That it's not just what you say, it's also how much you talk about it.

[NicolaHare]

Surprise, another trans thread! But the dynamics of online spaces fascinates me.

Take MWR. Some stats. Feminism Chat has been active since 2010. At this moment 364 pages of threads have been generated. 144 of those pages contain threads that were created or active since January this year. At the beginning of 2018 a significant portion of threads were trans themed and these threads tended to contain the most posts, and the board has only grown more fixated with the topic since then. You have to go quite a ways back to find a page of threads that isn’t 90-95% to do with trans people.

Nowhere else on the site is so obsessed. For example: on the LGBT themed boards you only have to go back 1 or 2 pages to find threads from 2017 and earlier. There aren’t any trans threads in the 1 and a fraction page of threads from 2018 on the politics board. There are, I think, about 2 in the half dozen pages of threads from this year in the currents affairs and news forum. And in 2018, all the education forums combined have generated about 5 trans threads.

This is weird, right? Why is a general feminism board with an overwhelmingly non trans userbase so fixated on a group of people they don't belong to and the issues surrounding them? It would be weird regardless of what anyone in any thread had to say on the subject.

Not surprising, though. Trans sceptical feminism ironically almost always ends up focusing on the transgender question to the exclusion of all other topics that its proponents believe that trans inclusive feminisms are neglecting, and so neglects them to an even greater degree. Honestly, I’m sceptical that they are being neglected at all: it seems to me that conversations about pregnancy, menstruation ect are happening in public view at far greater volume than ever before, taboos surrounding bodily functions are increasingly discarded by the discourse and pop culture, and that when we talk about erasure we’re actually quibbling about terminology, the trappings of language and not the substance of the conversation. To assign a motivation to the common theme on feminism chat of “We are being silenced elsewhere!” a significant part of it might be the catharsis of imagined persecution. “We are saying the truths THEY don’t want you to hear! We are rebels!”

(This interview with a former gender critical trans woman is worth reading. It’s American and several years old, but it describes the many of the other toxic intellectual cul-de-sacs you can observe in MWR. www.transadvocate.com/is-sadism-popular-with-terfs-a-chat-with-an-ex-gendercrit_n_18568.htm)

But to set aside the discussion of substance. Do you think that the mere volume of trans threads in feminism chat is indicative of a kind of transphobia? If it were a forum of straight people talking about nothing but same sex attracted people, even if what they had to say was positive would we not be inclined to see in it's users a troubling insecurity with regards to queerness. If it were a forum of white people talking about nothing but people of colour in the most effusive terms, would we take this at face value or would we assign sinister motives (as the resonance of Get Out suggests many would)?

I'm a heterosexual woman and I like men, with penises. I don't like men with vaginas.

This. I don't accept that men can have vaginas.

^^Nor do I accept that I'm a lesbian because my ex is now a trans woman (with a penis).

If I ended up in an intimate situation and it turned out my potential partner was a different sex to their presentation I'd be furious. It's a deliberate attempt to con other people. People don't like it.

As a straight woman I would be able to flatly refuse intimacy and leave/demand they leave.

However were I a lesbian I'd feel very much more vulnerable to being forced into sex in a parallel situation. Men are significantly stronger than women and very few rapes even end up in court.

Luckily few men who identify as women make convincing women, particularly if you spend any time with them or hear them speak.

I've been banging on about maternity rights on MN for YEARS.

It just wasn't on FWR.

You'll find all sorts of campaigning and activism related to women's rights all over MN.

It always has been.

The dynamics of online space mimics the dynamic of The Outernet in so many ways.

Honestly you can do one with your redefining language. We have all the words we need. Gay, lesbian, bisexual, woman, all perfectly good words with well defined and understood meanings. Just because you can’t come to terms with whether or not and how they apply to you, that’s your problem, not ours. It’s nobody else’s job to redefine themselves just to make you more comfortable

THIS.

So don't you dare, don't you bloody dare ask why women are obsessed with the trans ideology. When it is the trans ideology that is obsessed with them and their children.

Yeah this.

I don't really give a single solitary shit what goes on the brains of the pomo-addled and, I suspect, neither do any of the women contributing here. I wish they'd just go to an actual ivory tower and bore each other to death instead of droning on all over FWR.

trans feminist

I'm sure transmen are welcomed into MRA circles with open arms.

I got about three lines down into that superior, self satisfied OP before I lost interest.

Another pretentious ego has arrived to inform the women what they may talk about, what they may be interested in, to instruct them on the opinions they may hold and to generally chastise and correct them.

Except fuck off, the 12th century's over. Your problem with women is your problem.

Couldn't have put it better Knicknackpaddyflak, excellent.

many of the other toxic intellectual cul-de-sacs you can observe in MWR

Maybe the visitor got stuck alone down one talking to no-one?

Yes - exactly what Knicknackpaddyflak said...

I'm amazed at the mental gymnastics some people seem willing to make to control women and their views in support of activists purporting to be women (or not men) spouting (very) literal bollocks.

Why do you care what we talk about OP? What's your skin in the game here?

Why shouldn't the continual campaign to change the very definition of womanhood and appropriate our experiences, our sports, our spaces and safeguards be not of very significant interest, especially during a period of govt consultation and beyond?

Why wouldn't we want to talk loudly and repeatedly about the impact on physically heathy children of affirmation only approaches and accelerated pathways to a lifetime of medication and the aftermath of massively invasive surgery- especially in the light of figures showing a massive increase in referrals (especially of girls) and wonder why this is?

Activists are trying to fuck women over whilst holding a hand over our mouths and you are telling us to keep quiet....what does that make you?

This thread is a triumph. I love all you brilliant women.

I frequently come on here, grumpy and fucked off with the latest assault on women by the Madness of Transborg, and find that reading the eloquent writings of clever, funny women is the tonic I need.

What's with the "MWR" bollocks, OP?

That threw me too Ereshkigal, the OP did put MNWR at some points in the diatribe which didn't make it any better, maybe they just can't bring themselves to use the letter 'F' when talking about Feminism and Female rights which gives a clue as to their agenda.

Reading the eloquent writings of clever, funny women is the tonic I need.

Absolutely, Clownfish. Posters like the OP make some very clear assumptions.

• That women (especially mothers) are dim and can be easily out argued by superior them.

• That we're uneducated and unaware (must be. We're mums. Only interested in prams)

• That we don't know what we're talking about (when most of us could write a thesis now. I've been banging on about this since 2012, FFS).

• That we're obsessed with TRAs (when we'd be happy to drop the discussion if trans ideology stopped harming women and children)

When we hand them their arse on a plate they fizzle out. Oddly enough, OP seems to have vanished...

In a nutshell, I think the OP is trying to say

• the other boards on here aren't as active
• FWR is very active
• FWR says things I don't like
• FWR needs to shut up

Is that about it? But with some links and long words and suggestions to go educate ourselves?

Let me get this straight. TRAs are trying to define ‚woman‘ out of existence in law and society by making it mean ‚whatever’ with all the dire consequences that entails, and then criticizes women are up in arms about it?

This is ridiculous. As long as ISIS doesn‘t have the ear of policy makers this TRA shit is THE number one threat to women‘s rights and protections in Europe.

Nope. I'm not shutting up either. Just WHY are trans women so obsessed with MN? Threatened by our very nature, by our biology, our intelligence and our eloquence. Women don't have penises. Trans women are TRANS women. I won't shut up and you can't make me. I'm vocal about this in real life too and you can't shut me up there either. The more you try to shut me down the more I will speak out.

And how pathetic is it, anyway, to start a thread bashing the feminist board while not on the feminist board? No wonder OP ran once it was moved.

maybe they just can't bring themselves to use the letter 'F' when talking about Feminism and Female rights which gives a clue as to their agenda.

YY I thought that too.

And how pathetic is it, anyway, to start a thread bashing the feminist board while not on the feminist board? No wonder OP ran once it was moved.

There have been a few of those recently. Under the guise of "how do I hide a whole board" and suchlike.

Yes, language is very important in being able to describe your position. Glad you agree.
So how's about not appropriating 'woman' and 'female' so we can talk about our lived experiences.

Words are words. And you’ll hear no argument from me that terminology battles are one of the least interesting and useful aspects of contemporary social justice struggles. I suspect that the 21st century reality that many people largely communicate their views on these subjects via a text based medium that more or less erases the body, and consequently the nuances of human expression, has made them worse. Trans woman v transwomen is a distinction you only make when communicating via text, when you say them aloud both come out as the same thing.

Take the menstruaters controversy. The words is a bit clunky, I agree, but from a certain perspective it’s also less euphemistic than a lot of the more standardised language on the subject, and in fixating on it I think a lot of people lose site of the fact we live in a time where major newspapers print articles about periods, which is progress. (And besides that particular article also uses “women” in the body text, the fuss is entirely over a headline)

So my view is that fears of the erasure of women in language is overblown. But if we grant them, surely we must give weight to concerns surrounding the limits Mumsnet has place on terminology used by and about trans people, which absolutely stifle discussions of contemporary writing, scholarship and medical documentation on the subject. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

OP can you link us to your other research into online spaces.

No, but I’ve already posted a links to someone else’s:

(Also, disappointed to come back to find 70+ responses, and not one discussing the Andrea Long Chu essay, which I think admits far more interesting bad faith readings than my posts thepointmag.com/2018/dialogue/wanting-bad-things-andrea-long-chu-responds-amia-srinivasan)

So my view is that fears of the erasure of women in language is overblown.

I'm more afraid of erasure of the concept of biological sex in law. You can't protect people from discrimination or provide sex based services if you can't say what sex is.

surely we must give weight to concerns surrounding the limits Mumsnet has place on terminology used by and about trans people, which absolutely stifle discussions of contemporary writing, scholarship and medical documentation on the subject.

Have they?