‘Demure and mindful’ - oh great.

[LunaNorth]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm23zye08j4o

So this trend. I’m bridling at the ‘demure and mindful’ bullshit being promoted by someone who is performing femininity.

Demure and mindful women seldom make history. Here we go again, being sent back into our boxes by men.

@Helleofabore

And again, yes, it was rude. Yet the poster, freedomdogs I responded to had just completely twisted what I had said, into something that they then felt they could proceed to label bigoted and not just once, and actually told me that I hated even the fact that trans people existed which was completely false and told me to calm down when I was not furious.
You were rude to me, too - remember?*
*
Strangely, no poster who has reprimanded me for pushing back, has told that poster that they were rude too.
That doesn't make sense, sorry.*
*
And I have not said that you were all one poster. So perhaps you are mistaken ?
I said "as some people appear to believe". I was addressing more people than you alone.*
*
Welcoming someone doesn’t mean that you, general you, cannot point out the weaknesses in their argument if their argument lacks substance or they, a general they, have just posted a falsity that has been posted and discussed repeatedly on a thread but that new poster can’t be arsed to read the thread before plopping down the post.
No, of course not. What Is currently occurring, though - and this is a perspective from a poster with slightly different views to yours - is that a single post is immediately seized upon and multiple questions asked from varied other posters. Few of these are phrased in a non-confrontational manner. This continues until the original poster becomes frustrated and leaves the thread.

Generally, this means there is actually no opportunity to present arguments or engage with the thread topic as time is spent just fending off attacks by FWR regulars.*
*
Do you, personally, believe that your view should be given affirming support just because you post in a public forum? Even if your view is not supported by evidence?
How would you know what my view is? You just told me to fuck off before you heard it.*
*
And generally, if a poster is posting their opinion which immediately displays a prejudiced view of the posters on a board, why should posters on a board accept being accused of being mean, hateful and bigoted, ignorant, far right, whatever the accusation ? Why should that accusation be accepted when it is based on whether a poster has accepted or rejected compliance of the other poster’s purely philosophical belief?
That mirrors the board and its behaviour - exactly.*
*
And why should a poster be welcomed if what they contribute to a thread amounts to censure of other’s language rather than contributing anything of substance that engages with the topic?
I would love to contribute substance. Really, I would. But I know I would only be attacked again and again simply as my views are not exactly the same as yours, and as such I'd get zero airtime.

I get it. You don’t like confrontation. You don’t feel compelled to actively join discussions unless your views are actively welcomed and affirmed, you don’t feel the need to post evidence to support your claims or to clarify your views.

You seem to support those who denigrate and be rude to posters who you don’t like while then claiming that the posters who have been abusive in nature have had their opinions silenced, when their posts seem to contribute nothing but censure. You, yourself, have been deleted for your own rudeness and for using slurs against those you seem to disagree with. Again while claiming that your opinion is being silenced or discouraged.

By the way, I have not told you to fuck off. That is absolutely false.

It's typing. You don't need air time.

Go on. Write down why this bepenised individual gets to have a laugh about how naice women are and the bbc thinks it is worth reporting because this fashionable womanhood has been experienced.

When that's over then explain why it wouldn't be on the nose if the joke was about the smell of fish, nagging or difficult women always having to say something and be listened to, the confidence of the female who stays in her lane and knows her place worth.

Write down why this should be considered any differently to the "banter" other bepenised individuals also find funny. After all what are mere cis women going to do about it?

Thanks quantumbutterfly.

Many of my posts are me working through what is fact and evidenced, or at least plausible, versus what is not. I find it a bit of a shame when others name change (and I know why they do and support that choice) because often some wonderfully articulate posters get lost in the name changes.

I’ve had a little catch up this morning, and am dismayed by the state of this thread. It’s been a while since mass deletions were in fashion.

That said, still absolutely no clarity on why Elle thinks a man can be a woman by declaring it so, or on why a woman can’t claim to be a category that doesn’t include transwomen but does include transmen.
I thought we were in masters of our own identity! Perhaps only men get to do that.

It’s possible to discuss issues, even with people who have different views, without conflict. I’d post evidence if I didn’t think it would be immediately rejected; I’d happily join in discussion if it was not so hostile.

As far as I’m aware, I haven’t been deleted at any time in the past two or three years. I certainly haven’t been notified of any deletions. If the ‘slur’ you’re referring to is ‘far-right’, I’m not sure I called anyone here that? What slur are you talking about?

As it happens, I don’t appreciate the ‘joke’. He’s male and shouldn’t get to comment on the things women experience.

Just read the first few pages and I see the TRAs made a rapid appearance objecting to MN discussing a front page story on the BBC News website 🙄

I would have said the same about deletions, Caliga. And on this board generally people prefer not to report- generally it’s better to let the poor quality of the comment stand than to get it deleted. When people do get rude through frustration (usually with sea lions) they usually apologise- more edifying than deletions I think.

I don’t know whether a mod has got impatient or whether a squad has been busy on the report button. I know that I didn’t say anything shocking- certainly not abusive- but have at least two deletions.

That now stands associated with this name. I’d challenge it and ask to know what I said that was delete worthy, but when challenged in the past, it’s led to disagreements and bans. Has anyone seen Michael round here recently?

This

"I didn't say anything abusive"

You told other posters to "fuck right off".

You have an odd definition of "not abusive".

I would have said the same about deletions, Caliga

same here, my deletions are usually for quoting posts that are subsequently deleted

not this thread though obviously 😀

No, I don’t think so. You’ve confused me with someone else.

Obviously I can’t prove that because the posts are gone.

I can be sharply sarcastic, yes. I may have referred to Ms Lebrun as male for obvious reasons.

I wouldn’t have told anyone to eff off. I can get fucking furious but I can’t type eff off in full. Puritanical upbringing 🤣

I do apologise. I did indeed confuse you with another poster. No you have not been deleted nor have you used the word that I jad in mind. No I want referring to ‘far right’ in this instance.

The rest stands though.

And yes. We know we can discuss issues with different opinions without conflict. We do it quite a lot as it happens.

I wouldn’t have told anyone to eff off. I can get fucking furious but I can’t type eff off in full. Puritanical upbringing

i can 😀

but i don’t cos i don’t name change and want to behave myself as much as possible on here and that would obviously be deleted…i don’t do obvious stuff 😀

And actually don’t we have a recognised acronym here for that? FOTTFSOF? Surprised that eff off is deletable then.

I wonder whether some informal stalemate was upset where someone reported others for using slurs and so others decided to return the favour. It’s a return to sad times anyway.

When we can’t discuss the feminist perspective of a news story in the feminism pages without massive derailment and sealioning, leading to mass deletions.

well said sigma

I’d post evidence if I didn’t think it would be immediately rejected; I’d happily join in discussion if it was not so hostile.

If you have quality evidence that men can change sex and turn into women then this board would be very interested in it. They might try to pick apart the report but everyone should question studies/statistics. It won't be personal against you.

If you haven't done this because you fear a pile on, then after the first few posts perhaps say it's overwhelming and you'd rather a one to one. Many of us are happy to sit on our hands and watch two educated people discuss something important., it has happened a few times before and I've personally learnt a lot from that kind of posting.

What many of us don't accept, and seek clarity on, is what "identifying as" actually means. As soon as someone questions it their character gets insulted. For example just look at Elles posts. We cannot understand her thinking, seek clarity as to why she thinks both men and women are women. Even after five pages she hasn't explained it. I might not like her explanation but I would like to understand why she thinks it. A childish "because they can" isn't an explanation btw.

Apologies if I have got you mixed up with another poster. There was a fair amount of effing and so on.

If you have quality evidence that men can change sex and turn into women then this board would be very interested in it. They might try to pick apart the report but everyone should question studies/statistics. It won't be personal against you

This. I have literally never seen anything I am convinced by in almost a decade and I'm perfectly able to explain why not in as much detail as it takes. Happy to engage politely as long as it's mutual.

In order to identify as something, you need to have a clear picture of what that thing is.

To say “anyone is a woman who identifies as a woman” reduces the word “woman” to just letters on a page. It divorces the word from any material real thing.

You can only imagine what it is to identify as a “woman” because you already know what a woman is, as defined by the class of adult human females that have been referred to by this word for hundreds of years.

If you remove “woman” from meaning a real physical thing, there is nothing to identify as.

The genderist view is either: based on sex stereotypes, or a quasi religious faith in "woman" and "man" essences that can be unrelated to sex. As pp said this is also based on stereotypes.

The gender critical view is that "gender" is a social construct imposed from outside on female and male people, which is often harmful, especially when it's used to oppress female people for sexual and reproductive reasons.

Thank you for recognising your mistake and apologising. I appreciate that, Helle.

So again, what makes Jools Lebron a woman? What makes Roxy Tickle a woman? What is the thing which distinguishes these specific biological males from those who don't identify as women?

If it's that you know they're not female but think it's up to individual people to decide what sex they would prefer to be known by, please could people be open and clear about that, rather than dancing round it.

General questions, not directed at specific peopie.

Thank you. Maybe you could also apologize for saying that I have told you to fuck off.