Strong words from feminists unhappy with trans exclusionary ideology..

[crispbuttyfan]

freedomnews.org.uk/its-spelt-sisterhood-not-cis-terhood-statement/

a little taster of the content, not my words....

"We are disgusted by the TERF techniques of bullying trans people and their friends and comrades. TERFs stand against a vulnerable minority by refusing their right to exist, using their dead names, doxxing them, smearing them online and in the press and waging a fear campaign, all whilst accusing trans women of being a possible legal and physical threat to cis women. These techniques are not consistent with their announced aim of getting legislation refused by parliament and belie the TERFs real agenda of intolerance.

We are sick and tired of TERF alarmism. There is no evidence that trans women are in any way a threat to cis women. To the contrary, there is a lot of evidence that TERFs feed the prejudice against trans women. The countries which introduced their own versions of GRA are not experiencing the problems the TERFs associate with allowing trans people to determine their own gender."

crisp what you do you think of this?

"*Despite the Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist’s declaring the term TERF as a slur, we continue to use it. We do not believe it is a slur although admit it can get used in place of one now. However the bad reputation associated with this word come from the behaviours of those that subscribe to an anti-trans way of thinking. We are using TERF here as a descriptive term to firstly distinguish between radical feminists who are anti-trans and those who are not. We are also using it so that other people know who we are talking about as it is the most used term to describe this specific group of beliefs. We reject the innocuous sounding ‘Gender Critical’ as a poor attempt to minimise and hide the harm that comes from the belief system of those that invented it. We believe that, in time, when it is as unacceptable in our movements to hate people based on their gender identity as it is to hate someone based on their sexuality or race, that this term will be used to describe these people who opposed this overdue societal progress."

are they saying we got what was coming to us?

It's not worth engaging.

but all trans people are somehow connected and responsible for each other in this mad cuckoo land that exists on these 'feminism' boards??

Lol.... no.... you post something portraying violence against women as justified and desirable...

What is being expected is that you take responsibility for you doing that.

The fact the violence you are posting to promote as justified and desirable was committed by another person is irrelevant.

It’s not about ‘all trans people’ it’s about you. You being responsible for what you do.

In the world of narcissistic ideologies, accusations are always admissions. Always worth remembering.

speakingwoman
what do I think of it? As I understand it.... the term was indeed coined by radfems to distinguish themselves from those who refuse to include trans women in their feminism.
Many rad-fems do include trans women in their feminism, so I agree the distinction has merit. see picture...
The acronym was used and gained popularity on places like twitter as no-one can expect anyone to type out trans exclusionary radical feminist..... especially as there was a 140 character limit.

At the same time it has been applied to many people who are merely transphobes of one distinction or another as an umbrella term.

What is usually illuminating is those particularly on twitter who reject the term as inherently abusive.....have a timeline full of terms like T.I.M.... AGP..... and various other abuses of trans women.

And the term gender-critical has become appropriated as a shield to hide transphobia behind, just as racists use the term race-realists.

there are plenty of trans women who are gender critical in the old sense..... and can still see the problems with gender stereotypes and expectations.

And trans women can never win in the eyes of 'gender-critical'
feminists either they are 'too' feminine and embrace stereotypes, or they are not really trans, and fetishists or some such nonsense if they don't. Both Monroe Bergdorf for instance, and trans women who hardly wear makeup or dresses and don't come close to passing are both equally vilified for entirely different reasons.

Thank you.

I did not realise that TIM was upsetting for people.

What can I call myself other than gender critical though.
I have to stick with that I think.

I don’t need it explained. If you post things promoting violence against women as justified and desirable then you will be held responsible for that action by other posters because this is FWR.

It doesn’t matter a jot how you respond to said holding to account or how many ridiculous and deliberate manipulations you attempt to perform to excuse your behaviour.

We see you, we will keep seeing you, you have been seen.

The language is being policed solely by the TRA side.

They don’t want to be called certain things (ok, fine.) but they don’t want women to be allowed to be called women, to be annoyed at ‘cis’, to reclaim TERF or to say they’re gender critical. Take all the words and silence the debate. I say NO.

It’s a silencing of women - NO. We get to choose what we call ourselves. We get to decide what terms we think are unpleasant. We get to say we are women, or gender critical and we define what that means.

Was it Mary beard a while back saying about how much abuse of women takes the form of violence towards the mouth? Kerb stomping songs, scolds bridles... bugger that. I say NO.

I am a woman. I’m gender critical. I am not cis. I am a woman. My words are not violent and they are not justification for violence against me.

10 pages in and no-one has done the usual MN 'So OP, what do you think of this article on which you have invited the rest of us to comment?'

Did you sign this crisp (or would you have done if you'd seen it)?

What do you think of this letter?

Got to agree with @Yambabe on Thu 24-May-18 18:57:22.

The letter is re framing the event and victim blaming. Nasty. That's not the light I am talking about. It is the heat.

No one is blaming ordinary trans people for what happened at speakers' corner. But trans activists who set out to assault or cause mayhem, who posted about it, who made it happen, they are responsible for it.

The wording around the event at hyde park is not 'unnecessary and unhelpful'.

It's lies. It's libellous. It's DARVO.

We don't hold ordinary trans people responsible for the actions of TRAs in general (you all need to speak up though! - write to your MP, it's confidential )

I don't hold all TRAs responsible for the actions of the 3 people (tara, tara's girlfriend, ponytail man) who physically attacked Maria.

I do hold all UK TRAs responsible for the way you reacted afterwards, as a community. I hold you responsible for spreading victim blaming lies and refusing to acknowledge and condemn violence from some people in your community. I don't believe any TRA in the UK was unaware of what happened at speakers corner. It got international coverage. Loads of you joined in with the DARVO and spread it far and wide. None of you condemned it.

Crisp. You posted that piece on here, you.

This. This is where your personal responsibility lies, crisp. You - you personally, here, now - are spreading victim blaming lies and refusing to acknowledge and condemn violence from some people in your community. And you are doing so on a feminist forum on a website for parents which is a predominantly female space (old fashioned cunty sort).

I expected whataboutery...... it's absolutely no surprise...... yet some people on here think trans people owe you a reaction in some way.... some people are demanding trans people who largely don't even know Tara or Maria exist..... should acknowledge something they don't know exists........... and that is a basis for condemnation.......

You. Posted. This. Shit.

Me: Here is Maria's account. I was there and her account matches what I saw.

Damn: And here are a few extracts from a slightly more independent report in the Evening Standard

Just to be clear here, @Damnthatonestakentryanother2, are you saying I am lying?

Did you sign this letter Damn? Or would you have done if you had been aware of it? What do you think of the content of this letter?

"Many rad-fems do include trans women in their feminism, so I agree the distinction has merit."

As transgender advocates have stated repeatedly, and Radical Feminists have agreed, transgender ideology is antithetical to Radical Feminism.
Therefore it would be impossible for Radical Feminists to include transgender identified males.

However, like the MRAs who signed this letter and opened all those faux feminist pages on FB, they can pose as anything they like by self ID.

We see you

@Offred
your entitled to your opinion however there was much more to the article than that which is being discussed.... reducing the talking points to an event that happened six months ago, and almost nothing else.. your entitled to your opinion, and your entitled to your demands of other users... as they are entitled to roll their eyes and ignore it..

@pencils
"I do hold all UK TRAs responsible for the way you reacted afterwards, as a community. I hold you responsible for spreading victim blaming lies and refusing to acknowledge and condemn violence from some people in your community. I don't believe any TRA in the UK was unaware of what happened at speakers corner. It got international coverage. Loads of you joined in with the DARVO and spread it far and wide. None of you condemned it."

how bizarre....? I don't even know where to start with this.... there are events that gain international coverage everyday that are not picked up by everyone.... this is just so weird as a way to condemn people.... in your mind everyone saw the coverage and so it must be true.... never mind reality.

@thebewilderness
Your entirely wrong about rad-fems supporting trans people.
The simple fact this is where the schism exists should tell you that your opinion of what gender identity is and how it manifests and the lived realities of trans people differ wildly from radical feminists who support trans people. So your understanding of the 'debate' can not be used to exclude rad-fems who entirely disagree, I'll repost a couple of pics for you pic for you of a couple of notable rad-fems and judith butler...

Crispy, you define males as women, and MRAs are Feminists.
You have zero credibility with me.
"Don't act like you was there when you wasn't"

When did you first learn about the events at speakers corner last september, crisp? You personally.

Did you sign this letter?

Would you have signed this letter?

What do you think of this letter?

We see you

Yes.

lol.... nobody expects the spanish inquisition!!

we see you??
next you'll be telling me you know where I live....

Demands? Nah mate... no demands just pointing out the tactics don’t work. Obviously if you post to promote violence against women on FWR then people are going to point out what you are doing and hold you accountable. Because you are accountable for that. You can try and ridiculously extrapolate it to a ‘you are asking all trans people to apologise’ all you like...

It doesn’t wash.

crispbuttyfan - we see you?? next you'll be telling me you know where I live....

We leave threats like that to TRA.

Was it Mary beard a while back saying about how much abuse of women takes the form of violence towards the mouth? Kerb stomping songs, scolds bridles... bugger that. I say NO.

YY. So important to recognise what this is. And let's not forget all the many oral rape threats made on social media and documented on sites like www.terfisaslur.com

we see you??
next you'll be telling me you know where I live....

Don't be silly. We see you for what you are and what you're doing.