Found this in the New Forest!

[Boomboomboomboom]

Thought you would all enjoy this little bit of guerrilla feminism spotted deep in the New Forest, Hampshire today. Brought a little Christmas cheer to my sister and I!

I’m just suddenly PMSL at the thought of an “unsafe” piece of slate.

I guess you could slip on a leaf, fall and scratch your arm on the slate, develop sepsis and die. Way way waaaay more dangerous than an intact male being locked in a cell with females. Obvs.

I think it's been long since established that being pro-female rights = automatically anti TA politics, which by logical extension does have to mean in turn that pro TA politics is automatically anti female rights. And the TA politics frame this as both cannot exist at one time, there must be a choice of one or the other.

This is not a view held by any female people I've yet met. They see it as perfectly possible for both to exist at the same time with sufficiently diverse range of provisions and mutual respect for beliefs and differences. However this position of compromise, tolerance, and coping with the existence of needed resources for females (even if all the TA political needs have been met and all needed trans accessible resources provided alongside) is 'hate'. In some unspecified way.

I suppose it's the same that there's a strong feeling that those believing in TA politics should not be exposed to the existence of other people with other needs and beliefs even in written message form in public places. But unfortunately other people cannot be obliterated, nor can reality, so that this political belief can exist uninterrupted. Other people exist too. And are equally human.

The answer is not to prevent anyone of any other beliefs ever being allowed to express or have anything that interrupts the political narrative - and lets face it, that is going to be an endless game of whackamole without ever ending or reaching a point of success while others being shut down get louder and angrier and more resistant. The answer is to learn to cope with the idea that different beliefs can exist alongside each other, and tolerate that resources can exist for both. And female sex based rights existing and being spoken about are not 'unsafe' things, because that is appallingly and unacceptably sexist and repressive of others.

@FrancescaContini

I’m just suddenly PMSL at the thought of an “unsafe” piece of slate.

Well there's always the risk it might fall off and hit your foot as you're walking through the forest. Maybe bruise a toe. Or worse. Probably better to wear sturdy practical walking boots when walking through the new forest to mitigate these risks. Leave the high heels at home.

If only all of these problems were so easy to solve. Well, they would be easy to deal with if it wasnt for the hardcore of males and their allies thinking that women's safeguards are so last year.

Unless you also believe that no one should ever state in writing "TWAW" in a public place in case it upsets someone of other beliefs, this does not have a leg to stand on.

No one has an entitlement to require the rest of the world to protect them from encountering other beliefs, views and needs. No one has an entitlement to require that those trying to retain political rights under attack don't actually mention it for fear of upsetting those who want those rights removed. #notyourmum

There we have it, trans rights are anti-women and misogynistic. Women must always, always validate men, women are merely service and support humans and must be kind at all times irrespective of the detriment and harm this causes them. Thank you for clarifying that so clearly and unequivocally BlueberryCheezecake and NoNotMeNoSiree.

Frankly, I don't care if that sign upsets your friend, or any other trans person NoNotMeNoSiree, the harm and devastation to women and women's rights this gender ideology is doing to women goes way, way beyond upset and hurt feeling. Also, I care not one iota what you think that says about me your opinion of me is irrelevant to me.

Frankly, I don't care if that sign upsets your friend, or any other trans person NoNotMeNoSiree

No I don't care that much either. Although I'm surprised that a transman would be so distraught and feel so unsafe about feminism and women's rights. Bearing in mind, underneath, they are female. And thus feminism and women's safety also covers them. Did you ask your friend what they thought, NoNotMeNoSiree before offering your opinion on their behalf and deciding these words would render them unsafe?

Anyway, offense is taken not given. A few words on a piece of slate in the new forest means nothing, particularly when stacked up against the sustained attack on the safety of women and girls.

@Artichokeleaves

I think it's been long since established that being pro-female rights = automatically anti TA politics, which by logical extension does have to mean in turn that pro TA politics is automatically anti female rights. And the TA politics frame this as both cannot exist at one time, there must be a choice of one or the other.

This is not a view held by any female people I've yet met. They see it as perfectly possible for both to exist at the same time with sufficiently diverse range of provisions and mutual respect for beliefs and differences. However this position of compromise, tolerance, and coping with the existence of needed resources for females (even if all the TA political needs have been met and all needed trans accessible resources provided alongside) is 'hate'. In some unspecified way.

I suppose it's the same that there's a strong feeling that those believing in TA politics should not be exposed to the existence of other people with other needs and beliefs even in written message form in public places. But unfortunately other people cannot be obliterated, nor can reality, so that this political belief can exist uninterrupted. Other people exist too. And are equally human.

The answer is not to prevent anyone of any other beliefs ever being allowed to express or have anything that interrupts the political narrative - and lets face it, that is going to be an endless game of whackamole without ever ending or reaching a point of success while others being shut down get louder and angrier and more resistant. The answer is to learn to cope with the idea that different beliefs can exist alongside each other, and tolerate that resources can exist for both. And female sex based rights existing and being spoken about are not 'unsafe' things, because that is appallingly and unacceptably sexist and repressive of others.

Well, having watched 'third spaces' and other reasonable compromises being repeatedly shut down and rejected as 'anti trans', one could start to get the feeling that Blueberry and NoSir are correct, and that 'anti-woman' is actually an inherent part of the genderist argument.

It seems that a hierarchy of rights is baked into genderism. Which would make sense - sex stereotypes are deeply coded as females being subordinate to and lesser than males. And genderism cleaves to these stereotypes.

If the world truly was 'gender neutral' or all spaces were mixed sex, transgenderism would be meaningless. Nobody could 'transition' to, or from, anything.

Genderism only works as a system when underpinned by both the biological reality of sex and the concomitant assignment of value/hierarchy to the two sexes.

Thanks, Blueberry and NoSir for your useful explanations.

Gosh, this thread has been interesting!

I can confirm I spotted the slate from the path but couldn't read it from that distance, so ventured the few metres or so off the path down a slight slopes to read what I construed as a pro woman, not an anti-trans message.

Any sensitive trans person who runs the risk of being offended by an almost entirely nature-based piece of feminist art could just admire the heart from afar without the risk of a heinous assault by reading the writing.

Also very interesting that such a pro woman's right slogan is being construed as anti-trans which just confirms that some in the trans community and/or some trans supporters really do think that women should prioritise men's feelings above their own safety which is the heart of the debate really.

Surely "suck my d.ck t.rfs" emblazoned across the street, where there's far more people walking, is more offensive than a tiny statement about the heart of feminism on a slate.

Anyway, yet another excellent thread demonstrating the misogyny of the genderist movement which seeks to prioritise male feelings over women's safety.

Nobody's saying that isn't offensive, course it is, it's disgusting.
It's not a competition though.

Oh, great you're back, NoNot. So can you specify what is 'offensive' about the slate?

It's not a competition though.

No, it's not.

There's really no comparison - one is a pretty, unobtrusive object with a message intended for women, which is appreciated by people like the OP who come across it.

The other is also a message for women... it serves no other purpose but to upset and intimidate. Not 'pro trans', but very specifically a male expression of contempt for women.

Quite, any sane person can tell that is disgusting.

A state of fact about what exactly feminism is and has always been about, is not in any way offensive.

Siree and bluech have made this "about trans," somehow.

A state of fact about what exactly feminism is and has always been about, is not in any way offensive.

Of course it's not, well unless you are the kind of person who thinks that women only exist for the validation of men and their feelings which is a contemptible way of regarding women, is misogynistic and inherently un-feminist. There is no other way you can read the objections to this slate from those who are objecting.

@NoNotMeNoSiree

Nobody's saying that isn't offensive, course it is, it's disgusting. It's not a competition though.

If you had seen that slate 6 or 7 years ago would you have thought it “ disgusting “ then? If not , then what changed in your mindset? And if you had found it “ disgusting” then, why was that?

I mean the slate, not the appalling t-shirt message.

@Rhannion

And slate is a nature material so quite at home in a forest.

@Rhannion

Yes, but I don't think we should be using such places to fill with political messages. It's nice to go for a walk and have one place to forget about all of that.

@NoNotMeNoSiree

oh shush @blueberrycheezecake** Did you really just do that What happened to wanting a debate? We're on page 2, we've had a dissenting view and as a result already a shush, an attempt at gaslighting and an accusation of derailing.

That poster seems to enjoy shit-stirring and I VERY much doubt is here to actually have a debate, where one is open to new viewpoints. Therefore, I reserve the right to sush them thanks.

@NoNotMeNoSiree

Yes, but the act of writing on stones/slate as someone pointed out at the beginning of the thread could be seen as a kind of graffiti?

It was me who said that, and as I have also pointed out, my views on this extend to all political messaging, including trans activist graffiti.

@KimikosNightmare

Yes, but the act of writing on stones/slate as someone pointed out at the beginning of the thread could be seen as a kind of graffiti?

Hyperbole is never good for either side's case.

This is graffiti.

That slate, regardless of what one thinks of the message, is not graffiti.

@KimikosNightmare No, but it is using places of nature (where people go for peace of mind and tranquillity) as another place to post political messages. I happen to like the slate but if I saw this out in nature I would take it away. Same if I saw any kind of flag.

Also, I would like to point out that I don't think of the slate as graffiti - it's a natural material and the message was written on that. The graffiti I was referring to was writing on stones and such.

What I would like to avoid is a situation where we're using the countryside or nice place where people go for a walk as somewhere else to go 'Hey - here's my opinion on this'.

I don't want to see it, even if I agree with the message. In national parks we already have problems with umpteen rock stacking showing up. One person does it, then another, then another, then another, then another, all wanting an Instagramable pic and and opportunity to say I WOZ 'ERE on somewhere beautiful before they return to urban settings.

In once small place I counted 50 - 70 of them. Things like that quickly add up and become an issue and a bloody eyesore. I do not want to see the same thing being done with political messages, however small, even if they are lovely or I agree with them.

I understand this may be an unpopular opinion and that people have decent-counter arguments to it, but I would like people to consider thinking about the matter differently or try to see where I'm coming from.

Sorry for the derail though :/

using the countryside or nice place where people go for a walk

Almost all of the land in the UK is used, affected, farmed, managed by humans. I wonder if the idea of 'nature' as something separate and pure to be unsullied by humans might be at the root of some of our problems with poor ecological choices!

We live here. We are nature, we aren't separate, we can't preserve 'nature' as something that isn't fundamentally intertwined with humans and humanity.

Having lived rurally most of my life, I find the idea that a not-urban space should be pristinely absolved of human traces so that townies can periodically visit and bask in its beauty impractical to say the least. Yes, green spaces and wild spaces are very important, but they are all also connected to our lives intimately and daily and always, and most often they are also workplaces and our homes.

Yes, there are lots of rocks out there with various messages on them. We have Jehovah's witness rocks, 'inspirational quotes' and lots and lots of 'NHS thanks' rocks around here. (I live rurally). I just cannot get worked up about it.

I do share concerns about littering & potential misplacement of materials, and I have always carefully considered the consequences of my actions.