Can we stop being obedient soon, or will this coercion continue for evermore?

[theOtherPamAyres]

I know that Mumsnet moderators are hot on keeping respectful debate and for that reason does not allow misgendering, certain terms, and the like. It's their site and they make the rules and I respect that. This topic isn't about Mumsnet, it's about the growing confidence of feminists to refuse to use the terms and language of gender.

Karen Ingala Smith, speaking to the Womens Select Committee, showed how it could be done. As a result of the clarity of her language, she was able to cut through the nonsense and make her points forcefully. In contrast, Janet from Womens Aid, with her convoluted language about gender, sounded confused and muddle-headed.

When we are forced to use words like 'transwoman' and 'she' - for fear of prosecution, civil actions, job losses, imprisonment for contempt of court, exclusion, abuse and physical assaults - we have helped to normalise transgenderism. In effect, we are saying that a man can be a woman.

I believe that we can no longer support Trans Rights by default, by caving in and going with the flow. At some stage we have to assert the right to use our own terms - because we can't wait for legal precedents and government reviews. The more refusniks and recusants there are, the more confidence will grow.

What tips and tricks of language did you start using when you could no longer kowtow to the demand for obedience?
How did you write or speak about people/men/women who identify as trans? (Did you see what I did there?)

We're resolving this off the boards and won't be able to come and update on the thread as this concerns an individual user.

Again, this is inconsistent. Many times they explain why someone is banned, as they did with our stalker friend, as they did with Posie. It’s also not just about an individual user, it’s about moderation policy and it needs explaining. If Barracker, or anyone else, expresses disappointment and anger at their inconsistency, MN seems to punish those with suspensions or permanent bans. Many of them we won’t even know about. I’m beginning to become quite concerned about this forum and may leave altogether if moderations aren’t fair and consistent.

Stay safe, darling.

(That was to blackberry pie darling.)

One last reference: I won't be shutting up until Barracker is no longer languishing, locked in L.

Holy cannoli! Just waking up to this in the US Eastern time zone.

Will be forwarding the excellent Barracker's insightful piece far and wide, and hoping for her swift return.

I'm thinking out loud. Feel free to correct or add to my new dictionary of terms and language that help me express my truth, restore my defences, and overcome the stupefaction of gin/jelly babies/Gas and Air.

I'm conscious that the Government put Night Nurse in our water when it said that changes to the GRA were merely simple administrative measures. It's not as though the compelled language enabled people to claim membership of a particular sex-class and trash the protections of the Equality Act, or anything like that - no, no, no

Misgender becomes mis-sex
Transition becomes sex-change
Non-Binary becomes No-sex
Gender Recognition Certificate becomes Sex-Change Certificate
Gender Reassignment becomes Sex Change
Transwoman or man becomes trans person, transexual
Transgender becomes transexual
To Dead-name: ?

Any improvements? Any suggestions? Any gaps?

Has anyone read one of the articles featured at the bottom of Barraker's Medium article, the one entitled 'The misunderstood non-binary transgender experience'? It is a conversation between a MTF transwoman and a MTF non-binary (I'm not actually sure what that means...) - anyway, worth a look for the knots some people are tieing themselves up in. Also for mis-information eg that 2% of the population is intersex and that Caster Semenya is genetically female.

It seems in the hierarchy of oppression, the MFT non-binary outranks the MFT transwoman, as the amount of humble pie being eaten for past transgressions is quite something...

We deleted Barracker's reported post because we felt the comparison between the use of female pronouns for transwomen and rohypnol - a date rape drug - just wasn't in the spirit. We've been in touch with Barracker off the boards.

There is innacurate comprehension of the analogy which was specifically comparing the disinhibiting effects of drugs such as rohypnol / gin (see also GHB, Ketamine, Ecstacy etc)

The focus of the post was specifically on the impact on girls and women's ability to assert appropriate boundaries. Their capacity to assert these & to identify risk of male-pattern violence.
This is a key Safeguarding concern.

Barracker's post (unsurprisingly given this is FWR on a parenting website) centred the safety, privacy & dignity of women and girls.

Its difficult not to see the likely focus of reports and such a response as centring the possible impact on male transpeople's (mistaken) feelings.

Centring the needs of women & girls rather than males is a key plank of feminism & required in 0rder to challenge patriarchial norms.

FWIW this is why I think Barracker's suspension is unjust although I sympathise with the moderators who have a tough job.

A pp HeronLanyon said that forcing people to use a pronoun for a person that is obviously not in accordance with the person's sex is like an assassination of reason. I agree with this.

But in some ways Barracker's analogy of Rohypnol is even more apt. I can't stop thinking about the six-year-old girl in Cllr Field's speech. She innocently asked a 17 year-old boy if he was a boy. This shows she has healthy reasoning - her internal perception of the world lines up with the sex of the person she was perceiving.

To make her stand, humiliated, in front of a group of people to publicly apologise for the healthy development of her reason is nothing short of rape - it is rape of the reason because it forcibly penetrates her healthy mind with a false idea.

How can she trust her own mind now? How can she trust the adult world now? The adult world has purposefully de-stabilised a developing psyche. She will now have to struggle against this memory of fear and humiliation if she is not to develop a slave mentality - that is to have to say that reality is what the person wielding the biggest stick says that it is.

This is what is at stake in our schools and if the country's largest parenting website wants to be on the side of children it has to take the mental and emotional development of children seriously, even if the government and all the opposition parties seem to want to enslave their minds.

To Dead-name: ?

Previous name.
Many people have them.

Agree with most -
I would say 'non-binary' means 'normal'.
Also - people can't change their sex, so I wouldn't all the GRA a sex change cert, or imply in any way that they have actually changed sex, though I do call people who have been through surgery transexual, which is inconsistent.

Yes - previous name or original name.

Powerful post, clitherow.

people can't change their sex, so I wouldn't all the GRA a sex change cert,

I would call it a sex change certificate - because it allows people to claim that they are the opposite sex and acquire the rights, sports, spaces, and jobs of their acquired sex.

This is how trans people have been able to claim that they have been in women's spaces for years and years.

The fact that it is called the gender recognition certificate is one way of administering the drug, deadening the senses and misrepresenting what is happening.

My point, as others noted, is that language is as powerful as a drug in altering perception and response.

The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis suggests that language influences the way that a person thinks.

The was a remarkable programme on Radio 4Extra about this last night. The programme is about the profound effect language has on how we think:

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08tj4y1

Trigger warning: folksy delivery, but it shouldn't be a showstopper.

But in some ways Barracker's analogy of Rohypnol is even more apt. I can't stop thinking about the six-year-old girl in Cllr Field's speech. She innocently asked a 17 year-old boy if he was a boy. This shows she has healthy reasoning - her internal perception of the world lines up with the sex of the person she was perceiving.

To make her stand, humiliated, in front of a group of people to publicly apologise for the healthy development of her reason is nothing short of rape - it is rape of the reason because it forcibly penetrates her healthy mind with a false idea.

Anything which confuses or disinhibits children from naming sex makes them vulnerable to exploitation by those adults who are determined to manipulate/exploit.

All Safeguarding & Child Protection best practice stresses the need for children to hear and use clear unambiguous language as this strengthens clear boundaries.

Children are easily silenced by adults who deliberately confuse, shame, humiliate them.

A silenced child is a child at risk.

How can she trust her own mind now? How can she trust the adult world now? The adult world has purposefully de-stabilised a developing psyche. She will now have to struggle against this memory of fear and humiliation if she is not to develop a slave mentality - that is to have to say that reality is what the person wielding the biggest stick says that it is.

This is what is at stake in our schools and if the country's largest parenting website wants to be on the side of children it has to take the mental and emotional development of children seriously, even if the government and all the opposition parties seem to want to enslave their minds.

This ^^

Is their any crowing on Twitter about Barracker being suspended? I’m just wondering if they’ve published the full comment from her or have they done their usual comment/lies without showing any ‘evidence’ of her so called transbigotry?

Language is indeed powerful.

Propaganda Techniques
(basic)
From people.howstuffworks.com/propaganda1.htm

"A commonly used technique is name-calling, which takes its cue from playground behavior. Often, this technique is utilized to divert attention when someone is trying to avoid answering a question or providing hard facts.

The bandwagon technique encourages the viewer or listener to join the crowd by aligning with the most popular, successful side of an issue

Glittering generalities are very common in political propaganda. Glittering generalities combine words that have positive connotations with a concept that is particularly beloved.

Card stacking is the presentation of only the details, statistics and other information that impacts public opinion positively. In other words, the bad stuff is left out entirely.

The plain folks technique is designed to get ordinary citizens to identify with a political candidate or other figure that they otherwise may have nothing in common with.

Propaganda based on fear is designed to scare people into choosing sides.

The transfer technique is more subliminal (operating on a subconscious rather than conscious level) than the other techniques we've discussed. Using this method, a group or person attempts to align themselves with a beloved symbol in an effort to transfer the status of the symbol to the cause they represent.

Many other propaganda methods exist, but they subsist on the same basic principles as the ones listed above: Manipulate the message to portray an issue or person in the most favorable light possible, and when necessary, make the opposing side look shabby in comparison.

Many people believe that propaganda does more harm than its proponents would admit to. Some go so far as to claim that propaganda is a bedfellow of censorship because they both serve as tools for repression, confusion and suppression of information" (continues)

post above from interesting thread May 2018
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3246755-Transphobia-or-truths

After many years on internet discussion boards, I've noticed that lots of people don't understand the mechanics of how an analogy works. They think that if you make an analogy between two things, you're saying that the first thing is exactly the same as the other thing. It can be exasperating. Anyway, I suspect some of Mumsnet's moderators fall into that category. (And they'll have been responding to faux-outraged TRAs yelling: "Miss! Miss! She said calling people by the right pronouns was the same as being forced to take Rohypnol!")

No one can change sex. I think the term “sex change” has caused women endless problems. When I talk to people locally about single sex provision, they assume that trans people always have surgery, and they often think that having done so means they become the opposite sex.
Also non binary is just ridiculous. Everyone is non binary. It seems to be a term allowing people to pick whichever stereotype they feel would be most advantageous on any given day.
It certainly does not mean “no sex “ ! ?

They think that if you make an analogy between two things, you're saying that the first thing is exactly the same as the other thing.

Yes, so many people think this! I just had a conversation with my 17 year old about it, who gets just as frustrated by people’s inability to understand analogies correctly and not instantly assume it’s a like for like comparison. Frustrating as hell, and sadly forum moderators are no more likely to comprehend analogies than the federal population.

general population