Posie Parker Zoom

[AdHominemNonSequitur]

Posie Parker has been warned by Zoom that her account may be suspended for promoting hate. Now she can sometimes go a bit far, but as far as I am aware all she does is deny TWAW, which is still supported by UK and probably US law. Are they going to ban the UK government when it debates trans rights too. This is absolutely terrifying over reach. Can anyone still be in denial about the deeply illiberal nature of this shit show. What have we let happen under our noses. What are we still letting happen? What is wrong with people? Why can't they see?

@NeedToKnow101

The two police officers who took their own lives were white.

Correct. My bad. I switched in my head the officer killed. I got the second confused with this officer

www.cnn.com/2021/02/06/us/louisiana-black-sheriffs-deputy-suicide/index.html

If you're going to talk about the attack on the US Capital, get your facts correct. 1. 5 people died in the Capital attack including a police officer

It's unclear and unproven at this point what the police officer died from apparently.

www.politifact.com/article/2021/feb/22/what-we-know-about-capitol-police-officer-brian-si/

As I said: it wasn't an attempted coup by the military or anyone else. (Or only a few crazy people that could have thought they had a chance at that.)

It could hypothetically be "insurrection" but you need more than just media reports using the term.

@JustAmotherOne

NancyDrawed

“ DId she actually say 'Transmen should be sterilised'?”

Yes, she literally stated, multiple times on multiple platforms, that trans men should be sterilised. When challenged she went further and said trans people should not be parents.

There was no misinterpretation, and she stood by her opinion.

I was on the Twitter thread the night when Posie made the remark you are painting here in the worst light possible. She did not say that. It was a discussion around doing the most female thing a human can do - get pregnant and give birth. And she made clear that it did not compute for her how one could reject being female and still want to do this most female thing of all.

I happen to disagree with her on this reasoning, for a number of reasons, but she did not call for anyone to be sterilised against their wish.

There's plenty debate to be had on the things she does and says. If you want to heartily disapprove of her, there's really no need to twist her meaning, she offers more than enough material all on her own.

With the men with guns suggestion...

Well why wouldn't trans-women feel comfortable with people that self-ID into the women's toilets? I don't think there could be a risk with self-ID?

Men with guns haven't been proven to be dangerous in women's toilets, so I think it's a lot of fuss about nothing. Actually, people have been carrying guns in women's toilets for years and you just don't notice it. And maybe some of them were men; I mean, who can tell?

Yes I agree with the below from jj. I remember her comment about transmen should be sterilised. I commented to her on twitter and thought she would delete the post seeing how it was coming across. But no, she doubled down on it.

Her recent comments re MAGA men were a calculated political comment aimed at a particular audience, not a blunder. I watched the full piece and the tone of that talk was pitched in a certain direction to appeal to certain (anti-feminist) audience.

I sometimes write things directed at a particular audience myself so recognise it sometimes when I see it.

The reason people can't understand the comment about sterilisation is because there has been a general degradation in people's ability to understand comments contextually. This is everywhere, in politics, in discussions about television shows, etc.

It's like there exists in a whole section of the population an inability to think beyond one sentence to the sentences that surround it, much less to comprehend anything like words that have more than one meaning, or hyperbole, or sarcasm.

Her explanation of her comment was pretty clear, and made sense in the context of the larger conversation. She things there are some choices people make where ethically, they should also then refrain from having kids. Those choices are not very compatible with putting the needs of kids first.

That's not a hugely controversial position - I imagine lots of people could think of situations where they would feel that followed. Is it the case with the decision to transition - well, it's not a crazy idea, in the sense that motherhood and fatherhood are deeply sexed roles, and that affects kids. - it's a pretty valid question how that affects kids.

Compared to the very controversial opinions that people are rightly allowed to debate in public spaces and on social media, that one doesn't seem on the farther side of crazy.

SmokedDuck

It appears that we are in need of new laws as we are considered the illogical hateful extremists.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/feb/24/new-uk-laws-needed-to-stop-hate-speech-and-extremism-says-report

“ But as for 'trans people should not be parents'. Is that transphobic? “

Yes. Yes it is. Very.

If you really can’t see that, and want to justify yourself and others who say it, be aware that to people outside the FWR/GC environs, it is plainly, totally, indefensibly transphobic.

charlie

“I was on the Twitter thread the night when Posie made the remark you are painting here in the worst light possible. She did not say that.”

Right here Charlie, on mn. There are screenshots on this very thread, and you can even go find the thread and see for yourself.

To defend her and her views is your choice, but the ship has sailed on denying she said these things.

@JustAmotherOne

“ But as for 'trans people should not be parents'. Is that transphobic? “

Yes. Yes it is. Very.

If you really can’t see that, and want to justify yourself and others who say it, be aware that to people outside the FWR/GC environs, it is plainly, totally, indefensibly transphobic.

I notice how you selectively quoted.

However, it really doesn't matter because everything except chanting the accepted mantra is transphobic. So concern for children is just one more thing to add to the list. I'm already irredeemably transphobic for thinking that it's not possible to identify yourself into being a woman.

I'm more concerned about children, who have no choice in who their parents are, than I am about the feelings of their parents. But there are no circumstances where I would agree with forced sterilisation.

I thought the MN screen shots on here showed that Posie categorically does not support forced sterilisation of transmen and that she stated that clearly and unequivocally?

That's right, prioritising the safeguarding of children and young people is a most heinous crime and constitutes literal hatred and fear of people who might introduce their children to an unhealthy environment .
Sadly for your witchhunt, that's not the case. I just think we should be very careful if prospective (adoptive, foster or fertility treatment) parents are on the side of gender ideology that promotes the sterilisation of children, the use of hormone treatment and puberty blockers on vulnerable people who deserve better mental health care, and mutilation of healthy bodies.

Having said that, I don't agree with the argument of sterilising anyone, regardless of who they are or who proposed it. That's the beginning of a very slippery slope which I draw my red line at in terms of interference with the lives of others.

Her explanation of her comment was pretty clear, and made sense in the context of the larger conversation.

Even if she had meant what some people here think she said, are we not capable of arguing an opposite point of view? Surely the way we arrive at reasonable thoughts is by taking them to logical conclusions and then pushing back to what is reasonable.

The only speech that should be limited is incitement to violence.

For those of you who think that she is helpful for getting public support, I think you’re kidding yourselves somewhat. She’s actually turning a lot of people away from being able to state their views because she makes them seem extreme and prejudiced. If you’re serious about protecting women, it’s also not the average person on the street you need to convince - it’s politicians and policy makers.

It’s interesting the hoops people will jump through to excuse absolutely anything she says. Tweet about disliking seeing Muslim girls in headscarves, tweet about trans people and sterilisation, homophobic ‘joke’ YouTube video from years ago, lesbophobic comments about butch lesbians, going on a rightwinger’s YouTube channel. All totally fine and anyone who has an issue with it is just trying smear Posie.

And I am also a longtimer and remember her from years back and some of the threads that got deleted. I will say that the happy married family image she portrays is a false one though, given the multiple things she used to post about, so she has my sympathy for that. She’s not a happy person.

Tweet about disliking seeing Muslim girls in headscarves

I can’t see how this is an extreme view. It’s not extreme to acknowledge that the religious act of covering girls and women is an act of oppression based on sex. Boys and men are not held to the same standards of modesty.

Ah yes, “everything is transphobic”.

This one gets rolled out when something undeniably transphobic is on the table.

And the perennial “it’s all about safeguarding the children” line.

Throw in a “witch-hunt” and a swipe of mythical “promotes the sterilisation of children” and we are hitting the full house.

The number of posters on this thread supporting and arguing for the position that trans people should not be parents, is revealing.

This is what lies beneath the FWR facade.

As this board is so fond of saying, gotta love a bit of sunlight.

Men with guns haven't been proven to be dangerous in women's toilets, so I think it's a lot of fuss about nothing.

Seriously?!
You'd be happy with men with guns in toilets, to what, protect "women's honour?"
But trans women are OK to be kept out with guns?!
So.... let me get this straight
trans women, not welcome because they were born male so not to go in the women's toilets.
Men with guns, the right type of man to "protect us" they're fine in there - it's a fuss about nothing?!
Jesus.
Not sure where in the world you are if you think it's fine for men to go in the women's toilets because of a "well, women have been taking them in for years"
Actually, people have been carrying guns in women's toilets for years and you just don't notice it

but that's really, not the norm in the UK.
Thank fuck.
Even if where you are people regularly carry guns into toilets, why are you OK with men with guns "protecting women" in the toilets but not trans women going about their business?!
Seriously, someone make this stance make sense as it's batshit.

I'm fine with the sunlight. I don't think the things I have said are anywhere near as controversial as you seem to think. Most people are horrified by the idea of medicating children, of lying to them that their father is their mother or their mother their father, or of re-educating them if they dare to correctly identify a man as a man or a woman as a woman. Bring on the sunlight, there's nothing to hide.

Nothing "lies beneath the FWR facade". There are people who agree with you, and people who don't.

Posie isn't the GC leader. She is a free agent. Perhaps you should condemn everything trans activists have said about women?

As this board is so fond of saying, gotta love a bit of sunlight

God, yes!

@Mockolate

Men with guns haven't been proven to be dangerous in women's toilets, so I think it's a lot of fuss about nothing.

Seriously?!
You'd be happy with men with guns in toilets, to what, protect "women's honour?"
But trans women are OK to be kept out with guns?!
So.... let me get this straight
trans women, not welcome because they were born male so not to go in the women's toilets.
Men with guns, the right type of man to "protect us" they're fine in there - it's a fuss about nothing?!
Jesus.
Not sure where in the world you are if you think it's fine for men to go in the women's toilets because of a "well, women have been taking them in for years"
Actually, people have been carrying guns in women's toilets for years and you just don't notice it

but that's really, not the norm in the UK.
Thank fuck.
Even if where you are people regularly carry guns into toilets, why are you OK with men with guns "protecting women" in the toilets but not trans women going about their business?!
Seriously, someone make this stance make sense as it's batshit.

I think you missed the point. Spectacularly.