I'd like to commend GibbertyFlibbert for his posts, on this thread and others.
On other threads, his dogged persistence with what we might charitably call his ' non-standard ' understanding of 'science', as well as giving some of us a good laugh, has shown up attempted justifications of the 'transwomen are women' theme for what they are - wholly vacuous as well as curiously risible.
Now on this thread GibbertyFlibbert points up for us what is wrong with Mumsnet's proposed 'moderation of trans rights ...'
' Sweeping negative generalisations about any group, including trans people and gender-critical feminists, won’t be tolerated ', so says Mumsnet ...
... but as GibbertyFlibbert helpfully points out, ' The accusation that trans women aren't female is about as sweeping a negative generalisation as it gets '.
C'mon Mumsnet. Are you really going to (in GibbertyFlibbert's ever-moderate and balanced phraseology) ' allow [! sic] people to refuse to accept trans women as women '?
I refuse to accept trans women as women (except in the sense in which sea horses are horses and red herrings a kind of fish, of course). Are you going to allow this refusal? Hein?