Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Dealing with inflammatory posts re Trans on MN

835 replies

womanformallyknownaswoman · 07/04/2018 17:37

I am concerned to see the message below from MNHQ at the end of the T thread. Regarding posts that I consider "goady", I have a personal policy of not feeding them, not engaging and not rising to the bait. I ignore them. OPs looking for conflict as a way to feed themselves won't get it from me. Firstly, it's exhausting-they are not interested in dialogue, despite what they say, and secondly the best way to deal with them, imo, is to starve them of attention and not rise to the bait. Don't give them what they want i.e. a fight and conflict.

My concern is I predict there will be a lot more new threads and OPs looking for a fight, as the public becomes more aware of the issues and the tide starts to turn against TRAs. They will want to try and get this Place closed down for discussion, and none of us want that to happen.

Personally I have found it empowering to learn how not to engage and to turn it back on them if absolutely necessary, by the use of ridicule and short rebuttals of their nonsense. I am happy to share some techniques if it will help plus learn more from others. There's no point in trying to score points and win all the arguments they make as it's the engagement down their rabbit holes they want - they literally feed off conflict. They're anti-social remember, so any attention is better than none. They want to keep you coming back and arguing, so they can derail, prolong, provoke and generally make life difficult for MNHQ - to force them to take action. The negative attention "turns on" those looking for a fight….so please don't feed them, ignore them and lets keep this place open.

Message for MN:

Hi all

Since this thread is getting near its end, this seems like a good moment to make a really serious point.

We've just made some more deletions on this thread, and we're pretty exasperated tbh - we feel we're running out of ways to say 'please stick within the TGs or risk losing MN as a place to discuss this issue.'

We're really proud of our commitment to free speech, and we put a huge amount of time and resources to enabling this debate to take place - as many of you have pointed out, it's one of the few places left.

To those who haven't yet been able to stop and look at things from our end of the barrel - please understand that you're risking this space for everyone; if you really can't debate civilly with those you disagree with, it might be time to consider that MN is no longer the place for you. We're sorry to have to say this - we don't like it one bit - but tbh nothing else seems to have got through so far: we're at a point of last resort.

Thanks to all those who modify their first instincts and manage to make their points in a calm, considered and civilised manner - even in the face of goadiness. We appreciate it (and so would Michelle.)

Thanks all

MNHQ

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
Juells · 10/04/2018 11:19

Why is all the onus on women to budge up and be supportive and not upset anyone and be inclusive and give up rights and space and hard-won protections?

Women are mugs.

Teacuphiccup · 10/04/2018 11:19

Yes another thing that says transitioning helps gender dysphoria.

No one is denying that. Transition away.

Doesn’t mean you’ve actually changed sex though so women should get to keep the right to sex based protections.

UpstartCrow · 10/04/2018 11:20

What does the scholarly research say about the well being of women?

Juells · 10/04/2018 11:36

What does the scholarly research say about the well being of women?

It says no-one gives a fuck Grin

AstraiaLiberty · 10/04/2018 11:37

Trans 'folk' usage - useful sealion indicator

Folk, maybe. Folx, definitely.

flowersonthepiano · 10/04/2018 11:45

I like the list as a starting point. I like some of the suggested modifications, particularly those from Teacup. As you put the list up as a proposed foundation for future dialogue, @Sue0001, I trust you are open to other’s input on the terms of reference of the dialogue?

Ereshkigal · 10/04/2018 12:32

Concerns about prisons, sports, guides, school loos and changing rooms, sexuality, legislation, policy, society etc etc if they start from WAWAG then we have re-centred and established the truth of it....

Love WAWAG. A great name for a movement or group.

Ereshkigal · 10/04/2018 12:35

Juells Grin spot on.

flowersonthepiano · 10/04/2018 12:43

I love WAWAG too. Excellent.

Beyond11cisRetinol · 10/04/2018 12:56

Just to go back to miiiiles upthread...

Suffix -ism (as in transgenderism) doesn't necessarily imply an illness (eg hyperthyroidism).

From our old friend the dictionary definition; "a productive suffix in the formation of nouns denoting action or practice, state or condition, principles, doctrines, a usage or characteristic, devotion or adherence"

So the word transgenderism could easily imply a stance based on fact (darwinism), a religion based on belief (Hinduism), or a belief system based on dodgy personal bias (racism).

The usage of "transgenderism" is a perfectly valid word, not an insult - and claiming it is insulting looks very much like "everything is transphobic" from the outside.

SirVixofVixHall · 10/04/2018 13:09

So much of the pressure on women to back down on this issue is framed as “ why can’t women be more accepting and tolerant” ?
The women now speaking up on this are women who have been accepting and tolerant their whole lives. Women who have fought for minorities, lesbian women, women who have supported the vulnerable. That these are the women now standing up and saying no, should give everyone pause for thought. It is easy to bully and guilt-trip women who are kind and selfless, but I, like many, have young daughters. Where I might not fight for myself, I will fight for them. I will fight for their right to sex-segregation, privacy, protection and dignity. I will fight for their right to have spaces that are for their sex alone. I will fight for them to feel they can listen to their own inner voice and assert boundaries against male people.

I am happily married to a kind and decent man, I had a father I adored, I have male friends who I love. But ultimately I care more about the safety of girls and women than I care about the feelings of men. I do not trust any male person who refuses to acknowledge why women and girls need single sex provision. I know as soon as they say that, that they are pretending not to understand, for their own gains. It is a huge, waving red flag. Any male person who wants to access the female estate, is a male person who cannot be trusted.
It is utterly meaningless to me, how someone chooses to dress. Whether or not someone wants to wear makeup.what name they choose. Who or what they tell me that they are. Meaningless. We are female and male. Females are at risk from males and we live our entire lives mediating around that risk- not walking down the dark lane, not wearing the shoes we can’t run in. To suddenly tell us that we should be more “loving”, that this risk is in our heads....gaslighting.

Freshlylaidterf · 10/04/2018 13:21

I do not trust any male person who refuses to acknowledge why women and girls need single sex provision
^^
This

Ereshkigal · 10/04/2018 13:33

So the word transgenderism could easily imply a stance based on fact (darwinism), a religion based on belief (Hinduism), or a belief system based on dodgy personal bias (racism).

The usage of "transgenderism" is a perfectly valid word, not an insult - and claiming it is insulting looks very much like "everything is transphobic" from the outside.

Agree. Certain people will object to anything that doesn't validate their worldview 100%. When I use it I am referring to the whole social phenomenon.

merrymouse · 10/04/2018 14:46

Sue, thank you for the links you have posted, however I think they display a lack of knowledge of the gender critical point of view. (That isn't necessarily a criticism - if you are hear to broaden your horizons, great!).

The main issue is that you are confusing identity and sex. A paper that draws links between hormones and people who are trans or gay (whatever the merits of the research) doesn't change the fact that women suffer discrimination because of their sex, not their identity or sexuality. 'Masculine' women and lesbians don't suffer less discrimination, or require different sex based services, protections or rights.

It is quite clear that trans people suffer discrimination, but not for the same reasons as women. I need to be able to describe and explain why I and other people with a female sexual reproductive system suffer discrimination, and I can't do that if I don't have a word to describe people with a female reproductive system.

I think it is wrong for anybody to make assumptions about anyone's identity or try to box them in to a particular identity box. Please don't make assumptions about my identity either.

CisPinkHoodie · 10/04/2018 15:10

It is quite clear that trans people suffer discrimination, but not for the same reasons as women. I need to be able to describe and explain why I and other people with a female sexual reproductive system suffer discrimination, and I can't do that if I don't have a word to describe people with a female reproductive system

Yes! That's it

AngryAttackKittens · 10/04/2018 17:44

Women should not have to prove to others (who are these others and why are they the ones who get to decide?) that we deserve a particular place to be single sex on the basis that it's ‘proportionate and legitimate’ to have it in that particular case. The fact that we want single sex spaces should be enough.

Ereshkigal · 10/04/2018 17:48

The fact that their feelings shouldn't trump our own when it comes to consent and dignity is legitimate enough. Or should be.

AngryAttackKittens · 10/04/2018 17:53

Yes another thing that says transitioning helps gender dysphoria.No one is denying that. Transition away.Doesn’t mean you’ve actually changed sex though so women should get to keep the right to sex based protections.

What appears to be being argued (not just by Sue, to be clear - this is a much broader way of framing things that she's only echoing) is that women's compliance and willingness to include some men in the definition of "women", and give them unconstrained access to any women's spaces in which they feel like they ought to be, is a part of transitioning and essential to their mental health.

Framing female compliance as essential to men's mental health is exactly what's getting so many women angry about this issue, and I'd suggest that anyone who wants to engage with women on this issue in the hopes of finding a solution stop doing it. If there is a genuine clash of interests here then that needs to be acknowledged and an actual compromise reached. Group A gets whatever they ask for and Group B meekly accepts it is not a compromise, it's Group B being bullied into compliance.

Juells · 10/04/2018 17:55

Framing female compliance as essential to men's mental health is exactly what's getting so many women angry about this issue

Succinctly and brilliantly put.

TallulahWaitingInTheRain · 10/04/2018 18:09

Framing female compliance as essential to men's mental health is exactly what's getting so many women angry about this issue

Absolutely this.

thebewilderness · 10/04/2018 18:10

Sue0001, do you know if any of the studies included females? I looked at several an they refer to males and people but our half of the population appears to be remarkably absent from the research. At least those that I read the overviews of. Also, I feel I should caution you that surveys are unreliable research tools.

thebewilderness · 10/04/2018 18:23

2.Women have a right for certain single sex services which exclude others where it is ‘proportionate and legitimate’ to do so
This has been up my nose since I first read it in the EA.
Women and girls safety, privacy, and dignity, is negotiable and businesses who choose to provide for women and girls safety, privacy, and dignity, must demonstrate it is 'proportionate and legitimate' to do so. Various states of undress do not qualify and if what they are telling GG is correct children sleeping and railways sleepers do not qualify for single sex accomodations. So I am guessing home alone in your own bed just might qualify for a right to single sex occupancy.

AngryAttackKittens · 10/04/2018 18:26

So I am guessing home alone in your own bed just might qualify for a right to single sex occupancy.

I dunno. I mean, did a male person indicate that he'd like to be there too? Did you offer a reasonable explanation as to why he couldn't be, and was your explanation accepted by a panel of impartial (ie male) people?

Ereshkigal · 10/04/2018 18:30

Was it a proportionate and legitimate use of the exemption in the Equality Act? I.e. could you consider some form of reasonable adjustment so that he could be there, for instance a male chaperone?

Beyond11cisRetinol · 10/04/2018 18:46

"Proportionate and legitimate" is just bullshit tbh.

Like women can only have women-only-space if the powers that be deem their need to be reasonable - it's a bit too close to "why can't you just be nice?" imo