Lang Cleg 2

[TiredofthisBSbutIstandwithLang]

New thread as we got to 1000.

@notbadconsidering excuse me?

Yes, the recognition of sex, or sex-related socialization and behaviour is not villification

Feminists, do you think it would be worth trying to get something added on safeguarding to the sticky post at the top of FWR. Something like 'Mumsnet recognises the safeguarding of children and vulnerable persons as an acceptable topic of discussion for a feminist board.'

Positively exhausted, NotBad

It would be a genuine thrill to read something substantial.

Do we need another thread for Lang I wonder. Given this one has strayed to “vilification,” something LC never did.

Discussing how such an ideology affects females, on the feminism and women's rights board, isn't an act of aggression

I disagree. When a person's very being is picked apart, criticised or discounted I think that is vilification.

Given this one has strayed to “vilification,” something LC never did

Keep on saying that, it won't make it true.
I''ve experienced first hand that she definitely did do this, so you can keep going on about never happened! but it blatantly did.
Even Justine is saying she did, but people still don't want to listen!

f a transperson behaves poorly, criminally, abusively, or threatens women, girls, or the rights thereof, they can and must be callled out on their behaviour.

Where their behaviour intersects with child and vulnerable person safeguarding, that's a duty.

/////

This with bells on

Don’t people get tired of it?

Yes.
But for me, every now and then it's worth taking people's comments at face value, and seeing how they respond.

The fact that they never respond in a pleasant, understanding or mutually respectful way then gives me the oomph to ignore my female socialisation for a while longer, and accept that I'm so tired of it I could scream.

If only Lang were here.
Sigh

When a person's very being is picked apart, criticised or discounted I think that is vilification.

And the same could be said of men who think they are women because they 'feel like women' or because they like dressing in a feminine way or because they believe they think like women...

Portraying women's lives and experience as role play or a costume is pretty offensive to women.

I disagree hooves. For example, I can love and respect a religious person and still be critical of aspects/the foundations of their beliefs. In fact, many religious people deal with this every day.
In fact, saying that an ideology being someone's "very being" reads like you believe it should be exempt from critique - even from the class of people whom it adversely affects - which is creating a protected class and exactly Lang's point...

It is important to remember that Mumsnet like other companies provide us, the product, to their customers, the advertisers. Using the content providers to volunteer to police one another is guaranteed to create conflict and conflict sells.

as in dictionary definition, vilification

• a rude expression intended to offend or hurt*

Definitely have been on the receiving end of posts which have definitely been intended to offend or hurt and others clearly have too.

Sapphos

No it’s not vilifying trans people. As has been pointed out to you when the context of that screenshot from over a year ago was explained.

Did you have any luck finding out how many of Lang’s deletions were for falling foul of the new FWR guidelines as opposed to all the other reasons she could have been deleted?

I don't know Sapphos, sounds like a joke to me? Some context might be helpful?! I'm unwilling to vilify LangCleg on the basis of a carefully curated screenshot. 🙄

Willis, do you use Twitter?

Once again that post was two fingers up to those who support an ideology that threatens the rights of women and girls for the feelings of a minority.

It isn't vilifying trans people, clearly.

Willis, do you use Twitter?

Why?
Never tweeted anything trans related in my life if that's what you're getting at.

Definitely have been on the receiving end of posts which have definitely been intended to offend or hurt and others clearly have too.

Is that another one of those things that only magical you can see and we are all blind to?

NotBadConsidering I haven't a clue but I am sure it wasn't a decision MNHQ took lightly. I am sure they would have wanted to avoid all this if they could.

ALittleBitofVitriol the context (which I agree is always important) was provided earlier today when the poster first shared the screenshot.

I’m very hurt by the trans ideology. By the idea that my womanhood is something a man is entitled to. By the idea of a female penis. I vehemently disagree with all aspects of it. That’s discussion.

Does posting the same screen shot over and over constitute badgering?

I’ve received posts that were intended to hurt or offend (I guess), I’ve been called a man, who the fuck cares??

Lang is a legend who cares about children. Thank you Lang, my child is safer because of posts I read of yours.