This woman is all of us.

[CAAKE]

Lily Madigan speaking to a rapt audience at an Enfield North CLP meeting.

Photo is from this tweet -
twitter.com/enfieldnorthclp/status/964240546977013760

A lot of the pattern type behaviour makes me think of psychology/persuasion stuff like Robert Cialdini's work on influence, NLP etc.

I think as a matter of course, that anyone trans committing an offence should have their previous name and their sex made public so that there is transparency about it

I agree. Too easy to simply change gender to hide.

Why can't the news articles say trans woman in the title? Why just woman?

The poilceman was pushed onto tracks by a drunken trans woman. So with the strength of a man.
I also don't understand why they put that she would've gone to a mans prison if she'd been convicted. All it does is give the TRA's ammo to get sympathy. It also seems like a pattern that judges appear to be going easier on trans women because they don't want to call them men.

The second article make it look like a perverted woman instead of a perverted man. No mention of trans at all.

Sorry I should have clarified about the headline in the first article - I just meant to highlight in casual reading it wasn't apparent.

I worry about the issues already mentioned - transparency and data.

I'm with Red on this one. When they hit low, we go high.

What @BitFuckedOffNow said.

This thread is fantastic, and I think Mumsnet HQ have found a really good balance between allowing free speech and not allowing nastiness, given the difficult legal position they find themselves in.

I find it easier to just not use pronouns, even though I understand the argument of those that do want to use the correct pronouns.

And as for the poster above who said there are journalists, politicians, judges, authors etc watching the thread... spot on.

Through work, I have spoken to several high-profile journalists (male and female) and two sitting MPs who follow the threads (and they have told me there are more) and are making inroads with persuading their colleagues that the position of many posters here is not bigotry and that concerns are absolutely valid.

When you hear this stuff discussed in the media, it’s usually as a direct result of it being discussed here.

It’s all a bit Handmaid’s Tale at the moment, but there are more politicians who will now begin to stick their heads above the parapet.

Without the courageous and insightful work of people here, there would be virtually no opposition to the likes of Madigan.

News headlines have taken the 1st rule of misogyny to new heights when they report crimes trans identified males commit as being committed by women. You would almost think a bunch of MRAs in the news room have decided this is the way to make their lie about "women committing as much crime as men but never prosecuted" look true.
1st rule of misogyny: Women are responsible for what men do.

That's brilliant news, Janice

That’s very encouraging news Janice.

The Slacktivist has a policy to always use the proper title when speaking of The Liar Tony Perkins.
Henceforth I shall use the proper title when speaking of The MRA L Madigan instead of calling them Madagain, though I really do like that play on words best.

Through work, I have spoken to several high-profile journalists (male and female) and two sitting MPs who follow the threads (and they have told me there are more) and are making inroads with persuading their colleagues that the position of many posters here is not bigotry and that concerns are absolutely valid.

MN really does have a far reach, doesn't it.

I do often wonder how much of a part MN has played in delaying this GRA thing, and possibly stopping it. Janice Turner has to take some credit too, she has been amazing. But it could very well be that when the mods decided that yes, we could actually discuss it here instead of being deleted and banned, that the tables started turning. Its been interesting to watch the threads go from 90% 'you bigot' to 90% gender critical as women read more and more about it and actually started thinking about it instead of mindlessly repeating the cultlike chant. I know the turning of the tide on here gave me the courage to brace this topic with some people I knew in real life, and it turned out they all thought it was horseshit too just did not dare to say it.

In terms of why many media outlets are not referring to trans women as trans women, if they're following AP guidelines it's because they're not allowed to (this is the case for many US based sites/newspapers). The obvious way to get around that is to include a photo, which is what many dissenting journalists appear to be doing. It's frustrating to see "women commits crime that would be extremely atypical if a woman had done it" headlines, but much like Mumsnet they're trying to work around rules that are already in place.

I don't like it and wish it wasn't necessary, but at least people who actually read the article will come away knowing that the crime was committed by a male person, and hopefully annoyed about seeing them described as a woman.

That's very good to know Janice. All most of us want - all - is for clear daylight to be shone on this, for all sides of it to be shared openly with the general public. People have the right to make an informed choice.

That mirror article is terrible. I don't think your average reader is thinking about whether someone identified as a 'woman' might actually be a man.

I agree that there's some great conversations happening on this thread.

I'm all for staying within the parameters of what MNHQ ask us to do and agree that with a little thought and care it's easy to write about a person without dead naming or misgendering them. Play the long game, and all that 👊

If you think someone is spouting bollocks, and you'd say they were spouting bollocks then you'd be discriminating if you didn't say they spouting bollocks on the basis that they were trans. Treat all people who spout bollocks equally.

Ouchbirthhurted

The process you outlined, is spot-on.

And I do believe it's a deliberate, highly organised set of stages. Going back 10 years or more.

Unfortunately (or fortunately), transactivists being the misogynistic, blind twits they are, have no idea of the collective power and voice that women can acquire.

Steeped in male socialisation, they truly believe their own PR.

That women will sit down, shut up, and do what they're told.

It never ceases to amaze me how some men are blind to the point of irrationality, when it comes to women.

I find that thing where people are willing to hand out "correct" pronouns to trans women who they think are nice but not to the ones who're not pretty patronizing, tbh. I know I don't mean it, if the person I'm talking to knows me at all they know I don't mean it too, so why the charade? It both undercuts the idea that male people can't be women by implying that some can if we like them enough and treats the person you're talking to like a dog who you're giving a treat for rolling over. Bothers me. If I like someone I'd rather not patronize them.

Women lie for the sake of male ego but also out of caution.
I will not lie for men for any reason any more, but I understand why some women do and why they teach the next generation to do so.

It wasn't that long ago that a thread like this would need assistance from specific Gender Critical MNers in arguing the point. Now, people arguing the point and with very clear awareness are everywhere. Way to go everyone. Keep on keeping on.

As to what Datun and Outbirched are saying about "the process" -
I've just come across this article on twitter - might start a new thread about it as it seems to be well-researched piece.

"Who are the rich white men institutionalising transgender ideology? Exceedingly rich, white men (and women) who invest in biomedical companies are funding myriad transgender organizations whose agenda will make them gobs of money"

http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/20/rich-white-men-institutionalizing-transgender-ideology/

My jaundiced take on the Equality Act is that the circumstances matter. If you are talking about whether Heather Peto stood previously for election then clearly you can use the old name and probably pronouns too. It would be unreasonable to think that this was an attack motivated simply by Heather’s transgender identity.

If it’s an ad hominem attack then you are on shaky ground. The more vicious the things you say the less likely you will be considered reasonable to use biologically correct pronouns because in that circumstance it looks like an attack on identity.

In short if you want to let of steam use the preferred pronouns and the new name then rant away.

I follow so many young feminists on Twitter who regard misgendering as the equivalent of tarring and feathering, mainly because trans activists have told them it's an act of violence. I think misgendering as a provocation doesn't do any good to the legitimate arguments that feminists need to make to coax the younger generation into considering the issues. We make it too easy for the trans activists if we do something they can point to as violence, even though I feel enormously tired at the whole preferred pronoun malarky. Rightly or wrongly, it invalidates the rest of what we are saying and thinking in the eyes of a large group of young people who have been persuaded that trans rights are MORE IMPORTANT than any other form of rights, be they LBG or feminist or social, and we need to get them to hear us too.

Lily Madigan is now making the extraordinary claim that TERFs are not feminists - and cause death, hunger and homelessness to young people. Okaaaayyyyy Lily.

I mean, it's just more ludicrous every day - Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists Lily. That's what you call us. Although the enlightened amongst us (ie nearly everyone on MN ) know this means Telling Everyone Real Facts.

I think Lily is just doing this to get a rise now.

Very disturbing to read that article re. Pharma & trans*ing young people/children with puberty blockers & hormones - what is it they always say? Follow the Money.

I'm very scared for our children at the moment.

and cause death, hunger and homelessness to young people.

Wow, so we caused neoliberalism, the world economic crash, cold weather, high house prices, increasing university fees, and and the collapse of the welfare state? I never realized I'd been so busy.