3 Friends- News is getting out

[Flatmeringues]

I’m a long time lurker. I found this board a couple of years ago when I had started to become a bit worried, Firstly, I want to thank you I have learned so much and I’m in awe at the sheer intelligence on display here, when I feel something isn’t quite right but I can’t articulate why I feel like that, I come on here and someone is able to explain/has already explained, in a much more coherent way than me,what was worrying me. This board has allowed me to have the words to express my worries and fears. Thank you.

Im posting today because after a couple of disheartening experiences last year I’ve learned to be more circumspect about bringing up my gc views, I now always leave it to others to bring up and try not to dump everything I know/believe in one sitting.

However, something strange has happened in the last 2 weeks I have met 3 different friends that I haven’t seen since before COVID. We’ve never discussed this topic before. All 3 of them brought up the topic in a “have you heard about this” “can you believe it”.
One was most concerned about teenagers and puberty blockers and the topic had been brought to her attention by the Keira Bell case. Another works in Education and was worried about the susceptibility of Autistic girls. The third is a textile teacher and became aware through Jess de Wahl and the Royal Academy.

All three were worried, are reading around the topic and now aware of all the issues, I don’t think 18 months ago any of these women were aware at all.

I thought I’d share because It gave me hope.

These women are all mothers of teenage girls.

These women are all mothers of teenage girls.

In my personal experience, it is the mothers of teenagers in general that are more aware. Except for a male friend who read about it in Madness of Crowds, it seems to have past the rest of my friends by completely unless they have teenagers.

I only became aware of the issues because of my daughter. I used to put up with everyday sexism, like it was just a thing that women had to deal with. Fuck that shit, I’m angry now!!

My daughter is adopted and, as feisty as she is, she is so vulnerable in certain ways because of her past and the trauma she has suffered. I see these issues as a fight for her future. She’s only 5, but I’m already teaching her (thanks to the wisdom of the witches on here).

She went to the circus recently, and the acrobatic performer raised her fist when she was being applauded. My very tiny daughter raised her fist in response, whilst others were clapping and she shouted ‘I’m a women, hear me roar’. So proud, she clearly doesn’t understand properly, but she will. I am determined that she will be more savvy than me, more confident than me and more able to call this bullshit out for what it is. At 42 I am only just learning about feminism, I see feminism as an integral part of her learning and so important for her future.

What a lovely post Flatmeringues

The posts on the LCBT children board encapsulate the dilemmas for so many parents who can see that their child has been caught up in social contagion yet feel powerless to challenge what is happening. And numerous other parents and teachers are watching in horror as social contagion runs rife through peer groups.
Fortunately these desperate parents generally get considered and thoughtful responses on Mumsnet.

Thanks for posting this, always good to hear something positive! I think people are starting to wake up to this, there's been quite a lot recently in the papers. Once people get past thinking you're making it up, because it all sounds really far fetched, they invariably come down on the side of reality and common sense. Its just a matter of time before it reaches a critical mass then the whole thing will crumble and disintegrate. Gosh I am feeling optimistic today!

Let's hope so, OP. Although I would add I've been positive everything was just about to change for ... well. Five years, now?

I've been interested in public opinion shifts for years. I did some research, some years ago and found that in many cases, we search out the media that suits us, rather than media influencing. There is so much emphasis and belief now that media influences us. it is taken as a given. I am not convinced. The last general election shocked so many people, the BBC especially, who had assumed this idea that the media influences rather than the other way around. In a similar way, Trump did much better than expected because the media in the US is Democrat, it was a shock that they lost seats but emphasis has been put on the (almost win) of the Senate - not enough if you think media is the driver of public opinion.

Nowadays, so many are still making the assumption that we are 'sheep' following whatever might be thrown our way. Many organisations have now fallen into this trap and believe their own hype. It is going to be interesting to see what happens when the 'silent majority' truly get hold of what has been happening, Kiera Bell being one of the biggest eye openers, along with prisons (though I haven't discounted individuals, they have less impact than the subject JKR, Jess etc). These big issues show where society is and foolish media people ignore at their peril because once something gets out there, the impact is at a very deep emotional and preservation level. It is no longer theory and something for discussion over the dinner table - it is real, and if it is a threat, the impact will be swift.

Great Op, similar experience, I mentioned at my art group (during the Covid break last summer), it was something about single sex spaces and they all added something GC and one said she had kept quiet because she thought (me being on the left) I would think her transphobic

It's raining here, can you tell?

One must remember the surprise of the vote to leave the EU. All the reporting was that people would vote with what they knew, but the reporting was wrong. Nobody was listening to the concerns being raised by ordinary people, and when the people were given the opportunity to be heard, they surprised the London-centric media and politicians.

Same with the last general election. Who knew Boris would actually end up as PM? Momentum scuppered a lot of previous 'Red Wall' support due to their dogged pursuit of identity politics.

I live in hope that a lot of the damage done in secret, once exposed to the general public, will be able to be addressed.

My words aren't flowing very well today, apologies.

Highame - There is so much emphasis and belief now that media influences us. it is taken as a given. I am not convinced.

I haven't read the original study but may I ask what you think of this?

Examining the impact of Italian local government corruption scandals on its citizens, the authors use an ingenious data source to measure the public’s level of dishonesty: supermarket’s self-service checkouts. Supermarkets carry out random checks on customers who have scanned their own groceries, with more than 200,000 such audits allowing us to identify how widespread dishonesty is and, crucially, how it changes over time.

The researchers use this to show that in the aftermath of a corruption scandal appearing in the media, shoppers are 16 to 30% more likely to intentionally under-report the contents of their shopping trolley. That’s a big effect that is at its strongest for four days after a scandal breaks

archive of Guardian item: archive.is/DWX4z

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jul/25/government-corruption-more-likely-we-cheat-at-tills?CMP=fb_cif

I can't sort out if it's:
giving licence to do something that some people want to do but ordinarily refrain from (it would never influence people who do this all the time);
the only outlet for protest or revenge that people feel they have (even tho' it's directed at the wrong organisation);
joining in as an abuser or transgressor;
something else that is triggered by the coverage that falls away.

Thanks for the link Embarrassing Interesting but I would argue that short term effects of media stories are not the same as our fundamental feelings of self preservation. I don't think these feelings assert themselves until and unless we feel there is a threat and that threat doesn't have to be life and limb. It can be that societal cohesion is just as important to self preservation. I have a view that the silent majority are unconcerned in the main, which is why they don't feature until something hits a tipping point. I also like the idea of pack mentality which means people wake up at a certain point and they do this in large enough groups to (in stages) send something higher up the agenda.

I didn't answer did I Perhaps we are inherently dishonest, maybe it's part of the human condition but only exerts itself when triggered and then slides back to oblivion. Covid has thrown up some really strange things. I have found lots of people have become much more strident in their likes and dislikes, so does that imply that under threat we become much more tribal?

Thanks for sharing OP. I am gradually speaking up more, and having the same experience as you - a) it becoming a more mainstream discussion, and b) most people are indeed on the so called ‘GC’ side.

I should say, my two good friends (one male, one female) that I have spoken to about all this are both chatty and well connected people so I have no doubt word is getting round their circles.

It gives me hope too.

I should say, my two good friends (one male, one female) that I have spoken to about all this are both chatty and well connected people so I have no doubt word is getting round their circles.

One very smart move by Sex Matters and their book sponsorship programme is to ask people to consider nominating well connected people with good 'social stickiness and influence' (I paraphrase) to receive a copy of Helen Joyce's book.

sex-matters.org/take-action/sponsor-a-gift-copy-of-helen-joyces-book-trans/

[quote EmbarrassingAdmissions]I should say, my two good friends (one male, one female) that I have spoken to about all this are both chatty and well connected people so I have no doubt word is getting round their circles.

One very smart move by Sex Matters and their book sponsorship programme is to ask people to consider nominating well connected people with good 'social stickiness and influence' (I paraphrase) to receive a copy of Helen Joyce's book.

sex-matters.org/take-action/sponsor-a-gift-copy-of-helen-joyces-book-trans/[/quote]
Yes, definitely a good strategy. I sponsored 2 books, one for my MP and one for Sex Matters to choose - hoping that they know of some suitably ‘social sticky and influential’ people!

I see the book is number 7 in best sellers this week, excellent.

@Masdintle

One must remember the surprise of the vote to leave the EU. All the reporting was that people would vote with what they knew, but the reporting was wrong. Nobody was listening to the concerns being raised by ordinary people, and when the people were given the opportunity to be heard, they surprised the London-centric media and politicians.

Same with the last general election. Who knew Boris would actually end up as PM? Momentum scuppered a lot of previous 'Red Wall' support due to their dogged pursuit of identity politics.

I live in hope that a lot of the damage done in secret, once exposed to the general public, will be able to be addressed.

My words aren't flowing very well today, apologies.

I agree. Trevor Phillips talked before about the Labour party in the late 90's and early 2000's being a place where immigration was just not allowed to be talked about. They basically made it taboo to even mention immigration, even though a large portion of the population had questions and concerns and wanted some reassurance.

Those people were told they were racist and bigoted (sound familiar?) even if they just had legitimate questions to ask. they were told that their concerns made them hateful (also familiar).

And lo 15 years later Brexit happened. I'm not saying that was the only reason for Brexit, but the point he made is that if you ignore and shout down people with genuine questions to ask and issues to raise, it doesn't just make those issues or legitimate concerns go away.

In a similar way, Trump did much better than expected because the media in the US is Democrat, it was a shock that they lost seats but emphasis has been put on the (almost win) of the Senate - not enough if you think media is the driver of public opinion Isn't that partly due to 'media' having changed and more people seek out 'niche' media online or social media, that reflect their views, rather than the mainstream media?

Anyway, my experience is that even the avid fans I know of this gender ideology don't actually understand what it stands for and make blatantly ' transphobic' statements whilst trying to convince me of it. So a friend told me that there is no need to misgender someone, as you can just call them 'they' (Transphobic, under your ideology that is misgendering) or patiently started to explain the difference between sexual orientation and gender to me by saying, 'sexual orientation is who you are attracted to, so homosexual people are same sex attracted but gender is..' At that point I cut her off and said, ' no, under the ideology you are defending gay and lesbian people are same gender attracted, not same sex attracted' She said ' 'What?' I explained further, and explained this was also Stonewall's position and then there was a silence before she said ' but that's absolutely crazy.'

I couldn't agree more, Mullets. I remember it well. It was 'racist' to even mention that the vast, vast numbers of Eastern Europeans that came to make a better life for themselves (doing nothing wrong, they were well within their rights) but changed the face of some communities for ever. The government expected 13,000 and got half a million or so. Never mind the concentration of certain Asian populations in certain areas - Gordon Brown's Bigotgate was due to the changed face of Rochdale. I see so many parallels with cries of 'bigot' and the shutting down of legitimate questions. The then Labour government were quoted as saying 'rub the Right's nose in diversity'.

@Masdintle

I couldn't agree more, Mullets. I remember it well. It was 'racist' to even mention that the vast, vast numbers of Eastern Europeans that came to make a better life for themselves (doing nothing wrong, they were well within their rights) but changed the face of some communities for ever. The government expected 13,000 and got half a million or so. Never mind the concentration of certain Asian populations in certain areas - Gordon Brown's Bigotgate was due to the changed face of Rochdale. I see so many parallels with cries of 'bigot' and the shutting down of legitimate questions. The then Labour government were quoted as saying 'rub the Right's nose in diversity'.

Yep. I remember trying to talk to other left wing friends about this before Brexit - I had a feeling we were going to leave because of this very issue. It really pissed me off that people were being called names just for wanting to discuss immigration levels.

Well Mulletsaremisunderstood , I recall Trevor saying - during Blairs pomp - that people who talk about class are living in a 70s time warp. That worked out well didn't it?

@Masdintle

I couldn't agree more, Mullets. I remember it well. It was 'racist' to even mention that the vast, vast numbers of Eastern Europeans that came to make a better life for themselves (doing nothing wrong, they were well within their rights) but changed the face of some communities for ever. The government expected 13,000 and got half a million or so. Never mind the concentration of certain Asian populations in certain areas - Gordon Brown's Bigotgate was due to the changed face of Rochdale. I see so many parallels with cries of 'bigot' and the shutting down of legitimate questions. The then Labour government were quoted as saying 'rub the Right's nose in diversity'.

Exactly, and this was from the Labour party, who claim to represent the working classes. People who saw the negative effects that mass immigration was having on their small towns.

Not that I'm saying immigration is wrong, but it needs to be managed properly, and importantly, when people have concerns about it, it doesn't automatically make them right wing bigots!

@Abhannmor

Well Mulletsaremisunderstood , I recall Trevor saying - during Blairs pomp - that people who talk about class are living in a 70s time warp. That worked out well didn't it?

OK..... I'm not sure what that has to do with this.

I mentioned TP as I remember he talked about it in a tv show about the Labour party. I'm sure he isn't the only one to have made this point.

foolish media people ignore at their peril because once something gets out there, the impact is at a very deep emotional and preservation level.

Yep. And that emotional level extends to the media as well.

The very fact that the media has failed to represent your views at all. except to denigrate them, mock them or condemn them, turns people against the media. There is a reason the acronym "MSM" has come into being. There is a reason people no longer believe MSM on things even when they are true. If they feel that they've been lied to or betrayed or ignored, why should they trust the media which has done that to them? This is one of the reasons why Trump supporters are so entrenched; it doesn't matter what the media tells them Trump has done or said now, they either don't believe them (because they've got into the habit of not believing them) or they don't care because if it upsets the respectable media, it's probably a Good Thing.

This is not a good position to be in, for the fourth estate.

Just thinking some more about this, the way the liberal media have responded to the trans issue has really changed my outlook. I've become so angry with the BBC about their refusal to cover the trans issue honestly that I no longer give a shit about keeping the licence fee. 20 years ago I'd have written letters, gone on demos, done everything I could to preserve it if it was under threat. Now? Meh, if the Tories want to get rid of it I don't give a shit. If I want to hear interesting programmes, there's plenty of stuff on Netflix and Youtube now. I no longer feel any loyalty at all to the BBC. Or the Guardian. And I think a lot of people feel that way.

The Guardian is interesting, when you see stories come up on FB, you can tell they're trying to capture the young American market and I wonder how much of that is because they've lost so much of their home market. I used to buy it every day. I wouldn't pay money for it now.

But the problem for them, is that if they are pandering to an American readership, they lose credibility as a media source here. It's a dilemma.

Sorry just meandering around.

Screamingbeans, as someone living in the US, I can't agree with you. It's a mistake, I feel, to accept or reject a media outlet because of its position on one issue. I am not going to start watching Fox because they call out gender woo. They peddle lies about the "stolen" election, about vaccination, about QAnon, in short they peddle lies—except on one issue, and they do that because their viewers like it, NOT because anyone at Fox thinks it right. (I bet every last person employed by Fox is vaccinated, including Fucker Carlson.) We must fight to get the BBC to start recognizing the truth, not abandon it to Rupert Murdoch. Do you really think he will generally support women's rights? And he won't be open to rational persuasion, either.

I say all this for the same reason that I am not going to start supporting the Republicans because I disagree with (some of) the Dems on gender or on a couple of other social or political issues. There's a baby/bathwater interface here that has to be avoided.

Oh I'm not suggesting we all move over to Fox News/ The Sun/ Daily Mail.

Just that I no longer feel an emotional loyalty to any of the media outlets I used to. I no longer feel a personal investment in them. I no longer feel like they're talking to me.

I don't feel like fighting for organisations which are shafting me.