Batten down the hatches.....

[Gingernaut]

Now r/GenderCritical has gone, Helen from Mermaids wants to know which is the most transphobic

Not sure who's going to be targetted next, but MN is winning.

[SerenityNowwwww]

Runner beans don’t give you the runs (thankfully).

[HH160bpm]

Don’t rain on my parade perhaps

[BewaretheIckabog]

Hot dogs are dogs

BUT

Ladybirds are neither birds nor ladies 🤔

[SerenityNowwwww]

Nah. The are itty bitty dinosaurs.

[BaronessWrongCrowd]

Dragonflies are dragons.

[SerenityNowwwww]

Coconut shells are more horsey than horses. They go clip clip.

[Xanthangum]

Seahorses are actually more horsey than horses.

You don't see them at Aintree because racing is institutionally seaphobic.

[Lamahaha]

I feel we need some sort of a battle cry a song, music, something stirring and inspiring like the Can you hear the People Sing, from Les Miserables or We Shall not be Moved.

[Eveta]

Hmm are you going to start targeting Mumsnet now Helen? I expect that will go just as well as the court case with Miranda Yardley.

[ContessaferJones]

I welcome a lively debate on the topic with our new members I've been getting good results with DH recently - he made the comment of 'You're not transphobic, you're concerned with women's rights'. I nearly fainted from the shock!

[Anotherlovelybitofsquirrel]

Facebook has many I mean, A LOT of GC groups that are private or even secret... and in the underground we are gathering strength, gathering recruits by people who can't speak out. One group admin said yesterday that they gained 2000 new members since the JK fiasco. Others say the same.

Really comforting actually. Like a lovely on a cold day


Agreed. A very warm feeling

[TorkTorkBam]

One of the things males want is for "their" females to be safe. In my experience men were until recently mostly oblivious to this debate over women's rights. Whenever they realise they quickly jump to the GC position. Men judge other men's predatory tendencies towards women much much more harshly than women.

Mainstream debate is needed. Let the sunlight in.

[Michelleoftheresistance]

The storm cones were when lesbians groups were forced underground. What males want, males generally get at the moment in our society and female people are allowed to have the bits left over once the males have taken everything they want and need. So long as they're not big bits.

It's confronting the establishment enough with the reality of how utterly discriminatory, sexist, regressive and unacceptable this is. And even then they're trying really hard not to look, because cross males are not fun to deal with.

[justanotherneighinparadise]

It comes to something where we need an underground movement to discuss women’s vaginas freely

[ListeningQuietly]

Eleanor Roosevelt fought to get women the vote.
She also fought to give women the right to get elected
and now identity politics is undermining that in New York.
So sad.

[TorkTorkBam]

I wonder if it is more powerful to agree-ish

Woke-beard: Transwomen are women!!!!
Exasperated-GC: Seahorses are horses!!!!

[BaronessBrighterThanYou]

Seahorses are not horses.

Just trying it out.

[ItsLateHumpty]

Lamahaha

I find this

Facebook has many I mean, A LOT of GC groups that are private or even secret... and in the underground we are gathering strength, gathering recruits by people who can't speak out. One group admin said yesterday that they gained 2000 new members since the JK fiasco. Others say the same.

Really comforting actually. Like a lovely on a cold day.

[ErrolTheDragon]

Another thought . . . if we are expecting an influx of new members they might not spot this very important info, even though it is pinned at the top of the Board Index:

There is no such pinning on the app, so if people get that rather than using the browser - it's an obvious thing for new users to do till you realise you need the browser for some functionality (I use the app mostly) - they're very likely to be completely unaware. I doubt all posters read even the normal talk guidelines (which of course links to the extra stuff) before wading in.

[MrsNoah2020]

[quote DuDuDuLangaLangaBingBong]Kiwi Farms is also protected by being in NZ

It’s not NZ based, in fact, I think it got banned In NZ due to hosting footage of the Christchurch shootings?

The owner is from the US and lives somewhere in Eastern Europe, I think.

As far as I know he has his own server and uses Cloudflare for security:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloudflare

I’m not a member of the farms although I am partial to a lurk every now and again, same with Lipstick Alley, Piston Heads and Datalounge, which are similarly outspoken, gossip-heavy places (aimed at different interest groups/demographics)

Null, the owner of the farms once popped over here for a wave at us Mumsnetters. The post got deleted, iirc, not because it said anything awful but because it was on a thread about a certain serial litigant who doesn’t need any extra motivations.

I notice someone tried to start a KF thread disparaging Mumsnetters but it didn’t take off, we aren’t really very interesting, not compared to their usual interests! Their thread about the Mumsnet NSPCC webchat is pretty funny though (the one that the NSPCC refused to participate in when all the advance-questions were about safeguarding breaches in trans inclusion policies).

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3353297-did-the-webchat-with-the-NSPCC-go-ahead[/quote]
Ah, I must be mis-remembering the NZ ban. I knew the 'Kiwi' bit in their name had nothing to do with NZ, but I thought there was a NZ link.

[MrsNoah2020]

[quote MoleSmokes]MrsNoah2020 and AverySuitableGirl

I asked MumsnetHQ detailed questions about data security (past and present) and what, if any, personal info about Premium Members would be held by Mumsnet or accessible by Mumsnet staff.

The answers from Justine Mumsnet are in this thread, which goes into painstaking detail. Certainly enough to reassure me that there is no more risk than registering as an anonymous member with an anonymous email address in the first place:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/3878378-Premium-Membership-Privacy-and-Data-Protection-MNHQ-please-clarify[/quote]
Your questions were great, but I don't know how you can conclude from Justine's answers that there is no more risk than registering as an anonymous member with an anonymous email address in the first place. Justine admits that 'senior' members of her team will be able to link MN users to their Stripe (the payment mechanism) data, including name and postcode. That is a hell of a difference from now, when no one in MNHQ has any idea of my identity.

To believe that there is no risk in subscribing, I would have to believe that MN will be effective at ensuring that any of their employees with access to my data can be trusted with it. I do not believe that. MN has repeatedly been blasé about personal data, and dismissive of users' concerns. I am not going to put my privacy and my job (given my GC views) on the line to give MN money. If they want my money, they need to do what thousands of other websites, blogs, podcasts etc do, and allow me to donate anonymously.

[MoleSmokes]

Another thought . . . if we are expecting an influx of new members they might not spot this very important info, even though it is pinned at the top of the Board Index:

Mumsnet moderation principles for discussions around gender identity and sex

[MoleSmokes]

MrsNoah2020 and AverySuitableGirl

I asked MumsnetHQ detailed questions about data security (past and present) and what, if any, personal info about Premium Members would be held by Mumsnet or accessible by Mumsnet staff.

The answers from Justine Mumsnet are in this thread, which goes into painstaking detail. Certainly enough to reassure me that there is no more risk than registering as an anonymous member with an anonymous email address in the first place:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/3878378-Premium-Membership-Privacy-and-Data-Protection-MNHQ-please-clarify

[Siablue]

That message sent to Posie Perker is horrific. Whoever sent that is dangerous. I hope there is a way of catching them,

The Kiwi Farms guy sounds like he gives zero fucks. I read the Mermaids thread on there. Good grief there is no way Susie Green would want anyone to read that. The do have quite an evidence trail and do not mince their words.

[Al1Langdownthecleghole]

I've just seen this article dated yesterday 30th June, which would appear to give the other narrative. I'm not a DT subscriber so I can't tell if the two articles were presented as different viewpoints, or if it just a coincidence. It's still a relief to see transgender ideology being examined though.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/06/30/niche-transgender-ideology-corrosive-society-says-report/?utm_content=telegraph&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1593610478