Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions
Thread gallery
48
EasternStandard · 16/04/2024 10:32

Boiledbeetle · 16/04/2024 10:26

LRM face when VA was calling him out on his shit. He really couldn't give a fuck could he!

It’s incredible these people can’t see their own role in this

WickedSerious · 16/04/2024 10:35

Boiledbeetle · 16/04/2024 10:26

LRM face when VA was calling him out on his shit. He really couldn't give a fuck could he!

'Particularly nasty on both sides'.🙄

And that's all he took from it?

Right you are then.

FlakyPoet · 16/04/2024 10:37

I think the ‘both sides’ bit and the ‘sterilisation and medical harm is right for a minority of children’ bit are Cass’ signals to those who would literally have her assassinated for wrongthink - she would have had the trans equivalent of a fatwa issued if she didn’t spout some appeasing nonsense from one size of her mouth.

VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia · 16/04/2024 10:39

If @MNHQ have any decency, they will, in the light of Cass, apologise to LangCleg and offer to reinstate her account. She was calling out the institutional abuse and gaslighting of women earlier than most of us.

sweetsardineface · 16/04/2024 10:42

LRM doesn’t care and never will, but it doesn’t matter because his views are no longer relevant. He will hate that more. He will hate ‘losing’, hate not being part of the vanguard and being able to say whatever the fuck he likes with impunity. He, Ruth Hunt and others are squirming. At last.

VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia · 16/04/2024 10:51

The look on LRM's face is one I've seen before. My first bf was a compulsive liar and would claim physically impossible feats. To give an example of the kind of thing, that he had cycled to another city in a timeframe that would have required him to travel at over 100 miles per hour. On a pedal cycle. When I did the arithmetic to demonstrate the impossiblility of that claim, he doubled down and had that look on his face. It's the look of a man who knows he is lying and doesn't care because it's only a woman he is lying to and he doesn't think he needs to be honest with women. I conclude that LRM is a nasty sociopath of a misogynist just like my first bf. I wonder if he would have worn that facial expression if a man had been calling him out?

How do we strategise to get the gender-woo Labour MPs like him out? I know that deselection at CLP level doesn't work because the national party will parachute candidates in. What else is an option? Without splitting the non-Labour vote?

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 16/04/2024 10:56

What I think is a real shame about LRM is that he could have been a really interesting and useful addition to the House of Commons. He's young, he's not privately educated, he's gay, and he's a great example of how someone who is HIV positive can go on to live a very normal life.

He's about the same age as me and I remember having the impression, in the late 1990s and early 2000s, that contracting HIV was basically a death sentence. I thought it meant a life of celibacy and stigmatisation followed by dying young. And yet here is an HIV+ MP who has been in the House of Commons for 8 years, appears to be in good health and could have a long, bright future ahead of him.

It's a real shame when people like that turn out to be absolute knobs.

Magnoliasunrise · 16/04/2024 10:58

ArabellaScott · 16/04/2024 07:33

Note this wasn't reported on the BBC, too.

I contacted BBC News and Newsnight to ask what are their plans for reporting on yesterdays HoC debate re this.

Davros · 16/04/2024 11:01

@dunBle The big thing that needs to happen, and I'm sceptical whether it will, is CAMHS getting much more capacity to deal with autism and general mental health issues. I think pretty much any parent that's had to deal with them despairs over the wait times for any meaningful interventions. Perhaps if some of those with complex needs had been dealt with more appropriately earlier on, then they may never have felt the need to transition.
We also need to keep in mind that Autism itself is not a mental health condition. Hence the efforts to stop people with autism being put in secure mental health units if they display "too much" Challenging Behaviour. However, Autism can be comorbid with mental health issues and, thanks to this madness, now very much more than in the past. I think this has ruined the progress that was being made on Autism in society. @dunBle is right that many people girls with autism would not have gone down this path with appropriate support

VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia · 16/04/2024 11:02

VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia · 16/04/2024 10:51

The look on LRM's face is one I've seen before. My first bf was a compulsive liar and would claim physically impossible feats. To give an example of the kind of thing, that he had cycled to another city in a timeframe that would have required him to travel at over 100 miles per hour. On a pedal cycle. When I did the arithmetic to demonstrate the impossiblility of that claim, he doubled down and had that look on his face. It's the look of a man who knows he is lying and doesn't care because it's only a woman he is lying to and he doesn't think he needs to be honest with women. I conclude that LRM is a nasty sociopath of a misogynist just like my first bf. I wonder if he would have worn that facial expression if a man had been calling him out?

How do we strategise to get the gender-woo Labour MPs like him out? I know that deselection at CLP level doesn't work because the national party will parachute candidates in. What else is an option? Without splitting the non-Labour vote?

Edited

Add Kate Osborne to the outvote list: https://twitter.com/KateOsborneMP/status/1779933237197824489

https://twitter.com/KateOsborneMP/status/1779933237197824489

Davros · 16/04/2024 11:02

Sorry, the bold/quote failed

RethinkingLife · 16/04/2024 11:02

VitoCorleoneOfMNMafia · 16/04/2024 10:51

The look on LRM's face is one I've seen before. My first bf was a compulsive liar and would claim physically impossible feats. To give an example of the kind of thing, that he had cycled to another city in a timeframe that would have required him to travel at over 100 miles per hour. On a pedal cycle. When I did the arithmetic to demonstrate the impossiblility of that claim, he doubled down and had that look on his face. It's the look of a man who knows he is lying and doesn't care because it's only a woman he is lying to and he doesn't think he needs to be honest with women. I conclude that LRM is a nasty sociopath of a misogynist just like my first bf. I wonder if he would have worn that facial expression if a man had been calling him out?

How do we strategise to get the gender-woo Labour MPs like him out? I know that deselection at CLP level doesn't work because the national party will parachute candidates in. What else is an option? Without splitting the non-Labour vote?

Edited

~Posted this on another thread but relevant to this.

Harry Frankfurt wrote about this phenomenon.

Philosopher Harry Frankfurt first published "On Bullshit" in the Raritan Quarterly Review in 1986, and it appeared again two years later in a collection of his essays, The Importance of What We Care About. And then it sat quietly for 17 years before Princeton University Press brought it out in a slender, stand-alone volume that became an unexpected best-seller.

While "On Bullshit" certainly felt timely in 2005 (and, presumably, to the handful of people who first read it in the '80s), it's grown more relevant with each passing year, and it's now one of the defining texts of our era. I recommend it in its entirety, but I think the closing pages are essential reading for any citizen of the 21st century:

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose. [pp 55-56]

Both in lying and in telling the truth people are guided by their beliefs concerning the way things are. These guide them as they endeavor to describe the world correctly or to describe it deceitfully. For this reason, telling lies does not tend to unfit a person for telling the truth in the same way that bullshitting tends to. Through excessive indulgence in the latter activity, which involves making assertions without paying attention to anything except what it suits one to say, a person’s normal habit of attending to the way things are may become attenuated or lost. Someone who lies and someone who tells the truth are playing on opposite sides, so to speak, in the same game. Each responds to the facts as he understands them, although the response of one is guided by the authority of the truth, while the respond of the other defies that authority and refuses to meet its demands. The bullshitter ignores these demands altogether. He does not reject the authority of the truth, as the liar does, and oppose himself to it. He pays no attention to it at all. By virtue of this, bullshit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are. [pp 59-61]

The contemporary proliferation of bullshit also has deeper sources in various forms of skepticism which deny that we can have any reliable access to an objective reality, and which therefore reject the possibility of knowing how things truly are. These "antirealist" doctrines undermine confidence in the value of disinterested efforts to determine what is true and what is false, and even in the intelligibility of the notion of objective inquiry. One response to this loss of confidence has been a retreat from the discipline required by dedication to the ideal of correctness to a quite different sort of discipline, which is imposed by pursuit of an alternative ideal of sincerity. Rather than seeking primarily to arrive at accurate representations of a common world, the individual turns toward trying to provide honest representations of himself. Convinced that reality has no inherent nature, which he might hope to identify as the truth about things, he devotes himself to being true to his own nature. It is as though he decides that since it makes no sense to try to be true to the facts, he must therefore try instead to be true to himself.

But it is preposterous to imagine that we ourselves are determinate, and hence susceptible both to correct and incorrect descriptions, while supposing that the ascription of determinacy to anything else has been exposed as a mistake. As conscious beings, we exist only in response to other things, and we cannot know ourselves at all without knowing them. Moreover, there is nothing in theory, and certainly nothing in experience, to support the extraordinary judgment that it is the truth about himself that is the easiest for a person to know. Facts about ourselves are not peculiarly solid and resistant to skeptical dissolution. Our natures are, indeed, elusively insubstantial—notoriously less stable and less inherent than the natures of other things. And insofar as this is the case, sincerity itself is bullshit. [pp 64-67]"

https://www.edbatista.com/2020/03/on-bullshit.html

AdamRyan · 16/04/2024 11:09

Do you not think its possible he believes what he's saying?

I read some work a local paper had done into gay conversion therapy at the church Miriam Cates is trustee of. This was reputedly old school religious style gay conversion therapy (not trans "non affirmation" talking therapy)

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-67716140.amp

I think its entirely possible that a gay, HIV positive man would have such a different life experience to me he'd have a very different world view, but equally believe in it. And I think possibly he dislikes Miriam Cates because of her association with a church that has engaged in those practices, rather than because of her views on the T.

I strongly disagree with how he behaved in that debate, but unfortunately he's an elected MP and a key part of democracy is having views we don't agree with expressed and debated in parliament. I actually thought it was a shame Atkins completely refused to engage with his question yesterday. I'd have preferred it if she had called out his behaviour and answered his question.

Sylvester

Conversion therapy: Gay man speaks of traumatic church experience

Sylvester Harrison Moran says the "spirit of homosexuality was commanded to come out of me".

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-67716140.amp

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 16/04/2024 11:12

@AdamRyan Disagreement is an essential part of a healthy democracy. But if you can't express your disagreement in a civilised way you do not belong in the House of Commons.

AdamRyan · 16/04/2024 11:13

I do also think gay men have even less reason not to be misogynistic than straight men. They have more options to choose not to engage with women, they don't find women sexually attractive so may see them as generally lower value, and that's on top of the general misogyny in society.

Hmm anyway. I am not a LRM fan but there are equally odious men in all the parties (Crispin Blunt anyone?)

EasternStandard · 16/04/2024 11:14

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 16/04/2024 11:12

@AdamRyan Disagreement is an essential part of a healthy democracy. But if you can't express your disagreement in a civilised way you do not belong in the House of Commons.

He was clearly part of the problem. He raised toxicity

That included him. She was right to point that out

It’s a kind of arrogance that he won’t see that.

bombastix · 16/04/2024 11:15

I don't like LRM or Cates. He's a misogynist and so is she imo. Unfortunately these two people appear to be the extreme of their parties. It would be concerning if either ended up with serious traction over people's personal lives. Perversely it is what they both have in common!

AdamRyan · 16/04/2024 11:15

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 16/04/2024 11:12

@AdamRyan Disagreement is an essential part of a healthy democracy. But if you can't express your disagreement in a civilised way you do not belong in the House of Commons.

I agree with that. Unfortunately all the old rules and standards appear to have gone out of the window.

I think MPs need a written code of conduct with documented sanctions if they break the rules. It's clear "protocol" no longer cuts the mustard.

AdamRyan · 16/04/2024 11:15

bombastix · 16/04/2024 11:15

I don't like LRM or Cates. He's a misogynist and so is she imo. Unfortunately these two people appear to be the extreme of their parties. It would be concerning if either ended up with serious traction over people's personal lives. Perversely it is what they both have in common!

Well said

Lion400 · 16/04/2024 11:16

heathspeedwell · 16/04/2024 09:42

This really does feel like an historical turning point. I just wanted to say a huge thank you to Justine and everyone at Mumsnet who allowed this debate to go ahead. I genuinely think Mumsnet has played a huge part in allowing women to speak out about the harms being done to children. It has helped the UK to be a world leader in protecting thousands of vulnerable young people from this dangerous ideology.

Also wanted to say thanks to LangCleg. If anyone knows her in real life then I hope she knows what a massive, massive difference she made.

Second that. Thanks for letting us speak out and learn too, on here MN. Without this I’d have gone crazy. Being gas lit on a huge scale. But we knew it. The truth always comes out, but at points it didn’t feel that way.

A long way to go, men are men and they don’t give up their power easily. But it is looking more positive today. Wary of being too happy about it, lots of people will not let go. LRM 🤢 et al - and they will be in power soon. Shudder.

Meanwhile BBC News still ignoring.

EasternStandard · 16/04/2024 11:22

Lion400 · 16/04/2024 11:16

Second that. Thanks for letting us speak out and learn too, on here MN. Without this I’d have gone crazy. Being gas lit on a huge scale. But we knew it. The truth always comes out, but at points it didn’t feel that way.

A long way to go, men are men and they don’t give up their power easily. But it is looking more positive today. Wary of being too happy about it, lots of people will not let go. LRM 🤢 et al - and they will be in power soon. Shudder.

Meanwhile BBC News still ignoring.

I appreciated your threads, even though they’d get a lot of the be quiet posters. Sadly.

And so many other posters.

Despite the efforts from some to suppress at least it’s elevated to parliament and I think mn has played a part generally in all this.

RebelliousCow · 16/04/2024 11:33

bombastix · 16/04/2024 11:15

I don't like LRM or Cates. He's a misogynist and so is she imo. Unfortunately these two people appear to be the extreme of their parties. It would be concerning if either ended up with serious traction over people's personal lives. Perversely it is what they both have in common!

Just because a woman values women's role as mothers does not make her a 'misogynist'. Such an over-used word - a bit like 'fascist' is these days.

NoWordForFluffy · 16/04/2024 11:45

Davros · 16/04/2024 11:01

@dunBle The big thing that needs to happen, and I'm sceptical whether it will, is CAMHS getting much more capacity to deal with autism and general mental health issues. I think pretty much any parent that's had to deal with them despairs over the wait times for any meaningful interventions. Perhaps if some of those with complex needs had been dealt with more appropriately earlier on, then they may never have felt the need to transition.
We also need to keep in mind that Autism itself is not a mental health condition. Hence the efforts to stop people with autism being put in secure mental health units if they display "too much" Challenging Behaviour. However, Autism can be comorbid with mental health issues and, thanks to this madness, now very much more than in the past. I think this has ruined the progress that was being made on Autism in society. @dunBle is right that many people girls with autism would not have gone down this path with appropriate support

One of the fucking scandals in all this is how the National Autistic Society is totally captured. It's just appalling.

Both of my children are autistic, but I wouldn't look to the NAS for support for them in a million years.

Autism and gender identity

We look at the connection between autism and gender identity, and hear stories from non-binary and transgender autistic people.

https://www.autism.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/what-is-autism/autism-and-gender-identity

bombastix · 16/04/2024 11:46

@RebelliousCow - I don't like her stance on abortion and she is to me a very good example of misogyny. I wouldn't have her with any power over my life in the same way I don't want LRM to have any thank you

MidgeGreensteet · 16/04/2024 11:47

Typical that bloody Labour would make this all about the waiting lists.

The only thing that's let me sleep at night for the last two years was the knowledge that the adult gender services waiting list in my area was six years. Enough time for my young adult child to hopefully grow out of it and have their first sexual relationship. Given that most young people desist without intervention the waiting lists have been the best thing about the situation. The stupidity of so many politicians is astonishing.

Swipe left for the next trending thread