GC women thrown out of Edinburgh pub

[cariadlet]

Sorry if there's already a thread on this. I've been following it on twitter all day but didn't spot anything on Mumsnet.

The Edinburgh News has got a report about it.
www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/inquiry-launched-into-row-over-transphobia-in-edinburgh-pub-3355594

The reporter quotes a lot of the TRA's tweets which they would probably love but I think the reporter's just given them enough rope to hang themselves.

I'm sure the average reader who hasn't followed the trans debate won't be impressed by someone who calls themselves an "AGP porn addict male" in their twitter bio.

"I'm sure the average reader who hasn't followed the trans debate won't be impressed by someone who calls themselves an "AGP porn addict male" in their twitter bio."

She has since explained someone was calling her a "AGP porn addict male" repeatedly as a slur, so she put it in her bio as a joke. it seems the joke was missed by a lot of people.

Her Twitter bio now says she is "CEO of the Scotsman". (Which btw is also a joke.)

Screenshots of the individual who was repeatedly calling her that:

twitter.com/transwolverine/status/1429600076163387402

That makes no sense.

If someone calls you something horrible putting it as a publicly visible description with no context is just bizarre. It's not an in joke with a few friends.

If someone kept saying I was a member of the national front for example. I wouldn't put it on my linked in profile. Obviously. I'd laugh about it with my friends. It's an in joke.

And I don't think that anyone would put something like that up if they genuinely thought it was a massive insult.

@BilindaB

''Katy Montgomerie has a higher number of followers at 45k ish,and rarely gets higher than that. What's your point?''

A quick look shows many tweets in the high hundreds, and some with 1-2k likes. Find me a fairplaytowomen tweet with a similar number.

The recent GC glasgow event attracted about 100 people. I am saying that the number of GCs in the UK is no more than a couple of thousand people. Which is relevant whenever one of them tries to speak for all women.

Have you ever hear that’s quote” Better to stay silent and be thought a fool, than speak and remove all doubt” ? Well that applies to writing as well and you have certainly removed all doubt

@BilindaB

Simply stop speaking for all women - and i won't try to show how few women you speak for.

Women Won’t Wheest hen, better get used to it. 💚🤍💜

@MargaritaPie

"I'm sure the average reader who hasn't followed the trans debate won't be impressed by someone who calls themselves an "AGP porn addict male" in their twitter bio."

She has since explained someone was calling her a "AGP porn addict male" repeatedly as a slur, so she put it in her bio as a joke. it seems the joke was missed by a lot of people.

Her Twitter bio now says she is "CEO of the Scotsman". (Which btw is also a joke.)

If you look at this person's tweets, you'll see that 'AGP porn addict male' would seem to be quite accurate. So you can probably understand why people didn't realise this was a 'joke'.

In fact, I'm not sure what the joke is if you describe yourself accurately and people believe it.

She has since explained someone was calling her a "AGP porn addict male" repeatedly as a slur, so she put it in her bio as a joke. it seems the joke was missed by a lot of people.

Oh I see. The fact that they are completely fascinated by their growing breasts, and being male, and showing off those breasts on twitter constantly is not an indication that the label is actually true.

Got you.

Or are you telling us that they are a male? That their twitter timeline is full of lies? That their profile is more lies like CEO of the Scotsmen?

Leads us to question whether they are then habitually dishonest and probably not reliable to give an honest account of this event.

Sorry.

Or are you telling us that they are NOT a male? that should be.

As I said yesterday morning:

If you hilariously claim yourself to be an "AGP male" on your Twitter bio, the same one you are using to call women terfs and cunts, you can hardly complain when people unfamiliar with these issues don't realise you're clearly not an AGP male at all because the whole description isn't in any way a perfect fit for you or anything.

@Ekofisk

I am saying that the number of GCs in the UK is no more than a couple of thousand people. Which is relevant whenever one of them tries to speak for all women.

I think that you have truly no idea how many women (and men) believe that people with penises have no place whatsoever in female only spaces.

Exactly.

I have never been asked, filled in a survey, liked any tweets etc or turned up to any protest. I am GC as is many others I know via informal discussions that are 'undocumented'.

On the topic of refusing to serve a customer because you don’t agree with their views: www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/08/23/dominic-cummings-debates-brexit-scottish-independence-three/

The manager of a highland hotel told his staff that they did have to serve Dominic Cummings: Mr Urquhart said there was a “bit of an internal discussion” about whether Mr Cummings and his family should be served but he made clear “that refusal of service on the grounds of political belief is a dangerous slippery slope”

They then had a three hour debate the next day about Brexit and Scottish Independence.

Then again, I suppose you’re allowed to debate and have opinions if you’re a man. The Doctors incident is all down to those pesky women just not knowing their place.

I don’t know Eresh

I am still laughing at the attempts on this thread to give credibility to this person and to discredit people calling this person out.

The fact that someone can post that there is a tiny number of people who believe that sex is immutable, that gender stereotypes need to be abolished not used to bolster identities, and that the rights written to protect females from discrimination due to their sexed body should not be allowed to be eroded by any other group, still amuses me.

Blimey. The truth must be very hard to bear for them. That the over whelming majority of people in the UK wish to support trans people, but not at the expense of the rights for all females or at the expense of known science seems too painful for some posters.

The wild assertions were entertaining though. Or am I just talking to myself again with thousands of sock puppets? Hello? Hello? Anyone else out there?

Morning!

Ok, to clarify, I am talking about 'active' GCs. Those who do campaign, protest, post their views on Twitter (often harassing individual trans people - hello Glinner) and other social media etc . These people are the ones who those are a threat to Trans people, inflame transphobia and threaten trans people rights and safety.

Those that hold views that are GC, or coincide with some GC views (ie transwomen in sport) but not others, and don't actively campaign or contribute to GC crowdfunders or whatever, I'm not including in the 2-3000 number, nor do I worry much about them as they are not doing anything actively harmful.

As for me, as a feminist for 35 years I'm against enforced gender roles, believe much of it is patriarchal conditioning, so there are elements of GC ideology (or whatever you want to call it) that I would agree on, and there are even some views on trans people people here would probably agree with. For example, do I think someone should get a doctor's or similar medical expert's consent before being allowed to identify as the opposite sex? Yes, I think that would be appropriate.

Probably all from me today, so don't ask me questions I won't be around to answer, thanks.

Careful, helleofabore, our more excitable members will take that as a confession

I am wondering if the people here apparently defending our heroic bartender have actually had a look at their Twitter to see who they’re white knighting for. I know that transallies are very keen on people being known by the company they keep…?

elements of GC ideology (or whatever you want to call it)

I think reality will do

@Ekofisk

I am saying that the number of GCs in the UK is no more than a couple of thousand people. Which is relevant whenever one of them tries to speak for all women.

I think that you have truly no idea how many women (and men) believe that people with penises have no place whatsoever in female only spaces.

Agreed. They may call themselves GC, or even know what GC means, but they have GC beliefs.

If TRAs were upfront and honest about what trans now means (i.e. not necessarily had any treatment or surgery), they wouldn't have been able to sneak so much under the radar. No wonder they want to shut us up, by hook or by crook.

Morning bilinda!

I cross posted and didn’t see your post, but you still haven’t shared how you got to this number.

First up, I’m embarrassed that you think Twitter is any kind of metric, to be honest. I can assure you that of the gender critical people that I know, none of the organising that we do is done through Twitter. As has been repeatedly pointed out on this thread, Twitter is not real life, and what holds on there does not necessarily translate to how people feel and act in the real world.

I also refute the allegation that anything I do “inflames transphobia” or “threatens trans people’s rights and safety”. I am involved to protect girls and women’s rights. I am happy to work with transallies and trans people to figure out how we ensure that everybody’s rights are protected, but if the conversation starts by assuming that protecting women’s rights is transphobic, clearly that can’t happen.

Still, if you are really wedded to your numbers, then far be it from me to stop you, if you feel that fabricating numbers and refusing to clarify how you go them is a sure fire way to progress your cause, please do crack on

'A couple of thousand people' are GC...
'i won't try to show how few women you speak for'...
And then says that the 'couple of thousand' are the active campaigners.

Hmmmm.
Bit of a disconnect there, I feel. It's the nature of things that a handful of vocal, involved, active people often speak for many quieter ones. Though TBF we have well more than a handful of GC voices on MN.

Oh, and let's not forget that GC voices are booted from Twitter with monotonous regularity. So using it as a litmus test is kinda pointless.

@BilindaB

Ok, to clarify, I am talking about 'active' GCs. Those who do campaign, protest, post their views on Twitter (often harassing individual trans people - hello Glinner) and other social media etc . These people are the ones who those are a threat to Trans people, inflame transphobia and threaten trans people rights and safety.

Ah, the old "female standing up against erasure give transphobes permission to hate" trope. Thing is, even if that where true are you really saying we should shut up and and accept being written out of law, culture and language so nasty people don't do bad things in our name? Because males being seen and safe in their mental gender is more important than females been seen and safe in their immutable female bodies?

But I will concede you are certainly right that there are more "active" TRAs harassing and threatening women than vice versa. Probably more on JKR's timeline alone. I'm not sure how you think that is an argument against GC views though.

(And as an aside, do you realise that if you mentioned a medical gateway to trans status on Twitter or wherever you would be vilified as a worse transphobe than even Glinner or JKR? You think these people are moderate and reasonable because they seem to be on the side of openness and acceptance. But. They. Are. Not.)

I see that the definition of GC has now been changed to draw in people for another day of derailed arguing in order to draw attention away from the behaviour and the antics of the @mebisdead person.

Soooo....lots of people DO agree with us, but we need to bloody shut up and stop campaigning about it.

No

You're quite right, nauticant

Let's get this show back on the road!

Excellent points, blibbyblobby.