How is this anything to do with furthering women's rights?

[SparrowNest]

I'm sympathetic to many radfem arguments, but I can't for the life of me understand how opposing lacy lingerie being made to fit a wider range of bodies helps women.

Given that similar lingerie already exists in standard women's sizes, surely expanding that so it can fit anyone is only lessening gender constraints? How is trying to restrict it only to biological women helping anything?

www.pinknews.co.uk/2019/03/01/anti-trans-protest-over-pornographic-transgender-lingerie-fashion-show

@SpartacusAutisticusAHF I'm not an all choices are valid, nothing a woman chooses can be bad for women as a whole sort of feminist. I'm also a socialist.

I just don't thing targeting trans individuals is actually an appropriate response to any of the structural issues here. I don't think holding a subsection of people differently responsible for their consumption habits is a response based on class analysis. I do still believe that individual freedoms matter, though, and I know I'd find it deeply oppressive if someone attempted to restrict my freedom to choose what underwear I want to wear.

Sparrow, I agree with SpartacusAutisticusAHF that you're approaching this from a very different angle thsn a lot of feminists who feel inspired to protest. You've come to see certain aspects of the Gender critical argument, but you've not really engaged with the big picture. You're still happy for gender to continue to slope along, trapping people in it's tentacles. Others really aren't, and class analysis has a lot to do with that.

@SparrowNest Mumsnet pinned a thread at the top of the FWR board, that lists the terms we can't use.
It is generally considered good manners to read the pinned threads and posting rules when you join a forum.

My theory?

I don't live a theoretical life.

The only meaning they convey here is your subservience.

Op I was very tempted to report you every time you used c*s but the thread wouldn't make much sense.
And your increasing annoyance is really quite funny
Just read the guidelines

Must learn to type faster

Are the women in question trying to stop the men wearing the underwear? Or are they protesting the misogyny that is at the root of it all?

@FloralBuntingIsObnoxious

No, I just think that for as long as gender persists then a marginalised group shouldn't be placed under special scrutiny and held to higher standards than everyone else. I admit I'm not optimistic about things changing anytime soon, but it's not because I'm happy with the status quo.

(Fair enough to everyone pointing it out, I won't use cis anymore. I find that or natal the easiest options to convey what I mean in a way everyone understands, but I've no desire to offend people)

@PrestonsFlowers If getting posts deleted from a forum is a fun activity for you then you're welcome to go for it.

Men who get fulfilment of any kind from wearing underwear coded as 'female' in our culture are not 'marginalized'. What an odd conclusion.

Its Mumsnet HQ who made the forum guidelines and decide which terms are banned. Not other users.
Your posts where you have used banned terms may be moderated. Don't try to blame other users if that happens, especially when they have stated that they have not reported your posts.

@BettyDuMonde No, is that a problem? I didn't realise this was a local board for local people, I thought it was a forum on a popular parenting website where women discuss feminism and related issues.

I thought their demo was hilarious. They are parodying something that is very easily parodied. I know those women, I've spent time with them and understand their serious points but this was a huge piss take. Sometimes laughing at the ridiculousness of males, all of whom believe they are women, displaying their AGP is spot on.

@SparrowNest
Your reading comprehension skills are really not up to much are they?
I didn't say it would be funny to get your posts deleted

@FloralBuntingIsObnoxious Yeah, this is where we disagree. I think people genuinely suffering from gender dysphoria have a rough time because of it.

@userschmoozer I'm not going to blame anyone. I've said I won't use the term you dislike now I know you're all offended, and I'm not particularly concerned about the possibility of some posts being deleted.

@Trousering See this is it, I don't find mocking male-bodied people who think they're women a very amusing thing.

@SparrowNest You have to be shitting us.

Mumsnet HQ moderates the board, not other users. The link Betty posted is by Mumsnet. Its the forum rules as decided by Mumsnet.

Its actually pretty standard to have mods and rules on any forum, IDK why you have an issue with that.

Quick primer to explain to you. Note - the following is taken from Stonewall's pages, and I believe quoting banned words in the context of a political discussion about their meanings and usage is okay under talk guidelines; it's applying them to a specific poster (usually in contravention of that poster's expressed preference) that is not okay.

So here we go:

Gender
Often expressed in terms of masculinity and femininity, gender is largely culturally determined and is assumed from the sex assigned at birth.

Gender expression
How a person chooses to outwardly express their gender, within the context of societal expectations of gender. A person who does not confirm to societal expectations of gender may not, however, identify as trans.

Cisgender or Cis
Someone whose gender identity is the same as the sex they were assigned at birth. Non-trans is also used by some people.

Join the dots on this set of definitions and what you in fact have is an acceptance that gender is the set of culturally determined sex stereotypes (the ones feminists believe are the tool used to oppress women and keep us in little restrictive boxes) and that being cis involves being comfortable with the set of restrictive sex stereotypes used to oppress you. To tell a woman she is "cis" is to tell her that she is choosing to collude in her own oppression.

That's why we don't like the term very much, and that's why MN has said it's not to be used to describe particular posters. (Incidentally I don't agree with that ban - I find the term offensive, but I'm perfectly capable of articulating why it's so offensive, and if people then choose to continue to use it, they're the ones who then look like the unpleasant gits they are, not me. I think as a general rule censorship and language-policing are a bad thing.)

@userschmoozer I don't, I was replying to "You really aren’t a regular here, are you?" I've already said I won't use that term again, I don't get why you're still getting so worked up about it.

Sparrow, could I ask you not to put @ in front of my name. Just bolding Floral or something is adequate, I'm already having the conversation, which I'm perfectly happy to do, and I don't really need extra emails.

People who have gender dysphoria may well have a rough time of it, but pointing out the inherent sexist thinking behind their beliefs is foundational in explaining why the edifice they are building is a house of cards. Pretending they are marginalized because they want to wear frilly knickers is ridiculous.

Oh, and another point of MN etiquette - @-ing people when they're actually on the thread with you is very bad form. You end up spamming their inbox. It's the equivalent of shouting "OI, PAY ATTENTION TO ME, TO ME, OVER HERE, TO ME" when you're sitting in the same room as them.

For someone who claims to have lurked on MN for ages, you appear not to know the first thing about the boards. I'm sure you're 100% on the level, OP, but you might like to note that your behaviour (however unwittingly on your part) does overlap with that of a number of much less genuine posters.

@FermatsTheorem Sure, I get it. I just tend to find that if I post about these things on other sites half the people scream at me if I use "natal" and the other half scream at me if I use "cis", so I generally go with alienating everyone by using both of them. It's difficult to accurately convey meaning without using one or the other. People on here suggest just using "woman" is enough but it actually isn't, in a lot of contexts readers wouldn't be sure who you were including in that. However much you might politically oppose that ambiguity over meaning, it's still the reality of trying to communicate an opinion on these issues.

Betty made the comment about you not being a regular because lots of people name change, and regulars are rather keenly aware of the posting guidelines. It wasn't a comment to send you away.

I had no idea using the @ sent messages to peoples inboxes or I wouldn't do it. I was just trying to make sure it was clear who I was responding to.

I also don't remember claiming I've lurked on here for ages? I've lurked for a bit, but I mainly use other social media sites. I'm on here more now because I'm pregnant for the first time.