that say oh no not that either.

Or Pip Bunce who is a woman three days a week, using the ladies, and a man the rest of the time, using the gents, but being given an award for women in business. They'll say well that doesn't sound right, either.

Or they might consider a transwoman as a woman's officer, imagining a benevolent person, who will work on behalf of women. And when you say it's a spoiled brat of an adolescent, who claims they can get pregnant and makes Jimmy Savile jokes, then they'll say oh crikey, no, that sounds awful.

So they do agree. It's just that they don't yet quite believe exactly how many incidences there are. They can't quite imagine the gargantuan scope what being able to legally change sex can mean and how it will disadvantage women.

Because they will often, also say and no, not sport either. Or rape refuges.

Before you know it, they've agreed to every single point, but still have a nagging feeling that you ought to be kind!

Wow I gotta peace out of this thread, this is the kind of stuff that ends up on twitter in defence of mumsnet being shut down

Yes, it's difficult to believe it once you actually see what's actually happening, isn't it, and all your preconceptions have to be re-evaluated in the face of incontrovertible evidence. Go well, with your newly-opened eyes.

Please don't take moral guidance from twitter, look at the FACTS and think for yourself!

Wow I gotta peace out of this thread, this is the kind of stuff that ends up on twitter in defence of mumsnet being shut down

As SlocombePooter says, maybe try thinking. For yourself. Thinking through the issues and how to address them. Instead of a knee-jerk reaction that doesn't address any of them, ever. Not One. Single. One.

And Butters83?

If you think that justification for shutting women up is disagreeing with rapists in women's prisons, men insisting on access to women's rape refugees, men taking women's sports awards and political positions, then you're part of the problem.

Wow I gotta peace out of this thread, this is the kind of stuff that ends up on twitter in defence of mumsnet being shut down.

Not big on freedom of speech and women standing up for their rights then?

@prawnofthepatriarchy

Freedom of speech doesn't mean you can say what you want.

I protect women rights, and that includes trans women.

I am not going to agree with anyone on here so as I said, I am outta here.

@Butters83 - can you not see that trans rights and women’s rights are in direct contention?

If you support trans rights, the right to declare yourself as female and have that be sufficient for you to BE female - which is what they want - that tramples on the rights of biological women.

Trans rights mean anyone can declare themselves to be a woman and:

• access women's single sex spaces - loos, changing rooms etc, and anyone who doesn’t want a naked penis in their single sex space is a transphobe with no right to object.

• work in Rape Crisis centres, even though this will put off raped and traumatised women from using these centres.

• take the medals and records in women’s sports.

• take women’s awards in business and industry.

• take women’s places on shortlists for Parliament etc.

• insist on being housed in Women’s prisons.

• volunteer for the Brownies or the Guides, and go along on Pack holidays, sharing accommodation with teenage and pre-teen girls.

• children being medicated because they like the ‘wrong’ toys/colours/clothes for their biological sex.

• parents deciding to medicate their children who have come out as gay, because they would rather have a trans child than a gay one.

Basically, they want to eradicate biological women. They don’t want us to own the word woman - we are bleeders or uterus-havers whilst the trans women are the real women.

Prominent trans activist Shon Faye has actually said - “Women - enjoy ur erasure”.

You cannot conflate the rights of trans people and women - they are in direct conflict - how can it be otherwise, when they seek to erase us.

Someone very wise, on here, said - it’s not that we don’t think trans people deserve a seat at the table - they do. But women are not going to give up our one, hard-fought-for seat at the table to the trans women.

@Butters83

It's admirable that you want to support everybody. Who doesn't want that? Except sometimes, it's not possible. Rights do conflict. It is pie. Please look at what is actually being said, rather than the fear and concern that underpins it.

If anyone can be a woman, women, as a class based on biology, don't exist.

You need to understand that women are disadvantaged because of their biological category. If it doesn't exist, you won't see the disadvantage. Hence the 50-50 Parliamentary split scenario.

If you can't see sex you can't see sexism. If you don't see sexism, you don't see the necessity for women's rights.

You can't say you support women's rights, when you don't know what the hell they are. Don't say you support them, when you don't see them.

Freedom of speech doesn't mean you can say what you want.

It does mean I can say that men who identify as women are not actually women, that human beings can't change sex, and that Self ID is a dangerous, irresponsible policy. The first two are factual and the third is an opinion I can support with argument.

I am not going to agree with anyone on here so as I said, I am outta here.

TRAs never can provide a decent argument to support their contention that TWAW. I define woman as adult human female. Despite umpteen times of asking I have not yet heard a definition that covers all women and TW but excludes all men and TM.

The whole ideology comes apart if you question it. That's why you get #nodebate and TRAs refusing to debate feminists on TV or radio. They tend to do very badly here because they can't silence debate. So your refusal to engage is nothing new.

Sure.

Have a nice night.

TRAs never can provide a decent argument to support their contention that TWAW.

It's astonishing, isn't it? Originally, I thought, there must be something to this that I'm not getting.

But no. There is nothing to it, and I get it all.