Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

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
WrathofGRAconsultationKlop · 26/05/2019 10:55

Rickety
How the media uses language on the issue has been changing gradually over the last year
There is less he/she and more gender-avoiding language
The media were taken to task after the Lucy meadows case.
A male teacher who transitioned to female.
That level of harassment by the press never ends well.

So here we are.
Man committing a crime and the story is reported as a woman doing the crime

So it's not all gender avoiding then.

Mbwashenzi · 26/05/2019 10:58

See how long this lasts...

Can we stop being obedient soon, or will this coercion continue for evermore?
Justhadathought · 26/05/2019 11:00

The argument can be that transgenderism is the new gay in that the past generation couldn't bring themselves around to be liberal enough to accept gay people have a right.In essence, you could argue that by being against trans people in these situations you are repeating that sentiment

Yes, that's the argument...although it is flawed. Being gay does not necessitate the denial of biological reality, nor did gay liberation seek to redefine anyone's else's sexuality.

The issue is not a personal one; it is not about being "against" any one individual just because of how they feel about themselves. It is about questioning a whole ideology. Being gay is not an ideology, it is a sexuality; a sexual/emotional orientation.

Nobody wants to deny civil rights to anyone. Well certainly not here!

If you start off with a false premise, then you can never achieve a correct answer.

HeronLanyon · 26/05/2019 11:00

Just screenshotted it for myself to read. Good god what’s become of us ? Sick and tired of women being shut up.

clairemcnam · 26/05/2019 11:02

I use the language that states the truth. Language is important, I am not being forced into lying.

youllhavehadyourtea · 26/05/2019 11:02

I screenshotted part of Barracker's brilliant post but I guess if I put it up.here I'll just get deleted?

2 mins, I think it was.

youllhavehadyourtea · 26/05/2019 11:03

Barrackers post was a strong theoretical argument.
Why the deletion?

AnyOldPrion · 26/05/2019 11:04

Wow! Can’t believe Barracker’s post was deleted, and find myself wondering which part was offensive.

Wish I’d screenshotted too.

Language is indeed powerful.

“She’s upset to the point of tears because she’s denied access to the women’s changing rooms”

...provokes a very different response to...

“He’s upset to the point of tears because he’s denied access to the women’s changing rooms”

LangCleg · 26/05/2019 11:05

What's going on? Where is Barracker?

A critique of compelled speech does not break the rules: it critiques the rules.

Are we saying this is not allowed?

HeronLanyon · 26/05/2019 11:07

Oh ffs forgot to save screenshot. Mn can you say why it was deleted ? Scan read - I agreed with it and it wasn’t contentious surely ? Women are allowed to talk about this aren’t we ?

HeronLanyon · 26/05/2019 11:09

I am extremely critical about various things having been deleted since I’ve been on mn. Does that mean I
Am a transgressor ?

AnyOldPrion · 26/05/2019 11:10

Actually “upset and angry” would work better than the phrase I used.

And sadly I’m not surprised the post was taken down. Mass reporting will have been quickly rallied before more women could read something so powerful.

HeronLanyon · 26/05/2019 11:11

Found it ! Agree very strongly with every word. Well said barracker.

SophieLMumsnet · 26/05/2019 11:11

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.

HeronLanyon · 26/05/2019 11:12

I felt it was apposite.

Floisme · 26/05/2019 11:13

Well that touched a nerve didn't it.

WrathofGRAconsultationKlop · 26/05/2019 11:16

This drug is known to induce anterograde amnesia in sufficient doses; individuals are unable to create new memories.

Similar effects can be found in:

Colonisation
Regulatory capture
Control of the use of language and ideas
Cults

slipperywhensparticus · 26/05/2019 11:16

I think barracker has been banned

JellySlice · 26/05/2019 11:18

What the hell?!?! Not in the spirit of what?

Not in the spirit of women discussing things that endanger us, and making reasonable and accurate comparisons with other things that endanger us?

Or not in the spirit of women acting according to feminine socialisation and self-censoring in order to be 'nice' and 'kind' to men who will harm us if we're not nice and kind?

Datun · 26/05/2019 11:19

sophie

What did Barracker say? I'm sure she's quite capable of getting her point across in a different way, if that's what you're asking.

Datun · 26/05/2019 11:19

I think barracker has been banned

I don't think that can be right, surely? Sophie has said they're talking to her. I'm sure they'll sort it out.

BluebonicPlague · 26/05/2019 11:19

If you can't see the sex, you can't see the sexism. If you can't say the sex, you can't say the sexism.

WrathofGRAconsultationKlop · 26/05/2019 11:20

Nobody is suggesting trans use the date rape drug.
It is simply an analogy.
So suggest otherwise is absurd.

WrathofGRAconsultationKlop · 26/05/2019 11:35

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

What a great question op.

theOtherPamAyres · 26/05/2019 11:51

I was thinking about how to give evidence in a trial, without being coerced by the judge to use preferred pronouns, and without being sent down for contempt of court and being sacked.

How to disobey, in real life, but remain respectful and minimse the risk to myself?

I found a simple solution that I can live with, because the trans person can be referred to as the Defendant/Accused, the Complainant or the Witness. (The Accused said to me....)

If pressed about the status of an accused trans person, I would say that they identify as trans - not transwoman, not transman, but trans.

I'm not sure that judges would press the point, for fear of drawing attention to the sex of the trans person even further.

OP posts: