Women and girls' sex-based rights

[StephanieSuperpowers]

Well, here we are...

I'm still not sure why us blokes weren't allowed to listen to the women and (mostly) agree with them. It was like we were traitors or something though I have had the problem for ages of having a similar name to another, very unpopular, poster. Though obvs I could have been equally unpopular.

As Winterborne said, I think his initial preference - when we were first called a shit stain on the site - was that everyone shoved into the naughty corner would have a good think about what they'd done and publically repent.

When there were no abject confessions of fault and reform he expected a pitchfork-weilding mob to form and cleanse the problem. So he's angry at the scarcity of witch burners, as well as the continued presence of witches.

I've not fully left the other place yet. I'll hang on in an extremely limited set of threads for a week or 2, but have deleted most subscriptions and won't be roaming beyond my list.

Do you think anyone misses us?

No, I don't think anyone misses us, they appear caught up in the adventure of doing new lifeboats for the time being.

I'm just deeply curious about how they can all completely ignore this topic forever, once it blows up properly.

Do you think anyone misses us?

Do any of us care?

No, I don't really care, Gonners. I was just idly curious.

A couple of people who haven't been particularly involved in this previously seem angry about it. But they're very outnumbered.

I'm just deeply curious about how they can all completely ignore this topic forever

Good question. I suppose if the site is now mainly men of a certain type they'll just ignore the issue entirely.

I'm still posting over there but I doubt I will stay. I'm mostly interested in the narrative that will form around what has happened, as the last time there was a schism the narrative eventually became that a bunch of feminist made unreasonable demands on the mods and left in a huff when their blackmail wasn't accepted.

This time the emerging consensus seems to be that there was no issue with the women at all, it was one or two of the men on the thread who were frequently and blatantly trans and homophobic that was the issue. Of course no one goes on to explain why posts that were so blatatntly against the T&Cs were never reported to the moderators, or how this squares with two days of all and sundry calling the women who left "evil terf cunts"

People's capacity for fooling themselves never ceases to amaze me.

I started a thread on Queer Theory that had some good discussion on it but it was removed on the pretext with was nothing but angry shouting. It later emerged one reason for removing it was that the wrong sort of person to be discussing such things had started it, and such discussion were best left to those who had studied Queer Theory at university.

A lot of people don't roam beyond their usual threads - particularly into the dragon-territory of Issues - so had no idea about the thread or surrounding discussions. Quite a few have only spotted today that something has happened, and have no idea what, who or why.

I'm mostly interested in the narrative that will form around what has happened

The person who contributes most to incorrect narrative IMO is that archest of posters, who decides what's happened, based on pretty much fuck all, then tells anyone who asks, like its the accepted version. It never matches my recollection (or knowledge, where I have some), and I find it pretty toxic.

I was saddened to see that some posters, who I'd previously thought were pretty OK, saying "Well, I haven't read any of it, but surely the evil should be exorcised."

That includes one (dairy farmer) who is normally a stickler for facts.

I actually wonder if some of them are scared of losing the site and jumping in, to make their mark as supportive and righteous.

Either way, to denounce posters and views, without even bothering to read what was written, or any of the linked material is pathetic, to say the least.

such discussion were best left to those who had studied Queer Theory at university.

Heaven help us all.

Do it to Julia!

Or perhaps

Thank you for doing it to Julia.

”War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, and Ignorance is Strength”

I doubt I will stay. I'm mostly interested in the narrative that will form around what has happened, as the last time there was a schism the narrative eventually became that a bunch of feminist made unreasonable demands on the mods and left in a huff when their blackmail wasn't accepted.

I was still there then, and I remember an attempt (fought off) to repurpose the main feminism thread for dubious queer theory stuff like Foucault.

This time the emerging consensus seems to be that there was no issue with the women at all, it was one or two of the men on the thread who were frequently and blatantly trans and homophobic that was the issue.

This is such blatant nonsense it's infuriating. If only the men were the problem they could have been banned from the thread to let the women continue talking. Instead he just threatened to close the whole site.

I am actually feeling quite shaken today after the events in Nottingham with the film screening. We weren't even allowed to stay and talk. Then seeing the events at Hyde park this weekend makes me wonder how much further supposedly progressive left wingers are willing to go before we are sufficiently cowed to be supported again.

I am an ex JTT poster (no great flounce, I just felt I just felt I was only posting out of habit and it was time to move on). I haven't looked at the site for a long time, but someone on FB who knows I am gender critical suggested I take a look at Johnny's thread. The site has always had the regular bloodbaths, but I was genuinely shocked and repelled by what I read. I realise it's Johnny's site and he can do what he likes, but threatening to nuke it to shut women up when they are discussing an issue that matters to them isn't a good look. It's bullying by blackmail. The number of posters, mainly male, people I once respected agreeing that was fine if it preserved the site was really depressing. It's only a little internet forum, but I wonder whether people who are so lacking in principles in a small way are likely to be equally spineless out in the big wide world.

This weekend I went to a talk on women in politics, organised by the Oxford Feminist Union. The location wasn't announced until two hours before the start, for security reasons. Attendees were assured that their faces wouldn't appear on the video of the event. And the organisers said the people who wanted to ask a question but didn't even want their voice to be recorded could ask a steward to ask the question for them. It's infuriating that these precautions are necessary when women meet up to talk.

@Merrylus that was ultimately my issue and behind my decision to leave. I began thinking "who else will you be prepared to throw under the bus" and once you have seen it you can't unsee it.

@Ginmonkeyagain In a funny sort of way I wish I hadn't seen it, but it really confirmed to me what women are up against. Active misogyny is easily perceived but widespread apathy towards the undermining of our rights and protections is more dangerous in some ways.

What Merrylus (hi lus - this is Jenny28) said. And not just apathy but ignorance of what to most women are gobsmackingly obvious consequences.

I'm not sure whether I am more sad about the bandwagon jumpers (many of whom have written extensive tirades depite admitting they've never glanced at the thread in question) or those who fall into the "It seems quite unnecessary, whatever it's about" camp (although it's a quote I'm not targeting that poster in particular; I've seen quite a few say similar).

Probably the latter. The former group contains 1 or 2 posters I previously thought sensible, but not many; whereas the latter is widespread among people I previously respected and liked. I don't expect everyone to agree on the issues, but I'm sad that so many can't even see that there is an issue (either with women's rights or with the board's response) or that there are reasons it might be important.

@ExiledElsie could you pm me the details of that event? I like to know who I'm working with- and I may well be.

I'm loosely in Church networks. Not in a position of power, but occasionally on the edges of the LLF discussion. I'm keen that we don't lose women's rights in gaining LGB rights.

I think the left in particular can be very bad at allowing nuance. They just decide 'bad people think x' and as soon as you vaguely wander in that direction the moral righteousness comes out. Not all lefties etc etc. Although maybe the RW equivalent is the PC Gone mad crew. But they don't seem as telly offy. They just say they think it's stupid or whatever. But on the left it's sometimes like there's an uncleanness.