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

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Lisa Muggeridge Suspended by Twitter and Quoting her breaches MN Guidelines

353 replies

R0wantrees · 20/06/2018 22:22

I posted news that another woman has been suspended by Twitter. This seems likely as a result of targetted mass reports

Lisa Muggeridge comments at idgeofreason.wordpress.com

& recently spoke at the Inconvenient Women: We Need to Talk meeting in London.

I posted the quote by Lisa because it concerns me that women are being silenced.

My background is English Literature so my style is to leave a writer's words for others to read for themselves.

There were a number of apparent attempts to derail the thread and so when this happened, I quoted further comment by Lisa Muggeridge. To let her words speak.

I believe in the importance of free speech.

I have many books on my bookshelf, which I am sure may have contentious comments in. I don't though believe that books are dangerous or should be burned.

I also read authors who had serious failings.

I wasn't advised that there was an issue with the OP but understand that within the quoted comment was misgendering.

I felt that it was not for me to edit Lisa Muggeridge's words.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
33
R0wantrees · 21/06/2018 11:03

It does look [to me] like LM was attempting to instigate an unsolicited pile-on. Happy to be proven wrong.

Grizzlygrox

You've been making the smilar point repeatedly.
It has been understood.

This isn't the 'trial of LM' thread.

I doubt if any one is likely to join in with your focus.

Of course they may, should they choose, this being an open forum for civil and robust discussion. With many boards.

This particular board being 'Feminism & Women's Rights'

OP posts:
TellsEveryoneRealFacts · 21/06/2018 11:05

Grizzly - are you going to keep banging on until it really penetrates?

As that is what it looks like.

Grizzlygrox · 21/06/2018 11:10

I can’t C&P because of all the dead-naming but the gist of the thread was

“Hello. Here’s a blogpost. You are on notice. You are thick. You are abusive, you are dangerous.” Rinse repeat for 22 times.

Tweet 16. Roz wasn’t even responding.

“Because you re a creepy ass motherfucker, you will be reading this. I want you to read this. This is UK women putting abusive trans rights activism on notice.“

I know everyone here thinks it’s all so ruddy marvellous truth to power, but personally I think it does border on the abusive and is reckless.

You can’t just arrogantly declare you are putting a minority on notice and then be surprised when you get done for hate speech.

Grizzlygrox · 21/06/2018 11:13

It’s not MY focus.

The thread is waaah, LM got banned, free speech. So sinister.

It really isn’t.

R0wantrees · 21/06/2018 11:17

The thread is waaah, LM got banned, free speech. So sinister.

So patronising, so uncivil (and factually incorrect)

OP posts:
louiseaaa · 21/06/2018 11:20

When things get banned and I can't read and make my own mind up - I disbelieve anything that's said unsubstantiated. Therefore I can come to no conclusion.

When things get left on twitter/blogs/treads with all the accompanying comments - well then I can read and make my own mind up

I see you

Grizzlygrox · 21/06/2018 11:23

Patronising - your attitude to anyone who disagrees.

Uncivil - that’s LM and ironic considering a big chunk of this debate is that women have been socialised into being too nice.

Factually incorrect - re-read LM’s blogpost. It reads as though she just launched straight at Ros by virtue of the fact they are a reasonably well known TRA.

Tell me where my assessment of that post which led to her suspension falls down.

R0wantrees · 21/06/2018 11:25

As I have said to another poster on this thread.

No, thank you, I do not wish to discuss this with you.

OP posts:
Bowlofbabelfish · 21/06/2018 11:30

You can’t just arrogantly declare you are putting a minority on notice

Which minority? It was aimed at the rights activists. Not at transpeople.

Rather like the difference between putting say vegans on notice (entirely wrong and awful) and putting the people who were persecuting Huntington life sciences staff on notice.

A small vocal activist group who do NOT represent all transpeople are NOT a minority.

R0wantrees · 21/06/2018 11:33

Michael Biggs (Oxford)
'Free speech at Oxford:
Do women have the right to meet to discuss legislation?'

concludes:
"I have entered this debate not because I am a feminist but because freedom of speech is one of the highest values of a democratic society, and the basic foundation of university life.
Transgender activism poses a grave threat to freedom of speech. I think of the young MPhil student who had to disguise herself to attend this meeting because she feared the reaction of fellow students. This is the generation that we have educated."

users.ox.ac.uk/~sfos0060/FreeSpeechOxford.pdf

OP posts:
TellsEveryoneRealFacts · 21/06/2018 11:35

Tell me where my assessment of that post which led to her suspension falls down.

As I think Lang said yesterday - how totally coincidental that you should happen upon a LM thread with such deep knowledge of the situation. We are indeed honoured to have your presence here.

Is that what you are looking for? Or just derailing again and again and again...

LangCleg · 21/06/2018 11:42

Prioritising faux concern over debate style trumping incisive analysis of an assault on safeguarding frameworks - affecting all children in the UK, including those with a trans identification - is an interesting approach, I'll grant you.

Personally, I don't give a single, solitary, shiny shit what debate style Lisa Muggeridge has. I think the louder she speaks about the threat to safeguarding frameworks for children, the better.

And I seriously question the motives of anyone who doesn't - this is a massive red flag and it's deeply concerning that those flying it seem completely unaware that this is what they are doing. How could it ever be possible to prioritise respectability politics over ruddy great holes being ripped in safeguarding frameworks for children? Some reflection required, methinks.

Grizzlygrox · 21/06/2018 11:44

Thread begins like this.

“Roz this is a written notice to you. We are putting trans rights activism on notice in the UK. Its done.”

It’s insufferably arrogant but also, replace ‘trans’ with ‘lesbian or gay’.

I am not surprised at all that Twitter took a dim view.

TellsEveryoneRealFacts · 21/06/2018 11:45

I am not surprised at all that Twitter took a dim view.

Derail, derail derail.

Yes - you said that 100 times already.

R0wantrees · 21/06/2018 11:49

Lisa Muggeridge Comments:
"Guide to dealing/’debating’ with transactivists
Narcissism is prevalent here. Same rules as always with narcissists. Do not get embroiled in discussion of their identity, their identity is not relevant to you and outside making clear you do not see yourself reflected in their identity it serves no function but to prevent discussion.

All accusations are admissions. This is a very reliable compass. They will attribute their own motivations and actions to you because their identity is the only thing they can see and they can only see you as a reflection or threat to it. They are accusing themselves. Let them. Loudly.

Take every word at face value. Do not get dragged into debating it. They say women’s consent doesn’t matter? Take it at face value. They say they have the right to redefine lesbian to include them and they have pushed women to assert their sexual boundaries by misgendering? They are telling you they cannot recognise consent, boundaries, or female sexuality. This is an admission. Not a debate.
Do not treat a boundary as a negotiation. It is not/. You set the boundary and when they breach it, gaslighting, coercion, threats, you are receiving an admission of how far they will go to cross your boundaries. Take this at face value.

Do not be derailed from key points or boundaries, and use all admissions made. They will try to derail from the thing that injures them. Usually the reality of their identity and the threat you pose to it. Stick to their behaviour. The words they have used. Do not get embroiled in discussion of their identity. A narcissists identity is always the hill they will die. Accept when they tell you they cannot separate their identity from your reality.

You do not have to debate being a woman. You are one. Your biology, the inequality you lived, the knowledge you have that came from this. You do not need to debate whether you are a woman. Or their definition of woman. Outside being clear you do not see yourself reflected in them, you do not need to debate this. They do.
When you are discussing systems and laws that evolved over 70 years to protect women and girls you do not need to centre their identity in that discussion. It is irrelevant to that discussion. Those systems were fought for and created by women you dont know, they did that so you dont have to. You do not need to have arguments that are already done and are reflected in euqality legislation.

Do not have arguments you dont need to have. It is ridiculous to use failure to validate males as an insult. It is ridiculous to treat ‘you didnt think of males when you thought about inequality so you are a TERF’ as valid. You dont need to defend the right of women to self assembly without male supervision, it is yours already, they need to explain why they think it should end. If hearing about their male biology is offensive, that is not your fault. THey are male. That cannot be altered. You are not required to repeat things you know to be untrue because of the threat of violence and coercion. You are not required to be ‘inclusive’ and ‘nice’ at a cost of your own safety and rights. EVER.

Do not defend yourself from accusations which are not accusations. It is not an accusation or a crime to refuse to ignore abusive behaviour, it is not an accusation that you didnt orbit a males identity and validate him.

Misgendering and transphobia are insults designed to give men the right to abuse women and claim they are being oppressed. A nonsense. Stick to literal meanings, neither of this things is violent, neither metaphorical or literal and neither of these things warrant a violent response.

Remember what you are responsible for. You are not responsivle for managing their well being, not responsible for their threats of violence, not responsible for harm they do themselves or threaten to do themselves to control a situation. You are entitled to boundaries, to define yourself, and anyone threatened by this is telling you something.

Remember abusive behaviour is well understood. It is always a problem. It is legally and socially unacceptable to subordinate women with abusive behaviour. Nothing in the word trans changes this and any trans women suggesting it does is telling you ‘she’ is an abusive male."

OP posts:
LangCleg · 21/06/2018 11:49

Lisa talks in blunt terms about safeguarding frameworks for children. She has an informed perspective as a looked after child and social worker in the area of child protection. She has spent ten years objecting, in those blunt terms, to any political movement (not just transactivism) that obscures or creates holes in those safeguarding frameworks for children.

Some people object to that on the basis of respectability politics.

Let that sink in.

Then let it sink in some more.

Grizzlygrox · 21/06/2018 11:52

Derail. Lol.

Thread is about the supposedly unfair suspension of LM on Twitter & deletion of MN thread.

Anyone pointing out that in this instance the suspension is justified and that LM is scoring an own goal, isn’t the free speech martyr you claim, is derailing, concern trolling etc.

louiseaaa · 21/06/2018 11:53

Won't somebody please think of the children.

Seriously, how in fuck's name does being nice trump being safe?

Posted by a former safeguarding officer in an FE college
(Which means that I have sat on vrs meetings for vulnerable students around teenage gangs, grooming, parental alienation and homelessness - these people need safeguarding to be clear, robust and boundaried)

TellsEveryoneRealFacts · 21/06/2018 11:55

Anyone pointing out that in this instance the suspension is justified and that LM is scoring an own goal, isn’t the free speech martyr you claim, is derailing, concern trolling etc.

Once is enough though surely? How many times do you have to say the same thing repeatedly to make the same point before you get bored and go do something else?

It makes it look like you have an agenda.

Grizzlygrox · 21/06/2018 11:55

Sure. Nobody disagrees with safeguarding.

But abusing and threatening people, putting them on notice is not the way to get your voice heard. It’s every bit as thuggish as Corbyn. Nothing to do with respectability.

LangCleg · 21/06/2018 11:56

Accurately outlining safeguarding responsibilities is now hate speech, louiseaaa, didn't you know?! It's an own goal to do that, apparently.

louiseaaa · 21/06/2018 11:56

x post or what was said upthread by R0wntrees

ScarletBegonias · 21/06/2018 11:56

R0wan - thanks for posting those comments of Lisa's. They really are excellent.

R0wantrees · 21/06/2018 11:56

TellsEveryoneRealFacts

Its spookily like yesterday.

OP posts:
Bowlofbabelfish · 21/06/2018 11:57

Again, a small group of aggressive vocal rights activists who do not speak for all transpeople. And in my view actively works against the interests of many transpeople.

Such a rights group is not the minority they claim to represent, any more than say MRAs represent decent men. I can tell MRAs they on notice while having no hostility to men who reject them.