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?)

How long was Barracker's post? With a bit of editing, could it fit on, let's say a T shirt or a tote bag? Just asking for a friend.

@MNHQ I think you've called this one wrong. This is a legitimate discussion.

As a lawyer I have to say I'm horrified that the courts could force witnesses to lie by judges directing them to use preferred pronouns (as was discussed in the context of the Speaker's Corner assault case). Language does matter.

I often read these boards, nodding along, a growing fury inside me.
More and more this turns to horror as women are silenced across other sites and here now too.

Where can we state biological reality now?
Where can we speak the truth?
I don't want my daughter to have to fight this, the time is now.
Is it already too late?

For those who are curious, there's a twitterer named Dr Fox up a Thorntree who tweeted an interesting screen shot about 11 hours ago.

And, at the risk of deletion myself, my post at 11.51 this morning takes Barracker's original post, inserts 'a couple of gins' where the banned word originally was. No other changes.

(PS: For the monitors, (waves) my post also stresses that in my post, both the use of female pronouns and the intake of 'a couple of gins' were assumed to be voluntary, before your finger hits the report button! It was so 'in the spirit' it was about the spirit )

For those who are curious, there's a twitterer named Dr Fox up a Thorntree who tweeted an interesting screen shot about 11 hours ago.

Thanks pombear.

Can’t argue with Barracker, so silence her instead. angry

A major part of the problem is the concept of 'trigger words & phrases'. In the absence of nuanced & informed debate all we are left with is triggers for feelings.

The analogy may have been strong - but it worked as an analogy, and wasn't inferring that trans people are rapists. It was descriptive of an ideology which forbids certain words, compels others, and which suppresses criticism in pursuit of its goals.

Barracker's central point doesn't need the analogy.

'She wasn't allowed to change in the women's changing room' sounds much different to 'he wasn't allowed to change in the women's changing room'. The forced use of female pronouns dramatically alters the message.

Barracker's central point doesn't need the analogy.

And she’s said she’d be prepared to remove the word rohypnol. So hopefully HQ will accept that.

I wonder, if the rohypnol analogy was used on the Relationships board about men gaslighting women, and MRAs had reported, would it have stayed up?

twitter.com/tjvrd/status/1132584213012721664?s=21

I get the feeling that few trans people or their allies ( & female allies can be just as bad) actually read threads properly; they just grab the low hanging fruit.

Are threads only deleted if reported, or does the moderator ever make such decisions independently, even in the absence of a report?

I think because of the sheer volume of threads they mainly depend on reports.

crochetandshit

It's not too late.

And we can still state biological reality.

I still see it often on this board. And don't forget about offline life. I've been to two amazing events over the last couple of weeks where women spoke the truth and biological reality to each other, on panels, in the pub before and after, on trains travelling to and from events, and in their homes, in their workplaces in conversations.

The time, as you say, truly is now.

Barracker is being discussed over on Reddit.

I have been thinking about this issue of language. As far as I can find out, about two thirds of the languages in the world today are gender neutral and only distinguish between people, animals and things and do not apply a gender marker when discussing humans. So this is a peculiar problem for certain Indo European languages. However what is common to all, and I do think is important, is that language is not dehumanising. Hence when the President of Rwanda called Tutsis 'cockroaches' he knew exactly what he was doing and what terrible results would follow. One of the reasons I object to the term 'cis' more than T**F is that the former term is dehumanising (it belongs to chemistry) whilst the latter, though offensive, is not.

But there is something about using gendered pronouns that seems to be a triggering factor for TRAs. It is noticeable that all the cases that have been investigated by the police have been for misgendering eg Miranda, Kate Scottow, Harry the Owl etc and yet Katie Hopkins was not investigated by the police for calling migrants 'cockroaches'. Misgendering does not dehumanise a person - it is merely calling them something they don't want to be called in a specific language. But calling people a uterus haver does dehumanise, after all rats also have uteruses. I therefore don't understand why misgendering can be a sign of hate, rude possibly but not dehumanising.

Incidentally I read Barraker's post several times last night and, although written with passion, is did not dehumanise anyone, nor imply TRAs used rohypnol on others, and I can't see at all how it warranted deletion.

Delete Barracker
And watch her analogy
Spread out through the net

Silly TRAs
When you try to silence us
Our words reach further

Recent tweet Andy Ellis retweeting another is interesting -1 min ago. I really cannot believe mn deleted this post now having read it in more considered way.
I agree with every word Barraker wrote and I assert my right to agree with it and say so too. Not to do so is to tumble into an abyss of self hatred and of coerced delusion.
Mn - she said ‘like’. Deleting the post is like a nightmare !

The fact that the reporting on this board is openly led by 'members' who never post, never participate on MN, merely stalk the boards to police women talking here because of some self appointed sense of superiority and then brag about this on Twitter is in itself extremely creepy. On what other MN board are men permitted to stalk and police women?

Fucking A

I’m another one who wants to know if barracker is banned

At the moment im just going to stop visiting mumsnet at the weekend

I need to know if i need to stop visiting mumsnet completely

Re Language, has a precedent been set with the treatment of scepticat in court ?
I feel that should have been challenged by now. To force someone in court to lie about the sex of another person, and to punish them for not adhering to it.
As far as I know the person who assaulted her is not in possession of a GRC ? So there isn’t even the legal fiction.
Is there any other area where one has to pretend to follow someone else’s belief system or be penalised ?

Rufus I would be very sad if you stopped visiting here.

I'm tending towards seeing this thread as an accidental positive right now.

It's truly highlighted some serious stuff, yet again (like it's not something we've been discussing again and again here for a long time, but I'm suspecting there are a lot more people watching right now!) and the huffy-monitor-reporters have ensured it's stayed at the top of threads today.

Well done huffy-monitor-reporters.

You've managed to elevate Barracker's Sunday morning 'interesting for all of us who know what you're talking about already' to 'what the fuck' for lots of other users.

Empress loving your post!

Bit of an own goal there @MNHQ No guidelines were broken, no misgendering happened, no reference to trans women.
Barracker's post has been shared far and wide now. It's being discussed on Twitter and Reddit
I was reading the thread but didn't see the post before it was deleted. I now know exactly what it said.
And that viewpoint is truthful and is a fabulous analogy, I'll be using it to reinforce my point.
So, to the OP it's very clear that coercive control of speech is definitely still with us and is being enforced here on FWR.

Pom In the long-standing MN tradition of haikus!

This really warrants a reply from @MNHQ @Justinemumsnet.

It's your most absurd ban yet, and if it's because your weekend moderators are just a bit jumpy, then they need to have more training or the same admin rights as the nightwatch until regular team members are back (e.g "this post has been hidden until the MNHQ team can take a look at it").

Otherwise you're now banning posters because they - what exactly? Point out the obvious ways that language is being used? That the words "she" and "he" sound different?

It should not be banworthy to say that language alters our perceptions and give an example of how.

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

I asked the specific question about use of automation in post monitoring/deleting recently on a site stuff thread. Other questions on the thread were answered, the automation point wasn't addressed.

I assume that external groups use automated tracking for key words and don't need alerting from anywhere else.

Barracker's post was referencing very well known social science and psycholinguistic science. Apparently science denial is in control at HQ