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
JanMeyer · 26/05/2019 13:03

I also do sympathise for the (albeit fairly small) gender dysphoric / trans person who is not pushing it in others faces. Just wants to get on with regular life with their friends and family and would in fact rather go into the disabled toilet, so as not to bother anyone (I know someone like this).

You say that almost like the person in question should be praised for using the disabled toilet and "not bothering anyone." Except they are, by using the disabled toilet they're bothering disabled people who are unable to use any other toilet. So I have zero sympathy with anyone who is selfish enough to do that.

ThinkIveFoundYourMarbles · 26/05/2019 13:15

Can't quite believe Barracker's post was deleted! Confused It's great that MNHQ is on the ball with inappropriate posts, but think you might be wrong about his one? As someone else said, the comparison wasn't with transwomen, it was with compelled speech to alter people's perceptions. It's a fully transferable point. With respect, I would also like to see it reinstated.

EmpressLesbianInChair · 26/05/2019 14:26

Message from Barracker:

“I'd be more than happy to rephrase my point about female pronouns having a dis-inhibiting cognitive effect upon instinctive self-preservation responses similar to the effect of certain drug classes. I can certainly do that without namechecking one specific brand of drug. There are many drugs, including alcohol, which, either voluntarily self-adminstered, or inadvertently consumed without consent, have the effect of lowering emotional and cognitive defences.

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

I've been generously offered the opportunity in the past to rephrase posts that might be misconstrued. I've always been grateful to the MNHQ mods for extending that goodwill and assumption that I post in good faith with every intention to follow guidelines.

But sadly, I can't rewrite as I've been banned, it seems.

The communication that MNHQ refer to hasn't reached me yet.”

AnyFucker · 26/05/2019 14:31

Erk

JackyHolyoake · 26/05/2019 14:32

This is an excellent essay about compelled speech etc:

www.openculture.com/2017/01/hannah-arendt-explains-how-propaganda-uses-lies-to-erode-all-truth-morality.html

placemats · 26/05/2019 14:37

Barracker's contributions have always been relevant and useful.

Can't stand this 'in the spirit' defence. What does that even mean?

This is real life!

P.S. Can someone please pm me the post?

placemats · 26/05/2019 14:38

Banned? WTF!

vivariumvivariumsvivaria · 26/05/2019 14:39

I'm finding it quite hard to discuss women's issues without using nouns, never mind pronouns.

I guess I'll need to figure out emoticons ad see if that medium could be used effectively.

SpartacusAutisticusAHF · 26/05/2019 14:40

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

placemats · 26/05/2019 14:43

Is talking about motherhood and pregnancy now a minefield? Or does 'in the spirit' just refer to FWR. What is the point of this site anymore if women are unable to discuss their biological reality?

MsMcWibble · 26/05/2019 14:44

Not on. I can't see a rule that Barracker was breaking.
'Not in the spirit' seems to be code for 'too many complaints because the poster was right'.
This is dreadful.

EmpressLesbianInChair · 26/05/2019 14:45

I guess I'll need to figure out emoticons ad see if that medium could be used effectively.

Perhaps we should start putting masks on & expressing our views through the means of interpretative dance.

terryleather · 26/05/2019 14:48

Banning Barracker? Seriously?

But then why am I not surprised that one of the most passionate and erudite posters on FWR is being shut down...

sackrifice · 26/05/2019 14:51

No more analogies?

No more references to other things that men also use to gain access to women's and girls' spaces and bodies?

No more what exactly?

This is quite telling tho.

AlwaysComingHome · 26/05/2019 14:53

The moderation on MN at the weekends is always particularly harsh.

R0wantrees · 26/05/2019 14:55

“I'd be more than happy to rephrase my point about female pronouns having a dis-inhibiting cognitive effect upon instinctive self-preservation responses similar to the effect of certain drug classes. I can certainly do that without namechecking one specific brand of drug. There are many drugs, including alcohol, which, either voluntarily self-adminstered, or inadvertently consumed without consent, have the effect of lowering emotional and cognitive defences.

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

This is an important point about the power of language.
Its a recognised long established academic position informed by a body evidence in both psychology and linguistics.

Barracker's posts are respectful, informed and nuanced.

SirVixofVixHall · 26/05/2019 14:56

Barracker has been banned ? Barracker ?
I wondered why I couldn’t message her just now.
I am really feeling the rage .

AlwaysComingHome · 26/05/2019 14:56

At least we got a clear and unambiguous answer to the thread’s title.

R0wantrees · 26/05/2019 14:56

Perhaps we should start putting masks on & expressing our views through the means of interpretative dance.

Or sandwiches?

placemats · 26/05/2019 15:03

The Weather Station. Transmission Radio. Female singer, a banjo player and the drummer takes it easy.

MangoesAreMyFavourite · 26/05/2019 15:04

So what do you reckon... do people have bots looking at all new posts and flagging them for people to mass complain?

How does this work? Does one have to be logged in to report a post or is every Tom, Dick and Harry on say for instance, twitter , able to report?

Sunkisses · 26/05/2019 15:04

When I have written about this issue amongst friends (who often disagree with me) on Facebook etc, I preface what I am saying with something like 'I am talking about sex and sexism. I can only do this if I use the biologically correct language of sex. I cannot do that if I am coerced into using politicised, ideological and incorrect language. I shall therefore use biologically correct language so I am can speak as clearly as I can, and will not create misunderstandings'. I think if you are talking about people who are not even present, it doesn't matter a hoot what pronouns you use about people who are not even there to be personally offended. If you are addressing an individual, to their face, then it is your call whether you want to use biologically correct language or to submit to their wishes.

R0wantrees · 26/05/2019 15:05

“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”
― George Orwell, 1984

LangCleg · 26/05/2019 15:06

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

Critiquing compelled speech is not generalising about trans people. It's is critiquing compelled speech.

@MNHQ - please respond. This is unconscionable.

What are you thinking?

R0wantrees · 26/05/2019 15:07

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”
― George Orwell, 1984

Swipe left for the next trending thread