Women's rights general conversations - Thread 8

[Kucinghitam]

Continuation of Thread 7.

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 "Has anybody noticed this recurring theme that keeps coming up??" or even "Random bloke asked me to smile while I was choosing onions in the supermarket, grr"- that sort of thing).

Saw that earlier. 90 actresses have turned down roles, eh, that's quite something! It will be interesting to see if the show is even able to go ahead.

Surely there will be trans-actresses queuing up to play JKR? For the avoidance of confusion, by "trans-actress", I mean someone who self-identifies as an actress.

There's an idea. I like being on a stage, so surely my true identity is 'professional actress'.

I'm a bit out of practice at learning lines, what with GCSE drama being several decades ago, but I'm sure I could ad lib appropriately.

Emma Watson as the Witch and BintuRowling as Aslan

"Do not cite the Deep Magic to me, Witch! I was there when it was written."

I spotted a thread in Site Stuff asking whether MN could introduce a "block/mute poster" function. I have to say with some of the recent irritable atmosphere (in many topics not just FWR), and when I see certain prolific posters, I find the idea slightly tempting. Then I give my head a wobble and remind myself that I can just exercise my scrolling finger.

Edit: Obviously I realise that people can apply the same to me too, I'm not going to weep into my cornflakes if somebody scrolls past me.

Would you even know about it?

It's not shitposting, dishonesty, slander, reposting already debunked fake shite, or disingenuity, that irritates me (most)

Everyone has opinions and all are free to post. No factor.

It's the sheer volume and relentless hobby horse merailing. It's quite frankly just not cricket.

We share this space, and some people could do well to reflect on that.

I think I'd prefer a button to press when I find posters to be infuriating that when pressed the mobile/tablet in the hands of the annoying poster vibrates so vigorously the annoying posters head is literally given a wobble!

However I fear if it became reality I'd be on the receiving end waaaaay too often and would be constantly looking like I was having a fit!

If we have a mute button, I'd like that poster's comments to be not only invisible but not replaced by a 'Post from hidden user' message.

Thinking back, there used to be a function about that mods could use where an annoying person's comments would be 'blabberised' and everything they posted was automatically converted into nonsense. It was funny and very effective, if a tad spiteful.

Ha, found an old screen shot.

Oh, absolutely I would neither know nor care! Just figured I should acknowledge that others might want to avoid my witterings too.

The Other Place had the "ignore" function and I think I only ever used it for 2 posters, and only occasionally when I felt that even my scrolling finger needed a rest and as @BezMills says, I'm currently feeling exactly that fatigue right now. I like @Vegemiteandhoneyontoast's blabberiser, I mean, that's how my brain interprets some prolific posters anyway

I remember how some at the Old Place used to boast about the length (oo er, missus) of their ignore list. I never saw it as anything to be proud of.

that's how my brain interprets some prolific posters anyway

Mine does too, @Kucinghitam , partly because of the blabberiser of old. There have been many occasions I've wished it was still used, seeing a troll reduced to blabber gave everyone a good laugh.

I was just reading the thread about KPSS being wound down. It's bloody marvellous, isn't it? Here's a group of people doing really valuable work, and they are shut down and cast adrift (I assume this is all about funding?). Compare and contrast to some of the looney-tunes outfits being doused in public money these days.

I had quite a long ignore list, but I strongly suspect 90% of it was 1 or 2 posters under multiple names.

I see the name changing thread has gone.

I was just reading a piece about Stephen Whittle (yeah, slow Saturday! 😃), all of which is probably well-known to most posters here, but it mentions that he was able to obtain his name as father on the birth certificates of kids borne by his wife through donor insemination. But I wondered, regardless of Whittle's trans status, what normally happens with kids born by donor sperm? Is it automatic that the husband gets them registered as his?

It used to be very standard, at least in England, that if you were married to the mother, you could be declared the father even if you weren’t present when the birth was registered. I have a great grandmother that did just that, even though my great grandfather was demonstrably and irrefutably elsewhere at the times of the conceptions. (Prisoner of war). I assume that hasn’t changed.

I presume then it’s not much of a leap that if Stephen was married at the time of the children’s births, then Stephen could be named father.

my feelings around birth certificates are that they are for the benefit of the child and future family history researchers not the parents. With the changes in society and medical science, I would support a change in the content, which hasn’t changed significantly since their introduction in 1837. Children deserve to have recorded who provided their genetic material, who gestated and birthed them, and who has parenteral responsibility for them. In some cases they are all different people.

My DD's daughters were conceived by IVF with donor eggs and donor sperm (she carried and gave birth to them and the eggs and sperm we're from the same donors so the girls are full siblings to each other though not genetically related to any of us). My DD and her DH are named as parents on the birth certificates, but the girls know the circumstances of their births and my DD will facilitate them contacting their gamete donors when they get to 18, if that's what they want to do.

Were not we're.

Last night ChezKuc we were having family fun looking at the Electoral Calculus website and marvelling at the impending Tory collapse into oblivion (great joy), LibDem revival (erm) and Labour super-victory of red-flag-fluttering sunlit uplands.

It occurred to me that the clearly obsessive screeds and screeds of wind-up-merchant disingenuous obfuscatory shit-posting on any election-related topics (I've seen this with several different usernames, each associated with some particular Labour touchstone, and I find myself at the sheer volume of posting even on topics where I agree with that poster) must be like the ecstasy as the long-prophesied starship is finally coming to raise your true-believing soul into the cosmos. Like the verbose internet version of those Rapture bumper stickers, if you will.

Well done for assuming good intent is the reason for those posters posts @Kucinghitam , not sure I could manage to be that positive.

I’m Old Labour so I regard the upcoming election result (if it goes as predicted) as relief in having a not-Tory government, but am in no way celebrating as I naively did in 1997. In fact the idea of a super majority is worrying from a FWR perspective.

ThreeWordHarpy · Today 10:04

I’m Old Labour so I regard the upcoming election result (if it goes as predicted) as relief in having a not-Tory government, but am in no way celebrating as I naively did in 1997.

Call me a miserable cynic, but I was 27 then and very much pleased, though I disliked Blair quite a lot. Everyone was dancing and I said, "Give it a year or 18 months and there'll be all the same scandals as the last lot."

And lo....

"Unfortunately, there are races, organizations, and governing bodies still trying to set dangerous precedents by enacting discriminatory policies under the guise of protection instead of inclusion. These policies and practices don’t recognize our existence as queer, trans, and non-binary athletes, let alone affirm or celebrate us."

And there I was thinking that races were about fair competition, not about affirming people's "authentic selves". Silly me.

The absolute nerve of complaining that your identity isn't being celebrated!