I Believe Her

[Brittany2019]

This is disappointing :

Plus 4 of those at least aren’t anti men

Power - starter for ten:

What is the difference between a thread title in FWR and throwaway comments across the site?

If you manage that one:

Is class analysis a synonym of making a generalisation?

Do you need to phone a friend? Cos that's a different show.

But going back to the original point, I still don't see why it's an issue requesting that the site be used for the intended purpose of treating rape victims rather than as a GC soapbox/battleground.

I'm not particularly enamoured with the TRA agenda/politics, but I didn't read that as being the point. It's about respecting the purpose of the site and giving some dignity to victims in their hour of need (hence the example about her son).

You're actually undermining your point/credibility by doing it inappropriately in the wrong place. 🤷‍♀️

Because Power sometimes females just want a supportive place that does not include males.
As a rape victim who does not believe it is possible for humans to change sex all TW are male. Why can't I have a space where no males are?
Why must they seek support somewhere that is not for them or about them.
I would never infiltrate a support group that I did not belong to as I have too much respect for those that do belong.

I believe her.

If it's now a page for all victims of rape, then the 'her' is redundant and inaccurate. If the personal inner magic gender feelings of a male rapist are more important than a woman being able to talk clearly about what she has endured via his penis, then it's not even remotely a support page, it's a conditioning page where women are taught deference to men, especially men with magic inner feelings that override reality.

BecausePowersometimes females just want a supportive place that does not include males. Why can't I have a space where no males are?

I understand this need, but are you saying we should force individuals to run their charity how you want them to?

I understand this need, but are you saying we should force individuals to run their charity how you want them to?

Yes that's exactly what I said... Oh no wait it's the trans community that go about forcing female support groups to accept them or lose funding/get sued.

No Power but maybe the female rape charity or page should make it clear that they support females/males/non binary/TM and TW that way people like me who need single sex support can make an informed choice.

Is that the best you can come up with? Let's remind you of what you claimed (fibbed) Powerflowerrrr

For example, I've seen loads of threads on here literally titled "I hate men",

Using your search there are three or fourt threads on Mumsnet literally titled "I hate men", one with sorry added and another thread titled "I bloody hate men". None in FWR which is what you were suggesting given your reference to class analysis, but rather mostly in relationships and mostly about being treated badly by men. I don't think a handful over the years with those counts as "loads", do you? The other titles you list make it look like there are a lot more but they have the opposite meaning - women defending men.

So yeah, the BS about FWR hating men doesn't fly. It did provide a nice distraction to your racist posts though didn't it? And a derail from what Frothy is up to on her webpage. She appears to have created a space for woman-haters to attack rape victims and radical feminists. Very, very retrograde, especially seeing where she started.

You got it the wrong way round, Flowerrr.

Women's charities which have set up as single sex spaces and services are being forced to admit intact males who identify as women.

And can I add, because it's bugging me, Frothy may gave banned TERF as a term from the page, but so have Mumsnet, and look how tremendously well that works in maintaining a site where women feel secure enough to talk freely about their specific female perspective without fucking misogynists pissing all over them for not putting penis top of the priority list.

I agree Magdalen.

That discussion is peaking so many people right now.

Pointing out that TERF is unacceptable as well is an alien concept to many of the new breed of femanists. More lightbulb moments...

This is why discussion is powerful.

And why trans advocates want "no debate".

Because the more we discuss, the more women go away and think they are not just being kind, they are being duped.

Have you ever met a 10 year old kid afraid to be around men?

Or a women who has been so damaged by men she's afraid of them because of what's happened?

This is a reality that is out there.

We might not want to see it, admit it or confront it but there are many very damaged women and girls for whom this is their life.

I don't think you can have conversations about rape without thinking about this reality and how it's an important facet for many very vulnerable women in recovering from that.

If you fail to understand that when you have a page called 'I believe her' you fail to understand the reality of so many lives.

That's not to say that trans people shouldn't have services. They should. It's just recognising the needs of a very vulnerable group who frankly aren't interested in politics and just want appropriate care and support.

The politics being brought into this, are being brought in by people who don't understand that politics should always come after caring for individuals basic need for feeling safe. They are centring their politics not the women they are supposed to be. They are not putting the most vulnerable first on the basis of their need to have a space they feel safe in.

If your primary concern is about providing support for victims of rape then it should be about the best environment to do that.

In the context of trans people, if the primary concern is about rape, then it needs to be stressed that however important identity is, validation is a secondary consideration. I don't believe that the specific needs of trans people are therefore necessarily served within the same environment as women who are terrified of men for this reason. Its not in their interests to be in that environment either because of how fear makes people act. Its a point of conflict that should be avoided for the benefit of all.

Its not in either groups interest to be treated as a singular entity which misses a huge part of how each group perceives and responds to their personal experience.

It's failing to acknowledge and understand the reality of how you help to heal. You can't do it if you ignore the elephant which is biological sex and how that affects reality of experience.

If your ethics come before the needs of victims you need to have a long conversation with yourself.

I despise the politics on this which isn't serving anyone for this reason. It's just ignoring difficult, complex and very sensitive underlying issues whilst putting image and pr before victims of every type.

A little thread I've just seen worth reflecting on. The same sentiment applies here.

Joani Walsh @ joaniwalshi
While I was researching the piece on police recording offenders by self-IDd gender rather than sex I moved on to Scotland to see what was happening there. I spoke to two agencies. One had a press officer who couldn't understand my Qs. If they say they're women they're women.

So of course they'll go in the female estate. I asked him who they'd consulted on the policy. Immediately he was able to name a handful of trans lobby groups. I asked which women's groups they'd consulted. Flummoxed. Why would they consult women's groups about trans prisoners?

Couldn't name me one woman's group. Said they were another officer's responsibility. What's his area? DA and DV. So you consult women's groups on DA and DV but not on the impact of trans prisoners in women's prisons? No. Why would we? If they say they're women they're women.

I went to another agency. Asked the same questions. Which women's groups did they consult? Same answer. Could name every trans lobby group, not one women's. This time he called me back after the next week and said he'd spent the w/e thinking about our conversation.

The policy was coming up for review. He'd gone back into work, demanded to see to his bosses, pointed out something so obvious he couldn't figure out how noone had thought of it. They started consulting with women's groups.

Why do you think a woman's group (aka MN) get upset about the issue of transwomen being included in a women's rape crisis group specifically using the word 'her'. Especially given the history with MN with the origins of group.

It's almost like someone missed the point...

No Power but maybe the female rape charity or page should make it clear that they support females/males/non binary/TM and TW that way people like me who need single sex support can make an informed choice.

I think that'd be a sensible approach.

Maybe the issue here is that the personal and the political are becoming entwined. I probably agree more with the GC viewpoint, despite not being in either 'camp' or really being very invested in the whole matter (there are things much closer to home I'd rather spend my energy on), but it's clear the individual in question espouses very different views from the GC majority on here, which outside of FWR seems to be a much more common view.

I think there's little to be gained tbh from this bunfight. Neither side will change the other's opinion.

Yes, not really deemed very important. Just a bunfight.

I suggest, charitably, that you go and expend your energy on the things you care about then, and let the silly women who are angry about rapists and all that stuff have a conversation without astoundingly ignorant commentary from an onlooker who states happily that they don't much care either way.

which outside of FWR seems to be a much more common view.

I'd disagree.

there are things much closer to home I'd rather spend my energy on

So why on earth are you here?

If there are other things you'd rather spend your energy on why are you even posting on this thread? Nobody is asking you to get involved.

I'll say it again, Frothy needs to change the name of her group. Her slogan is far too closely related to a campaign based on rad fem principles for it to be an honest usage now given her views on radical feminism.

Oo err, Powery, that's not very nice.

You appear to have just fallen off the fence. Did it hurt?

Also.... why are you here? Hmmmm....

Power, you probably need both hands to hold the mask on. Perhaps some elastic might help, hook it over the ears? You're not going to be able to play the fair minded neutral if you're only going to commit for a few posts before getting openly abusive.

Frothy if you’re reading

Fwiw I strongly disagree that a rapist should be called “she.” Doing so is traumatic for victims of male violence. It prioritises rapists over survivors.

Thank you for banning the word T**F though. My sister got punched in the head by someone who called her that. For many women, especially lesbians, it’s a scary and abusive term. It is often used to coerce women into unwanted sex or shame them for their sexuality.

So thank you, for trying to make your page a less hostile and scary place.

It is your page, so I have to respect your choice to run it as you see fit. I cannot go there, but not every space has to include me.

I imagine this is hard and painful for you, and you feel attacked from both sides. Across our differences, I offer you my respect and best wishes 💚💜