Women's rights general conversations - Thread 2

[Kucingsparkles]

Continuation of Thread 1

There is so much excellent information and so many active discussions on FWR that I wondered if it would be useful to have a thread to sort of "cross-fertilise" between them - airing little thoughts or vignettes that wouldn't themselves merit their own thread, to highlight other posts/threads of particular interest or to point to notable developments on fast-moving threads so that casual observers know where to look.

(For example, "the X thread has meandered onto a fascinating discussion of Y" or "Poster P's amazing analysis on thread Z might have relevance to the scenario in thread W" or even "Random bloke asked me to smile while I was choosing onions, grr"- that sort of thing).

mach2· Today 19:01
At the risk of getting into conspiraloon territory, it all feels like an attempt to get a crowbar under every facet of society and completely upend it.

I know the feeling.

In two hundred years - if humans are still able to think and act, and have historians, sociologists, anthropologists and psychologists - I wonder what the rise of this ideology will seem to have meant?

I'll be honest I'm really annoyed that by the time this period of history gets written about and examined properly I'll be long dead. Which is annoying as I really would like to see what they made of it all!

A few years back a local friend, now aged 80+, called an unruly meeting of a women's group to order with "Come on chaps, get a grip!" The only people who gasped and tutted in offence were the under-40s. Everyone else just smiled and duly got a grip.

We don't seem to have any words, singular or plural, for women that are equivalent to mate, lads, chaps etc. Or perhaps I just can't think of them? "Girls" and "ladies" are both unacceptable to me.

I don't mind ladies, I can't stand girls applied to women.

Amongst women I have heard terfs, terven and wims. I quite like wims.

I've spent decades working for an American company so I'm inclined to use 'guys' but I know a lot of women on FWR don't like it so I'm trying to quit.

A technical glitch means the complications thread has been spared an extensive lecture on the order Testudines, with specific reference to the European pond turtle*.

But it was funny seeing the 'Look, squirrel turtle!' followed by the same poster repeatedly telling everyone else they shouldn't be talking about squirrels turtles.

• An interesting wee beastie, and a nice change from clownfish.

I don't mind 'girl' for adult women in Norfolk, because they use 'boy' in exactly the same way for men.

Around here they tend to say "folks", which is at least gender-neutral.

In the second wave we used sisters or sister comrades.

The one I don't understand if 'folx'. Given that 'folk' and 'folks' are already neutral, why the need to respell?

You want rationality in this business? Dream on.

I do indeed dream of rationality. Not with much hope of actually getting it, though.

Because 'nowt as queer as folk' has been trademarked by Yorkshire?

Ha!

There's a petition calling for the removal of LGBT content from the Relationships Education curriculum. I was wondering about it because it seems to have come from nowhere and flown past 100k and still climbing. Anyway it was tweeted 11 hours ago by a twitter account called 5pillars.

I wonder if they'd tweet about the Equality Act petition?

Are you on Twitter ICake? Could you ask them?

Does anyone here remember a recent thread where someone posted a link to a Twitter thread (possibly with ‘headteacher’ in the Twitter name) which had probably 100 responses to a question of what children/schools need most, and nearly every answer said no more gender identity pushing?

Discussion on another thread suggested that one wasn't a petition we'd all want to be associated with I think?

IcakethereforeIam · Today 00:33
There's a petition calling for the removal of LGBT content from the Relationships Education curriculum. I was wondering about it because it seems to have come from nowhere and flown past 100k and still climbing. Anyway it was tweeted 11 hours ago by a twitter account called 5pillars.

I wonder if they'd tweet about the Equality Act petition?

It must be the Five Pillars of Islam.

I found this,
”5Pillarsuk. A Muslim psychologist says she is determined to keep speaking out about the dangers of Relationship and Sex Education (RSE) teaching in..”

Probably they are very upset about how children are being taught in PSHE like they were in that protest in Birmingham at a particular school in 2021.

That's what I thought Scrolling, it's why I posted about it on this thread. We're running short of posts on the Equality Act thread, so that's another reason. I can sympathise I share some but not all of their concerns. I'm tired of the false teaming and the smears.

At the risk of getting into conspiraloon territory, it all feels like an attempt to get a crowbar under every facet of society and completely upend it.

To join you there, it's always seemed to me like people are being tested to see what extent of unevidenced nonsense they will be induced to accept as fact or policy.

My plumber called me mate the other day. My group of female forty something friends often use guys or mate when talking to each other. I see them as gender neutral terms.

Haha, yes. The poster who brought up the topic, shouting furiously at people engaging with the topic, and using the engagement as evidence of the badness of the people engaging. I was all ready to post my long-winded explanation of SexNotGender, but they ran away from their own discussion point.

Hmm, me personally I wouldn't support such a petition (regardless of the promoters) because I agree with LGB content in RSE/PSHE. I even agree, to a certain extent, with T content - in the sense that adolescents do need to explore their sense of identity and belonging as a normal part of growing up, and so IMO it's actually good to discuss types of identities and groupings.

Dangerously liberal and accepting, there, kuc. I may have to report you for being honest and good on a talkboard.

Yes, what kuc said. I guess the crucial thing is that it must be like RE (teaching about religion, 'some people believe, some people experience', not RI (religious instruction, this is what you should believe).