Why the ploppers plop and the sealions bark?

[JellySaurus]

When we ask questions relating to any aspect of trans ideology, ploppers and sealions accuse us of echo-chamber transphobia etc. we always invite them to answer our questions themselves, but they never do. We generally understand this to mean that this is because they cannot answer the question.

Maybe it's because they cannot ask it.

I was brought up in a tradition of asking questions. My dad always says that the most important word is "Why?" Yet in the wider world I regularly come up against shock that I should even query something, and I hear statements like "You cannot ask that!"

Maybe the first thing that TRAs, and all those immersed in the ideology, internalise and completely buy into is not TWAW, but No Debate. Maybe they cannot answer our questions because they cannot understand them. Because they do not understand that they are allowed to question.

Are we still countering No Debate?

"My definition of a woman is what society would generally see as a woman. So, I think that the experience of women tends to be the case that is someone is walking down the street, right, and gets cat called, that person is seen by society as a woman. Many people experience that."

Despite it being a steaming pile o sexist shite, that description doesn't surprise me in the least. There are a number of transwomen who rate their 'womanhood' based on street harassment. It's the fetishing of women's oppression again.

But in terms of MRA logic, its right up there for Tom. Women who don't get cat called aren't women. Got it.

@EeeICouldRipATissue

You've posted lots of comments on various threads criticising feminists (I presume, it's not entirely clear) but not made one clear argument about what you disagree with.

Perhaps you could start with the easy one from upthread: what is a woman?

Otherwise surely you are just doing exactly what this thread is about- plopping in solely to attack?

I think that the experience of women tends to be the case that is someone is walking down the street, right, and gets cat called, that person is seen by society as a woman. Many people experience that.

Wow. So ugly women are not women but men who get sexually harassed are.

Reminds me of that other awful answer a Genderist gave about women being anyone who is sexually submissive.

^Tom Harwood:

"My definition of a woman is what society would generally see as a woman. So, I think that the experience of women tends to be the case that is someone is walking down the street, right, and gets cat called, that person is seen by society as a woman. Many people experience that."^

Let me get this straight: trans people define their own identity, which everybody must respect, but women are defined by how men see them and react to them.

Riiiiight

women are defined by how men see them and react to them

And it is hateful to state that you disagree with it.

My definition of a woman is what society would generally see as a woman.

cf:

My definition of a police officer is what society would generally see as a police officer.

My definition of a priest is what society would generally see as a priest.

My definition of a horse is what society would generally see as a horse.

or - maybe the real reason for the tirade

My definition of a twat is what society would generally see as a twat.

Nailed in one, Tom.

@Helleofabore

We got an answer over the past few days on GBTV on what a woman was. As defined by this trans activist.

Tom Harwood:

"My definition of a woman is what society would generally see as a woman. So, I think that the experience of women tends to be the case that is someone is walking down the street, right, and gets cat called, that person is seen by society as a woman. Many people experience that."

I have not seen many other trans activists call this steaming pile out, so they must all agree. Although, if anyone can post links to trans activists calling out this definition, I would be happy to retract.

Wow! Jesus Christ did he really say that?!!! What a knob.

So, what happens if I've not been catcalled since I was 21 thank fuck ... have I transitioned?

@JellySaurus

^Tom Harwood:

"My definition of a woman is what society would generally see as a woman. So, I think that the experience of women tends to be the case that is someone is walking down the street, right, and gets cat called, that person is seen by society as a woman. Many people experience that."^

Let me get this straight: trans people define their own identity, which everybody must respect, but women are defined by how men see them and react to them.

Riiiiight

It would appear that transwomen are largely defined by how much a woman can be oppressed on the basis of her biology.

From what Tom says, the trans identity depends upon it.

It's so fucked up it's difficult to believe.

A man is a woman on the basis how how much women are objectified by men.

There really is no end to the twisted mind fuckery, is there?

I think that the experience of women tends to be the case that is someone is walking down the street, right, and gets cat called, that person is seen by society as a woman.

I saw this on Twitter. Now I'm used to hearing a lot of steaming bolleaux talked about women but FUCKING HELL. I was raging! A woman is defined as someone who gets catcalled at a building site. Quite apart from the utter misogyny and idiocy, where has this man been for the last 20 years since society generally agreed catcalling isn't nice and builders were told not to do it?

Watching videos by TW about how they love to be catcalled and dominated perchance?

I mean F.F.S.

As for EeeICouldRipATissue I'm almost impressed at that super double-bluff plop. Didn't answer any pressing questions of course but plopped with panache!

In my early 20s I dyed my blonde hair brown and halved the (still very prevalent) cat calls over night.

I presume I halved my womanyness too?

Telling that he'd choose something that prominent tw have said they find affirming, and not, I dunno, "women are the humans whose wombs get rented for surrogacy".

Catcalling is now going to be a hate crime isn't it?

So how will we know who is a woman now Tom? We might need a new definition.

Surely that is a very very transphobic definition of woman because it relies on Passing Privilege?

Also completely absurd in that he’s [almost certainly] just said neither of his grandmothers are/were women. That it’s not just that “woman” isn’t “adult human female”; “woman” is a group made up of some female humans, varying in age from the (barely) pubescent to an unspecified upper range (range being the apposite word).

Tom’s grandmothers are/were not - according to him - women because either they were amongst the fortunate few never to experience street harassment; or they transitioned out of his definition of woman as they aged. Depending on his mother’s age, she may also be one of his non-women.

I would very much like to know how Tom classifies those he considers non-women

Conversation is reminding me of a certain TW who wrote about enjoying being cat called

I would very much like to know how Tom classifies those he considers non-women

That's odd. I find myself struggling to give a fuck about anything he considers. Or indeed he himself.

Quite a while back a regular poster posted a link about community disrupters. I can’t remember it well enough to explain but it was interesting.

One reason we never get any answers is that we get fairly regular posters here criticising women for their opinions who are not actually even slightly interested in trans issues. They are a convenient excuse to either be openly misogynistic or derail threads into focussing attention on that one poster.

We do get posters here who post the most risible comments, almost a parody of a dim witted person arguing. And then loads of posters respond either with amazement that anyone could be so idiotic or just plain bafflement that anyone would believe things that your average 5 year old has sussed out.

Why do they do it? Because all attention is good attention.
If 5 posters are talking about you instead of the topic of the thread how wonderful that must feel.
It’s kind of like Bart Simpson acting like an arse (or it would be if I thought Bart Simpson were real).

I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of ploppers and sealions are like that, Delirium, but they can't all be misogynistic tossers or infantile narcissists.

There are quite a few posters who have told us how they came to shout at us and stayed to listen. Posters who came to MN with the unquestioning TWAW/Be Kind view discovered that it is good to question.

Re community disrupters - look up the Bunbury threads.

I think that the experience of women tends to be the case that is someone is walking down the street, right, and gets cat called, that person is seen by society as a woman.

I went to an all girls school. Very sex specific name.
I remember when a new building was being built the headmistress laid down strict standards for the builders. No bare chests. And NO CATCALLING (or wolf whistling).

Does that mean none of us were girls or didn't it count as the men had been told not to?

In fact now I think about it some of us liked to taunt the builders by wolf whistling at them! Faints. I'm all mixed up now. Were we men then?
If only I had worked harder in the biology lessons.

@Deliriumoftheendless

Quite a while back a regular poster posted a link about community disrupters. I can’t remember it well enough to explain but it was interesting.

One reason we never get any answers is that we get fairly regular posters here criticising women for their opinions who are not actually even slightly interested in trans issues. They are a convenient excuse to either be openly misogynistic or derail threads into focussing attention on that one poster.

We do get posters here who post the most risible comments, almost a parody of a dim witted person arguing. And then loads of posters respond either with amazement that anyone could be so idiotic or just plain bafflement that anyone would believe things that your average 5 year old has sussed out.

Why do they do it? Because all attention is good attention.
If 5 posters are talking about you instead of the topic of the thread how wonderful that must feel.
It’s kind of like Bart Simpson acting like an arse (or it would be if I thought Bart Simpson were real).

Completely agree. Some are just tedious time wasting attention seekers. Fondly imagining that serial name changing is a disguise.

'Community disrupters' is an appropriate description.

I'm here for some answers. I heard @EeeICouldRipATissue is coming back with them. I won't add any new to the mix, there have been enough questions asked upthread already. Im looking forward to answers. Finally!!

I'll pull up a chair and wait a while. They'll be back tomorrow I'm sure.

This is exciting. Like Christmas Eve!

Is anyone else reading our plopper as Eel 🐍 , rather than ‘Ee, I could..’ ?

I am in line to ask my question on fake tans and cheerleading. I believe an expert is on this thread.

@MrsWooster

Is anyone else reading our plopper as Eel 🐍 , rather than ‘Ee, I could..’ ?

Yes