Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Brian Paddick asking for feminist views on Self Id

165 replies

DarthArts · 26/03/2018 21:16

Fair play - he's asking for opinions.

He's being pointed to a woman's place and a lot of other GC women and Transpeople.

Brian Paddick asking for feminist views on Self Id
OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
LangCleg · 28/03/2018 09:42

I hope he will show some moral strength and go through with these meetings and not let debate be shut down.

What will happen is that he may or may not go ahead with the meetings but will never say anything remotely gender critical or questioning of the TRA agenda in public ever again.

You know it. I know it. We all know it.

It doesn't matter if he changes his mind because he'll never say that he has.

Italiangreyhound · 28/03/2018 09:48

Apologizing for consulting with women. That really shows where we are at. What about all the actual women in the LGBTQ+ 'movement', are they not getting sick of this?

BoreOfWhabylon · 28/03/2018 09:51

He is apologising if his actions cause hurt to anyone but he's not backing down. He says he wants to understand and has arranged meetings with feminists to do so.

Karen IS has tweeted this morning to confirm this.

Give the bloke a chance.

Italiangreyhound · 28/03/2018 09:56

@BoreOfWhabylon OK, I will give him a chance, I am always full of hope. But I still do not understand how he feels he needs to apologise for speaking to women, who is hurt by this?

BoreOfWhabylon · 28/03/2018 10:00

That's not how I read it Italian. He isn't apologising for his actions but is saying 'Look, I'm sorry you're hurt, upset etc' not 'I'm sorry I've done this'

We shall see.

Datun · 28/03/2018 10:25

He's been having DMs with Karen IS.

it would be a really horrible person, who came out and apologised to TRAs as a consequence of an exchange with Karen.

Perhaps he's just pre-empting with an apology, as he thinks it might protect him from abuse?

Or maybe, he's just horrible misogynist who doesn't give a fuck.

Sparctopus · 28/03/2018 10:29

I am cautiously hopeful... like Quentin, I think if he is getting the full TRA pile-on, it may actually open his eyes to what women are facing and to some of the characters behind the current TRA movement. Also I have a lot of faith in Karen to be able to explain the issues calmly and reasonably. And the fact he has asked to learn more in the first place is surely better than refusing to hear women's views at all?

Also slightly frustrated as apparently I was recently in the same place at the same time as he was - but didn't know about it till afterwards. I would have loved the chance to ask for a chat if I'd known beforehand that he would be there! (Though he probably had a full schedule anyway I guess).

SmurfOrTerf · 28/03/2018 10:30

Bore I read it the same way as you.
I was once forced to give an apology at work, the CEO asked me if I meant it did I fuck I gave him a death stare and said that was irrelevant.

Italiangreyhound · 28/03/2018 10:38

@BoreOfWhabylon "That's not how I read it Italian. He isn't apologising for his actions but is saying 'Look, I'm sorry you're hurt, upset etc' not 'I'm sorry I've done this'"

I don't get it, really, why are people hurt he is speaking to women? I honestly do not know why they are hurt. Unless they feel they should dictate public policy on everything that affects women? Can you explain why they are hurt? I am not being goady, I don't get it.

BoreOfWhabylon · 28/03/2018 10:51

I know you're not being goady Smile

I don't get it either. I can only think it's because PADDICK IS PREPARED TO HAVE DIALOGUE WITH EVIL TERFS!!!

Daff0dil · 28/03/2018 11:01

James Kirkup's article in the Spectator yesterday is really significant
in the context of the response to Brian Paddick. The response to his tweet can viewed with much greater awareness.....
It would be completely counter-productive to react with hostility to him...

blogs.spectator.co.uk/author/james-kirkup/

"Bluntly, why the hell is no one in politics shouting from the rooftops about this stuff? We’re talking about people trying to put the frighteners on Mumsnetters, for goodness sake. In any other area of public life, politicians usually fall over themselves in their rush to speak up for middle-class working mothers. Yet the politicians who were desperate to talk biscuits at Mumsnet Towers are curiously silent about the intimidation that some women now report there.

If this was simply a story of a small number of nasty people online and – sometimes – on the street doing bad things to women who speak up about a political issue, I suspect this problem wouldn’t persist. The relevant legal and political authorities would indeed pay attention to that fear, and maybe even do something, even if that was just listening to those women, meeting them, answering their questions.

But that doesn’t seem to be happening. It’s because those women have been – quite successfully and even skilfully – demonised and stigmatised, put beyond the pale of civilised debate as those who question orthodoxy often are. They’ve been given a name, a name that means they’re bad people, people who should not speak and should not be heard That name is “Terf,” which once meant “Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist” but now appears to stand in its own right as a term of abuse and dismissal alongside the other short, harsh words often used to question the worth and virtue of women.

And that small number of people who direct violence and abuse at “Terfs” are swimming in a larger sea of contempt and dismissal. Their conduct takes place in a social context where hostility to “Terfs” has become not just normal but even amusing, where there is no social cost to talking about and perhaps even inciting violence towards women who hold “unacceptable” views. Simply, some people, including people who would never themselves engage in that sort of violence, are doing things that make violent discourse and even violence look and feel OK. Sadly, they include journalists and politicians, people who parade their support for minority groups but speak about feminist women in terms they would never use about other people."

Sparctopus · 28/03/2018 11:02
Grin
Sparctopus · 28/03/2018 11:02

Sorry that was for the EVIL TERFS!

Kneedeepinunicorns · 28/03/2018 11:05

I honestly do not know why they are hurt.

Partly its the extreme hyperbole involved. 'Literal violence'. 'Hurt'. 'Triggered'. Everything is dramatised to the nth degree all the time, the language is constantly dialled up to extreme reaction. At first, when you're not used to it, it's shocking and calls up the natural responses you have to someone expressing extreme distress. After you start to realise it's constant and it's always 100mph drama or 100pmh yay, it starts to get wearing and you see it for what it is.

Partly it's the automatic splitting and polarisation of all debates that again is endemic to the culture, everything must be framed as either good (allllll good) or bad (terrible! Awful! Extreme!) and the inability to frame anything that has the faintest hint of rejection as anything other than a full out onslaught. Hence the 'hang on, it's all fine you doing whatever you want, the only thing is we want a few, limited spaces for biological women that are protected' is framed as 'you deny our right to exist' and several times I've seen that go the whole way to 'terfs want us dead'.

This is dealing with people (in this political social media movement, NOT all trans people as it's necessary to triple explain everything) many of whom show interaction styles usually seen in people with personality disorders, including narcissism. If you read around the Issendai blog she talks a great deal about trying to interact with family members with these issues and it's often impossible: their reality is so totally subjective and based on their own inner state and challenges that boundaries and relationships just aren't possible.

Which is fine, we all get to pick and choose who we have relationships with, and it wouldn't matter, unless that pathology was driving legislation and we had a political leadership asleep at the wheel.

BarrackerBarmer · 28/03/2018 11:08

I think there's a high probablility that he is like so many other men, oblivious to the arguments, unprepared to make even a cursory attempt to research for himself BEFORE engaging; determined to show women how wrong they are.

When I think about how I approach a subject of which I am ignorant and I KNOW is complicated, I do some reading first from both sides before I jump in and make a twit of myself.

I reserve the right to be sceptical of any person who, upfront, declares their position and immediately exposes a false understanding of the issues.

"I oppose Hindus because they all believe that Christians eat their bogeys for breakfast. I am open to discussions with these Christian hating people."

Who pronounces first, before even checking that they understand the position of the people they are condemning?

Kneedeepinunicorns · 28/03/2018 11:09

Incidentally, worth thinking too: a woman in severe distress showing this kind of constant drama and framing on the relationships board... would be pretty quickly told to calm down and get it together. This kind of dramatics doesn't get tolerated in adult women.

It does in teenagers

It does in middle aged men

Funnily enough...... they constitute most of the shouty ones online.

misscockerspaniel · 28/03/2018 11:15

Having apologised and said that he is not representing his party, the TRAs are doing a good job at winding him up. One of BP's latest tweet reads: "If you make judgments on the basis of only listening to one side of an argument, if you think debating issues is inflammatory, then I don't trust your judgement and neither should anyone else".

Kneedeepinunicorns · 28/03/2018 11:18

Ah, he's catching on. Smile

Daff0dil · 28/03/2018 11:18

the more this group of TRAs try to control things, the more visible this manipulation is...

LangCleg · 28/03/2018 12:20

I'm going to bookmark this thread and, if Paddick ever comes out with any public support for the gender critical view or makes any public defence of women's need for single sex spaces, I will come back, eat humble pie and apologise.

He will not.

Daff0dil · 28/03/2018 12:23

This is Brian Paddick's important statement:
I am told by a number of people that I have caused upset & damage & I have apologised for doing that. I have not & will not apologise for engaging. Don't shoot the listener

DarthArts · 28/03/2018 12:39

Well I was open minded about this but goodness me, the capitulation didn't take long did it.

Sigh

OP posts:
Kneedeepinunicorns · 28/03/2018 12:43

Er Brian....?

Which group is doing the name calling and reducing people down to abusive labels? Because it's only one.

Which group wishes the other side to not have the right to speak? Because it's only one.

Which group frames the very speaking of different opinions as a crime? Because it's only one.

Which group is leaking fear, hate, irrationality and abuse everywhere? Clue: again its only one.

Have a sesame street moment: what have we learned so far?

changeypants · 28/03/2018 12:57

i think its great when people in the public sphere model uncertainty, thoughtfulness and even changing their minds. it does not happen enough.

on the other hand i find there is something deeply distasteful in waiting for a man with the privilege of infulence to proclaim whether or not our views on something which affects him far less than it does us are acceptable to him or not.

ChattyLion · 28/03/2018 13:06

Kneedeep bloody good point.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.