FWR

[MarsScarlet]

FYI: I've name changed for this to avoid a pile-on.

This post is about the overwhelming negativity and hostility with the FWR board that new posters and posters with a differing viewpoint face if they attempt to use the board.

There is a persistent group within the board that are, to put it simply, hateful towards others. Despite posting there on and off for more than 4 years, I have never felt welcome, despite not holding any particular extreme views or being abusive to others. Without exception, I am accused of being another poster, or a man, a TRA, or some kind of paid activist. This occurs again and again until I leave a thread in frustration.

I’ve seen this happen to many other new posters. Few return. Why would they? Such an acidic atmosphere doesn’t encourage healthy discussion. I’d just like to discuss women’s rights, but this board makes discussion impossible.

I’m not exactly sure what the answer is, except for @MNHQ to request the board to tone down the rhetoric a bit and back off on any new names they may see on the board. Let people engage with you rather than actively drive them away.

I've been ill so not around much. But I got a Tunnocks tin filled with Caramel wafers at Christmas!!!!

I could manage a tea cake or a snowball though.

Ooh do you feel a poem coming on?...go on! Do it!!

(Still not doing volume 3 any time soon though)

‘No one is complaining about the desire for better rights for women, or safeguards for children’

That’s not true, is it?

TRA / gender woo wangers are doing exactly that.

I've been ill so not around much. But I got a Tunnocks tin filled with Caramel wafers at Christmas!!!!

Wow! Someone knows you well and thinks very highly of you (please don't burst my bubble by saying you bought it for yourself).

‘No one is complaining about the desire for better rights for women, or safeguards for children’

That’s not true, is it?

TRA / gender woo wangers are doing exactly that.

I think what the person was saying is that women can only have these rights if we include some men in them.

This.

I hope you're feeling better, Beetle. Nice tin!

The argument is that one TW is in more danger alone in a mans space, than a group of women are with one TW in a womans space.

Even if that is true, why are womens saftey and dignity compromised for the TW saftey - a TW may be vulnerable and also a danger to women? Why is that the solution? My guess its because thats what TW want, rather than been the most obvious solution. Many men are vulnerable, but the solution is never to use womens spaces.

No additional demonisation needed, it is all hanging out for everyone to see.

Her words squeak for themselves.

How you find yourself defending someone who calls for others to refuse housing and employment to trans people, simply based on their trans status, I don't know.

Of course.. of course… those men in dresses.

yeah the sneering posts and the laughing reaction emojis on posts that are not humorous just to harass posters privately.

I do find those who do it generally are the ones who post derisory posts about how unkind others are and how kind, righteous and tolerant they are.

I do find those who do it generally are the ones who post derisory posts about how unkind others are and how kind, righteous and tolerant they are.

It's one of the most reliable patterns I've ever come across.

I reckon some posters think it is ‘feminine’ to not complain about being told they are bigots, transphobes, hateful, ignorant, and whatever gets thrown around.

It really is.

Oh yes I forgot our op said we just wanted to be male in our arguments.

I do not think @Helleofabore did suggest she supported posy views on housing etc you just put words in her mouth. I dont agree with lots of things said by posy and her extremism has been discussed at length on FWR your just cherry picking

Are you saying you can't even find one?

In the hundreds of thousands of posts on FWR, you can not find a single post to back up your position? 😵‍💫

Ok, try 1 post in the last 3 years.

I don't know why this is so hard, I found a example of a personally abusive post within 60 seconds of reading the request to me, how many hours has it been for you? 😆

I came on belatedly to say how brilliant FWR is and deplore this attempt to silence it by telling on us with the teacher. Now feeling gobsmacked at the latest DARVO with today's critics accusing FWR posters of doing what they, the TRAs do. I mean we have receipts but FFS 🤦‍♀️

Oh, I see what’s happening here: some of you are trying to dress up your dismissiveness as some kind of intellectual civility. Let’s dissect the points since you’ve gone to the effort of misunderstanding everything so thoroughly.

No, it’s not “transphobic” for women to advocate for single-sex spaces - it’s transphobic when the advocacy assumes that trans women don’t belong because of some imagined universal threat. Framing trans women as intruders into these spaces isn’t protecting anyone - it’s othering a vulnerable group for existing. If your solution to safety is exclusion based on stereotypes, it’s not about safety; it’s about discrimination.

Once again, you’re misconstruing the argument. It’s not bigotry to discuss fairness in sports; it’s bigotry to blanket all trans women as "males invading women’s spaces" as though their identities and intentions don’t matter. Governing bodies already regulate these issues - based on actual science, not your feelings - and the tiny number of trans women in elite sports hasn’t “destroyed” women’s sports. Your exaggeration says more about your biases than reality.

Calling gender identity an “ideology” is reductionist at best, disingenuous at worst. Gender identity isn’t a set of arbitrary beliefs - it’s rooted in decades of medical, psychological, and sociological research. Calling it “ideology” is a rhetorical sleight of hand to strip it of legitimacy and equate it with subjective opinions. That’s why it’s dehumanising - it reduces people’s lived realities to a debate about “beliefs.”

The ultimate irony here is that you claim I don’t want to discuss when it’s clear you’re not here for good-faith dialogue. You’re not interested in understanding trans people - you’re interested in presenting your position as “rational” while dismissing theirs as emotional or invalid. The invitations to do it "on our terf (ha!)" over on the FWR board is very telling.

So no, this wouldn’t have been an “interesting” discussion because you’re not engaging with the actual issues. You’re just repackaging exclusionary rhetoric as polite disagreement and hoping no one notices.

O you know, when I hear someone calling for trans people to be refused housing and jobs I kinda discount what else they have to say, because they have told me who they are.

But if you think they have sense to speak after that, you do you.

I am one of those who says a cheery hello to the parking officers around here. And they are plentiful. But I stop them and ask them all the parking questions that I am not sure on and they always give me answers. I wonder if I should try out the parking thread scenarios on them if a poster is not sure of the legalities….

‘No, it’s not “transphobic” for women to advocate for single-sex spaces - it’s transphobic when the advocacy assumes that trans women don’t belong because of some imagined universal threat.’

I was interested to read your pov, initially.
I stopped reading at this point.

@blownawaybyit Saying trans women are women of some sort is totally irrational.

Great idea.

O you know, when I hear someone calling for trans people to be refused housing and jobs I kinda discount what else they have to say, because they have told me who they are.

You are obviously free to discount whatever KJK says. Who said or implied you couldn't?

No, it’s not “transphobic” for women to advocate for single-sex spaces - it’s transphobic when the advocacy assumes that trans women don’t belong because of some imagined universal threat

Male violence against women is not imagined and yes it is universal because males are universally a threat to women and girls.

That's the whole point.