Playing the oppressed feminist.
Not misogynistic at all, no siree!
I'm not manipulating anyone
Yes you were, it was very transparent.
and giving a warning of unpleasant content is in no way authoritarian. No demands or orders have been given.
You told readers to stay away for the sake of their faith in humanity because apparently according to you FWR (that would be the Feminism and Women's Rights discussion board for anyone in doubt) is "anti-trans" and that people shouldn't go see for themselves. That's quite authoritarian, it was also an outright lie.
They are not lies about FWR, I have engaged there on and off over the years and vehemently disagree that there is compassion for trans people and no anti trans rhetoric.
They absolutely were lies, and there is plenty of compassion for, in particular, young trans identifying people. There is no anti-trans rhetoric, just facts and resistance to predatory males.
People can go see for themselves.
Some of the statements made there are downright disgusting
Those "disgusting" statements would be those which correctly sex trans identified males. Acknowledging biological reality is not a transphobic, it is actually very important - especially in a health care setting, wrong sex treatment in a hospital can be fatal. This is something that TRAs do not like pointed out to them, which in my opinion shows up the inherent misogyny. They don't actually care about the health of trans identifying people (they really, really don't care about the trans identifying females, except where they can be used as a prop for the ideology).
"Man" is not a slur.
I've also seen plenty of misogyny from the so called feminists towards other women who don't agree with them or toe the party line.
That's funny because I see a lot of misogyny directed at the women in FWR.
What you mean is when a woman has internalised her own misogyny and is fawning for this men's rights movement while simultaneously throwing all women (including herself) under the bus, people call her a transmaiden. Well it might be rude, but it is true. And sometimes a poster says they are a woman, but from their posting style and what they say it seems very likely they might be male, so yes people do sometimes wonder aloud if those posters are male. Often we will never know, sometimes a poster will let slip that they are in fact a trans identified male. So again, it might be a bit rude, but posters have been proven right on that one before.
The board has a reputation both here and in other online spaces, it didn't get that from being compassionate and reasonable.
You mean reddit and other online spaces like twitter, those bastions of feminism? Reddit where women's boards and posts are removed. Where detransitioners and trans identifying people who don't subscribe to the insanity of gender ideology are vilified by their own community? Twitter where posts end up recorded on the TERF is a Slur website? Right then.
In comparison to MN FWR where open discussion is now allowed, and people don't fling abuse, rape and death threats at women and trans identified posters who don't subscribe to gender ideology.
Many feminists want nothing to do with the brand of feminism that exists there.
And I hope it keeps fine for them. However, I don't think feminism which centres male people is actually feminism. Many feminists want nothing to do with that brand of "feminism" either, because we are the sort of feminists who actually centre the females of our species.
Earlier on in this thread we saw a poster be hounded in the classic FWR style whilst stating "I don't understand what you're saying or what your problem is, leave me alone".
Where? Do you mean my conversation with @TheOtherBennetGirl which I think we both have agreed was constructive and mutually respectful?
It's the dogged determination to keep hammering your point that is classic of that board, like when you started banging on about misogyny and toilets and a list of their things I never even mentioned and are irrelevant to the shooting.
Dogged determination to keep hammering my point. Well they are all informative pieces of the greater understanding of the feminist position. I think they are relevant to the discussion of this recent school shooting, I have explained my reasons why - namely early recognition of possible mental health or deeper issues, which in this particular case is relevant and might have helped prevent this tragedy from happening. The zeitgeist of the gender ideology movement has successfully managed to make people completely afraid to talk about the issues inherent in this ideology, thus we had a climate where we could not address issues that may be present in some trans identifying people, because anything vaguely negative or shedding light on possible problems has been viewed as "literal violence" and a direct attack on every trans person.
It's like an extreme religious belief that allows absolutely no dissenting voice, no matter how polite or gently spoken. A lot of people don't like that approach, it is authoritarian and thought terminating on top of all the other issues it throws up. There should be no sacred castes. We know from our history that sacred castes have hidden multitudes of problems. It's one of the reasons we have safeguarding.
No agenda here, though I understand you are desperate to make out there is one.
Well you clearly do have one since you are trying to redirect people away from reading - READING! - other perspectives. Such a dangerous business that, reading other perspectives. You wouldn't want people to come to logical conclusions when presented with facts now would you, that would be awful!
Just pointing out your agenda to make this about transgender people when mass shootings are a gun problem, mental health problem, and a problem decades old in America that they never learn from.
And I have agreed that this is a gun problem which is decades old in the USA, and also that it is a mental health problem. What I also said was that trans identifying young people are often vulnerable, have mental health issues, and often have things that have caused deeper rooted issues - particularly young gay men trying to escape their sexuality due to homophobia, and autistic girls trying to identify out of the realities of their sexed bodies or sexual abuse.
Right I agree that sorting out the gun laws would absolutely reduce the mass shootings, but there's not an icicles hope in hell of that happening in the USA is there?
And WHY NOT? It's the root of the fucking problem!
Well I don't know do I? How do you untwist America from their constitutional right to bear arms? WHY CAPITALS AT ME HERE? I agreed that sorting out gun laws would massively help, what more do you want from me, it's not like I can go over there and single handedly convince and confiscate all firearms is it? I honestly wouldn't know where to start from a cultural point of view anyway, I'm Scottish so guns are the sole proviso of farms, competition shooters, and hunters here, and those are tightly restricted with the ability to remove licenses for many reasons, mental health concerns being one such reason. Carrying deadly weapons around as a matter of course is just completely alien to me.
Get rid of every transgender person on the planet and there will still be two mass shootings a week.
Where in any of my posts have I suggested I want to "get rid of every transgender person"? That is ridiculous in the extreme. This is a manipulative TRA tactic though, can't say anything vaguely negative about even a violent trans identified male, or the TRAs will shout "TRANS ERASURE! LITERAL GENOCIDE!" Not enough eye rolls in the world.
Still lots of dead children.
Yes but recognition of mental health issues early (which should IMO include any young person with a trans identity, for the reasons given above - twice now!), will help reduce the deaths of children by school shooters.
So I and many other people really do think gender identity is irrelevant here because he shouldn't have been able to buy a gun in the first place, because he was violent, because he was mentally ill, because no one should have guns.
I agree with this "he shouldn't have been able to buy a gun in the first place, because he was violent, because he was mentally ill, because no one should have guns" but again I think his falling into the gender ideology was an early indicator of his mental health issues, it seems like that was known way before any of the violent fantasies we now know he has after the fact. You seem determined to ignore that.
just throwing your hands up and saying 'well we can't change the gun attitude so let's jump on something else' is ridiculous!
Jeso woman, I am not saying that at all! I'm saying, as have others that the USA and gun laws are so entwined I don't know how you untangle them from each other. As it stands there's not an icicles hope in hell that you, me, or anyone else is going to be able to achieve that goal right now. I can't predict the future, maybe at some point (hopefully soon!) the USA as a whole will somehow realise that without tighter firearms laws, this problem of gun violence will continue to perpetuate itself. I mean it might seem self evident to everyone else, you and I included, but I just don't know what to tell you mate, I'm not an American.
They need to actually do something to protect the children in the US!
And I agree with you. I think part of that protection should also focus on early mental health intervention for children who have been sucked in by the harmful gender ideology. In regards to preventing future violence I think that particular focus should be be given to the trans identifying male children, because we know that males as a sex class are the ones who carry out the majority of violent and sexual crimes, and because of the inherent misogyny of gender ideology which has an overlap with incel culture. Another violent male group.