Your peaktrans moment for today! Top this if you can.

[Ritzsaltedcrackers]

A woman was thrown out of a FB feminist group for challenging the idea that transwomen get periods.

apparently they DO get periods just without the small aspect of bleeding.

She was told that she was minimising transwomen's periods.

www.facebook.com/beth.rep/posts/10216741083464856

TRAs or that person thinking they're having periods - they don't give a shit about our feelings. So why should I give a shit about theirs?

Yes. I think people really ought to give this a bit more thought. Why are male feelings important and women's not? WAWAG?

Beyond11cisRetinol
I agree that kidding yourself something that is biologically impossible is ridiculous.

Maybe I'm coming at it from a different angle, but as someone who originally felt the feminism board was only for people who agree with one set of views/very hive mindy/ more for people who want to make angry digs or score point, to see loaded personal comments about individuals sticks with me as ^if a lurker saw these threads, would they see women debating very serious debates, or would they look at them.and think 'this isn't my scene, maybe it's best to leave them to it'?

It's not about tone policing or.expecting women to be lovely and cuddly all the time (I hope that's not what anyonr takes from it), but more that we need more women to see the problems.and join the debate. To me, part of that means maybe being aware of how gender critical feminists present themselves.

@transauthor It'd be like if I was your mum and you got married to a person I hated and started using their surname. My letters to you would be addressed to your maiden name and every time you received a Christmas card, you'd feel like your life choices were being disrespected. It would eat away at you over time and you'd feel less than equal to everyone else who your mum respected their marriage

You do know this happens to women all the time?

I didn’t change my name on marriage. People insist on calling me Mrs dh’s name. When i’m dr myname.

All the fucking time. It’s ignorant, but it isn’t literal violence.

It is one more thing about being a woman that a biological man would never get.

Yeah I’m the same. In my three years of marraige I have only ever received one card with the correct surname on it.

My grandma even calls me by my husbands first initial so I’m mrs d teacups husband. Even though she knows I have never changed my name. She does it because she has different beliefs to me and believes I am disrespectful to my husband for keeping my name.
It’s irritating but not violence.

Thing is, it's not just the TRAs trying to control how women speak, it's also other women right here. And it's not on. It's controlling, it's unfeminist, and for every women who then thinks "oh I like the tone there now, maybe I should join" there will be (at least) one other who thinks "if I try to say anything someone is going to jump all over me, you can't say anything right there, some bugger is always chiding people about could they just phrase things differently and consider how they may come across and also are they aware that they're making gender critical perspectives look bad?"

Notice that those of us objecting to this policing of other women's language aren't saying that the women who prefer a very impersonal tone devoid of sarcasm or anger or even mild irritation shouldn't communicate that way if that's what works for them. The attempt to control how other women speak is going in one direction only, and those who it's being aimed at have every right to say no.

So, I'm saying no.

angry
After i first posted in feminism i buggered off and didn't come back for ages. The reason wasn't because of heated debate, or the topics, it was because there a sense of 'well some of us are angry so should be as direct, combative, selectively blunt to score points under the guise of just pointing out the truth. If anyone disagrees with us then that is women silencing other women. In an odd way it reminded me of someone I knew at university who knew for sure that their feminism was the only real kind and any other kind was women sticking up for men and more proof you were a silly woman who hadn't seen the light (again, similar narrative when people have all the 'peak.trans' moments in a i was blind but now i see).

You get people offline who are all "i'm like marmite, you either like me or don't", "people often have an issue with me but that's just because I tell it like it is", "i'm just blunt, if people can't handle the truth that's their issue". More often than not when people have that approach people don't think 'wow what an intelligent person', they tend to think people are just being an arse because usually 'tell it like it is' tends to translate to just being rude, inflamatory, argumentative whilst pretending that they are 'only saying...'

There's a chance that some of the feminism/trans/TRA threads end up being like those people offline who pride themeves on 'just telling it like it is' so people in that view love it, but it may not help bring others in.

I'm really not sure what you think you are achieving Maisy, apart from derailing this thread. You've made your point. People disagree. Move on.

The attempt to control how other women speak is going in one direction only, and those who it's being aimed at have every right to say no.

So, I'm saying no.

YY. Me too.

And there's also a chance that there are people who're just as put off by the kind of controlling of other people's language that you're attempting. Certainly there's more than one person so far just in this thread who has been.

I know you may not like this but other women don't actually have to do what you tell them to, or even agree with your analysis of the situation. Trying to DARVO when you don't get your own way is certainly interesting, though.

Remember when Masie was talking about points scoring earlier? Projection is a thing people often do.

Ereshkigal
By replying to those who have replied to me.
But as predicted on some of these threads, there's one view to have and that's be angry and claim any debate to the contrary is silencing women.

Between that and radical TRAs, it's sonetimes hardly surprising that many women don't really want to get involved in debate. Best let the radicals at both ends of the spectrum sling mud and everyone else should stand well back and leave them to it.

And there's also a chance that there are people who're just as put off by the kind of controlling of other people's language that you're attempting

You need to listen to this Maisy. She's right.

I know you may not like this but other women don't actually have to do what you tell them to, or even agree with your analysis of the situation. Trying to DARVO when you don't get your own way is certainly interesting, though
I know they don't.
Dear me.
Get angry feminists claiming debate and different views, alternative takes on how debate can be percieved is DARVO.
Got radical TRAs claiming that any challenge to them is bigotry and violence.

Makes it very clear why moderate, centre ground voices across the gender debate probably decide it's not worth engaging.

Nobody is telling you that you can't communicate in the way that works best for you, Masie. What you're being told is that you can't control the way other women communicate. Which is a boundary that you should respect.

if a lurker saw these threads, would they see women debating very serious debates, or would they look at them.and think 'this isn't my scene, maybe it's best to leave them to it'?
Speaking as a lurker, who first found FWR via Active Conversations, and over the past few months has spent more and more time reading on this board, I would definitely say that (apart from debates on biscuits) I would definitely see these threads as women debating serious things. I would like to thank Datun, AngryAttackKittens, bewilderness, Erishkigal (apologies for any naming mistakes; trying to page back to namecheck just deletes my drafted posts, this is version 3) and everyone else who has contributed. I don't usually join in, as the other posters generally seem to be able to describe the issues much more clearly then I can; however as a direct result of FWR, I have signed the petition, written to my MP, and spent far more time than is healthy reading these boards. Thank you all.

Makes it very clear why moderate, centre ground voices across the gender debate probably decide it's not worth engaging.

If a moderate, centre ground voice can't be arsed to engage, maybe it's because it doesn't matter to them.

I rarely sound angry on my posts. I'm seldom snarky or sarky. But I gotta tell you, it's really, really not because I'm not angry.

If you're not angry about this issue, then to my mind there's something wrong.

It really pisses me off that, to some people, a woman's anger instantly discredits what she says.

to some people, a woman's anger instantly discredits what she says

Unless it’s a trans’woman’, of course. Then it’s a perfectly legitimate response. 😒

Honestly datun it's not about it not mattering.
The implications are worrying for women and people should probably be concerned. Speaking to other women offline, they have concerns. None of them would descrive themselves as feminists (which i personally find sad. Feminism shouldn't have thr negative press it gets).

Anger doesn't discredit, but 'just telling it like it is, look I'm hilarious for calling a transwoman by their male name' type thing probably does discredit the debate.

In the aftermath of some of the crap MN put up with there were some really interesting threads and some were quite telling about how the debate is perceieved. To me at least it would be daft not to consider whether how people discuss issues is perceived.

Note that Datun and I are polar opposites in terms of tone, and yet apparently both useful to newbies in our own ways.

So, Masie, like I keep saying, how about we let everyone speak even if they're not doing it the way you'd prefer?

Thank you Thursday!

I mean, to be clear, people are going to make their own decisions about how they want to communicate anyway, but it would be great if they could do that without being scolded like naughty children, on a feminist board.

Also the constant TGLWGH has to be confusing as hell for newbies who'll have no idea what it means.

MaisyPops

I respect your view and I respect that you wish to use a different tone to that from others on the board.

Reading through the thread, pp aren't objecting to you making the personal choice to be nice, they're objecting to you telling others that they have to be nice, too.

The pushback you're getting has a lot to do with this being an ongoing issue. My guess is that we need all women in this fight - those who are uncompromising and direct as much as those who wish to be inoffensive and treat everyone with kindness.

It's not about tone policing or.expecting women to be lovely and cuddly all the time (I hope that's not what anyonr takes from it), but more that we need more women to see the problems.and join the debate. To me, part of that means maybe being aware of how gender critical feminists present themselves.

Is there anywhere women can talk without worrying about how others perceive their performance?
Have you thought how hard it is for women to stop "performing" for an audience of scrutinizers?
It takes years of unpacking our conditioning.
I understand that your expectations of women in FWR was not met the first time you came here but do you understand that your expectations were unrealistic? This is the condition of women's life. Failing to live up to other people's unrealistic expectations when women act like people.

There are very nice regulars. ItalianGreyhound comes across as very sweet and kind and tries hard to be understanding. Datun has self control to rival the Dalai Lama. There will be people for whom that's the tone they need to hear.

And then there will be those for whom what they need is LangCleg reminding them that class is relevant to a lot of this, or thebewilderness sharing experience that goes back to the second wave (and that's left her unwilling to suffer fools patiently) or Rosenberg's firm and unyielding setting out of radical feminist principles (and lack of patience with misogynistic bollocks).

Different voices reach different people. When someone wants to limit the voices that can exist because they think that what works best for them is what will work best for everyone that just demonstrates a lack of perspective.

My guess is that we need all women in this fight - those who are uncompromising and direct as much as those who wish to be inoffensive and treat everyone with kindness.
We absolutely do need a broad range. Tjat's why I'd mentioned that it's worth being aware of how things are debated.
Not saying for one second that it should be all frills and glossing over the issues, just trying to say that it's perhaps worth being aware that when some posts start to stray towards mockery of trans people / intentional misgendering that might put people off who are on the fringes.

Do you see what I mean?