Does anyone else feel that the tone has changed on this board?

[ViceLikeBlip]

This board has been incredibly important to me, especially when I felt like I was losing my mind because no one else seemed to see a problem with self ID, and everyone else seemed to believe TWAW (or, I now realise, everyone else was too scared to suggest they might not believe TWAW).

You guys helped me rationalise my thoughts, and realise I wasn't some awful transphobe, and I've been really grateful to be part of this community. And I really felt like I belonged: we were pro women's rights, not anti trans rights, and we didn't believe that all transwomen are dangerous perverts but rather we recognised that dangerous perverts do exist, and they will readily take advtange of any loophole that gives them access to women.

More than anything, you guys have been an absolute mine of information - facts, stats, latest developments, and you've pointed me in the direction of news articles and twitter rows that I never would have seen otherwise. I'm genuinely grateful for this.

But recently the mood seems to have shifted significantly. There seems to be a lot of open animosity and ridicule towards all things trans. The recent outcry about M&S letting some people put their pronouns on their name badges felt uncomfortably close to clamouring to have M&S "cancelled".

I guess I used to feel like this was a safe space where I was with like minded people, but now I don't think everyone on here can hand-on-heart maintain that they're not anti-trans anymore, and it makes me very upset to see this shift happening (and happening quickly).

Unfortunately a lot of comments are a lot more insidious and just-deniable and faux innocent. And so when they get challenged by the occasional person on here, you get met with "Moi? No, no, I was merely making a very innocent statement" - when they're still doing, as you say, an "eww" thing.

I think "eww, trans" is nasty, but could you give me an example of the kind of insidious comment you mean? Doesn't have to be a direct quote. Because I don't really get what that could look like.
The reason I ask is because elsewhere anything deviating from twaw is seen as bigoted, and the expected level of compliance is really high, including a rejection of transmedicalism.

Stopthisnow good post.

Basically the reactionary right wing says change your personality to fit your body, and conform.

Genderists say change your body to fit your personality, and conform.

There's way more similarity than difference there. In both cases there is a requirement to conform.

And both groups hate lesbians.

@scarpa

Well even despite the facetiousness, it's a serious point. In contemporary discourse the literal and metaphorical are constantly mixed up, to a point that is not just unhelpful but bordering on the mendacious. Yes, of course people can be harmed emotionally, not just physically. But being offended or upset by reading someone's opinions online is not on the same level as actual harm. When one reads young people on social media talking about being made to "feel unsafe!" it's odds on, we all know, that it's performative rhetoric and they don't feel unsafe at all. It's hyperbole; it's arguing technique.

With so much that isn't actually harmful to anyone being equated with "literal violence!" (even though it wouldn't be, anyway, it would be metaphorical violence if it was anything, but most of the time it isn't any sort of violence) -- then not only is it juvenile and (frankly) untruthful, it also denigrates the experiences of people who do suffer psychological harm, eg., PTSD, racial abuse, domestic verbal abuse and so on.

When I'm sitting on my sofa, I'm quite safe; but being upset by someone's comments on the internet is not, I think, unsafe. Really.

So when people go on about safe spaces, and what they mean is not "somewhere where I can feel physically like I'm not vulnerable to attack"; but "sitting on my comfy bed reading internet text where no-one says anything you disagree with", then it's okay for others to point out that these aren't the same thing.

And also that (as I think was it @BloodinGutters who posted earlier about this? sorry if I'm wrong); this talk of safe spaces online is a mockery of those who do suffer real experiences of PTSD triggers and flashbacks.

It's one of the very least estimable aspects of current youth / identity politics internet cultures, that serious mental distress or traumatic life experience is repeatedly trivialised by the self-indulgent overuse of discourse about mental health, with people talking about their "triggers" and "feeling unsafe" and "my anxiety", when what they actually mean is "I felt mildly disconcerted or out of my comfort zone." Whereas I know many people who have had stillbirths and suffered violence or horrendous medical trauma and bereavement and the most terrible life experiences, and really do experience traumatic flashbacks. Its not the same.

The whole rhetoric of the "online safe space" trivialises that, and tries to make normal human life a pathology on a continuum with severe trauma. But that ends up not making space for those who are genuinely vulnerable and hurt to receive help and treatment. We saw it yesterday on the 'cis' thread where a poster who had been on the "BeKind" roll also said "but I don't give a fuck about your childhood trauma." It's everyone out for themselves and their trauma these days, even if the most trauma they've ever had is reading things on the internet they don't like.

foxgoosefinch spot on.

Penis havers have always hated lesbians. Or at least been confused by them. Uncomfortable. Suspicious.

Fucking lesbians has similarly been a fascination. Persuading a woman who is the ultimate challenge to get with the dick.

Lesbian porn for male gaze has always been a thing. Sexy ladies being sexy! For male gaze. Maybe they will have a MAN join in later show them what's what...

Ugh just remembered. James bond rapes (v strongly implied) Lesbian. Her name? Pussy galore... Family viewing.

Women and girls have to a greater or lesser extent. Always felt 'unsafe'.
Due to the actions of men and sadly boys sometimes.

When it comes to safe/unsafe online.

That comes into play.

Because when it comes to threats online. Both sexes do it. But mainly. Men. Esp to women.

And when it comes to those who take that into real life. Men. Who carries out attacks irl? For whatever reason. That would be men.

@FlyingOink

Stopthisnow good post.

Basically the reactionary right wing says change your personality to fit your body, and conform.

Genderists say change your body to fit your personality, and conform.

There's way more similarity than difference there. In both cases there is a requirement to conform.

And both groups hate lesbians.

Looky!

And just to add to my last post before I go to bed -- one of the aspects of "dysphoria" is quite clearly an over-pathologising of quite normal feelings, especially in young girls.

"I'm growing breasts and leaving childhood, boys show me porn of women being choked and it frightens me, I'm feeling discomfort and grieving about that!" becomes "I have dysphoria".

Similarly, "I'm nervous about socialising with other teenagers, what if they don't like me or if I don't know how to behave?" becomes "I have social anxiety and need to go on medication."

"I'm encountering intellectual ideas I feel unsettled by, that go against what I've previously thought, and maybe I'm feeling like I don't know as much as I thought I did, am I a grade A student after all?", becomes "I feel unsafe and need validation of my identity."

I certainly don't denigrate serious mental illness. To be honest most or all of us could do with some therapy and help for something, too - you don't get to middle age without some bad life experiences. But young people are increasingly becoming prey to the idea that some categories of "identity" bestow special trauma status just by virtue of identifying as them, regardless of any adverse life experiences.

So a frail elderly Muslim woman who's suffered gynaecological problems and has never been undressed in front of any other man but her husband, doesn't get the dignity of being allowed privacy from male bodied people in hospital, because the person next to her is a transwoman, whose identity trumps her feelings?

The girl in prison who's suffered abuse all her life and has given birth to a stillborn baby can be put in a cell with a male sex offender, because he's considered to be "vulnerable" by virtue of self-identifying as a woman?

[quote foxgoosefinch]@scarpa

Well even despite the facetiousness, it's a serious point. In contemporary discourse the literal and metaphorical are constantly mixed up, to a point that is not just unhelpful but bordering on the mendacious. Yes, of course people can be harmed emotionally, not just physically. But being offended or upset by reading someone's opinions online is not on the same level as actual harm. When one reads young people on social media talking about being made to "feel unsafe!" it's odds on, we all know, that it's performative rhetoric and they don't feel unsafe at all. It's hyperbole; it's arguing technique.

With so much that isn't actually harmful to anyone being equated with "literal violence!" (even though it wouldn't be, anyway, it would be metaphorical violence if it was anything, but most of the time it isn't any sort of violence) -- then not only is it juvenile and (frankly) untruthful, it also denigrates the experiences of people who do suffer psychological harm, eg., PTSD, racial abuse, domestic verbal abuse and so on.

When I'm sitting on my sofa, I'm quite safe; but being upset by someone's comments on the internet is not, I think, unsafe. Really.

So when people go on about safe spaces, and what they mean is not "somewhere where I can feel physically like I'm not vulnerable to attack"; but "sitting on my comfy bed reading internet text where no-one says anything you disagree with", then it's okay for others to point out that these aren't the same thing.

And also that (as I think was it @BloodinGutters who posted earlier about this? sorry if I'm wrong); this talk of safe spaces online is a mockery of those who do suffer real experiences of PTSD triggers and flashbacks.

It's one of the very least estimable aspects of current youth / identity politics internet cultures, that serious mental distress or traumatic life experience is repeatedly trivialised by the self-indulgent overuse of discourse about mental health, with people talking about their "triggers" and "feeling unsafe" and "my anxiety", when what they actually mean is "I felt mildly disconcerted or out of my comfort zone." Whereas I know many people who have had stillbirths and suffered violence or horrendous medical trauma and bereavement and the most terrible life experiences, and really do experience traumatic flashbacks. Its not the same.

The whole rhetoric of the "online safe space" trivialises that, and tries to make normal human life a pathology on a continuum with severe trauma. But that ends up not making space for those who are genuinely vulnerable and hurt to receive help and treatment. We saw it yesterday on the 'cis' thread where a poster who had been on the "BeKind" roll also said "but I don't give a fuck about your childhood trauma." It's everyone out for themselves and their trauma these days, even if the most trauma they've ever had is reading things on the internet they don't like.[/quote]

👏👏👏👏

@TimOTey

would still just dislike the concept of trans people because they don't agree with it and think it's not natural.

I've haven't ever seen anyone post something like that. Im sure it would be deleted if they did. It seems to me that the concerns that women have here are entirely centred around safety and rights, for both women and children. I suppose there may be the occasional plopper who might post something nasty, but that often seems to be for screen shot material only.

I think it's something different.

The concept of the "trans" person was quite different. You had people with sex dysphoria for whom living as the other sex was a sort of mitigating treatment path. They were trans in the sense that they were living as the other sex, but their diagnosis was a dysphoric disorder. There was no innately "trans" person in the way people think, for example, of an innately gay person. The main connection with sexuality is that many of the men were gay and that was related to their dysphoria.

Then the idea changed and the argument seemed to be that a trans person was someone with some kind of not-yet-understood intersex brain, and they were "really" the other sex, mentally speaking. So, truly, a trans person. And lots of people thought that seemed plausible and some still do.

But I think there are less people now who believe that. In part because the scientific evidence doesn't seem to support it, and also because a lot of what people are seeing in the public discourse doesn't seem to support it. Some people feel that there still are some people who it applies to, but others now doubt that it is a phenomena at all. They just don't think that's the real factual explanation for what's going on.

I think a lot of people have moved from thinking the medicalized explanation was probably, to disbelieving it. So that's reflected in how people are posting and what they think should happen.

And just to add to my last post before I go to bed -- one of the aspects of "dysphoria" is quite clearly an over-pathologising of quite normal feelings, especially in young girls.

"I'm growing breasts and leaving childhood, boys show me porn of women being choked and it frightens me, I'm feeling discomfort and grieving about that!" becomes "I have dysphoria".

Completely agree.

Similarly, "I'm nervous about socialising with other teenagers, what if they don't like me or if I don't know how to behave?" becomes "I have social anxiety and need to go on medication."

Yes I have seen many instances of this, I think social media is adding to this, with its focus on likes etc.

"I'm encountering intellectual ideas I feel unsettled by, that go against what I've previously thought, and maybe I'm feeling like I don't know as much as I thought I did, am I a grade A student after all?", becomes "I feel unsafe and need validation of my identity."

I think young people have not been taught to think critically or how to debate properly, they have been indoctrinated in universities, and shielded from debate. They have no idea how to deal with people disagreeing with them, so when someone does it causes them cognitive dissidence. For example, with regards to gender ideology they have been told that it is progressive and liberating, and it can feel like they have control over their life when they can pick from an array of identities, so can feel liberating to them. When someone says, actually this is not progressive at all and this is why, it causes them cognitive dissidence so they want to block people, call people names and claim to feel unsafe.

young people are increasingly becoming prey to the idea that some categories of "identity" bestow special trauma status just by virtue of identifying as them, regardless of any adverse life experiences.

Yes I agree. I think young women are being manipulated into thinking males are somehow an oppressed group by virtue of the male identifying as a woman. Conversely I have personally known young women who have had trauma from CSA, who went on to identify as men, yet young women who identify as men are said to have privilege by the gender ideologists. The ideology only benefits males and is harming females in so many ways.

@Waitwhat23

And if you are referring to physical 'safe spaces' for transpeople, then third spaces are an obvious answer to balance the rights of everyone to be safe. But that's not allowed to be discussed - it's 'transphobic'. So women must be forced to capitulate.

I used to feel responsible for ensuring that trans women had safe spaces, if I didn’t want them in women’s spaces.

I don’t anymore because I think it just reaffirmed to trans lobbying groups

• that as a woman, it is somehow MY FAULT if I want to keep women’s spaces for women, for anything bad that happens to trans women in men’s spaces.

If it not my fault.

And if it is about safety in male spaces, there is a whole robust debate. What a good opportunity to make life safer for a lot of men. Gay men have reported lack of safety in some male spaces for years, however they have not told women that it is their problem to sort out. Vulnerable men, such as those with learning difficulties, are vulnerable in men’s spaces. Young men can be vulnerable. Homeless men can be vulnerable. Black men can be vulnerable.

There could have been a really good discussion about men’s spaces and safeguarding within them for other men, whatever their vulnerabilities. There could have been positive change.

However it seems very clear that it is not about safeguarding as third spaces are totally rejected.

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

I really like that infographic. It is all quite right wing conformity I agree.

It’s funny I told my mum about this recently. She had no idea, but had recently heard about Kathleen Stock. She is not a badge wearing feminist by any means. However she was quite shocked by it all, as many ‘normal public’ people are!

And funnily enough her first reaction when I tried to quite unbiasedly explain the current debate, she said

• ‘It all sounds very right wing’

She is right I think!

@334bu

*Also - the absolute hypocrisy of multiple people on this thread arguing that there's no such thing as a safe space and nobody's entitled to one while also arguing that the evil transes are taking safe spaces away... pick a lane!)*

I am sorry but this doesn't make sense. Who on this board said nobody's entitled to safe places? Are you talking about male people wanting access to female only spaces or females wanting single sex spaces? Female single sex spaces for vulnerable women are considered necessary by everyone on this board. Are you perhaps talking about safe places for males who identify as women. In which case the women on this board are firm advocates of third spaces.

We were all saying MUMSNET FEMINISM WOMEN’s RIGHTS: SEX and GENDER

is not a safe space and never has been intended to be one.

(Robust discussions and challenging beliefs was never a ‘safe’ thing)

The PP appears to have confused this with safe single sex spaces and services. Which always were, and still are legally, safe single sex spaces.

That or the PP is being deliberately obtuse.

But that never happens, does it?

@FlyingOink

I'll disagree on your last point, because I don't think laughing at anyone does any good - and steps over the line for me.

Maybe it's not a productive thing to do, but I think it's understandable. I think in some cases the audacity has to be called out, and the double standard needs to be called out. If Silvio Berlusconi can call Angela Merkel an "unfuckable lardarse" because she isn't pretty or slim enough for him despite being the (formerly) most powerful woman in Europe for many years, then a man dressed in something massively inappropriate who calls himself a lesbian can be laughed at for looking ridiculous.

I don't get into it but I see it a lot on Radblr. And for young women raised on selfies and photoshop and porn and twenty-step makeup and skincare routines it is a slap in the face to see a "whole-ass man" both appropriate your identity and demand validation for minimal effort.

Resilience is a big buzz word in education currently.

For good reason.

Anyone whose ego falls apart because someone laughed at them does not have resilient mental & emotional health.

If I go out dressed like a smurf people will laugh. If I am super attached to dressing like a smurf I better get used to it.

For all I know plenty do laugh at me as a middle aged woman wearing band ts & biker boots & ripped jeans like I did as a teen. Maybe they laugh because they think I’m too old for it now.

Their laughter causes me zero harm; just shows me who has zero taste (imho. & I’d be laughing at them shopping at tasteexcludesus)

@foxgoosefinch

And just to add to my last post before I go to bed -- one of the aspects of "dysphoria" is quite clearly an over-pathologising of quite normal feelings, especially in young girls.

"I'm growing breasts and leaving childhood, boys show me porn of women being choked and it frightens me, I'm feeling discomfort and grieving about that!" becomes "I have dysphoria".

Similarly, "I'm nervous about socialising with other teenagers, what if they don't like me or if I don't know how to behave?" becomes "I have social anxiety and need to go on medication."

"I'm encountering intellectual ideas I feel unsettled by, that go against what I've previously thought, and maybe I'm feeling like I don't know as much as I thought I did, am I a grade A student after all?", becomes "I feel unsafe and need validation of my identity."

I certainly don't denigrate serious mental illness. To be honest most or all of us could do with some therapy and help for something, too - you don't get to middle age without some bad life experiences. But young people are increasingly becoming prey to the idea that some categories of "identity" bestow special trauma status just by virtue of identifying as them, regardless of any adverse life experiences.

So a frail elderly Muslim woman who's suffered gynaecological problems and has never been undressed in front of any other man but her husband, doesn't get the dignity of being allowed privacy from male bodied people in hospital, because the person next to her is a transwoman, whose identity trumps her feelings?

The girl in prison who's suffered abuse all her life and has given birth to a stillborn baby can be put in a cell with a male sex offender, because he's considered to be "vulnerable" by virtue of self-identifying as a woman?

Fantastic post.

None of these posters are addressing the bulk of what women here are saying in the majority of the threads which is that women have a right to single sex services and spaces that they require.

Is that because there is no good arguments against them?

Third spaces are regularly suggested to meet everyone’s needs.

Women need places and services that are for natal women only.

Trans people deserve services that meet their needs. This is consistently rejected with accusations of trans/homophobia.

There is nothing transphobic or homophobic about women’s refuges, medical services, prisons or places where women and girls are in a state of undress.

That’s the majority of concern.

There are rightful worries about how language is dehumanising and excluding women by attempting to be inclusive. These are legitimate points for discussion.

@Stopthisnow

And just to add to my last post before I go to bed -- one of the aspects of "dysphoria" is quite clearly an over-pathologising of quite normal feelings, especially in young girls.

"I'm growing breasts and leaving childhood, boys show me porn of women being choked and it frightens me, I'm feeling discomfort and grieving about that!" becomes "I have dysphoria".

Completely agree.

Similarly, "I'm nervous about socialising with other teenagers, what if they don't like me or if I don't know how to behave?" becomes "I have social anxiety and need to go on medication."

Yes I have seen many instances of this, I think social media is adding to this, with its focus on likes etc.

"I'm encountering intellectual ideas I feel unsettled by, that go against what I've previously thought, and maybe I'm feeling like I don't know as much as I thought I did, am I a grade A student after all?", becomes "I feel unsafe and need validation of my identity."

I think young people have not been taught to think critically or how to debate properly, they have been indoctrinated in universities, and shielded from debate. They have no idea how to deal with people disagreeing with them, so when someone does it causes them cognitive dissidence. For example, with regards to gender ideology they have been told that it is progressive and liberating, and it can feel like they have control over their life when they can pick from an array of identities, so can feel liberating to them. When someone says, actually this is not progressive at all and this is why, it causes them cognitive dissidence so they want to block people, call people names and claim to feel unsafe.

young people are increasingly becoming prey to the idea that some categories of "identity" bestow special trauma status just by virtue of identifying as them, regardless of any adverse life experiences.

Yes I agree. I think young women are being manipulated into thinking males are somehow an oppressed group by virtue of the male identifying as a woman. Conversely I have personally known young women who have had trauma from CSA, who went on to identify as men, yet young women who identify as men are said to have privilege by the gender ideologists. The ideology only benefits males and is harming females in so many ways.

I really appreciate @foxgoosefinch supporting my pov on ‘triggered’

I think the social anxiety is a bit of both being downplayed by young people ‘identifying’ with it when they don’t have it, but partly I think it’s increasing. Part of which is because kids spend their lives on line (I know I know I’m on line right now…) but they don’t deal with real everyday life that is part of building resilience.

I’m saying this as a parent who has super anxious ‘precious’ girls who have always been extremely limited by their anxiety. My girls have autism, were diagnosed very young because even nursery ages leaving them house caused huge overwhelming sensory overload and extreme panic attacks. So I’m not dismissing there is very serious limiting problems with childhood anxiety and social anxiety, that isn’t created by kids never being pushed out their comfort zone a bit, but there’s plenty kids who don’t ever learn to deal with the feelings of insecurity and inadequacy -that are normal feelings, however horrid- that us ‘older’ generations had to face & deal with as teens. So they never develop necessary life skills and basic resilience.

This most definitely feeds into the gender ideology trend I think.

@TRHR

Totally agree with OP. A few months ago I raised concerns about GC being bad for feminism as it undermines bodily autonomy, choice (e.g. if I want to describe myself as cis and state my pronouns that's up to me), and defines women by reproductive capacity which I find regressive. I got called stupid, classist , criticised for reading too much of the wrong stuff at uni (what feminist position criticises women getting an education?) criticised for not reading enough, for not responding quickly enough, for combining replies instead of individual quote tweets... the gatekeeper is unreal. It's another way to tell women what to do and what to think. It's not a 'discussion board' - stating the 'wrong' opinion is not tolerated.

GC is one part of feminism tho. Actual feminism is different to every woman (the cunty type) on here. Probably get shot down myself here, but I never considered myself a feminist even until I realised back in 2004 what could happen. It's all been proved that my fears came true. Since then I have prioritised GC above all. When this is over will I be bothered to actually read more around feminism? Will i come on these boards to find another fight?

If you personally want to introduce yourself as cis, crack on. Just dont expect any of us on this board to call you a cis woman (when would we do that, how would we do that) when you announce yourself as cis does anyone congratulate you? Use it in a sentence?
I'm struggling to see how useful in the real world this is. Give me some idea.

I wonder if the TRA bullies ever stopped consider that maybe they are culturally insensitive at best, and RACIST at worst, by suggesting Muslim women must put up with penises in their face in women's spaces? In a competition between Woke vs Woke, which would win out in their brainwashed minds? The Meninist TRAs 'right' to have penis-bodied people in women's spaces? Or the rights of a Hijabi Muslim woman - who feels she can remove Hijab in a woman's only space?

This is a question I would like TRAs to answer. In their minds, which one has 'right of way'? Which one has right of way in a woman's space?

Probably get shot down myself here, but I never considered myself a feminist even until I realised back in 2004 what could happen. It's all been proved that my fears came true.

Shot down? Maybe mobbed actually. With all of those who have similar experiences gathering around to say ‘you are not alone’. Mine was a year later, being terminated from my professional role while 19 weeks pregnant.

I then looked back at all the discriminatory events I had experienced without even acknowledging them at the time and realized that whoever believed they, as a female, were being treated as an equal was obviously living in utopia and we should all go and live there.

And I look around in 2021 and it still has not really improved. But, crack on all those posters who cannot see the connection I say. The rest of us will focus on a wide front of issues, including prioritising gender above sex when sex matters.

Relative newbie on the Board. Definitely seen something here which could be new. Noticed it after the Board was split. Emergence of occasional posts which seem to try to 'position' this place in a particular way. Imply or claim posters think or believe certain things which I've not see much evidence of. As if saying it makes it real. Not talking about original OP here. But these type of posts have an emotive and manipulative feel about them. And feel disingenuous. Trolling feels too simple a word for this. But something is definitely off.

Ilike the rain ,I think its easier now the board is split to accuse posters here of a kind of universal "mindthink", which probably makes it easier to dismiss some of the arguments and paint everyone as a mad viper with hatred in their veins. Because of course all the reasonable feminists go on the other feminist board dont they!!

You can make a point about the ideology and lobbying without lumping all trans people into one group.

We are specifically forbidden to make generalised comments about any cohort, or unpleasant, libellous comments about individuals.

How much more do you wish to restrict our right to speak at all?

And, if you look more carefully, ie read some of those posts, you will see that it is not transpeople in general. It is TRAs and the actions/desires of transwomen in regard to female rights that are discussed.

As is said, over and over and over again. We don't discuss trans rights. We discuss the rights, safety and dignity of women and girls.

There's definitely a narrative being pushed by some posters with agenda of their own that the posters on here 'don't agree/believe with the existence of trans people' which is just not true. I think the hope is that repetition will cement the false idea in people's minds.

Screenshots of conversations on here are regularly posted on Twitter as 'proof' of things said here. Someone on another thread made the observation that it's always screenshots - why not a link to the discussion? I've just seen this demonstrated - a comment someone made here about the Forstater case has been posted on Stonewall's Twitter without any context in order to be ridiculed. As pp's have said, there's also a extraordinary amount of comments made, reported and deleted within minutes, but screenshots have managed to be taken in that time. Almost seems deliberate....