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

Emma Barnett and Gillian Keegan.

311 replies

heldinadream · 16/05/2024 08:46

Today prog R4 now - Emma holding GK to account!
16/05/24 8.45 been going on about 10 minutes really worth listening to!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
RapidOnsetGenderCritic · 18/05/2024 23:51

24Jules · 18/05/2024 16:17

I haven't misunderstood anything. And nor did I say you claimed being gay was a choice. I asked. You've answered.

As for so called sealioning? , I'd never heard of that before either. Every day is an education.

Is asking questions and being ignorant in some things, some kind of crime now then? Is it against the rules here?

Is only one opinion allowed here? Is no dissent permitted? Is it not permissible to have a different opinion to others, or disagree?

I’ve been reading this thread, and wondering whether to say anything. I’m not sure whether you’re aware how you come across.

Someone jumps into a forum which has a years-long record of discussing, in detail and often with nuance, every conceivable aspect of a subject, and asks a reasonable question; but instead of entering into the ensuing debate, she (I assume) jumps in and out, asking yet more rather random questions, demanding answers to them all, and generally giving the impression that she is more interested in being argumentative than in really understanding the well-formed opinions of the regular posters. I’m not sure I’ve seen a thread in which one person has dragged the discussion this way and that to a greater extent. How about listening to replies and engaging with the arguments before shooting off on yet another tangent?

maltravers · 19/05/2024 01:16

I think this definition of sealioning is illustrative: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning

Sealioning - Wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning

RainWithSunnySpells · 19/05/2024 10:03

It's important to distinguish between legitimate requests for information and sealioning.

I personally think that if that poster was posting in good faith, they would have actually looked at the video I recommended. It became clear that they had not watched it (and I suspect had no intention to). So the conclusion that they were sealioning (even if they had not heard of the term) is reasonable.

illinivich · 19/05/2024 10:58

But its easy to confuse the inept with trolling, too.

One of the strengths of this site is that ideas are challenging in a way that they arent in trans forums. So once their arguments are used here, they fall apart because they havent been tested, challenged and counter argued before.

The basic arguments are that trans people pass so well that they are in single sex spaces undetected, that women 'see' genuine trans people and invite them in, and that some men need to be in womens spaces because the threat of violence is high and disproportionately dangerous.

Notice that evidence isnt provided. Or for the fundamental idea that the need for self defined gendered spaces is more important than the need single sex spaces.

In trans forums, these are assumed without any reality checks, so when they arrive here they expect these assumptions to be take as facts or even relevant. They cant argue, so either argue points that dont help their case (showing some women commit sexual crimes doesnt support the need for gendered spaces), try to derail( look - AI, ask for explain for easily Googleable terms).

RainWithSunnySpells · 19/05/2024 11:12

That is true. I had a RL conversation with someone recently who I think has only ever heard complete agreement from RL friends and online friends. They are all completely on the same page and no-one has ever thought about it in any way shape or form. These ideas are 'correct' so they don't need to think.

Of course the idea that Mumsnet is a hotbed of transphobia is a known 'fact' in these circles. Any dissent is of course 'transphobic' in their eyes, so again the need to think is removed.

Datun · 19/05/2024 13:12

24Jules

Are you trans?

PeppercornMill · 19/05/2024 13:40

24Jules · Yesterday 18:12
Starmer won't push the Scottish self certification thing. And yes the left have plenty of interests. But trans friendly policy is a vote winner not a vote loser I think, so the left won't be pushing against trans either.

Really? I haven't seen anything to suggest that trans policies are vote winners. Even the whole Denton's thing acknowledged that the best way to get pro-trans legislation through was via something else (like attaching it to gay-rights legislation).

Having pro-trans policies gets you some very vocal activists, and politicians confuse those and Twitter with how the general population feel.

illinivich · 19/05/2024 14:12

I think politicians are in a difficult position. 'Trans friendly' policies would be popular in the media class, therefore would lead to favourable news coverage, but i dont know if the public would be as impressed?

And conversely, no trans friendly policies may annoy the media, but be unnoticed by the public.

I'm trying to think of possible trans friendly policies, but its difficult to think of ones that help trans people that don't impose on the rest of society or get involved in family life?

RainWithSunnySpells · 19/05/2024 15:43

We need to understand what 'trans friendly policies' actually means.

What are these policies? Are they ensuring that people who identify as trans have the same rights as everyone else, or are we talking about extra rights that the rest of the population do not have that are based on 'feelings' rather than something tangible?

Do these rights involve any body modification that is desired? If so, from what age? Will people without a trans identity also get any body modification that they desire from the same age? Would this be on the NHS or Private?

Do they mean the eradication of single sex spaces? Getting rid of all sex based terminology?

The whole lot needs to be laid out clearly. No obfuscation, no lies and no pretending that this would have no impact on the rights of other groups.

RandySavage · 19/05/2024 17:25

Trans friendly policies I'd support:

Being able to dress in clothes stereotypically associated with either sex

Extra provision (where possible) for trans friendly spaces - eg bathrooms/changing rooms, etc.

Provision for changing name easily (on company ID, etc)

Monitoring to ensure that trans employees are not unfairly disadvantaged with wages, promotions, etc.

Trans policies I will never support:

Forcing other people to refer to them by incorrect pronouns

Allowing trans people into spaces reserved for the opposite sex

Allowing trans propaganda at work (TWAW, flags except on special occasions, etc)

Snowypeaks · 19/05/2024 20:22

RandySavage · 19/05/2024 17:25

Trans friendly policies I'd support:

Being able to dress in clothes stereotypically associated with either sex

Extra provision (where possible) for trans friendly spaces - eg bathrooms/changing rooms, etc.

Provision for changing name easily (on company ID, etc)

Monitoring to ensure that trans employees are not unfairly disadvantaged with wages, promotions, etc.

Trans policies I will never support:

Forcing other people to refer to them by incorrect pronouns

Allowing trans people into spaces reserved for the opposite sex

Allowing trans propaganda at work (TWAW, flags except on special occasions, etc)

Every one of the "pro-trans" policies you list is already in place and entirely legal.
They lack no rights and DEI monitoring usually prioritises them, often to the detriment of other groups.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page