Owl and Fox Mumsnet Butterfly Reaction Video

[WatchThePotatoesBoil]

Yeah I know - I shouldn't have left a comment, but I couldn't help myself...

I did notice, in amongst the incoherent rambling about why gender stereotypes get used by trans people so much, that Owl said "We need gender stereotypes", which was perhaps more revealing than they intended it to be.

But I would like to say is it pisses me right off when people say Obviously you have never met a trans person.

Funnily enough, it was largely the experience of a man I know claiming to be a woman that led me to finally honour my own misgivings about the ideology. When it was more theoretical and vague and I really didn't know any trans people (met some briefly, but didn't know any) I found the cognitive dissonance much easier to deal with.

Once I was confronted with the stark statement "Joe is a woman now, Joe was always a woman, except she didn't realise until recently" that was when I just COULD NOT take it anymore. My poor suppressed critical thinking skills rebelled. Joe is a fairly decent sort, but he is not a woman and he has no idea what it is like to be a woman. (Obviously he's not really called Joe).

Well yes, there is the frequent testimony here that women were quite happy to go along with it all until they actually started engaging with AWAs themselves, self proclaimed trans among them as well as 'allies', and realized that so many of these people are raving narcissists, bullies, mostly quite turpid of brain and deeply selfish, and thought, like any sensible woman would, "Hold on a sec..."

Oh, dear, I watched the whole thing, painful as it was. The one with the long hair comes across as a not very bright, narcissistic teenager, all eye rolls and mocking tones. The one with short hair tries to come across as fair and balanced but seems to lack any capacity for critical thinking. Bless.

They just come across as really fake to me.

Plus "research after research after reasearch"... you sound like Donald Trump, love.

If the cat did their videos they'd be so much more interesting.

If the dog's arse did their videos they would be much more interesting.

I could only watch a minute of the pair of them. There was enough gawffing and eyebrow raising for at least a week. Why such a reaction to the word “mum”? Pathetic little people.

I am so not giving those idiots a click. I wouldn’t give them your time

These two are so patronizing and they also do not understand the sense of humour here at Mumsnet, or the fact that we are pointing out our experiences of misogyny. They are telling us as if we never realized it before that guess what? Society does not treat boys and girls the same way!! Idiots.

Also are these two parents? I’m guessing not because much of the time we are coming at this critiquing the idea of putting gender nonconforming children in a “trans” box rather than letting them express as they want and waiting to see if they will grow out of it as 80%+ WILL if they are not transitioned. Rather than taking this pair’s narrative where we MUST solidly transition this child or the child will be suicidal.

They also do not give an answer as to where were all the “trans kids” in previous generations in the large numbers that we have now. We all know that trans kids were virtually unheard of until really the last 20 years and they has been a huge escalation of numbers in the past 5 years.

Why are this oddball hetero couple so heavily invested?

Why do they assume all MN members fit a standard, rigid, stereotype?. The not knowing any trans peiple thing. I know 2 MtF trans women, post-op, well and I'm not gay and dont really mix in those circles. I was also out clubbing with every London transsexual in Heavan while these twits were at primary school.

An awful thought just popped into my head. Imagine Harrop and them, all in a film, “discussing” mumsnet.
Makes me feel sick.

I know, I was wondering exactly the same thing, is it because under it all, they are still insecure and they need children and the rising generation to prove that this is real and not just an huge ideological construct?

I think it’s disturbing a grown man creeps around Mumsnet and then makes ageist and sexist comments on twitter about members. But then, women and mothers especially, have always been harassed and mocked when they gather to discuss things important to them.

Why do they assume all MN members fit a standard, rigid, stereotype?

I know, it’s awfully prejudiced isn’t it? Funny how there are no articles about the disgusting misogyny, ageism and racist stereotypes directed at Mumsnet users over the past months, despite the enormous evidence of it on Twitter. Nobody cares about how women deal with this level of abuse, but misgendering is headline news 🙄

I know, I was wondering exactly the same thing, is it because under it all, they are still insecure and they need children and the rising generation to prove that this is real and not just an huge ideological construct?

I think this could be it. Like Susie Green, who transed her child, they need lots of youngsters on board to confirm to themselves that they have done the right thing with all the alterations to their own bodies.

Or it could be that they are so sure that they have done the right thing for themselves that they can't imagine any other outcome for children who are superficially like them. Letting children grow up until they're old enough to understand all the consequences of messing around with their bodies doesn't seem to be an option for people like this.

Oh god that's long

i made it to 12 minutes in

the producers of the reactionary video accusing a mumsnet post of being poorly structured was a highlight

also the short haired one - why wouldn't you prescribe blockers?

umm, because it's a gross infringement of a child's human rights to prevent them going through puberty you mental midget?

and yeah, that little laugh at the word mum

straight misogyny from the long haired one, internalised misogyny from the short haired one

The thing I found most interesting was watching the dynamic between them. Not sure that's an entirely happy relationship. Owl was totally hanging on everything Fox says and gazing at Fox adoringly. But when Owl spoke you could see Fox zoning out and looking bored. Not a good sign.

they need children and the rising generation to prove that this is real and not just an huge ideological construct?

Ideological Ponzi scheme.

To paraphrase Inigo Montoya "I do not think that word means what you think it means."

Hahahahahahaha!

Owl and Fox Fisher display classic male female socialised behaviour. Even when you look at still images of the pair. Fox is uncertain, slightly nervous, eager to please adopts submissive stances, looks to others for approval. Owl's expression is arrogant, self righteous, certain of themselves, dominating.

Oh dear, so earnest.

Owl contradicted Owlself re whether or not we can/should have our opinions influenced by fiction.

I also think they’re really confused about gender stereotypes.

Fox and Owl spend their time going to lots of international gender conventions and having important meetings with other wokies where they all shore up each others validation and learn the latest buzzwords. Just like any other cult members, tbh.

They will have had no meaningful interaction whatsoever with people who think differently to them, largely because they would consider it an attack to deal with a contradiction to their worldview.

So they read what was essentially a live reaction thread because they simply won't engage with anything substantive, of which there is much here on FWR alone. So they miss nuance, detail, anything which arises from a different starting point to their firm opinion. Therefore most everything sails far, far over their heads.

Echo chamber issue aside, they don’t appear to be the most incisive minds.

hipsterfun, well, yeah, the echo chamber prevents them rounding out their thinking, but I think it is a pretty charitable reading to assume that if they engaged with an opposing view they would actually have any comprehension anyway...