Excellent article on the problem of transphobia

[crispbuttyfan]

www.huckmagazine.com/perspectives/opinion-perspectives/mumsnet-transphobia-online/

"Regardless of intention, it seems to me that Mumsnet has allowed transphobia to become associated with their brand through their inaction. These boards have now become nothing short of echo chambers, spaces in which anti-trans rhetoric is continually employed with little objection."

The evidence is apparent throughout the feminism board.
Where lies are spread with abandon and the truth is slandered as 'gaslighting'.

She can't do that, Bowl - she's representing an organisation which is required to be polite and politically neutral (cf threads about the way women's organisations in Scotland have been silenced in the public consultation on reforms to the GRA, because they are publicly funded and thus now have a legal requirement to be "inclusive"), and you have to be polite to these people. Also some of them carry immense political clout (up to and including members of the House of Lords).

She did take me to an interesting talk (might have been a TedX one) by a prominent American climate scientist. His take home messages on using social media were "talk to the lurkers" and "don't fight trolls - it's like fighting a pig: you both come out covered in shit, but the pig enjoys it."

Bowlofbabelfish
"I’ve noticed this is a technique being used since a few months back. TRAs take a slew of very impressive sounding words and combine them in a solemn nodding tone to make a point that sounds really serious and sciency. But it’s just a jumble of words that don’t actually mean anything."

I'm extremely grateful to you for your recent posts. I have had this approach on twitter quite a number of times recently, particulary quoting that Nature article and some other selection of articles from National Geographic. They generally give a selection of sciencey terms and the inevitable 'your old fashioned biology' comes into play. Having not studied biology, I can't tackle it head on, but yes, I know that something isn't right.

But let's say what they claimed had some merit; a couple of papers with dubious provenance would hardly be enough to upend thousands of years of observable science.

Surely there would need to be a full, state sponsored research of the claims that the TRAs make to justify the disruption to society as we know it. The speed and carelessness with which this ideology has taken grip is astonishing and other than radical feminists, noone seems to be challenging it.

That Nature piece was an op-ed piece by a journalist. It was not a peer-reviewed scientific article. It's important to make that distinction.

Also, I might add that if someone wishes to make an argument that womanhood should be defined by how someone appears and get into loads of stuff about what parts of someone’s appearance matters most then let’s have that talk but please can we have it without the use of language designed to exclude and confuse.

How frustrating fermat :(

The thing is that there are as you say some people who there is actually no point arguing with, because they have a faith based opinion. Not necessarily religion, just based on their faith that x is true.

In that case, you aren’t going to change their minds and defusing tension via some combo of grey rock technique plus talking at length about the first tiny point until they grow bored is probably best.

The lurkers and the floating voters are the ones you can address.

It all reminds me of puritanism and the use of the phrase 'popish idolatry'.

Thanks guys, I just had a read through, I wouldn't expect anything less.
Most replies about an article referring to the mumsnet echo chamber, and all the replies are mostly echo chamber replies of nonsense, spin, and outright lies. Bravo!

"but the studies are bunk, here's a slew of totally misrepresented studies we like!"

"clownfish, intersex etc"

"What does outlier person a, have in common with person me"

"it's all about mens rights"

""men men men men"

"heres a total misunderstanding of current equality laws that everyone in the echo chamber agree's with"

"a,b,c is happening, will happen, even though theres not a shred of evidence"

Mumsnet is one of the few places with an reputation for unbridled transphobia, it is said again and again and again, and the echo chamber disagree's.... almost like they have NO clue about trans people, well thats clearly because you are all too busy pushing nonsensical sophistry and bigotry.

I wouldn't expect anything less.

Can someone give a summary of the papers which are most commonly cited?

If that's a not a goady post, I don't know what is

I often wonder what posters think the relationship is between being gender critical and the causes (or perceived causes) and the plight of 'being trans'.

I think some posters think that if it could be established that 'being trans' has a biological basis, this would eradicate the concerns that other posters have about conflating sex and gender. Others seem to think that a better understanding of the difficulties trans people face will eradicate concerns about conflating sex and gender. What they are failing to do is acknowledge the benefits to women and children from not conflating sex and gender.

I can accept that there may be some underlying biology leading to gender dysphoria, I am very aware of the plight of many trans people. I am happy to explore these issues. I am not happy to do so if the agenda is to try and use such discussions to try and justify eroding the rights of women and children.

Mumsnet is one of the few places with an reputation for unbridled transphobia, it is said again and again and again, and the echo chamber disagree's.... almost like they have NO clue about trans people, well thats clearly because you are all too busy pushing nonsensical sophistry and bigotry

Why can't you accept that some people are worried about the changes being made to women's rights without jumping up and down and shouting transphobe? Why, if we're so wrong do you not explain with something other than name-calling?

Surely, MNHQ calling people (groups thereof, so it's hardly a personal attack) transphobic and bigoted for airing their concerns isn't in the spirit of the bloody site.

of nonsense, spin, and outright lies

Which bits? The science word salad or the career scientists talking about actual science?

I do hope you’re not calling peer reviewed published work ‘nonsense spin and lies.’ Or feminist theory ‘spohistry’

If there’s any specific bit of the science you want explained or want to debate, bring it on. I’m sure our other more knowledgeable posters can deal with the feminist theory side too.

Once again you are trying to shut down conversation by yelling bigot at people - that doesn’t work here. There is no unbridled transphobia, only a critical mass of critical thinking intelligent women talking about the threats to the safety of women and girls

I imagine the OP was delighted when that you turned up babel

crispbuttyfan Hi just on lunch break you're absolutely right though I will say some people here have been willing to engage civilly, consider their positions and made me consider mine, others have simply deflected ignored or narcessitically transfered their own shortcomings onto me and if I was to hazard a guess I'd say the person using wordsalad over and over is the same person. Just know we aren't all Sparticuses and a lot of us welcome trans people here and want to make this a positive environment for lgbt parents not a hostile one.

Actually there's only one person who I know uses the phrase "word salad" instead of sesquipidalia which most people would use someone who has boasted to have invented the term. If this is the case, I might be wrong, I'm kinda disgusted someone who claims to speak for women would manipulate us in this way. I just pray my suspicions are false.

crispbuttyfan

It's posts like yours that reaffirm my view that it is dangerous to pretend something is true when it is not true because it corrupts the whole idea of truth for the person who can't accept reality.

There is a really consistent theme among TRAs of having a really fragile relationship with truth. For example, the TRAs saying MNers want a s. 28 style provision for trans when it's obvious that this was a question put by a TRA supporter and not agreed on by anyone. I've lost count of the outright lies told by prominent TRAs that just get endlessly repeated. It's very Orwellian.

An older, more experienced biologist has pointed out that you are mangling scientific terminology, and has offered a more coherent explanation. That is a very normal part of scientific discourse and is not the same thing as 'narcissistically transferring their shortcomings'.

I cringe to think how much word-mangling and patronising of older scientists I did with my new shiny physics degree when I first graduated, so I can sympathise with that. Just accept that you still have a lot to learn and that the degree is just the start.

I've definitely heard word salad in many contexts, along with acronym soup. Keep reading and thinking (and good luck with the baby, I presume?).

Actually there's only one person who I know uses the phrase "word salad" instead of sesquipidalia which most people would use someone who has boasted to have invented the term. If this is the case, I might be wrong, I'm kinda disgusted someone who claims to speak for women would manipulate us in this way. I just pray my suspicions are false.

It's an extremely common phrase on social media.

Can you reword your post mum25? I honestly can't make head not tail of it

I'm chuckling at the idea that 'most people' would use sesquipedalia rather than word salad.

I might - but I am pretentious (and I can spell it).

Lancelottie of course I have lot to learn and I can be fallible, no scientist worth their salt would say differently however can babelfish admit they might be wrong: That the categorization of phenotype isn't clear cut, especially when taking the intersexed and transition into account? Can they admit potential fallibility?

I'd ask her, frankly. I think Babelfish knows very well what she's talking about. Setting up new categories isn't the main point of science.

AssignedPuuurfectAtBirth sorry on my phone and not much time before I need to get back to classes forgive the typos.

Lgbt people are welcome here.
Some of us are civil.
Silencing ad hominim and arguments from authority have been used ironically from people who have claimed I am doing the same.

Have to dash

Oh right. Got it now. Never heard of the term 'sesquipedalia' but I use 'word salad' now and then. I picked it up on twitter

Totally weird question btw