Men of the far right and the women's movement

[SapphosRock]

Excellent article from Jean Hatchett about the recent fascism debate.

https://thecritic.co.uk/men-of-the-far-right-and-the-womens-movement/

This bit really struck me:

On one side of the fence are aggressive men screaming “fascist” at women who are clearly not. On the other side, skulking in the shadows, beneath the banners of women, are men who clearly are.

OK. So Sapphos, how you seen any research that has made the past research that testosterone has serious negative effects on developing babies?

If so, please post it.

Because even a recent ‘females taking testosterone should be allowed to continue throughout pregnancy despite the KNOWN risks’ article admitted there are potential adverse risks to the feotus and expect there are many other side effects that are unknown due to ages of the children so far.

Are you quite comfortable with mothers making those choices?

So, where is the sin-denounciation-list of the TRAs, where they distance themselves from their ‚die in a fire‘ and ‚smash the TERFs’ head‘ individuals?
Or is that just overheated rhetoric while all Posie says is a manifesto cut in stone?

See, it's not this message that bothers you Sappho. It's Posie personally. You've brought this message up several times when you were a TRA and everyone responded with the context.

It was you as a TRA who thought this message was out of order. And now it's you as a gender critical supporter, who thinks it is.

And a few minutes ago it was HoO who was out of order.

it's Posie you don't like. And not because of these messages. There a million people who write messages that you don't like.

But it's the successful women's rights activist who gets in the neck.

And seriously, I know this might be difficult for you to grasp, given your past, but no one gives a flying fuck what TRAs think. They are not the ones people are trying to reach. It's the media and politicians who hold the power.

Sorry.

Have you seen any research that has made the past research that testosterone has serious negative effects on developing babies redundant?

Or is this another ‘I only thought about this from x perspective and haven’t read widely about it to establish a child centred perspective’?

It's a gotcha.

Except it isn't. And not just because the context. How can it be a gotcha when Posie doesn't speak for Sapphos or her brighton friends.

It's just another stick to beat her over the head with.

The power of that tiny blonde is extraordinary isn't it!

Did you read any of the Freddy threads Saph? Because that’s an extremely mainstream view on this board.

Who cares? They're going to hate you anyway, no matter what the nuances. You can't change that, so all this "do it to Julia" stuff is just demeaning and destructive - to you and to the women who bravely spoke at KJK's event.

You weren't brave enough. You want the boys to like you more than you want women's rights.

Personally I find it pathetic, but it's your right to set those boundaries. Just stop expecting other women to be bounded in by them.

This is it. It's just about finding ANYTHING at all they think will make Posie "look bad" so they can be the best big girls ever.

It's pathetic. I like what rufus said. You're boring me now.

Did you read any of the Freddy threads Saph? Because that’s an extremely mainstream view on this board.

yes. I recommend anyone who has never actually thought about it to go and look up the well known side effects of taking testosterone throughout pregnancy. Google will bring up numerous studies, you should read through to work out which are credible and which are not.Up until now, of course, most of it was done on rats. But I would consider that the constriction of blood flow to the uterus is quite well known considering it was a result of several studies before 'transitioned females' became something to be concerned about.

That constriction of blood quite obviously would account for small foetal size found in other research and has been noted in humans.

Now, knowing this is a highly likely potential side effect Sappho, do you think it is something that you support? A female taking testosterone knowing that it is highly likely to harm their child?

www.yahoo.com/news/transgender-men-nonbinary-people-asked-123112148.html

Here you go Sappho.

I am sure you will read this and think, well, why isn't there robust data. But think about the ethics of that. How many human babies should be put at risk to 'allow' a group to continue to take testosterone? What is the number you are happy with, Sappho?

That is why there is little data and it is 'murky'.

The exact same argument was used for Puberty Blockers, and for negative side-effects of cross sex hormones for females. And double mastectomies. Look how that is working out?

So, Sappho. You posted the screenshot. Care to explain why one small group of people should be exempt from centring the child instead of their own desires?

Oh by the way. On the subject of the legal case from Freddy, Julie Bindel said this:

www.telegraph.co.uk/family/parenting/julie-bindel-say-child-has-no-mother-deny-biological-reality/

"Children have a right to know from where they came. If trans men can be recorded as a father, it would set a precedent, where if a child is taken into care, that child will never know who their mother was, they would literally only see a father on the birth certificate. Single and gay men can adopt and raise children perfectly well, but denying the existence of a birth mother, I believe, amounts to cruelty."

Another sin for Bindel's page! Add it to the surrogacy and grooming gangs. Better get cracking.... or is it truly just Kellie Jay Keen your mate has such a prejudiced view on....

Do you see the issue yet?

What is your aim here?

The more you post, the clearer it gets that your group seems to be out of step with the majority of the movement. Even out of step with Julie Bindel in some instances and with Kathleen Stock since she has changed her view.

So to be clear, out of step with other LGB women's activists.

Yet, you are just doubling down through your continued posting.

Yet, you are just doubling down through your continued posting.

It's almost like fanning the flames is the point.

It is almost like creating an unhealable division is now the point. Unhealable for whom though? What would be the point in bricking up the boundary here?

And I say that because we all have our moments and then come back together if we can.

Why would someone try to make it so hard to 'come back together'?

I completely agree. KJK has been made into some sort of bogeyman figure. Everything she does must have some sinister motive.

I may not agree with everything she says but she's really good at getting through to the normies who have no idea about what is going on in the gender ideology world.

Whatever she does is pounced on and yet she just keeps going, good for her.

It's bad enough that the TRAs do it but it's really disgusting that supposed champions of women's rights are doing it too.

Let me tell you something, the TRAs are never going to think that you're anything other than transphobic unless you completely capitulate to what they want. You can make as many sin lists to point at other people as you want. They will still hate you.

Sappho, as someone that was completely convinced by the TWAW brigade, until something bad personally happened to you (I notice you were fine with everything until it affected you, a lack of empathy for others, no?), do you think you could have been taken in again?

The Fifth Column is a real thing and we shouldn't be so naive as to think the women's movement is free of such individuals.

That's why the honesty of women like KJK is so vital.

It's perfectly rational for feminists to believe forced sterilisation of any women is abhorrent, even if those women identify as men.

The feminists I know are supportive of all women and the female experience of pregnancy and childbirth, even if those women identify as men.

PP is not supportive of trans men and actually said they should be sterilised.

It is therefore important to make a distinction between feminism and PP as they are very different ways of thinking and very different types of activism.

Fine.

I’m going with whichever, wave, branch or rebrand of feminism puts the welfare of kids over the wants of adults.

let me know when The Real Feminists of Brighton have approved the paperwork and I’ll make the T Shirts.

The feminists I know are supportive of all women and the female experience of pregnancy and childbirth, even if those women identify as men.

we have seen.

The potential harms of testosterone on a developing foetus have been pointed out to you. You continue to take a parent centred approach that is not child centred.

Do you acknowledge there is potential harm to the child? Or not?

At least it’s consistent with Saph not wanting to hear about negative outcomes of using donor gametes!

And has your group started on the Julie Bindel sin list page?

no one gives a flying fuck what TRAs think. They are not the ones people are trying to reach. It's the media and politicians who hold the power.

This.

It is therefore important to make a distinction between feminism and PP as they are very different ways of thinking and very different types of activism.

I don't understand why you couldn't "make a distinction" by simply not going to PP's event. Why "making a distinction" means weeks long bullying and harassment of PP and shitting all over the women who spoke at her event.

It's bollocks, mate.

You don't want to "make a distinction" - you want to crush PP because she's doing something you are not smart or brave enough to try. You like the safety of your little group where nothing ever gets done except endless chatting about who's pure and good. You don't want to risk actually doing anything and you don't want PP to go ahead and make gains because that would spoil your little meander down a cul de sac.

And that's the charitable interpretation of your behaviour.

There is no need to worry about healing a division. I worked that out ages ago when a group I was involved with who were at pains to use careful language also assumed everyone would agree with saying "tories are scum".