Banned from women-only FB group

[maet]

A trans woman edited by MNHQ because OP is using second language posted in a women's only FB group wanting free emotional labour and "validation" from untrained women to help them with getting over their abusive ex boyfriend.

I stated it wasn't appropriate to ask untrained women to take on their emotional labour, especially considering what had happened to them was so traumatic (according to them they ended up in hospital), and especially not for free and suggested they seek professional help instead.

Cue trans woman and women stating I was being transphobic, and "wouldn't understand the fear a marginalised group would go through."

I was told I hadn't been through a traumatic experience before so couldn't possibly understand what the OP was going through.

I've been banned from a group specifically designed for women. Nowhere in the post did I mention anything about the OP being trans.

I am so sick of this shit. The world has gone mad.

"my response was:
"Most members won't be able to provide appropriate help for you, as we are in tech and not medically trained. However there are many English speaking therapists in Berlin, and I hope you'll find the help you need!"

She says these are her words as used in the group. Have you not been on MN enough to have seen that often what is vented here in an OP is not what was said there, to MIL, to boss, to DH, whatever. But she's lying...

That's the only one that I'm believing. I have no idea what the trans woman's account is. I'm basing it on what the op says she said

Same

They were banned because a biologically male trans person created conflict and drama in a supposedly women only group. It's a fairly common dynamic and outcome in women's Facebook groups and one I've witnessed several times, as have others.

I am not interested in going round and round further on this with you.

Well apparently MN FWR is a court of law, and the OPs first statement was taken down and used as evidence against her. All following statements are clearly lies to mitigate the first, and corroborating witness statements are unsafe as there is obvious bias.

The OP found her community targeted by community disruption.

But why one earth would you say you said something if it turns out you didn't really say anything like that at all?

Haha, everything needs explaining. Then it can be nitpicked, then explained again, then nitpicked again, then explained again. And so it goes, on to 1000.

YY, exactly.

"I totally agree. But neither the transwoman's presence nor post impacted the OP's safety or well-being or disadvantaged her in any way."

The OP actually said she was blindsided by reading a graphic account of trauma in a forum where she was not expecting to read something like that. By suggesting the MTF trans find a more appropriate forum to get support for their trauma she was accused of transphobia and banned so yes she was disadvantaged.

Yes OccasionalKite, you said, twice

Only another 190 to go!

But neither the transwoman's presence nor post impacted the OP's safety or well-being or disadvantaged her in any way.

The op has said that the sexual abuse descriptions were very graphic and were related without warning in front of a rape survivor in an environment where you would normally feel confident you would never hear such a thing.

ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Erish It's actually amazing how badly threads go bonkers if anyone disagrees.
I mean it was all on topic and discussing the OP before it went bonkers oi oi lol

She's saying it because it's true. Bears repeating.

*Datun
*
*It's astonishing. The OP's own account, own description, own narrative, where at least three or four people have said they have experienced exactly the same thing, is disbelieved, in favour of a virtually hypothetical man.

The only account you have is the OPs. The only one.

It's chilling.*

Like in Islam there has to be two witnesses to a rape for there to be any prosecution. Or not even in Islam, same in our justice system really. The woman herself is disregarded as a reliable witness.
I think this is the only crime where the victim is not seen as a reliable witness. If you get mugged, you are a reliable witness. If you get burgled, you are a reliable witness. If you get raped, you're not.
I know we're not talking about rape here but it's astounding the lengths people will go to to infer that a woman's word is totally worthless

But why one earth would you say you said something if it turns out you didn't really say anything like that at all?

Exactly. It's not like she got some minor detail muddled up. The 2nd statement bears no resemblance to the first.

It's not about disagreement. It's about nitpicking, picking on, nitpicking, picking on.

But let's just say: the OP says she didn't mention trans anything. Yet was mysteriously banned for "transphobia" after the MTF trans person kicked up a massive fuss. That is the dynamic here.

They could have rebuked her for being insensitive, perhaps. But no, it had to be "transphobia", the worse of all possible things in the known universe.

It's

Really

Time

To

For

Bed

I saw community disruption at first hand with MTF trans who would befriend young women on the internet, get close to them, find out their secrets and then pass them off as their own. This upset the women whose lives were being mined for female narratives greatly. They hung around a feminist forum for years, causing massive fights between the libfems and the rad fems. It was very disturbing. It's been repeated again and again over the years.