Glinner in Mail on Sunday today

[Lamahaha]

Fabulous article:

Speaking out against transgender extremists has made me the most hated man on the internet, writes Father Ted creator GRAHAM LINEHAN

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7982837/How-hated-man-internet-writes-Graham-Linehan.html

Of course it is not a 'purity' issue to expect people to behave with integrity and courtesy.

My sympathies to anyone who has been bullied and threatened by intolerant bigots of any persuasion.

But what does really matter is when people widen the circle of their own understandable rage and upset and actively seek to attack people who won't fall in line with whatever particular standards they demand.

We have to agree to disagree on some issues or waste time we don't have.

Sweary

Not everything is a fucking purity spiral.

We have to agree to disagree on some issues or waste time we don't have.

I campaign for people to understand the problems inherent in self-ID because if we don’t it will cause harm to women and children. To me it would be entirely inconsistent to overlook males causing harm to women (or children) just because they also speak out against self-ID. We’re as bad as the anti-science, no-debate, rewriting history lot if we overlook harm caused by those we otherwise agree with, and I for one am grateful for those speaking out.

That said, most of us also agree with free speech and are against the cancel culture. I haven’t seen anyone saying that Linehan shouldn’t write these articles or encouraging no-platforming. But, as elsewhere on MN, women are honest about their experiences, and a fair few MNers have experienced Linehan denigrating them publicly (generally, from following all the big players on Twitter, this seems to occur after a woman tries to give him a heads up about something he doesn’t know).

Talk about whoever you like, read and enjoy whoever you like, but on MN women will be honest if they’ve been hurt or had their own campaigning undermined by someone else. And that’s what’s happening here.

No it's not. There is more happening. Agree or disagree. But if women like me are told we can't be 'proper feminists' because of views we have or people we do or don't support, that's a waste of time. I won't waste my time.

I hope you don't go Sweary.

Since so many posters have adopted 'Lang' into their user name, here's an example of what Lang herself had to say. Admittedly it concerned other individuals, not Glinner, but I've always remembered it:

You don't want to support .....or ......Fine. Don't. Just stop telling everyone else they shouldn't either. I'll support who I want, what I want, when I want. If I disagree on an issue I will say so. If I agree I will say so. I'm not playing the hierarchy game.

You are very defensive Spero. I’m not saying you’re not a proper feminist. I don’t know who any other MNer is unless he or she uses their real name, or I’ve met them. Anyone in here could be a male, in which case my opinion is they can’t be any kind of feminist. And there are women who say they are not feminists at all doing amazing campaigning for the rights of women and children.

But when a man causes me harm I will say it. And when I witness a man cause another woman harm and undermine her campaigning - as Linehan did to Sweary and other women - I will say it. I haven’t seen anyone go around doing so unprompted and for the sake of it - frankly we’re all too busy, in this fight of our lives. But when he’s mentioned positively, it comes up. That’s not going to change, and it’s where we need to agree to disagree; women shouldn’t have to stay silent about harm they’re caused for some lofty ideals about the greater good. Never, never, never.

And when I witness a man cause another woman harm and undermine her campaigning - as Linehan did to Sweary and other women - I will say it.
Thanks to this thread, I have now learnt that this happened. That's good.

I also like the article, and think it will inform a lot of people. That's good too.

I don't feel they are mutually exclusive. I can see that having Linehan lauded is galling, to say the least, particularly if he has wronged you/someone you know. However, the article, as well as opening people's eyes to the TRAs, also allows us to discuss the harm he has done in other ways. Win-win, surely. Sweary hopefully you will stay.

I am expressing a view about something I feel strongly about and something I have considerable experience about.

If you want to dismiss or diminish that in pejorative terms - I can't stop you.

I can't make people listen to me or agree with me. All I can do is set my own boundaries and my own decisions about where I put my time and what risks I take.

But I hope I have given enough time and taken enough risks to merit at least some listening.

I agree with you that those things aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive, AnotherNightWatering.
Though I do fear his style means that he puts more people off than he pulls in. (I very much hope that you’re right and I’m wrong though.)

Don't go, sweary.
I'm still none the wiser about most of the things Glinner is meant to have done, because instead of pointing to sources in context everyone's been arguing instead and continuing with the assumption that (a) everyone knows who's said what to whom on every SM platform and (b) if you've expressed support for the article you think Glinner is like omg the best feminist ever ever which I would have thought wasn't necessary to point out that no, it's not what I'm saying.

The irony is I think most people on this thread are largely in agreement about most things.

This is a very interesting thread, but I feel rather caught in the middle.

I read Glinner's article yesterday and felt so grateful that he has written about this clearly and in relatively simple terms. I can see that speaking out has come at a high personal cost.

I also appreciate that Venice and Sweary and Posie and Julia and Julie, and so many women, have spoken out eloquently and with passion - and that this has also come at a high personal cost. We need you wonderful, amazing women - please stay, please keep speaking!

I sent the Linehan article to my son. He knows a lot about this personally as his younger sister has been kidnapped and disappeared by gender ideology. She thinks she is now a man and is medically transitioning.

My son feels he has to keep silent about his views due to the nature of his work (wokesvillle) and the attitudes of so many peers and friends. I hoped that Glinner's 'reasonable' voice would help him see he's not alone and give him a bit of male solidarity and perspective.

For me, personally, this whole issue, is about what it means to be female. About our right to uphold and keep the boundaries of our own sex class. About the unbreakable generational bonds, emotionally, biologically, intellectually, spiritually, between mother and daughter. About the inalienable right of women and girls to have their own defined space, separate to natal men - for reasons of safety, privacy, dignity and opportunity. About how women must be at the centre of our own experiences, feelings, rights and bodies.

Gender ideology and queer theory are extremely harmful to women and girls. But pretend not to be. And that's why we need to analyse and act from a truly feminist perspective. But it's not just about women and girls is it?

The harms to men and boys are also dire. The harms to society as a whole are appalling.Truly terrifying.

Just because I don't always agree with some views from some de-transitioners, especially about parenting and gender critical opinions, doesn't mean I don't support them, agree with many things they do say, uphold their right to speak freely, admire them, or want to work alongside them.

So I think part of the problem with having a range of different opinion on this board is that many of us want to discuss gender ideology from a feminist perspective. And many of us want to discuss gender ideology from a collective perspective. And that many of us want to discuss both and all perspectives.

Should FWR be a place where we discuss it from all perspectives? Possibly not. But the trouble is, everything overlaps - the tentacles reach far and wide. It becomes extremely difficult to separate the tangled web out. Which is the whole purpose of course.

Believe me, as someone who's life has been profoundly affected by genderism, the only way to get a grip on this nightmare is to look at the very biggest picture. And the only way to tackle this is to acknowledge our differences, whatever they are, and then hope that all groups who are invested in change can work individually but alongside each other with a common purpose.

"I think most people on this thread are largely in agreement about most things"

Agreed!

I can’t imagine what it must be like to be so much in the public eye, to have made a stand, and then, from your peers....just tumbleweed. There must be so many others who feel the same way and just don’t want to risk “coming out”.

I've re-read this thread and I don't think anyone has said that Glinner shouldn't speak out, I'm glad when anyone does. But women should be aware of his previous campaigning for porn, not least because it could explain his support for certain AGPs over women. Those old tweets of his about porn weren't ironic, it's weird that anyone could read them as jokes. Why doesn't someone ask him to explain his current views on pornography? I can't because I'm banned from twitter.

Sisterwendy.

Agree totally.

And so sorry for your family

It’s real people getting hurt mutilated in this genderism

Yet it is always being potrated as being life affirming and brave

And full of rainbow shite stuff

It’s so not. It’s damging and dangerous

From the article in OP, I’m 51 and I’ve never seen anything like the authoritarianism on display, the desperate desire to shut down the conversation. No genuine civil-rights movement advances in secret but this one has as one of its mantras ‘NO DEBATE’.

February 2019 Ginner wrote,
"Hello, you coven of squints far right Nazi witches!

I'd like to collect some anecdotes about when and why you first became involved in the debate about gender ideology and activism. I've also asked on Twitter but thought this might be good for longer answers.

Please tell me your stories!"

Its an important thread of women's experiences, knowledge & recognition of the wide ranging extents to which Women's Rights & Safeguarding have already been removed/damaged. The posts catalogue significant impact to women's lives but also the actions many people have taken at cost to themselves.
Every voice deserves to be heard, many of us listened, learned & continue to learn from women who post here. I shall ever be grateful

Its worth re-reading.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3518546-help-a-brother-out

I am struggling to put this in to words because it comes down to the individual reasons that bring each of us to FWR which will be slightly different for all of us, but my own take is that this is all politics. With all the usual shit that politics of any kind entails.

We need to get sustainable change, that is, change via legally enforceable routes, and we need new legal protections for women and kids to be put in where they are currently lacking. We also need to reverse regulatory/institutional capture and that will mean needing to use the regulatory/institutional levers that are already available to shore things up so its not possible not to ignore safeguarding any more, plus adding in new legal measures as needed.

Clearly there is a crucial hearts and minds campaign needed too to gather support and share understanding of why genderist dogma is harmful to women and children. We won’t get public support for proper safeguards for us all (including just reinstating and using the safeguards we already have) without it. But I don’t know how to do that side of it. I’m massively in awe of people who can like Magdalen or Posie. I’m focusing instead on the legal challenges and ways of making practical changes via institutions.

So for me it’s about getting what we can from the system we already have, while at the same time saying loudly, this system is totally fucked and it is stacked against us and these are the changes we must get done, to achieve xyz.

I’ve worked on some feminist campaigns before and with some of them, the right legal result was achieved. Where the right legal results were achieved this was through allying with others from as diverse and unlikely other groups as possible to bring together and allying only on that one issue. Some were people I did not even like being in the room with. It’s politics, with all the compromise and glad handing and whatever the fuck else has to happen to get the result that you need. I’m not sorry because women are safer now and I can sleep well at night knowing that.

The unsuccesful campaigns, which have seen Labour, Coalition and Tory governments successively pat them on the head and do precisely nothing to help, are the ones where the broad base of alliance approach was not taken. They are the ones where those people who already have a seat at the table were not brought on board, and all of the preaching is still being done only to the converted.

I agree Chatty. I think we're in the fight of our lives in which we're up against most of the mainstream political parties, the police, CPS, NHS, sporting bodies, god knows how many universities and schools, the 'liberal' media.... Hell we even lost the Girl fucking Guides.

I'm hoping the tide is turning but I still believe we're in deep shit. I think getting out of it will need a push, the likes of which I haven't seen in my lifetime. Anyone who puts a shoulder to that push - be it Janice Turner, Julie Bindel, Helen Joyce (re-tweeting Glinner yesterday) Posie Parker, Kathleen Stock, Glinner, James Kirkup or Harry Miller - has my thanks and appreciation.

I was pushed out of the whole movement by the Glinner gang, only coming back recently and really deciding it’s not worth it for my own health.

Sweary

I wonder how many saw the evolution of #ManFriday here on FWR & realise how very significant it was in breaking through the implications of 'no debate' & self id into mainstream media and pressurising the government to hold a consultation?

I was reading the boards at the time shocked & very much in awe of the intelligence, wit & fabulousness of the ManFriday women's words & deeds. It was a collective yes but women who stepped forward especially Amy & Sweary carried an additional load, did brilliant things with it & at considerable cost.

#ManFriday may have 'hung up their 'flowery swimming hats and mankinis, in the devout hope that [they] won’t need to use them again', what they achieved in just six months shouldnt ever be underestimated.
This is especially true now whilst there is now a second 'self-id' government consultation open in Scotland & a desparate need for everyone to understand the implications & take part.
See here: forwomen.scot/

May 18 2018 SwearyGodmother speech from WPUK meeting:
'Why ManFriday?'
(extract)
"I’ve called ManFriday a movement, I think a better word might be concept. We are a loosely organised group of women who are horrified by the implications of self identification and the resultant erasure of women. We are making a stand against what is happening by self identifying as men on Fridays. We show how preposterous it is to be able to self-declare as the opposite sex by doing exactly that.

This all came about when Amy Desir took it upon herself to address the ludicrous guidance Swim England produced to engage trans people in swimming. This guidance, soundly rejected by the good ladies of Mumsnet, included such gems as telling us women who object to penises in their changing rooms require education, whilst our boobs should be covered at all times for fear of causing offence. Amy started a Mumsnet thread one Friday morning in February telling us that she had arranged a meeting at her local pool to discuss her inclusion in men only swimming sessions as a self identified man in accordance with the guidance.

This thread inspired a whole lot of us – around 160 at the last count – to get behind the concept and thus ManFriday was born. We started with a Facebook page where we plan our protests and share resources and now have a website, a very active (and funny) twitter account, and a whole load of unconnected women joining in on Twitter every Friday using the hashtag ManFriday.

I joined after seeing Amy’s thread coincided with me wanting to be able to do something. I had attended the Woman’s Place meeting in London in February and was in awe of all the women there. I was too shy to put my hand up and talk – I didn’t feel like I had anything to say at all, but I think might make up for that now.

At this point I should confess that I am very late to the feminism party. Partly due to having been a teenager in the 90s when we all embraced ladette culture and insisted that we were equal to men by behaving like the worst of them. I thought we didn’t need it, and didn’t notice when my life was damaged by the set up of our patriarchal society. I should have noticed when my male juniors were given more respect than I was when I was managing client meetings. I should have noticed when my career faltered in my late 20s and early 30s in spite of me being, and remaining childless. I should have noticed when my doctors refused to take my gynae problems seriously, until my husband said he was on board with the treatment I wanted. " (continues)

ManFriday exists because the rights of women and girls are under a large scale, wholesale attack from the trans rights movement. It exists because our letters and our conversations are ignored. It exists because women’s voices are so routinely dismissed we’ve had to move on to direct action. Trans rights activism often called men’s rights activism in a frock, and frankly that’s what it is. Women are set to lose so much if this push in changing both the law and it’s application in our day to day lives succeeds. ManFriday exists to push back against this, to roll back what is already happening in statute and in practice.

In Scotland we have seen the word woman being redefined to include anyone with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. This means that the legal definition of woman includes men. We cannot define ourselves as a sex anymore, and if we can’t define our sex how can we define our sex based protections and our sex based oppression?" (continues)
manfridayuk.org/2018/05/18/why-manfriday/#more-1541

June 2018 Important collated evidence thread by James Kirkup highlighting the significance of the actions in particular the Parliamentary petition with 12 902 signatures which forced a Government response:
"The Government has not yet decided whether or not to introduce a self-declaration model, and will not change the Equality Act 2010 provisions which support organisations to run single sex services."

Petition:
Consult with women on proposals to enshrine 'gender identity' in law
The government proposes to amend the law to allow people to self-identify as men or women, and to stop allowing organisations in sensitive situations to exclude people of the opposite birth sex. We call for women to be consulted on how to protect women and girls' rights, safety, privacy and dignity.

We call for:

• Respectful and evidence-based discussion about the impact of proposed changes and for women's voices to be heard.

• The government to consult with women’s organisations on how self-declaration would impact on women-only services and spaces, data-gathering, and monitoring of sex-based discrimination.

• The principle of single-sex spaces to be upheld – and where necessary extended.

References:

• The Sex and Gender Ethics Society
• A Woman's Place UK
• Fair Play for Women
• #ManFriday"

James Kirkup
"Some facts about the events that preceded the Government statement here that the coming consultation on the Gender Recognition Act will be narrowly drawn and not affect the Equality Act’s single sex exemptions
I offer these facts because some are claiming “there was never any question of removing/amending EA exceptions.” Those claims are either mistaken or dishonest.
August 2015
Stonewall submission to the Women & Equalities Select Committee says MPs should amend the EA to
“remove exemptions, such as access to single-sex spaces”
Jan 2016
Women & Equalities Committee says EA should be amended so that

“occupational requirements provision and / or the single-sex / separate services provision shall not apply”.
July 2016
Govt response to W&E Committee says: “we agree with the principle of this recommendation” on EA exemptions and seeks evidence for “future policy discussions”
July 2017
Govt promises GRA reform “ as part of a broad consultation of the legal system that underpins gender transition.”
July 2017
Stonewall commits to “advocate for the removal” of EA provisions allowing sex-based discrimination.
June 2018
Govt says:

“We are clear that we have no intention of amending the Equality Act 2010, the legislation that allows for single sex spaces.”
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1004635839480164352.html

Amalfi I’m not suggesting that anyone go back to the kitchen, at all.

Just that FWR should remain a place for a spectrum of feminists (provided they centre women).

Because higher up (if that’s the word) feminists may be in various groups, with varying standards. But for many other women, FWR is their only place to discuss feminism.

sweary

You’ve done incredible things and should feel supported on this board of all places. Personally I would be fine not to talk about GL if that would make others feel more supported here.