Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

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

652 replies

theOtherPamAyres · 25/05/2019 23:14

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?)

OP posts:
Thread gallery
13
ThePankhurstConnection · 28/05/2019 11:14

Well as a result of this banning, a friend drew my attention to what has been going on here. I read the medium piece first and then this thread (which I haven't finished.

Barraker's Medium piece was powerful and well written and it resonated with me, probably more than the original post would have. In fact I was away over the weekend, talking about this IRL with like minded women, some of whom will be on here and to be honest I probably would have completely missed this post.

I'm glad MN and the reporters did me the favour of drawing attention to it because it has made me think very deeply about this pronoun issue and this analogy is one I will now be discussing off these boards.

I was shocked to hear that Barracker was banned/suspended? because I have always enjoyed her posts and found them provoking. The Medium article was even more thoughtful and provocative and it will stay with me for far longer than the original post would have and the fact she was deleted and banned for it will be forever intertwined with her message. It amplifies the message of suppressed and forced speech when someone/something illustrates it so beautifully for us all by silencing it and thankfully that is what has happened here. So I really did get the message, me and many, many others.

I sincerely hope Barracker will be back and I thank her for posting her Medium article.

ThePankhurstConnection · 28/05/2019 11:26

I would really like to know what the 'Spirit of Mumsnet' is now, because it really doesn't seem to be the same spirit, of intelligent debate, critical thought, female-centred support, and freedom to take the piss out of nonsense both within and outwith of Mumsnet' that existed when I joined 10 years ago.

Yes, this.

The spirit of Mumsnet now seems to be cowering in the corner but making sure you smile about it so people aren't upset by your emotions.

R0wantrees · 28/05/2019 11:33

The spirit of Mumsnet now seems to be cowering in the corner but making sure you smile about it so people aren't upset by your emotions.

That the additional rules are only in place on the feminism and women rights board is particularly concerning.

R0wantrees · 28/05/2019 11:34

@JustineMumsnet are you aware of this thread and what has happened this weekend?

floraloctopus · 28/05/2019 11:39

Maybe we should all do @justinemumsnet until we get some satisfactory answers.

floraloctopus · 28/05/2019 11:40

The spirit of Mumsnet now seems to be cowering in the corner but making sure you smile about it so people aren't upset by your emotions.

Much like domestic violence victims end up doing...

Michelleoftheresistance · 28/05/2019 11:41

The spirit of Mumsnet now seems to be cowering in the corner but making sure you smile about it so people aren't upset by your emotions.

Again symptomatic of the bigger picture.

HQ are supporting a campaign against coercive control. BUT there is a specific group of males exempt and protected so that you may not call their behaviour coercive (whether or not in reality it is the truth) and you may not use the strategies against coercive control if they in any way might dislike or be upset by you doing so.

Likewise: This group is a special exemption from safeguarding procedures. Single sex spaces. Court rules. Policing. Equal balancing of one person's right's against another.

We're being told that normal rules should not equally and uniformly apply to these people despite the fact that this very often disadvantages and oppresses other people involved in the situation. And despite multiple examples of this disapplication of the rules being abused, and in many cases ending in criminal offenses against others?

What justification is being given for this? Why does it mostly take the shape of concealment, deception, stealth, silencing evidence and protests and the voices of those affected, denial of facts and emotive pleas for sympathy instead of putting forward the factual, positive case?

R0wantrees · 28/05/2019 11:42

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.

recent thread, OP Anlaf wrote:

"Karen Ingala Smith in Parliament now on single sex refuges

She's excellent, as i think is Jess Philips. Karen's talking v movingly of the challenges in offering women only refuge services, the two boroughs where her organisation has had pushback already for not being inclusive enough, and in assessing male-born people for risk in accessing female services

Watch live:

parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/0d07ff13-636e-4b51-a946-2877e583dc4c

Lots of handwaving from one Maria Miller "

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3592260-Karen-Ingala-Smith-in-Parliament-now-on-single-sex-refuges

see also thread discussing the behaviour of the male witness described by OP BrightonReSisters

"DV Select Committee contributor wants to browse adult sites on train wifi

By now you've probably all seen, or at least heard about, Karen Ingala Smith's wonderful contribution to the Women & Equalities Select Committee yesterday. If not, you can see it here:

parliamentlive.tv/event/index/0d07ff13-636e-4b51-a946-2877e583dc4c

You may NOT have seen this re one of the other contributors, Diana James. Diana works with refuges in the south West. On the train to the Select Committee yesterday, Diana wanted to shop online for sex toys. Diana wasn't happy that GWR blocked the online sex toy shop from their WiFi, due to the adult nature of their products. We know this because Diana publicly tweeted to GWR to complain.

That Diana thinks it appropriate to visit an adult site on a public train is disturbing. That Diana thinks it's a good idea to broadcast this publicly is odd. That Diana thought GWR would bow down to Diana's demand to access adult content on their WiFi is downright bizarre.

Diana was invited to give evidence about provision of services for survivors of domestic violence and that makes behaviour even more worrying than if we were talking about a teenage boy or suited commuter.

Diana can of course do as Diana pleases within the bounds of the law. That said, this is a red flag.

When someone in Diana's position thinks this kind of behaviour is appropriate we must ask questions. The first question is probably the most obvious: why ask a this person, with questionable boundaries, to speak for vulnerable abuse survivors?

It's a small mercy that at least GWR seem to have their heads screwed on."

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3593346-DV-Select-Committee-contributor-wants-to-browse-adult-sites-on-train-wifi

Datun · 28/05/2019 11:45

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.

Exactly.

Which is why you get arguments along the lines of why are you tarring everybody with the same brush? Why are you demonising a whole group of people because a few who abuse the system?

You might as well say why not let grown men have access to all disrobing children, because you are condemning them over the few paedophiles who will exploit it.

It's about not creating the circumstances for exploitation in the first place. Especially when it's a question of feverishly removing the gatekeeping that has been painstakingly put there to mitigate risk.

R0wantrees · 28/05/2019 11:45

HQ are supporting a campaign against coercive control. BUT there is a specific group of males exempt and protected so that you may not call their behaviour coercive (whether or not in reality it is the truth) and you may not use the strategies against coercive control if they in any way might dislike or be upset by you doing so.

See also Women's Aid and the police who with MN launched a campaign to raise awareness of coercive control:

'Walking On Eggshells'
Coercive control is domestic abuse. Controlling or coercive behaviour was criminalised in 2015 - but it still affects hundreds of thousands of women in the UK.

Mumsnet, Women's Aid and Surrey Police have joined together to help raise awareness of the dangers of coercive control.

A new survey found 38% of Mumsnet users have suffered some form domestic abuse."

www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=hC1pCi-GwGU

R0wantrees · 28/05/2019 11:48

It's about not creating the circumstances for exploitation in the first place. Especially when it's a question of feverishly removing the gatekeeping that has been painstakingly put there to mitigate risk.

This is the systemic damaging of Safeguarding & Child Protection frameworks.

This will impact children and vulnerable adults including all women.

Who benefits from this?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a3301266-Safeguarding-girls-and-protecting-women-post-Jimmy-Saville-metoo

JessicaWakefieldSV · 28/05/2019 11:51

The spirit of Mumsnet now seems to be cowering in the corner but making sure you smile about it so people aren't upset by your emotions.

Yes well it’s definitely changed since I first used MN.

What I find... a concerning problem... is that when we complain about the moderation being inconsistent and hard to stay within, about the ‘special’ rules needed only on the feminism boards to keep us nasty women inline, the response we get, both publicly here and off the boards, is basically:

we are allowing you to talk about something affecting you that nobody else is on social media, so be grateful and accept we will force you to use the words your oppressors say you should, we may change the rules and unfairly ban users, and still we expect you to be grateful.

floraloctopus · 28/05/2019 11:55

Let's reframe that

You are allowing us to discuss something despite your control of us and you expect us to be grateful that we are not banned.

He is allowing me to live in his house despite the fact that I am not worth anything and expects me to be grateful that he is not throwing me out.

See the similarity? Gratitude is expected from the little woman.

R0wantrees · 28/05/2019 11:55

Mumsnet have been bullied and coerced.

See Justine Roberts interview Times April 2018
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/mumsnet-founder-justine-roberts-transgender-activists-try-to-curb-free-speech-on-site-z3sr3nf6q?shareToken=ade388be59ac427155003eff83c5158c

“Transgender activists have contacted Mumsnet advertisers and said they will be organising a boycott of their products if they don’t remove their advertising from Mumsnet,” Roberts said.

“A significant minority of our users feel very strongly about women’s rights and very uneasy [about the proposals]. This is an issue that needs to be discussed and that’s why we’re prepared to take any potential advertising hit.”

MN members AIBU response:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3222471-AIBU-to-be-extremely-proud-of-Justine-Roberts-Mumsnet-right-now

Trans Media Watch reported the site to the Home Affairs Committee on Hate Crime last year
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3238618-Trans-Media-Watch-has-written-to-parliament-saying-trans-identified-male-can-be-considered-as-hate-speech-and-that-Mumsnet-users-referring-to-penises-are-being-transphobic

JessicaWakefieldSV · 28/05/2019 11:57

See the similarity?

As a child of domestic violence, yes I do. I hope MNHQ understand how horrified some of us are by this, and why we feel this way.

TirisfalPumpkin · 28/05/2019 11:59

I would like to thank Barracker for her article. I’ve previously opposed compelled pronoun use due to being autistic and unable to process the cognitive dissonance of not saying what I see. This perspective helped me get out of my own somewhat self centred perspective and see the harm it does to others - it’s not just about speaker vs pronounee but the entire social context of the conversation. Roofie-ing someone’s drink is an arresting analogy but I think it needs to be to properly illustrate the point.

I hope Barracker’s posting privileges are reinstated and she receives a full and unambiguous apology. The sooner this happens the less bad it looks.

Datun · 28/05/2019 11:59

Given how targeted HQ is over this issue, I imagine they are bending over backwards so they can prove themselves in the right in a court of law, time after time, if necessary. And avoid any or all sanctions.

With the court cases being vexatiously brought now, none of which are succeeding, and the other gc legal challenges, which will stand a great chance of success, I'm wondering if they may start to relax the rules once precedents have been set.

R0wantrees · 28/05/2019 12:01

He is allowing me to live in his house despite the fact that I am not worth anything and expects me to be grateful that he is not throwing me out.

See the similarity? Gratitude is expected from the little woman.

THere are women posting and reading in exactly this situation.

"A new Mumsnet survey to mark the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence, run in partnership with Women’s Aid and Surrey Police, reveals that 38% of the survey respondents say they have been in a controlling or abusive relationship* with a partner – but almost a quarter (24%) of users who said they had been in a controlling or abusive relationship told no-one about any incidents of controlling or abusive behaviour."

www.mumsnet.com/relationships/coercive-control

most importantly thre are women posting on the transwidows thread about the impact their male partner's controlling/abusive behaviour has had on them and their children:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3101834-trans-widows-escape-committee

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3471122-trans-widows-escape-committee-2-the-trans-widows-strike-back

R0wantrees · 28/05/2019 12:05

Francis Crook executive director of the Howard League for Penal Reform "said that she was worried that ‘some men with a history of extreme violence and sexual violence against women have found a new way of exercising aggression towards women’.

‘These men are not transitioning because they like women and want to be a woman, but in order to exert a new kind of control and dominance over women, a sort of infiltration."

source:
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5798945/Trans-women-convicted-men-attack-vulnerable-inmates.html

R0wantrees · 28/05/2019 12:07

Claude Knights (safeguarding expert & 15 years as head of Kidscape)
on sex offenders who transition and are afforded the opportunity to change their name and hide their history as a consequence commenting on the case of "Christopher Noble, 32, transitioned to Christyl Knight while behind bars for keeping a stash of over 4,000 vile pictures and videos of kids as young as six months old"

“Allowing these individuals to hide a secret past is a dangerous practice.”
“Anyone who’s fuelled the vile trade in indecent images of children and therefore contributed to their sexual abuse should not be allowed to change their name.”

Source: www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/3006679/paedophile-jailed-transgender-christyl-knight-christopher-nobile/

floraloctopus · 28/05/2019 12:09

but almost a quarter (24%) of users who said they had been in a controlling or abusive relationship told no-one about any incidents of controlling or abusive behaviour."

Sadly because of a previously common view that it wasn't abuse. It gets presented as the man valuing the woman and wanting to look after her/keep her safe etc. In other words wanting her and not letting anybody who would treat her properly from being able to get to know her.

R0wantrees · 28/05/2019 12:16

speech by Cllr Sarah Fields at Declaration of a Sex Based Rights event at Leeds Civic Hall Saturday 28/05/2019

(extract)
"So, I just want to start off by thanking the many women on the Mumsnet Feminism boards. You are a constant strength and inspiration.

About three years ago, not long after I was first elected, I was contacted by a woman in Leeds, for advice. Her six year old daughter had been verbally attacked and then subjected to a violent outburst by a 17 year old male who had been allowed to join a local girls group as a helper. This was because he said he identified as a female. What had this child done? She had asked him if he was a boy. And then this six year old girl had been made to stand alone in front of the entire group and apologise to him.

And I couldn’t get my head around this. So I began to do some research. And this was how I found my way to gender critical thinking and radical feminism.
And these are the following statements I’d like to make:

Every single person on the planet is unique. And I don’t care what they wear. And I don’t care who they love or have sex with, as long as they are consenting adults.

There is no such thing as living as a woman. We are women. And it is our female biology which makes us women. It is our sex. And biological sex is observable in every single cell in our bodies: it is a physical, material and biological fact. And our sex is what makes us a class. Our sex which makes us uniquely vulnerable to male violence. Our sex which means we bear the entire burden of reproductive labour. The structural oppression which women face as a class is because of their sex. And that is why all women need legal recourse to separate and sex segregated spaces.

It is simply not ethical to categorise males as females based on their subjective feelings. To do so means the female sex no longer has legal protections or legal meaning and is instead reduced to destructive, regressive gender stereotyping.

If you cannot define women, then you cannot defend them." (continues)

It is absurd, it is dangerous and millions of women across the country are saying we have had enough. You cannot identify into an oppressed class because you cannot identify out of an oppressed class. And women are uniquely oppressed across the planet: reproductive health and autonomy, Female Genital Mutilation, violence, rape, child marriage, no right to vote, death in childbirth, post-natal illness, denied access to education, lower wages, chemical contraception, sex trafficking, surrogacy, pornography, prostitution and objectification.

I’ve had women in prisons and post-prison services in Leeds who have contacted me in fear and despair because they are confined with men who threaten them with rape, assault them, repeatedly expose their so called female penises and taunt them about playing the system and flushing their hormones down the toilet.

Our statistics will be skewed and we will lose a tool of analysis that provides us with the ability to challenge the very inequalities for which sex based provisions and quotas were created." (continues)

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3595007-Leeds-Councillor-thanks-Mumsnet-FWR-in-gender-critical-speech

ThePurportedDoctoress · 28/05/2019 12:17

www.mylondon.news/news/zone-1-news/passenger-complained-great-western-railway-16330620

Passenger complained to Great Western Railway after being blocked from browsing sex toy shop on train WiFi

BTL comments:
"Don't let the feminists see this"
"Oh dear, banning women from inappropriate websites on public transport is oppression......"

What would "Jay" say if they knew that the person in question is not of the female sex?

JellySlice · 28/05/2019 12:17

I'm having second thoughts about my outrage over Barracker's deletion and banning.

Yes, it is outrageous that it has happened at all, but reread the deletion message.

Reminds me of Winston Churchill's forced 'apology' when he was reprimanded for stating that half the House were idiots: he said "Mr Speaker, I withdraw my statement. Half the House are not idiots". (Apocryphal?)

R0wantrees · 28/05/2019 12:18

What would "Jay" say if they knew that the person in question is not of the female sex?

This is the issue.
THe person demonstrating male pattern behaviour was male.