Dealing with inflammatory posts re Trans on MN

[womanformallyknownaswoman]

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

@FeministBadger "Significantly this is the same demographic who previously experienced high levels of anorexia which is now less prevalent."

Listening to a young woman with dysphora describe not liking her growing chest does sound very like anorexia. As far as I am aware. Although I do not know enough about this. I had a friend with anorexia, I do not know enough generally but I have a different kind of eating disorder linked to OCD. I think maybe there are many contributing factors, ASD, anxiety, etc.

I don't know why the 'trans community' (if such a thing exists) would wish to automatically claim all these young women.

One purpose of going through the process to get the GRC (as adults) is it helps to work out medically what is going on.

Just as young people cannot get married or vote we know they cannot always make logical decisions with long reaching consequences. I would say this was even more true in terms of 'decisions' about themselves!

Which of us ended up doing the job we wantrd to do at 12 or marrying the person we wanted to marry at 14!

I wanted to be a nursery nurse at 12 and to marry Donny Osmond at 14. Dear reader, it will not surprise you to known, neither came to be!

Does that mean we do not take young girls seriously? No, it does not. We do take young people seriously. However, we cannot assume all the mixed up, body-hating young girls are really boys, even if they themselves feel this at this moment.

We take young people seriously in that we care about their feelings and want them to be happy, while at the same time realizing that adolescence is turbulent and all about trying to figure out who you are, while your brain isn't finished developing yet.

Hope Pink. Wow. Fabulous.

Yes. AngryAttackKittens that is so true. That's what I meant. We don't take them literally that they are boys but we do take them seriously as important, special values people.

We take young people seriously in that we care about their feelings and want them to be happy, while at the same time realizing that adolescence is turbulent and all about trying to figure out who you are, while your brain isn't finished developing yet.

Yes. We understand that adolescence is a period of turbulent identity formation. And we also understand that adolescent girls in particular often go through a period of intense body hatred as a reaction to the demands an aggressively patriarchal and sexualised adult society is putting on them. That's why many feminists see a link between anorexia/bulimia, self-harm and trans identities in adolescent girls.

Hope Pink is an amazing person, absolutely honest and kind hearted. I follow Hope on Twitter.

@SirVixofVixHall I do as well. Hoping to organise some street protests in the future and he's promised to come help.

Hope Pink is fab. That is all.

I’m not on twitter, is there any way we can show support for Hope?

Does anyone know why my "what's your gender" thread was deleted? I hope I didn't offend anyone!

Brilliant, Hope Pink, loved the article. I don't do Twitter either and would also like to show support.

Never heard of Hope Pink before this but they sound awesome

And i agree with others

I dont do twitter either

Is there any other way of showing support?

Same with that Jena lady on the FGM thread

IM NOT ON TWITTER BUT IF I WAS I WOULD ABSOLUTELY HAVE YOUR BACK

(That probably means nothing if I'm not on twitter )

I'd never heard of Hope Pink, thank you for sharing that! Now that's a man who is a real role model; an intelligent and reasoned voice expanding the 'bandwidth' of what men look like, what their names are, what their choices of clothes and appearance might be, and being himself without regard for gender conformity. He and Miranda Yardley are brilliant examples of positive gender freedom, and what is needed is a strong campaign on reducing male violence and policing of masculinity.

I think some new joiners have this impression and are therefore posting positive content about trans people even though it has no relevance to feminism or impact on women and girls

If they'd take the trouble to look around the forum it would be apparent that there isn't a lack of information or understanding of the issues, and much of the stuff being plopped is material long since shared and discussed here.

It reminds me of Six O Clock Charlie from MASH, someone whizzing by, lobbing something randomly positive at MN FWR board and zooming away again. Doesn't do much to help really.

All the best to you, Hope Pink.

Hope Pink has done a lot. Isn't he the one who takes selfies dressed up to the nines in men's loos with captions saying how he is never harassed?

It's really interesting that he is now identifying as a man.

I do get the impression that the longer some men (with gender dysphoria) are surrounded by radical feminism, the quicker they get it, and it does sometimes alter their perception of themselves.

Then you've got Peter Tatchell on Twitter saying how awful it was that a transman with a broken arm was asked about her medical history.

Cue dozens of posts saying if she's on T she could have osteoporosis, she can't have an x-ray if she's pregnant, certain meds would be contra indicated, etc.

He had zero clue that every woman, every single woman, is asked these questions. It's nothing to do with being trans. It is to do with having a sexed body that is different to that of a man. And how medication works on it.

I wish men like him could be injected with the little bit of radical feminism that seems to be working wonders on people like Hope Pink and Miranda Yardley.

Feminism is logical. People call it a philosophy, an ideology, but, to me it's just plain logic. Based on evidence and statistics.

Men pride themselves on being logical, don't they? You'd think they'd get it then.

Yes that was an embarrassingly stupid tweet from Peter Tatchell - would it be better for trans people to die from drug complications because their doctors were scared of triggering them if they asked about their current medication?

On the subject of anorexia, eating disorders are massively over represented in autistic people. Who can guess where this sentence is going...?

Should have refreshed first

yetanother and Italian, regarding your posts this morning on the reasons for increased numbers.

I agree that a few people will be coming forward now as a result of the internet, higher visibility and the creation of (hard to miss) trans mouthpieces.

What I think might be worth noting, though, is that these are likely to be often the ones with a lower degree of dysphoria or no actual dysphoria at all.

Because if you really have the kind of dysphoria yetanother and I had it is simply not possible to push it to one side and not be driven to seek some kind of solution. Even if you have no idea there is one available because it is not talked about as now then you know something is wrong and if you are in any way sensible you seek help to try to resolve it.

I think this is part of what characterises the difference between transsexuals and transgender people more broadly. Whether there are other causes. How relevant it is that one focuses on reassigning the body physically and the other can be content just by doing so socially or dressing differently - the overriding difference is the depth of the dysphoria that is either something you can live with or not.

Those with that deep dysphoria were so relieved after years of suffering to feel 'normal' that there was no urge to create movements or campaigns or bonding sessions. The whole focus of transition was to blend in and become not create a new type of person to stand out.

The way the activists are out there in your face is in a huge contrast and further emphasises to me differences not similarities. Though, of course, some of that is generational.

A social media society post the Millennium is going to create sharp divisions in how things are done. But I still think those who physically transition have less of an overt desire to declare themselves something other because the point of the transition was to become something that was.

Not saying that is what was achieved, but being the purpose that drives physical transition that is not there otherwise, it creates a desire for inclusion and seclusion versus a desire for expression and declaration for those who see themselves as a new type of person and want to challenge self expression.

As these are the ones more likely to be experimenting around us it is no surprise at all to me to see the huge rise in numbers of children and the increasing numbers of girls declaring they are trans boys.

The trans boys who were transsexual will not have had the luxury of waiting and not acting until a social revolution arrived. They will have been driven to come forward and seek medical assistance. And did exactly that. As trans men have always existed.

Half of the first handful of cases dealt with by doctors before world war 2 were trans men. 15 years ago, long before this revolution, just under 30% of those getting a GRC were trans men.

Hope is fab

terfing

Apparently it was "goading"
I thought it was light relief myself!

ophelia

What?

Whats that about?

Please feel free to pm me if you would rather not say on here

Oh dont worry the whats my gender one