Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions
Thread gallery
47
Ereshkigalangcleg · 06/10/2024 12:52

It is a word we use for occasions such as a change in PM or just in opposition. That is how it is used in Australia in any case.

Pleased to have learned something!

Edenvale · 06/10/2024 13:04

Thanks @Helleofabore ☺️

LongtailedTitmouse · 06/10/2024 13:07

Over 35 poster names on this thread and a single poster posts over 26% of posts…

GailBlancheViola · 06/10/2024 13:10

The difference is I've never claimed KJK isn't part of the GC movement.
I think she's more of a hindrance than a help and I think her behaviour in constantly going on about "socfems" amd the "managerial class" while getting increasingly involved in American Christian Right politics is a large cause of the fracturing in the GC movement and that's an opinion I'm entitled to hold, same as the people on here who think she is "a stone cold legend" in spite of her marmite approach.

I don't think KJK is a stone cold legend, I merely think she does her activism her way and is entirely right and free to do so, I do not obsess over her, her every utterance and action as some seem to do.

KJK has had a lot of flak from others involved in the movement including an entire issue of the Radical Notion magazine authored by JCJ dedicated to tearing her to pieces plus social media groups of left wing feminists whose sole purpose is to denigrate her, prominent left wing feminists referring to her as a domesticated zombie and nazi barbie, her and her followers as pound shop Eva Brauns so please don't place the blame for the fracturing of the movement at her door. All of those attacks came from those who call themselves socialist feminists (or socfems in short) why should she not respond to their comments?

lifeturnsonadime · 06/10/2024 13:15

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

timenowplease · 06/10/2024 13:26

LongtailedTitmouse · 06/10/2024 13:07

Over 35 poster names on this thread and a single poster posts over 26% of posts…

And controls 90% of the narrative.

timenowplease · 06/10/2024 13:30

@LongtailedTitmouse where did you get those stats?

LongtailedTitmouse · 06/10/2024 13:37

timenowplease · 06/10/2024 13:30

@LongtailedTitmouse where did you get those stats?

Pen, paper and tally marks

timenowplease · 06/10/2024 13:38

LongtailedTitmouse · 06/10/2024 13:37

Pen, paper and tally marks

Old school! 😆👊

CassieMaddox · 06/10/2024 13:41

GrumpyMenopausalWombWielder · 06/10/2024 12:38

Seeing as we're still going off in different directions, away from the main subject of this thread, it's interesting to me how much disdain there is for Wikipedia as a source of information. It certainly has its weaknesses, granted. But I came across this earlier & find it to be an interesting & fairly helpful piece of information - the actual website itself has links to sources so if anyone needs to go a bit further in terms of evidence to support what's said here, just post 'sealioning' into the search engine & you'll be able to look at the links. I will say, I haven't bothered to. Smile

"Sealioning (also sea-lioning and sea lioning) is a type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursuing people with relentless requests for evidence, often tangential or previously addressed, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity ("I'm just trying to have a debate"), and feigning ignorance of the subject matter. It may take the form of "incessant, bad faith invitations to engage in debate" and has been likened to a denial of service attack targeted at human beings. The term originated with a 2014 strip of the webcominc Wondermark by David Malki, which The Independent called "the most apt description of Twitter you'll ever see"."🙂

I can't quite put my finger on why I felt the need to get more clarity on this term. But, anyway, it seems interesting. It's completely irrelevant to the discussions on Moira Deeming's defamation case, and the evidence that's come out of the trial thus far. But as there no limit to what's being discussed, I thought I'd throw this in here just for the hell of it.

As you were 🙃

Yes, I'd say the constant "polite requests" for evidence to back up statements I make is getting very tiring.

I'm not sure implying posters are bad faith is the right way to tackle it though.

Imnobody4 · 06/10/2024 13:53

LongtailedTitmouse · 06/10/2024 13:37

Pen, paper and tally marks

Pity I was going to ask you to do a word count.🤣

Snowypeaks · 06/10/2024 13:56

GrumpyMenopausalWombWielder · 06/10/2024 12:38

Seeing as we're still going off in different directions, away from the main subject of this thread, it's interesting to me how much disdain there is for Wikipedia as a source of information. It certainly has its weaknesses, granted. But I came across this earlier & find it to be an interesting & fairly helpful piece of information - the actual website itself has links to sources so if anyone needs to go a bit further in terms of evidence to support what's said here, just post 'sealioning' into the search engine & you'll be able to look at the links. I will say, I haven't bothered to. Smile

"Sealioning (also sea-lioning and sea lioning) is a type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursuing people with relentless requests for evidence, often tangential or previously addressed, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity ("I'm just trying to have a debate"), and feigning ignorance of the subject matter. It may take the form of "incessant, bad faith invitations to engage in debate" and has been likened to a denial of service attack targeted at human beings. The term originated with a 2014 strip of the webcominc Wondermark by David Malki, which The Independent called "the most apt description of Twitter you'll ever see"."🙂

I can't quite put my finger on why I felt the need to get more clarity on this term. But, anyway, it seems interesting. It's completely irrelevant to the discussions on Moira Deeming's defamation case, and the evidence that's come out of the trial thus far. But as there no limit to what's being discussed, I thought I'd throw this in here just for the hell of it.

As you were 🙃

😂😂

And in all seriousness, Wikipedia is great for any sport-related queries.
Unless they're related to men in women's sport, obv.

CassieMaddox · 06/10/2024 13:56

Imnobody4 · 06/10/2024 12:43

I've seen the movement change from a broad church of women fighting for change across a broad political spectrum, to fractured infighting about who is or isn't acceptable as GC. It's sad.

I thought you believed feminism is a left wing project.
You are not a spectator sighing on the sidelines. You are an active participant. You choose to post antagonistic responses from every angle you can find.
People are not 'accepted' as GC they either are or aren't. It is you who have chosen to denigrate women putting themselves in line of fire. You basically want to celebrate another GC woman who doesn't share your opinions lose a significant case (to the movement as well as herself).
This isn't a discussion I'm being drawn any further into.

What on earth are you talking about?
I've never said "feminism is a left wing project" and its not what I think.
I'm not being "antagonistic", I'm trying to discuss the case and respond to very one-sided comments (such as the one upthread where pp said it was a fact that before LWS the only issue around Deeming was her views on abortion. That's just not accurate).

And I don't want to "celebrate her losing a case". I'm interested to see how the judge rules on a debate happening day in day out in GC circles, which is the debate as to whether its defamatory to discuss KJKs extremist associations.

There aren't going to be any winners out of this case in my opinion. They all look ridiculous.

And actually, yes,fine, don't discuss with me. It's pretty fruitless anyway if you are debating your own assumptions of what I think, rather than what I actually think.

Cailleach1 · 06/10/2024 13:58

CassieMaddox · 06/10/2024 12:25

Here you go cailleach
I don't think I said anything at all about supporting men or welcoming them. Can't see why you would equate what I said to "a vegan eating meat". Perhaps you can explain.

I think there was another one Cassie, part of a larger response from you. Opinion still remains, from all the postings I’ve seen from you. Indeed, even Lord Haw Haw himself wasn’t as productive.

CassieMaddox · 06/10/2024 14:01

Cailleach1 · 06/10/2024 13:58

I think there was another one Cassie, part of a larger response from you. Opinion still remains, from all the postings I’ve seen from you. Indeed, even Lord Haw Haw himself wasn’t as productive.

OK. Well maybe you can find it as I don't think that I said anything like what you are representing. Mainly because it's not what I think. I found the post I remember making about equal opportunities feminism, now its on you I think.

GrumpyMenopausalWombWielder · 06/10/2024 14:04

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Rexpanda · 06/10/2024 14:06

CassieMaddox · 06/10/2024 12:33

The difference is I've never claimed KJK isn't part of the GC movement.

I think she's more of a hindrance than a help and I think her behaviour in constantly going on about "socfems" amd the "managerial class" while getting increasingly involved in American Christian Right politics is a large cause of the fracturing in the GC movement and that's an opinion I'm entitled to hold, same as the people on here who think she is "a stone cold legend" in spite of her marmite approach.

I think she's more of a hindrance than a help

I strongly agree, I feel it would be hugely beneficial to the Let Women Speak project and women if she was to step back and let someone less controversial take the reigns.

GailBlancheViola · 06/10/2024 14:15

I strongly agree, I feel it would be hugely beneficial to the Let Women Speak project and women if she was to step back and let someone less controversial take the reigns.

Let Women Speak is KJK's project, how about those who don't like her or the project just let her and those who support her/the project get on doing their activism their way?

Cailleach1 · 06/10/2024 14:21

I don’t think such a thing as LWS in the public square would even exist without her. She had a backbone of steel, and remained firm on the topic of women’s (and children’s) rights when nobody would even say boo. For sheer publicity she is genius. I wouldn’t make the mistake that it is not that message which is why people actually attack her. Figuratively and literally. There is a lot of pretence it is for some other reason.

There are, of course, other women taking different tacks. Achieving wonderful things. Incredibly important things in legal challenges through court cases. Of course, Pesutto had to issue an apology to KJK that withdrew any slurs which he felt safe and at ease to throw around before. Make them think again!

There’s that song which I will change
“All (God’s creatures) women have a place in the (choir) fight to reclaim women’s civil rights,
some sing low and some sing higher,
some sing loud on the telephone wire,
some just clap their hands, or paws, or anything they got”

Cailleach1 · 06/10/2024 14:23

And she is ‘untoward towards paedophiles’. I like a woman who won’t back down on the safety of children in the face of men’s wishes to not impede them.

Shortshriftandlethal · 06/10/2024 14:24

CassieMaddox · 06/10/2024 11:27

Yes, neither do I.
I do know plenty of people who think that worrying about "capture" of schools and a deep state infiltration of the civil service by transactivists (a la Liz Truss) is a culture war.

Or the very polarised emotive language described upthread.

We can agree to disagree how useful those kinds of strategies are.

The capture of institutions by Queer Theory and Identity politics is a demonstrable fact not a 'Culture War'. 'Culture War' is just a meme used to dismiss, without further thought, alternative perspectives and values.

GailBlancheViola · 06/10/2024 14:28

The capture of institutions by Queer Theory and Identity politics is a demonstrable fact not a 'Culture War'. 'Culture War' is just a meme used to dismiss, without further thought, alternative perspectives and values.

I don't know anyone can say with a straight face that institutions (including the Civil Service) have not been captured.

CassieMaddox · 06/10/2024 14:32

Shortshriftandlethal · 06/10/2024 14:24

The capture of institutions by Queer Theory and Identity politics is a demonstrable fact not a 'Culture War'. 'Culture War' is just a meme used to dismiss, without further thought, alternative perspectives and values.

Edited

So you agree with Truss?

https://www.bigissue.com/news/politics/liz-truss-trans-activists-cpac/

Liz Truss blames 'trans activists' for her disastrous time as PM. Yes, really

Liz Truss, the UK’s shortest-lived prime minister, has claimed that she faced a “huge establishment backlash” during her short tenure.

https://www.bigissue.com/news/politics/liz-truss-trans-activists-cpac

Filomene · 06/10/2024 14:33

AlisonDonut · 06/10/2024 06:44

How did the police know that neo Nazis were going to be there, enough to arrange an escort for the whole time?

Only the police know if the n-N were going to be there - an escort for whom? The 'escort' the police gave them could have been to prevent a confrontation with the antifa group. I can't recall how many 'antifa' were still to the north side but to escort them from any other angle would have meant to walk them through the TRAs or antifa. The police let them exit toward the South which meant walking between the women and the feral TRAs where they took the opportunity to nazi salute them. A police line between both groups. [I'm in a livestreamer's, jaw open in amazement.] At the south was more police presence, police vans etc. It was the same designated route that the women pre-planned with police to leave the event. Police contained the TRAs for a while longer once they asked women to wrap up early so women could disperse safely.

GrumpyMenopausalWombWielder · 06/10/2024 14:33

Anyone else taking over the idea & practice of LWS would inevitably curtail the thing that makes it work. The open mic for women to speak freely about something that matters to them. Any one of the other groups that have formed could, at any point, have given women a voice within their orgs, without censorship, giving them the chance to claim democratic representation of women & giving a true reflection of what women think/need/experience & how the GRA impacts any/all of that. But not one of them has done this.

Politics now is all about censorship & control. Who controls the narrative. Who gets their voice heard & who is deemed beyond the pale. I've sat through too many meetings, events, hustings etc. where there's no direct communication with the audience, questions are collated & edited, sanitised and bastardised, to give the person answering the chance to answer the question they want to, not what people are asking. And that's for the questions that make their way through that process so the claim of having answered the Q can be made. So many don't get answered at all. It's effectively a brick wall, and those in power or seeking it can carry on oblivious to the reality of what people think/feel/need/want in terms of any political situation.

The reason KJK gets so much flack is because she doesn't abide by the general rules. And love her or hate her, what she does, and how she does it, is the way many women have had the chance to speak & their voices heard.

The arrogance of claiming the thing KJK does would be better if KJK didn't do it, is astonishing. Especially when so many other groups could do their own version of it, but chose not to. Go hassle them & ask them to do their version in response, if KJK's efforts upset/offend you.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.