Did anyone watch Stella O'Malley's critique of GC feminists on YouTube?

[Betweenthe2]

l

I'd be interested in opinions on this from people who have watched it (rather than dismissed it out of hand because of the title)

I like Stella. I like her work ethic. I find her warm and generous in person and someone who is trying (and is) making a considerable difference.

Some of the points she makes here have been made on these boards, as OP writes.

Honestly, I think I can live with not agreeing on everything Stella says and still hold her in high regard. And I expect, as a reflective person herself, Stella is evolving, assessing and reflecting on her own stance as the expertise and evidence builds around her. I can't imagine what it's like to also be doing that whilst under scrutiny in the spotlight.

I appreciate KJK too. I also do not agree with everything she says. See also: Andrew Doyle, Kathleen Stock and a host of others.

I do wish we could get back to holding nuance and not treat every person and every topic like the answer to a question on Runaround.

I did not call her misogynistic names. If you have a better word for it let me know as English is only my fourth language. I could say handmaiden but would be a similar issue for your sensitivities now won't it.

Exactly! Mumsnet serves the same function that consciousness raising groups performed in second wave feminism: giving women space and language to describe their experiences of living in a sexist society. Then they gave women opportunities to form groups and projects for tackling specific issues affecting women and children, Mumsnet users have gone on to campaign and found groups that lobby politically and socially on relevant issues too.

Women talking to each other must contain potential to be disruptive; why else would so many male-dominated societies feel suspicious of it as well as try to prevent it and/or denigrate it.

Good comment. I find the cannibalism sickening. I don't agree with preferred pronouns but I don't find if helpful to indulge in vicious attacks on other women who are making a positive contribution.

But no matter how much infighting there is, nothing will stop me saying that it is impossible to change sex

I thought it was really interesting. It's a shame we have hardliners dictating who can and can't be GC these days, and I'm especially sad to see people like Stella - who stuck her neck on this issue years ago - lambasted by anonymous people on forums.

Boring, boring, boring.

I'm getting so tired of this debate being 'intellectualised'. It is very simple.
No one, literally no one, including the Trans/Queer community believe people can change sex.

@OneMorePlant if you describe what you mean by "cool girl" that would help me. I actually hadn't heard it as a concept before being on mumsnet. It does sound sexist to me to be honest (as does "headgirl".) I watched the gone girl clip and that made it seem more sexist. It seems like a slur for women whether or not it's a man or woman using it.

I was going to post but this sums up my thoughts with far more eloquence than I could muster.

Personally I think being GC is (and should be) a pretty broad church and listening to someone whose views I partially share, I feel is an opportunity to reflect on my own position.

Sometimes I've changed my views but on other points I've found my original position strengthened.

I think it's important to challenged and not see this a personal. In fact I'd like to see this as a key differentiation between the GC and GI "factions", that we are not "no debate" but open to discussion and accepting different perspectives.

Thanks @BreadInCaptivity I wonder if the splitting factions might also be a sign of growing pains? More and more people are aware of the issues now, more data is being produced - and we are all learning as we go.

I absolutely reserve the right to change my mind - and, with reflection, to not change it at all! 😀

Yes I think "growing pains" is as good an analogy as any other.

At the start (if we can even pin point that) just finding anyone with GC views to connect with was a challenge given so many mechanisms to do so were shut down.

So when "we" found each other it perhaps was natural that sought to focus on common ground.

As the GC perspective has made significant gains in law (thanks again to Maya/Alison/Sonia/Rachel/Jo) then perhaps the confidence that's given has also opened up the cracks as it were. Maybe it's human flaw that when you are "winning" to become overconfident in your position enough to mess it up (political party's are a case study in this) by turning your focus from the issue you have in common to making your mark on the debate by highlighting your individual contribution as unique.

I think it's a mistake to assume that people with a public profile in this debate don't have an ego irrespective of the "side" they are on and in an age of social media that's a big incentive to offer something new/divisive/unique.

I think that's a fair analysis @BreadInCaptivity. In a past life, I worked in TV, it wasn't unusual to see fame go to some people's heads or develop a distorted view of themselves. Social media is probably having a similar, and more immediate, effect without the financial pay off. It must be very discombobulating.

this is an important discussion i think, and i want to say all due respect for the founders of the GC pushback here and long may you all continue with a hard line. I have learnt an awful lot from you all.

what stuck with me was O’Malley was talking about twitter and the splits that occurred there, but that is not in this space.

I am not on twitter nor will i ever be because it is not a space of proper discussion and just encourages tribal thinking.

I thought O’malley’s view that they (Genspect) must focus on protecting children first and foremost, other issues should follow as interesting, and made me think.

I hope this is not a terrible analogy.

The gender ID movement is an attack on women and children on so many fronts. We cannot all be defending them all at once, by everybody. We would all be running around without any effect.

Troops have to be moved to the areas of attack in accordance with troops skills experience and separate interests/passions.

There is no divisions in the GC movement just troops

So having looked at all the different key players in the public domain we have all our bases covered.

Without a command unit. How amazing is that.

So united we stand divided we fall.

👏👏👏

I don't mean anything by it, it has the same meaning as handmaiden. A woman that goes along with men's wishes and throws other women under the bus to not upset the menfolk.

If you have another word for it that does not upset you let me know.

Thanks, that's clear. I genuinely had never heard of this trope before.

I'm not upset by it and I have no wish to stop anyone using it. It's good to know what people might mean by it.

Personally, handmaiden and cool girl have a slightly different spin for me. There is something more religious and devout and intolerant about handmaiden. And cool girl seems potentially more knowing, calculating and in some ways demeaning. Neither of those is how I would describe Stella O'Malley having watched a few episodes of the podcast Gender: a wider lens.

The idea that she is a traitor to a cause or to women makes no sense to me. Unless I have missed something, which is totally possible as I'm not on twitter. I think she's been clear in the videos I've seen about why she sometimes uses preferred pronouns rather than sex-based pronouns. The idea of different brains is interesting and whilst I agree that nobody can avoid Stroop effects, it might go some way towards explaining why people care differently about this issue.

Stella and others are ignoring a key point to the push back they are recieving from lessers.

Promoting AGP men and pronouns are all saftguarding concerns. They have been told this often enough, but choose to frame it as purity spirals and free speech issues.

If stella and others would address the safeguarding concerns head on, let everyone know that they understand, lots of this division would disappear.

I’m so fed up with the attacks on Stella and the divisions that people are trying to create.

Stella’s done some amazing things. Shockingly, she hasn’t been perfect and got everything right and covered all the bases, first time. That’s because she’s getting stuff done.

pronouns aren’t a safeguarding issue. That’s ridiculous.

@ZuttZeVootEeeVo i think you mean if everybody agreed with you, and accept you have no flaws …. There would be no division.

No. I meant exactly what i said.

Lots of people, who do know better, are pretending that there is no safeguarding issues with lying to children about the sex of men.

We are parents on this site, we know that we tell our small children that if they are lost to ask help from a woman. If we also tell children that women can look like Hayton, how can we be sure that they will ask for help from a women?

@ZuttZeVootEeeVo Sorry i have not noticed that Stella thought we ought to lie to children about peoples biological sex, if she has said that i would agree with you.

I am of the view that it is best not to lose one’s small children in the first place. I know no mother who has lost her small child, including myself.

I totally believe that children recognise sex straight away, it is a human trait, so advising a child to look for a woman is not problematic since Hayton to my mind looks like a man.

Although frankly i have no clue what any of this has to do with Stella. Could you perhaps direct me to things she has said, so that i may have a better understanding.

Thanks in anticipation

She 'addressed' it in the video by saying it's her who understands safeguarding and everyone else has it wrong including safeguarding orgs. I think she meant Safe Schools Alliance. She said those who raised safeguarding issues publicly weren't following proper guidelines of proportional response.

This is absolute rubbish. The proportional response guidelines mean you shouldn't overprotect children or vulnerable adults to the point where it interferes with their development or human rights (e.g. never allowing kids outside or insisting on residential care when a less restrictive care package would be adequately safe.)

To follow her reasoning, if a child or parent made a very loud disclosure of abuse in the playground at hometime it shouldn't be followed up because the correct procedure was not followed. She doesn't get that the procedure is for her / her org to follow, not for the public, and she doesn't understand what it means anyway.

It was very obvious after the debacle with the Blanchard video that she had no clue and had googled and misinterpreted basic safeguarding principles. She appears to have stopped reading as soon as she found what she thought was a gotcha.

Benji has done a reaction video (it's very long and won't be up long), I had forgotten it was her that Stella bellowed 'How DARE you!' at in that twitter space:

Stella caused a blow up on Irish GC Twitter today by stating butch lesbian dress & behaviour gives lesbians a sexual charge akin to AGPs when they wear female clothing 🙄🤷‍♀️🤦‍♀️

Irish lesbians took umbrage and of course, Graham Linehan got involved to defend Hayton and Stella, so now GC campaigner Iseult White has had to lock down her account. From what I can see, lesbians in the UK aren’t massively happy with Stella either.

I dunno what causes Stella to keep digging rather than engage with people but that’s what she does 🤷‍♀️

Found some of the relevant info on Duncan Henry’s account for those interested:

https://x.com/DuncanHenry78/status/1756287390069510188?s=20

'Stella O'Malley 12:01 pm • 10 Feb 2024

I'm horrified that Iseult White, a fellow therapist, who has been working with detransitioners as part of Genspect's Beyond Trans project, would decide to go to the trouble of making a clip of me speaking in the middle of a sentence. This extremely unprofessional, unethical and sly action removes all context about what I was trying to say.

I was talking about why I believe men and women should be free to wear what they want, within the limits of decency.

Sex is weird. We all get sexual charges in random ways. What's wrong with some lesbians getting a charge out of wearing a strap-on or wearing certain clothes? I've no problem with that. It's pretty lesbophobic imo to suggest that lesbians aren't allowed to have these sexual feelings. (And yes, of course not all lesbians ).

Are we now not allowed to have any sexual feelings ever? About anything?'

Well i watched “live react to Stella” video and had no actual clue what she was on about, but i guess that might be because i cannot relate to an extremist lesbian position that i do not share. She has a right to her views though. Arguing amongst ourselves is never a way forward.

We know our shared GC goals lets stick to that.

Are you saying it's "extremist" of lesbians to correct Stella O'Malley's claim that they find wearing masculine fashions arousing?

I don't think it is extremist at all.

I haven't watched all of it, but something just struck me. 'Terfs' were really brutally dehumanised and threatened by the TRAs. It was normal for TRAs to talk about punching and killing, even raping the women they called 'terfs'. But although they obviously don't like GC people, they don't talk about them with the same level of violent hatred. I think this is because 'terfs', radical feminists, were by definition women, and also women of the left who TRAs expected to support them. 'Gender critical ' covers a much broader group including men and conservatives. And the TRA hate them less. There's less aggression and more whiny victim mentality.