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?)

So we’d be better sticking to “he means he’s neither male nor female”?

If by ‘means’ you mean ‘pretending’, then yes.

An aside, where I live, there are loads of mixed sex toilets appearing. Most have images rather than words.

Yes its interesting that providers don't want to label toilets /changing rooms as 'male & female' 'mixed sex'

Symbols, acronyms, made up words.

It seems they will do anything but label the toilets/changing rooms as mixed sex.

It seems they will do anything but label the toilets/changing rooms as mixed sex.

The questions then are why? & also what are the consequences of this?

These new terms are designed to be 'on trend'.
That's how they can begin to alienate parents away from young people.

We are going through what anthropologists call a liminal phase.
A transition in the use of language.

We are being pushed towards a new threshold of acceptance.

Also he wants you to pretend he's not male or female.
He wants you to ignore the fact that he's male

Excellent wording.

These new terms are designed to be 'on trend'.
That's how they can begin to alienate parents away from young people.

Its to eradicate sex as a class, reference etc

Its to eradicate sex as a class, reference etc

Rather than empowering women, it seems more like a complete denial of female power, motherhood, nurturing qualities etc.

Also he wants you to pretend he's not male or female.
He wants you to ignore the fact that he's male

Exactly. We're constantly being told that using someone's preferred pronouns is just a courtesy. It isn't. All males who insist on being referred to as women are complicit in the assault on girls' and women's boundaries and hiding male violence.
Plus the idea that the female pronouns are some kind of a badge to be handed out to 'nice' trans people is ridiculous.

Rather than empowering women, it seems more like a complete denial of female power, motherhood, nurturing qualities etc

Its more than that, it breaks boundaries/ Safeguarding Frameworks which are intended to provide safety, dignity and privacy for women children & vulnerable adults.

98% of sexual crimes are committed by males.

All of this boils down to 'I wish to replace objective reality with my subjective choice for my own personal/emotional reasons and require you to enable this'.

You can go on and on about how deep those feelings go, and about authentic self and about how distressing it and a whole load of cod science to try and validate this, but it still boils down to:

'I want you to participate in this subjective game, for me, against objective reality'.

To which the only just and socially tolerable answer has to be, your right to swing your arms around is fine, but it ends at somebody else's nose.

To which the only just and socially tolerable answer has to be, your right to swing your arms around is fine, but it ends at somebody else's nose.

and metaphorically speaking, Barackers nose has been bashed and MN rules have unwittingly enabled this.

You then have to wonder

a) why a person would belief their right for self expression and inclusion entitles them to reach and batter other people's noses if they want and need to

b) what is the biological sex of the massive majority of those wanting the right to legally prevent people's boundaries about their noses getting battered?

c) what is the biological sex of the massive majority supposed to present their noses and shut up?

d) what does this tell us about what is actually going on here?

This is why the pronouns and language take over has cloaked and disguised the above to slide it under the radar. Reduce it down to males and females and there are the patterns society is very familiar with dealing with and preventing.

We are going through what anthropologists call a liminal phase.

Yes. And non compliance - deliberate, direct, uncompromising - is the only weapon we have against it.

The dynamics of abuse are relevent.

Silencing, smearing, isolation are consistantly used as tools to control.

'Privilege' is another weasel term where a useful word was commandeered and has been turned into 'women deserve to be punished for being women'. (And all good women will already be in sackcloth and ashes, apologising.)

It's all very 11th Century.

The use of 'Flying Monkeys' is relevent:

Flying Monkeys (The Narcissist’s Tool for the Smear Campaign)

by Inner Integration
May 13, 2018
(extract)
The topic today is about the role of flying monkeys, who can become flying monkeys, how the narcissist recruits flying monkeys against the target, why does the narcissist use these flying monkeys" (continues)

Flying monkeys do the narcissist’s bidding. That’s what the smear campaign is, is they’ll do whatever the narcissist wants. The narcissist wants them to go out and talk badly about you and spread lies about you or the narcissist wants them to outright abuse you or to make you feel like you don’t belong. (continues)

So who can become flying monkeys?

There are two different categories of people.

The first category is the naive.

The naive are people who are just clueless. They can’t see it, they can’t fathom it, they’ve never been through anything like that, so they can’t even imagine that somebody would do such a thing to just make up all these lies about you and spread them across town. They just can’t even fathom that a human would do that or maybe the naive is also the fawning type.

This is the type of people who when faced with a fight or flight dilemma, they choose fawning instead where they just melt into into a strong, dominant personality to feel safe and they don’t realize what’s happening. You might have noticed that even you became one of these flying monkeys when you were in your naive state before you woke up, before you figured out what was going on.

The second category of people who can become flying monkeys are the toxic.

These are the people with no boundaries. They love gossip and drama, they’re addicted to that stuff. They have an integrity problem and usually they want something from the narcissist. They want status, they want flattery, they want favours. They’re getting something out of the narcissist, which is why they’re willing to do their bidding." (continues)
medium.com/@OwnYourReality/flying-monkeys-the-narcissists-tool-for-the-smear-campaign-798daf7a59c0

*All of this boils down to 'I wish to replace objective reality with my subjective choice for my own personal/emotional reasons and require you to enable this'.

You can go on and on about how deep those feelings go, and about authentic self and about how distressing it and a whole load of cod science to try and validate this, but it still boils down to:

'I want you to participate in this subjective game, for me, against objective reality'.*

AKA religious fundamentalism.

'I want you to participate in this subjective game, for me, against objective reality'.

This is coercive control.

I just had one of those 'blinding flash' moments.
There is a world of difference between those of us who understand the underlying structure and its mechanisms, and those who can only see its various manifestations. So they see behaviours or incidents as separate and unrelated.

It makes it possible for people to write off warnings about risk assessment. From their POV, we look like deranged doom mongers who occasionally get it right by accident.

There is a world of difference between those of us who understand the underlying structure and its mechanisms, and those who can only see its various manifestations. So they see behaviours or incidents as separate and unrelated.

YY just as those who focus on what they see & judge as defining behaviours of a victim of sustained abuse unaware that those are predicatable consequences of known patterns of control/gooming/abuse.

yes, exactly, that's why radical feminism looks at the root, whereas queer theory just looks at the pretty flowers.

Queer theory/post modernism denies the recognition of changing and multiple power dynamics. Identifying power dynamics means that abuse of power becmes clear.