The charity "Birthrights" is being abused and threatened

[PumpkinSpiceWoman]

Do "GC"s never, ever wonder whether they might be the baddies? Or even uncomfortably close to them?

I abhor all abuse.

I still believe that sex is immutable and want to fight to maintain single sex spaces.

They must be receiving all the abuse via private channels, as I’ve seen nothing on their public social media that would be classed as abusive.

Unless just merely disagreeing with someone is now abusive.

You could have posted a link. Or at least described what is meant by “abuse.” I’ve noticed a remarkable double standard on this whereby disagreement is classified as abuse if it comes from a GC person, while threats of violence and rape are discounted as just hilarious jokes if they come from TRAs. (Actually, everyone’s noticed that. If someone’s got the graphic comparing JK Rowling post to the responses to it, that might be handy.)

That said, if the charity are being abused and threatened as you say, then the people doing that are “baddies” and they are not on my side.

Not sure what the point of your thread is. Is there a link? A tweet? An article?

Or just a random opportunity to shame people discussing the conflicts on the rights of women and children by other groups?

Unless just merely disagreeing with someone is now abusive.

There does seem to be an element of this coming through most social media. When reading dissenting view points is deemed as unsafe, there seems to be a very low bar set.

@PumpkinSpiceWoman

Do "GC"s never, ever wonder whether they might be the baddies? Or even uncomfortably close to them?

Do you? All I see here is more mudslinging and denunciations.

Examples of abuse and threats please?

Could you post examples of the abuse please?

I think people are quite well aware that abusing people or organisations and threatening them is bad. No one here is doing that, unless you know otherwise? Everyone here would no doubt utterly condemn anyone who is abusive and threatening towards anyone else.

I'm sure you havens tons of evidence of this abuse. Screenshots, links etc. I can't wait to see them.

Abused and threatened in what sense? In a "nailing dead rats to the door of a rape crisis centre" sort of sense, or in a "having different political opinions on Twitter" sort of sense? Because so far I've only seen genderist abusing and threatening people and businesses in the sense most people use those words. And given that to a lot of genderists any form of disagreement = "literal violence" I'm going to take the description "abuse and threaten" with a fairly large grain of salt until I get more details.

BTW when TRAs were physically assaulting feminists, nailing dead rats to rape crisis centre doors, hanging effigies of GC politicians, threatening to rape and kill JKR, tweeting pictures of porn on threads for childrens etc etc, did you ever stop to ask yourself whether you might be the baddies?

Since I don't know what the abuse is and who is giving it , how can I respond ?

Hmmm believing that humans are sexually dimorphic and that gender is a construct of regressive stereotypes designed to keep one sex in a hierarchy above the other?

Yes, I'm sure from some people's perspective we are the baddies. In much the same was that we're also likely to be on the "wrong side of history" for so long as history is written by a certain class of person.

Not me, guv.

Oh hang on

People felt hurt and abused at the word woman and mother being misused and eliminated

And saying so triggers someone

What's sauce for the goose is clearly not sauce for the gander

Ah, a quick google indicates that this likely refers to women criticising Birthright's awful treatment of Milli Hill.
twitter.com/birthrightsorg/status/1414557632547934209

As far as I can see, this is the usual conflating of criticism with abuse and there are certainly no threats.

@PumpkinSpiceWoman

Do "GC"s never, ever wonder whether they might be the baddies? Or even uncomfortably close to them?

No.

Have listened to both sides. Know trans people, live with people of conflicting opinions. Have carefully considered the needs, rights and demands of different people. And have no doubts whatsoever that demanding everyone move over and be silenced to accommodate you, regardless of the harm this causes, is utterly unreasonable.

Those who want to abuse others can make it easier by giving themselves a psychological pass. How to do that? Start by lessening and labeling people. Like calling them 'baddies'. Once you put people in the baddy box, you can treat them pretty badly yourself. And not feel guilty.

They’ve posted this on Instagram. Which says their staff have experienced threats of violence which is in no way acceptable. However they were complicit in Milli Hill being on the receiving end of similar abuse (this in no way makes it acceptable).

I know you love redefining words op

Abuse != disagreeing
Abuse != exercising democratic rights

Abuse == gaslighting

No.

@Iliketherainbest

Those who want to abuse others can make it easier by giving themselves a psychological pass. How to do that? Start by lessening and labeling people. Like calling them 'baddies'. Once you put people in the baddy box, you can treat them pretty badly yourself. And not feel guilty.

In addition to this, when you cast those peoples' speech as "literal violence", then you can tell yourself that actual physical violence is self-defence.

The question really is whether @PumpkinSpiceWoman is going to come back to the thread to explain how they know what abuse this charity is getting and that it is coming from people that @PumpkinSpiceWoman thinks is a "gender critical" feminist or that is "uncomfortably close" to one?

Or is this just a big exercise in chiding women for no reason?

Abuse = women disagree with us

@PumpkinSpiceWoman

Do "GC"s never, ever wonder whether they might be the baddies? Or even uncomfortably close to them?

No