Pronouns are Rohypnol

[Lamaha]

The original artical was apparently deleted from Medium, and this is a cache. Very thought-provoking. It demonstrates just how using the "wrong" pronouns messes with our brains. It's not just about being polite and courteous.

webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3ASPK6ZOcWUnYJ%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fmedium.com%2F%40barrakerr%2Fpronouns-are-rohypnol-dbcd1cb9c2d9+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=safari&fbclid=IwAR3kCZOWM3RwHhHqnC1EOrjPQxJstHHxhyFKv4MSOeIoCk46G4zbL-5NFrk

I think it's more complicated than that, dog.

It seems to be a function of badness, embarrassing-ness to the trans agenda and litigiousness. The latter itself depends on which jurisdiction the individual operates under, it seems.

It’s a good article.

I once did bend over backwards to speak trans, translating everything in my mind to be socially acceptable for the sad trans person.

But it wasn’t good enough, was it, then they wanted access to my women only services and gleefully shut down rape shelters which sought to uphold their single sex status.

Give them an inch and all that.

I was away for the day after writing my last post and the whole day I feared that the thread would be deleted and I'd get a suspension. Glad to see we're still talking.

At the moment I am reading the long thread linked above and I see that Barracker's original comment was deleted -- but then reinstated. I haven't read more than two pages yet of that thread, so it seems the topic is now OK? I was wondering if I should have self-reported this thread.

I am finding a difference happening in the language used by the press when researching the sport thread, lots of "male runner" or "biological male" wins women's race type headlines. The articles then go on to explain said male identifies as transgender but stick to only using pronouns within quotes from others. It is a subtle shift but it is there.

When the truth offends, we lie and lie until we can no longer remember it is even there. But it is still there. Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Soon or later, that debt is paid.

That's one of the final lines from Chernobyl (watch it, it's fab) and it seemed apposite. Nothing good comes from mandating that people lie.

Oh dear, I'm rather embarrassed now! I see that this article has been posted long ago on that utterly fascinating thread, and here I am being stale bread! As ever I am so impressed by your eloquent and brilliant arguments and agree that it is time to stop with the courtesy pronouns.
The whole gender thing does my head in especially when it comes to "gay transgenderism" -- very often these "relationships" boil down to straight sex and all the trans talk is just showing off how utterly cool and progressive one is. I pity the females who have bought into this nonsense.

Oh dear, I'm rather embarrassed now! I see that this article has been posted long ago on that utterly fascinating thread, and here I am being stale bread!

Don't be embarrassed, Lamaha. The more publicity that article gets the better!

It's a great article

I'm just happy that it has not been deleted, and me suspended. This was my fear all day yesterday, while I had no internet! It's really troubling, that it has come to this on MN. However I am still reading that thread and am very hopeful, since the "offending" post by Barracker is back! It's like reading an edge-of-your-seat novel but knowing there's a happy ending.

My worry about the pronouns in reporting is the inaccurate perception this can create.

For example, it is a generally accepted fact that almost all rapes are carried out by men.

If, based on their preference, the story becomes "she raped 3 women" it misrepresents the facts.

Over time, people can start to believe that actually, women commit quite a lot of rapes.

That to me is a dangerous perception and one which could be pervasive across many issues.

This was my fear all day yesterday

Oh aww. I'm sorry you had a hard day. This is because the women of FWR are being coercively controlled. See this thread:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3602931-Why-does-Mumsnet-listen-to-outsiders-rather-than-just-Mumsnet-users

I think, in honour of Barracker and her fabulous article, we should all name the problem when we see it.

You should not be made to feel like this because you saw an article on the internet that you agreed with.

I hope MNHQ are realising this is how their special FWR restrictions are affecting their own users.

That is an amazing article. I was going to send it to some people and then I thought no, that will only make them mad at me - is this what we have been reduced to? I was never afraid of an argument before, but I have come close to losing people over this (my family) and I'm not sure how to proceed. But I might get them to read it when we are together - I think it is better to discuss it than email it.

Pronouns are the thin wedge. The aim, I think, is to make obsolete the prefix trans, so that the words girl and woman are inclusive of both sexes.

One of my peak trans moments was from a post here on MN, with a link to some woman's anecdote. It began something like, "Imagine you are a girl --- and this and this happens to you (horrible exclusion from sports).
It turned out, during the course of the comment, that the "girl" was actually a transitioning boy. The poster had simply removed the prefix trans from transgirl to drum into us that "transgirls are girls". To make this ordinary and normal. I found it horrifying, and a possible taste of the future. We MUST resist this. Accepting pronouns out of courtesy will eventually lead to this.

The aim, I think, is to make obsolete the prefix trans, so that the words girl and woman are inclusive of both sexes.

You're absolutely right. And what this achieves for male born people necessarily involves removing all power from female born people to name themselves, their biology, to in any way separate themselves from male born people. There is no benefit in this for female born people, there is just loss after loss after loss.

This is not inclusion, this is hostile take over.

I hope MNHQ are realising this is how their special FWR restrictions are affecting their own users.

So do I.

As for this (excellent) article, I have made a point of mentioning it in all my rad fem groups and shared it widely among women, it is relevant every time someone shares one of 'those' crime articles.

You're absolutely right Lamaha. And we're already seeing that with the shift from transwomen (which my spellcheck now highlights as incorrect) to trans women. So that transwomen become a subset of women rather than men.

It's entirely deliberate

Found an example of this just now on Facebook. This is from a dating site. You need to tick your preference. Note that the choice between man and cis man, woman and cis woman. So man and woman now keen exclusively trans people.

The issue I have with the whole correct pronouns are ok if a man is sufficiently 'bad' enough thing is that it plays into the idea that these people aren't 'real trans'.

As we know, 'real trans' is meaningless. Those of us (general us, not just FWR) who use it to mean 'person suffering from gender dysphoria' and/or 'person who has had genital surgery' are way out of step.

Firstly because feeling dysphoria is now not a necessity of being trans, and secondly because when many transpeople talk about having 'surgery', they don't mean genitals they mean boob jobs or facial surgery.

Personally, I try and avoid pronoun use but surely Karen White etc. are as much trans as any other trans person, because they say they are trans.

If it's ok to call those people men, we are agreeing with the TRAs that they can be discounted, because they're not really trans. And therefore It Never Happens.

(The logical contortions hurt my head!)