More bashing of mumsnet

[Ikeasucks]

Why are orgs and businesses just capitulating to this bullying? mobile.twitter.com/MForstater/status/1265201870437519360

You must acknowledge that others disagree with you, therefore your assertion that there are only 2 sexes meets the definition of dogma, because you are saying it is incontroversibly true, and yet this is not a universally held belief
There is no belief, at all, ever, that will be univerally held. If something is not a fact because some disagree, then nothing at all is fact tbh. Any position, on any topic, you will find some on the opposite side.

Here is an example of a fact I am happy to give, that I consider will be pretty much universally believed: the letter t is the last letter on this post

I've personally decided that "T" no longer counts as a letter. It's a number now. And everyone apart from you agrees with me. Prove otherwise. Oops, it looks like you're wrong, because T isn't a letter!

They're not saying GMB can't engage with people on Twitter despite Twitter having a real problem with violent threats against women, paedophiles and Nazis. Presumably because they think neither Twitter or GMB is responsible for everything posted on Twitter ... but they think all women on MN are responsible for everything on MN. Blaming women for everything and asking them to take responsibility for everything is blatant sexism.
Totally spot on.

(Also sorry, posting before reading all the updates..won't post until done now!)

And clearly, based on the responses whenever these threads about whether transphobia is a problem on mumsnet come up, many other people have the same perception.

Good for them, and you. It doesn't really mean much. It just suggests that an awful lot of people don't approve of women stating their boundaries without sugaring the pill with "kindness".

I love mumsnet and think it’s a fantastic forum where women discuss all manner of subjects relevant to our lives and beyond.

However, there is no doubt about it that there is a tonne of transphobia- vitriol, fear, hatred directed against trans people - on this forum. Unfortunately I don’t think this problem is by any means unique to mumsnet; rather, as with many other subjects, the views expressed here are representative of a broader cultural trend in the UK today. It’s deeply disturbing and sad.

@NotBadConsidering

But it has been asserted that there are only 2 sexes "is fact". ie incontrovertibly true, whereas many, many people disagree with this

Many people disagree with evolution and believe in creationism, many people think the earth is flat etc.

This thread is not about discussing the number of sexes. The issue is and the question you’re avoiding is, to use your analogy, would it be appropriate for Creationists to lobby a union on Twitter and tell them that Mumsnet is “a place lacking God” if there was discussion around this? If Mumsnet got a reputation for being “anti-Creationist” would that make it true and warrant the removal of support?

This thread is about how Mumsnet is bullied by activists. If you want to discuss the idea of what the imaginary third sex might be, start a thread.

I haven't avoided the question at all, I thought I'd contributed quite a bit on this actually!

I have said, if an organisation is found to be transphobic, I think it is right for others to boycott it, eg not advertise on it, not do survey work on it.

I have said it is very hard to establish what the threshold is for determining a site as transphobic - and I am not in a position to say that the mumste site is transphobic.

I have said that it is unfortunately the case that organisations may well make decisions based on perceptions, and I do believe mumsnet has an image problem on trans issues.

I believe in robust academic discussion on difficult topics, but I don't think that is what is happening a lot of the time here - I'm not going to repeat myself but I've already set down how I feel threads unfold here.

Several people on this thread, yourself included, meet this criteria for espousing dogma. You state "it is not dogma to say there are only 2 sexes.It is fact" but there are many, many people, and very credible figures who have spent their lives on this subject who disagree with you

You do realise that the author of the "Sex Redefined" article, Claire Ainsworth, has since confirmed she never meant it to be used to prop up spurious views about there being more than 2 sexes. That isn't what she is saying.

@BatShite, @Ereshkigalangcleg - of course - but as you already know - I was not the one originally trying to assert any facts or universally held beliefs - I was challenging those posters who did. I cringe every time I see 'this is a fact', and it happens too often on the feminism threads.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Several people on this thread, yourself included, meet this criteria for espousing dogma. You state "it is not dogma to say there are only 2 sexes.It is fact" but there are many, many people, and very credible figures who have spent their lives on this subject who disagree with you

You do realise that the author of the "Sex Redefined" article, Claire Ainsworth, has since confirmed she never meant it to be used to prop up spurious views about there being more than 2 sexes. That isn't what she is saying.

It really doesn't matter - you could find thousands of internet articles talking on similar points.

Definition of dogma "a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true"
Several people on this thread, yourself included, meet this criteria for espousing dogma. You state "it is not dogma to say there are only 2 sexes.It is fact" but there are many, many people, and very credible figures who have spent their lives on this subject who disagree with you
You must acknowledge that others disagree with you, therefore your assertion that there are only 2 sexes meets the definition of dogma, because you are saying it is incontroversibly true, and yet this is not a universally held belief.

Believing the earth is (almost) round is now dogma!? Who knew!

Let’s hope the flat earthers don’t get wind of the fact 99.9% (I’d posit, I’ve not done a poll) believe the earth is round, and get us all ‘no platformed’, not just those with ‘wrong thought’.

No, suggestionsplease, don't be disingenuous.

You stated:

Here is an example of a fact I am happy to give, that I consider will be pretty much universally believed:

And I showed you how a nonsensical, ludicrous statement by me could potentially rip the rug out from underneath your "pretty much universally believed" fact. Because that is basically the same thing that "I'm a woman because I feel like one" and "trans women are women" is doing.

It really doesn't matter - you could find thousands of internet articles talking on similar points.

Not such "credible figures" though. More like whiny TRA blogs.

Believing the earth is (almost) round is now dogma!?

Pomo is one hell of a trip

It's also funny that you're so willing to jettison Claire Ainsworth's well regarded article as irrelevant if it doesn't make your case. Which was an irrelevant diversion anyway.

The existence of intersex people is not positive evidence for the existence of ladybrains. Sex and DSDs are already well understood. All the positive claims here about the existence of more than two sexes are yours, and novel. You prove them. But whatever you do, it's still not any sort of proof that opposite "gender identity" to your sex exists as anything other than a psychological disorder.

I cringe every time I see 'this is a fact', and it happens too often on the feminism threads.

You cringe when people say “this is a fact” about things that are factual?

Mumsnet has an image problem with transphobia because people are determined to paint it as such for their own ends. Nothing you’ve posted has explained why anything is deemed transphobic. You’ve posted about how various points are open to discussion in your view and open to debate and you want to debate that right now, and how the discussion doesn’t go the way you think it should. But how do you think that gets viewed as transphobic on Twitter?

The only conclusion I can make is the debate and discussion doesn’t conclude what activists on Twitter want it to conclude.

So the debate is actually why do they want to lie to people and create this image problem. I think we know why.

You state "it is not dogma to say there are only 2 sexes.It is fact" but there are many, many people, and very credible figures who have spent their lives on this subject who disagree with you

Argh, not this again.

1. There are exactly two types of gamete, sperm and ova.

2. A human who can only produce sperm is male. This is incontrovertible fact. Male is one of the two human sexes.

3. A human who can only release ova is female. This is incontrovertible fact. Female is the other of the two human sexes.

4. The considerable natural variation in secondary sex characteristics does not invalidate (1)-(3).

5. The male humans listed in (2) can never become female, nor can the female humans listed in (3) ever become male.

6. The tiny proportion of humans who have disorders of sexual development do not invalidate (1)-(5) and do not constitute additional sexes. Humans with DSDs are either members of one sex, or exceptionally rarely (like 300 or so in the scientific literature) chimeras made up of fused male and female blastocysts. To be a chimera made up of male and female cells, the two sexes male and female must exist in the first place.

7. The male humans mentioned in (2) have the ability to impregnate the female humans mentioned in (3). Some of the male humans wish to rape, putting the female humans at risk of pregnancy, and we don't know which ones will and which won't. This is one of the reasons why many women wish to segregate some spaces by sex, although it's not the only reason.

The bottom line is this.

If trans and women’s rights are discussed openly, with evidence, with links to information, with science, with multiple examples of “it never happens” happening, and with people applying logic and rationale, it is impossible to conclude that, at the bare minimum, there is an actual debate to be had. Twitter activists cannot stand the fact that if the discussion is open enough and goes on long enough, because it opens them up to scrutiny. They don’t want debate because in their minds, it’s settled. That’s why the mantra is “TWAW, no debate!”

They cannot stand the sunlight. And as a result of that sunlight - no matter what the posts on thread might actually say or conclude - they want to keep things in the dark, and the way to do this is to scream “transphobia!” and hope that people are too nice to want to carry such a label and will capitulate. They know deep down that debate is detrimental because it leads to questions they can’t answer. As demonstrated by the multiple times questions are asked and not answered. Unfortunately they are occasionally successful, as evidenced by the actions of GMB.

But the answer is not to say “Mumsnet has an image problem with transphobia” and implore Mumsnet to change. The answer should be for Mumsnet to be defiant, and for everyone to say “Mumsnet allows proper discussion, and whiny toads on Twitter don’t like it. If you see transphobia show us and if you want to withdraw your support for women with employment issues because of it, that’s on you, but you won’t bully us into changing”.

Observation:
I saw some posts on Twitter by some lads in an amateur football team in Gateshead where they were taking the mickey out of a trans person in a video they posted on YouTube.

Conclusions:

1. Twitter is transphobic
2. Young men are transphobic
3. Amateur football teams are transphobic
4. Gateshead is transphobic
5. YouTube is transphobic
6. I am transphobic because I saw these things
7. Mumsnet is transphobic because I am posting this on Mumsnet

ps. Only the last one matters - apparently.

@bizawit vitriol, fear, hatred directed against trans people

Wouldn't you be scared of someone who wrote things like archive.is/K2IQ1 and archive.is/VQa6V and archive.is/wXZ0x ?

"TERF’s, like all Nazis, have no right to a peaceful existence or steady employment."
"Doxxing is another effective tool against fascists, just as it can be against TERF’s."
"If you can cause a TERF to lose their job, do so!"
"The database [of people Antifa don't like] would be accessible globally and protected via redundancy from ever being deleted. You can bet that any and all TERF’s will also be in that database."
"Property damage is another escalation up the chain of direct action."
"What about bodily harm against bigots? Is that a valid tactic? Yes"
"Similarly, there was the heroic trans woman who almost delivered a blow for justice against TERF Julie Bindel."
"If TERF’s couldn’t step into public venues without fear of being drenched in milkshakes, they might think twice about their allegiance to hate."
"Generally speaking, killing is a step too far." [Only "generally speaking", not "always"?]
"But when TERF’s go after trans women and others, they don’t stop their harassment until the target is dead. [This is libel BTW.] This is why you are justified using any of the strategies outlined above when opposing their kind."

"TERF’s and other fascist bootlickers are never victims [of sexual violence] - they are always the oppressors."
"we should openly doubt the accusations of anyone who does not believe in social justice. False accusations [of sexual violence] are exactly the kind of game the alt-right and TERF’s will use."

"even if a trans person forces a cis person to have sex with them, it’s not rape. cis women can’t be raped by trans women."
"im sorry you’re a forced-sex survivor and i wish you the best, but it wasn’t rape. the trans person who forced you to have sex with them is socially below you in terms of power, therefore did not rape you."

So we have a movement whose extremists think that it isn't rape to force a woman, any woman not just the terven witches, into sex because she has "cis privilege"; who think women they disagree with who've been raped should not be believed; who openly advocate that women they disagree with should be "violate[d] any way you want" (how is that not a euphemism for rape?); and who think that harassment, doxxing, and physical violence towards women they disagree with is OK.

And you wonder why some of us might show "fear directed at trans people"?

who think that harassment, doxxing, and physical violence towards women they disagree with is OK.

Not just OK, desirable.

Impossible not to include, in my post.

*conclude. FFS!

The site has a HUGE transphobia problem - and the usual response is

Please link evidence etc etc

The feminism section is filled with it and other areas calling trans women men in dresses, saying non binary folks don't exist and are invalid, there are only two genders, etc etc ad nauseam.

Calling Mumsnet out for its transphobia isn't bullying, it's the truth.

I bet glinner will have a twitter tantrum soon as a result. Or on here. Either way, MN was called out and obviously the truth hurts.

@Whataloadofshite

saying non binary folks don't exist
Actually no, the consensus is that everyone is non-binary because no one completely fits masculine or feminine stereotypes.

there are only two genders
There are two sexes. We do not care about gender.

men in dresses
Kurt Cobain and Jaden Smith both look(ed) great in dresses. I'm not sure why calling someone male who wears a dress a "man in a dress" would be offensive.

Please review my comment on page 11 and let me know why I shouldn't be scared of male people who advocate that level of violence towards me and want to enter the single-sex spaces where I am vulnerable.