Debbie Hayton in the Times

[Igneococcus]

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/women-are-right-to-have-concerns-over-trans-reforms-5kj5k28sd?shareToken=aa090ad90f6f886db629247a0d6ca19b

Slightly off topic, but on the topic of female socialisation.

I am in various WhatsApp groups, mainly with women, but recently joined a WhatsApp group of my friends and their husbands to arrange a weekend away. The men completely took over the group, with in jokes, teasing and messing around, and the women struggled to join in or make any arrangements. I doubt anyone else noticed, but due to this FWR board I’m now so aware of this type of behaviour.

Raisins in seeing patterns I’ve never been properly aware of before since this all came to the fore for me. Start a new group for the girls in your whats al group.

Yes. It's called male domination.
It's everywhere.

Apart from the spaces women carve for ourselves and don't let men in.

This is a really powerful thread. Thank you to everyone who has contributed to the discussion. Lots to think about and definitely a few pennies dropping!

And the sound of all those pennies dropping is deafening.

I misread this as all those penises dropping ...

which they could well be at the march of angry women coming towards them

Thelma

Hear Hear. Me too. I have been on here for a while now and I never stop being shocked, surprised and energised.

It's been interesting to see a transman I work with who will argue, threaten, invoke flying monkeys and get very upset at boundaries put down by female line managers... and will go to male members of staff and ask them instead. They are not willing to see female staff as having authority and see male staff - even male staff of lower management rank - as having greater authority and power over women.
Is this person on hormones? Because testosterone supplementation is basically anabolic steroids but legal. It's either roid rage or internalised sexism. Both are really common, sadly the latter is common in some lesbians too.

It's an individual so as much personality as anything else, but incidentally no, I happen they were not on hormones at that time. They just believed that women were of lesser value than men.

That is though the second time today I've read a woman generously looking to excuse or sympathise with poor behaviour on the grounds of it possibly being caused by hormones. Female socialisation is really powerful stuff, and women really are incredibly generous.

grr, I happen to know

Bloody phone.

Back on topic - I think there's an unwillingness on either side to accept that the status quo is always a house built on sand. Trans activists crow about the right or wrong side of history as if all the rights and acceptance so far is guaranteed forever.
It isn't.
Same for us homos - the political pendulum can always swing back. You could name any minority group - acceptance, equality, visibility, whatever positive aspect of the status quo you're talking about, it can be reversed. The worst of that group poison the public against them. The public start thinking for themselves, or worse, are guided by the opposite faction. What happens? Well it depends but it's never good.
The problem is that the recognition of this fact makes one sound a bit wet. Zealots want to keep pushing, like gamblers chasing a bigger win. The house always wins, they lose their money, and those who pushed it too far are remembered for all the wrong reasons.
Most of our "progressive" laws were made against the wishes of the wider electorate, who "caught up" much later. The decriminalisation of homosexuality had no popular support, for example. Most people now are accepting of gay people - but is that through living and working alongside us or because Peter Tatchell staged some protests? It's not a rhetorical question, I don't know the answer. I suspect softly softly catchee monkey is a better approach (and encompasses more reasonable people who want to live their life, not force their way of life down everyone else's throat). However even softly softly doesn't work in a binary problem with a yes/no answer. Most people are quite sympathetic towards trans people but the number who believe they are genuinely their chosen sex is tiny. Built on sand. If this gets pushed too far the backlash will be felt by trans people, gay people, and anyone obviously non-conforming. They are putting us at risk with their unreasonable demands, their childish petulance, and their inability to see themselves as the tiny minority that they are. We live in a mostly straight world. As much as I've known homosexual people who want to live in a little gay bubble, it's not possible, even with the largest of ghettos. We live amongst others. We have to be mindful and respectful of that. That's what galls me about the TRA angle. They stomp around thinking they own the damn place.

That is though the second time today I've read a woman generously looking to excuse or sympathise with poor behaviour on the grounds of it possibly being caused by hormones
Not at all. I did say it could be internalised sexism. I mentioned the roids because I've met a few FtMs who were fucking insufferable because of the steroids (and the adulation of their fan base too, I guess)

Most people now are accepting of gay people - but is that through living and working alongside us or because Peter Tatchell staged some protests? It's not a rhetorical question, I don't know the answer.

Dwindling belief in disapproving deities has helped a great deal.

As far as I can tell T makes you bald, angry, and hairy. And gives you cancer.

Yes, Materialist and Turph - there are already rumblings from far right-type voices about this all "serves feminists right" and is "what you get when you let the gays get their way." It worries me that all of this is leading towards a backlash that hits everyone who hasn't signed up to ye olde patriarchy.

It reminds me of learning about Thermidorian reactions in history many years ago:

"For historians of revolutionary movements, the term Thermidor has come to mean the phase in some revolutions when power slips from the hands of the original revolutionary leadership and a radical regime is replaced by a more conservative regime, sometimes to the point where the political pendulum may swing back towards something resembling a pre-revolutionary state."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermidorian_Reaction

On the women's side, there is the problem that women are socialised to be utterly shite at acting out of self interest, or even to recognise what our own interests are. That's why a lot of people with male socialisation find us frustrating, full of mixed messages and difficult to pin down. So the problem isn't your self-interest, but women's lack of self-interest. That's why it is so easy to trample all over us without even knowing you are doing it (or even us knowing that you are doing it - we are more likely to find ourselves at fault again). Women are waking up out of the brainwashed complacent stupor we've been in though, so I think we can put a clear set of cards on the table.

Brilliantly put Clarice. Of course this has a flip side which is many women who are mothers tend to very much put their kids first and I think this is where many women are waking up as the TRA agenda very clearly is a huge threat to safeguarding. A point heavily underscored by paedophile TRAs like D Challenor and K White.

Yy Turph, Clarice and Ineed

Fairplay for Women film:

Powerful film that hopefully may encourage many women to fill in the Consultation. It’s a shame then that the questionnaire is so ridiculously long, complicated and difficult to fill in and understand. It has been designed to be far easier to fill in from the trans perspective.

That film is powerful. I managed to write a letter to me MP without mentioning trans once. As did that film. This is about male bodied people

Surely this can't be true?

twitter.com/TheOnlySprout/status/1042398341630324736

armchair

Oh dear

Is there evidence that "Debbie A" is Debbie Hayton?

That sprout person is appalling. I want to scrub each time I read something of his.

Was that 'Debbie A' actually Debbie H?

Looking at the article cited
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/a-f7db-why-i-wont-accept-the-politics-of-gender-identity-1

And what @DebbieInBirmingham was writing not much later
https://debbiehayton.wordpress.com/2016/11/29/caution-urged-when-parliament-debates-changes-to-trans-rights/amp/?twitterr_impression=true

... both critical of subjective 'gender identity' - well, it seems unlikely. But OTOH, I'm pretty sure there are posters on FWR now who might have said something like that before they'd woken up to what was going on. So, either way, not exactly something to worry much about now.

Sprout is a twat.