This is why mumsnet is considered transphobic

[gingerginger2]

Syntax

jayhulme.com/blog/warinwords

fairplayforwomen.com/pronouns/

I was delighted to see he only got one comment and it was three days ago! Obviously nobody is rushing to agree with his (reality defying) nonsense.

They understand the power of definition and expression, and try to destroy and twist language to their own aims.

Oh yes. TWAW, t**f, carriers, chest feeders, woman/lesbian OED, complaints about tampons being described as for women...

Oh sorry, that’s the translobby...

‘He’ oh another wee male gobshite who doesn’t like women then?

From the op article:

"When a group is defined out of existence, there is little we can do to stand up for ourselves. If we cannot point out the disingenuous undercurrent to their “reasonable statements” there is nothing we can do to defend ourselves from them. This twisting of language is clever, but every time it is pointed out for what it is, we win a little victory. I hope you have learnt enough from this, that you can help us win some little victories.
I hope you see what they are doing, and stand against it."

Absolutely. If you can't define Woman how can you provide the appropriate care and safeguarding?

If you can't define lesbian, how can you assert boundaries against rape culture?

If you can't define gender dysphoria, how can you provide the appropriate care; which may or may not involve actual transition at an age when the individual understands all the medical and social implications of this?

There's 3 minutes of my life I won't get back. If the writer is so interested in the power of words, they need to remember that 'Woman' means something too and it doesn't include 'Man'.

I got as far as to the end of the list, haven't read the rest of it.. I am obviously what they consider 'transphobic' over what I think of that rubbish. Especially the first one LOL

Isn't that interesting. I often examine the language used by the trans cult, because it tells us so much, and so I understand the impetus to try and do the same from their perspective.

All I will do in response to this piece is point out that when I have evaluated their terminology, the most obvious part of the methodology they employ is to use language to obscure, to confuse, to define those who use the words as an accepted part of the cult, and those who reject the language as outside the cult. The meanings of the words are almost incidental to them.

The complaint in this article is that those critical of genderism use plain statements that are factual and convincing, but underneath, somehow, those reasonable statements must mean something else. The problem for them is people read our statements and accept those statements without confusion. Everything in the article is begging the question, assuming that the plain sense cannot really be all there is, determined to reject the conclusion.

On a positive note, it's the first use I've seen of the argument that 'trans women' is just a prefix that hasn't gone straight for the racist comparison of 'black women'. Sadly, it has gone straight for 'gay women', and I'm not sure swapping out racism for homophobia is much of an improvement.

More dangerously is that in transphobe-speak trans women become “transwomen” and trans men “transmen” - what is so dangerous about that? The missing space.

More dangerously is climbing Everest. What is so dangerous about that? Its one of the world’s tallest mountains and many climbers have died in the attempt.

More dangerous is entering a lion’s cage. What is so dangerous about that? Lions are 250kg of predator as many poachers have learned.

More dangerous is signing an anti-abortion proclamation in Alabama. Why is that so dangerous? The added signature. Women will die or suffer grievous injuries from illegal abortions.

But then you have the most dangerous of all, THE MISSING SPACE.

While inventing their own vocabulary to speak on trans issues

Oh, the irony.

Mumsnet is only considered transphobic because we refuse the bow down to men.

Very well put FloralBunting the writer is clearly despairing because we do mean what we say. When words have meanings that's not all that difficult. And it makes raising awareness of the serious, damaging consequences of legal sex self-determination easier as well.

The whole thing is manipulative, full of insinuation, obfuscation and downright lies. Nearly full TRA bingo too.

Had the best laugh at the "I'm a writer, so I know what they're doing". Assuming the audience is too dumb to parse the meaning of fairly simple words AND therefore needs the learn-ed writer's benign guidance is of course one of the worst follies of writers AND THEN proceeding to do what one accuses the other side of doing merely adds insult to injury.

Don’t give the ‘writer’ the clicks

I don’t agree with the article but think it is interesting in trying to understand why talking what could be considered normally is considered transphobic by certain people.

I thought others would find it interesting too.

And I was hoping to crowd source a countering from the clever folk here.

It’s Orwellian innit?

It's actually quite an interesting article, I am not sure that it successfully makes the point the author wants it to make though.

I thought it was a parody for at least half of it!

I've noticed that a lot of these young poetry types affect a John Hegley style of speaking. Do they not realise he was taking the piss?

Jay - like many recent graduates I've had the misfortune to work with - has an overweening sense of their own self importance which is entirely out of step with their actual ability.

What a poor confused child. I will not participate in our delusion and it seems from your woeful little poem that not many other people are buying into it either. These poor kids have been sold such a load of shit

That read like a load of paranoid claptrap

I actually loled at the middle bit where it is argued that not leaving a space between the word ‘trans’ and ‘man’ or ‘woman’ is more harmful than using the correct noun for a person’s sex

That lack of a space. Every time you ignore the space bar a fairy dies

At least Jay has managed to avoid the unbelievably racist ‘trans woman is a qualifier, like black woman’, so it appears some learning has taken place

Oh, I see Floral got there first regarding the lack of implicit racism

That will teach me to RTFT before posting!

I think it gives an incredibly sarcastic tone which people will look and think- actually these so called transphobes are not saying anything outrageous at all.on fact its common sense.

I dont think.ot exactly has the effect they were hoping for given that are trying to literally pull apart basic science and language and twist it to play the victims.

Cheers mate

Just ask them to define 'woman' and you'll see just who is mangling words (or they won't answer). Transactivism is such an intellectual vacuum they constantly appropriate GC arguments and try (and fail) to twist them. When we point our the misogyny, homophobia, violence, doxxing, deplatforming behind the movement they try to borrow the phrases and make accusations against GC feminists none of which stands up to any scrutiny. Plain lying is a favoured tactic. No wonder they have to hide behind no debate. So DFO with your cis, cervix havers, carriers, non men bollox. And the word woman is taken. Find another. Transwomen is fine.

It’s interesting to see how the statement

I am concerned about the proposed changes to the GRA going ahead. I want to see more discussion around protecting single sex spaces.

Can be considered totally normal, uncontraversial and moderate by most definitions . But in the context of this article is transphobic.

The author seems to think it’s a code used to appear normal whilst actually being transphobic.

I think otherwise. I think it’s the way the majority would talk, who aren’t transphobic but don’t realise how much the definitions, parameters and frames of reference have changed in the last decade.

It’s like stumbling into an entirely different culture and causing hideous offence for having uncovered shoulders. Except for this is a sub culture within a wider culture which is attempting to change the wider culture’s language and definitions.

Which needs to happens and does happen sometimes. (Ie progress against homophobia And sexism) . Trouble is that this isn’t that simple, but in borrowing the tropes of the fights against sexism/racism /homophobia they make it that simple.

Hmmmmm

Haha I didn't get past "The thing is, transphobes work with words. They understand the power of definition and expression, and try to destroy and twist language to their own aims." Using hateful language like Women are female. It really is an alternate reality.

Can't help feeling it's a piss-take. Nobody could be that stupid.

I believe Jay is a transgender man. I’m confused about the reference to “erasing and dehumanising” trans people. Of course they are real and fully human!

OTOH I feel erased by the idea that being a woman has nowt to do with being female... while calling us “menstruators” etc is dehumanising.