What do people get from coming here to 'scold' us?

[CassOle]

My first (not completely serious) thoughts are: their arse handed to them and screenshots.

However, is there more to it?

Why do some long term posters come back again and again with the same arguments that haven't worked before? Do they think that it might work this time?

Then there are the 'my Trans friends are lovely' scolders. Do they really think that we should forget safeguarding, biological reality, single-sex provision etc. becuase they have lovely friends?

Lastly, the thread ploppers. If we are lucky, they might even reply. The one last night might have been getting sexual kicks from it, but we have had other ploppers who just appeared to want to tell us how mean and nasty we are.

None of these (that I have seen) have brought good, well reasoned arguments to back up their points. Maybe that is what causes people to scold and run, or plop and run, as when the arguments cannot stand up to scrutiny (or they have the screenshots), they stop posting.

This then brings me back to the long term posters who are TWAW. I would not like it if they were driven off this board, as it is a public board and as long as the T&C are kept to, they have every right to post. It must be hard posting against the main opinion on any matter, so they must get 'something' from it. Maybe Chris et al will be kind enough to explain this from their point of view?

From what I’ve heard it all went a bit creepy.

Oh Zelda. I saw you effort and I thought your post was excellent.

But the hints were already in the OP. The power demand over language and the discussion about sex and relationships and being 'passive'.

Passivity was considered the reason for why the OP believed they were female. They positioned it just the same as those other male people who have famously said that they wanted to be 'fucked like a woman' or how ever they choose to word it.

Well, I don't really post much here anymore because I got a bit tired. But I guess it's much the same reason I'm posting here now.

Someone posted a question - 'why do people post here to scold us?' and it landed in an echo chamber and lots of people popped up to give speculative answers that seemed objectively wrong like 'they are all men typing one handed' or 'they post because they have nothing but contempt for mums and then see how smart we are and how dumb they are and run away' and it felt worth challenging a bit.

And most people here won't agree and will assume I'm a dumb man (I am a cis woman in her 40s who has experienced pregnancy, misogyny, and SA and still is largely trans supportive, fwiw) but at least I'll have said it and maybe a couple of lurkers will not be quite so pulled along with the prevailing narrative.

Some days it feels like it's all I can do as a fairly light weight trans ally.

I also occasionally do pop up in trans spaces if I think they are being wildly off base to say 'no, I don't think that's how gender critical feminism works at all' or 'that isn't transphobia, that's an access clash'.

Maybe I just like tilting at windmills.

Just while you're here (and you probably won't answer - fine)

Do you at least acknowledge that if transwomen are granted access to women's spaces, that creates conflict with women's rights to their own same-sex spaces?

Do you consider your allyship to women to be in any way important at all?

I also occasionally do pop up in trans spaces if I think they are being wildly off base to say 'no, I don't think that's how gender critical feminism works at all' or 'that isn't transphobia, that's an access clash'.

How is that received @SometimesSnoozing ?

Male who identifies as a woman Andrea Long Chu for example in “Females” a “work” fawned over by the literati (and gullible) notoriously described the female “barest essentials” as:

“an open mouth, an expectant asshole, blank, blank eyes”

https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/january-2020/sissy-porn-and-trans-dirty-laundry/

which might be news to some of us who’ve inhabited our female bodies since birth and have to use them for all sorts of boring prosaic things.

There was something about the Japanese language not having pronouns. But I am unsure why this meant we had to use cross-sex pronouns when writing in the English language.

I used to be involved in constant arguments on Twitter, back when it was TRA central and women were routinely banned for anything and nothing, I can say that part of the reason for doing that was because it felt somewhat productive to be making those arguments on a public forum. It was certainly the case that I honed my debating skills on this topic and learned a lot about those on the other side of the divide. It was quite addictive and I did feel I was doing something important for women’s rights. I guess there may be posters here who feel they are doing the same?

Is Long Chu’s vision of womanhood one you identify with @SometimesSnoozing? And can you maybe understand why other women don’t want men like that in women’s spaces?

Well, if @Helleofabore liked my post, it was worth it! Thank you for your kind words and support. You are one of the posters I look to for intelligent, compassionate comment.

I'm very impressed with your linguistical analysis- I will look out for that sort of thing in future! Thank you 😊

I accept that it is an attractive argument that countries that seem more 'progressive' are generally better for women.
My issue with it though is that drilling down into very wide-ranging statistics about different countries is an art as well as a science and therefore not robust evidence for the specific issue that the majority of gender critical people have, which is: why is it better for transwomen -ie biological males - to use the rights of women instead of using their own rights (eg under gender reassignment).
It is also the case that some people probably do hate trans people. I'm not sure that there's any section of society that isnt hated by someone - women certainly are! However, again that is not an argument that is specifically relevant to the question of why it is better for transwomen to use the rights of women instead of their own rights.
I accept as well that some people who hate trans people also hate homosexual people. However that again doesn't get to the crux of the problem with males using females' sex-based rights.

So no actual reason for me to believe “trans women are women” then? You just want to proclaim your ideology to non believers? I’d really appreciate if you’d have a think about the point about Long Chu that I raised and the many “trans women” who think similarly about women and try to understand why most women want female only spaces, even if you don’t.

So no actual reason for me to believe “trans women are women” then? You just want to proclaim your ideology to non believers? I’d really appreciate if you’d have a think about the point about Long Chu that I raised and the many “trans women” who think similarly about women and try to understand why most women want female only spaces, even if you don’t.

Weird, not sure why it posted twice!

Oh, I've had this argument in trans spaces before! I think access clash is an issue between all other minorities groups. I think it would be nonsensical to assume that there is no access clash between the vulnerabilities of trans people and cis women. That's not how reality works.

I do, however, think that every time I see examples given, 20% strike me as genuine examples of access clash (like, unclear language that might make medical information inaccessible to EAL speakers vs trans inclusive language, as an example), 60% seem like they are genuine anxieties but a bit overblown and either could be or are managed on a case by case basis, and I do think 20% feel like they are bad faith and seem to aim at making trans lives very difficult in practical terms for the sake of some much milder discomfort from some cis women.

And I would like trans people to be more sympathetic to those with genuine anxieties and vulnerabilities. I don't think it's fair to be really quite aggressive to women saying 'I've been abused and so I'm scared' (and I've challenged trans people on that too) but I also don't for a minute believe that there aren't lots of spaces where trans people can be included and I think the current framing of this discourse is much much more harmful to trans people on a fundamental level. If things change, I'll argue more with trans people.

I mean, you didn't ask that. You asked me why I posted. A bit of a bait and switch?

I did ask you about Long Chu before I posted that, read the thread.

There you go @SometimesSnoozing- no “bait and switch” 🙄

I started to reply but I don't have a lot of time this afternoon and I'd like to reply fully so I will come back to you later.

If I start off by saying I support them, I believe in their identities and am not having a go, but just want to talk about access clash, no one has ever been mean. I've had more name calling here. Which I suppose makes sense because I come here saying that I'm not GC so I therefore must be a handmaiden TRA tool of the Patriarchy secret man or something.

I think overall trans spaces tend to be more prickly/defensive. Here is more....I dunno...similar to my experience as the unpopular kid in an all girls school.

I also clearly asked you what the rationale would be for me to adopt the belief that a group of men are women that you appear to hold@SometimesSnoozing- please don’t misrepresent my posts.

but I also don't for a minute believe that there aren't lots of spaces where trans people can be included

Can you expand on that? Presumably you mean single sex spaces as otherwise there's no issue.

Because the prevailing attitude is that you can't distinguish between men who should have access, and men who shouldn't. Either in law, or in real life.

Partly because anyone can fake any category. But also because for many of women whose space it is, a distinction is irrelevant. It's the maleness that matters.

so what sort of spaces are you talking about?

Thanks for the reply Suggestions.

I do not worship KJK. I agree with her on some things and disagree on other things. I agree with you 100% that someone should not be rejected for housing or employment just because they are trans identified. It is quite right that that would be illegal and I disagree with KJK on that point.

I find your point about homophobia interesting as I find that one thing that worries me about gender identity ideology is that it is homophobic. The first thing that made me think this was 'the cotton ceiling'. If you get rid of sex as a meaningful category, then you essentially erase same-sex attraction which is demonstrated by 'the cotton ceiling' and its counterpart 'the boxer ceiling'. I also remembered reading about how Iran was 'transing away the gay' and was reminded of this with some of the whistleblowers regarding the Tavistock.

The issue I have with self ID and the statistics that come from countries with this in place is that it renders those statistics unreliable. Thus, those ranks are also unreliable. Do those countries have statistics for how many males are held in female prisons, for example? Do they do proper (unbiased) research into how this affects the female prisoners? What would, or indeed, could they do if they found that it had a negative effect?

I also don't for a minute believe that there aren't lots of spaces where trans people can be included

What kind of spaces are you talking about here?

Someone posted a question 'why do people post here to scold us?' and it landed in an echo chamber and lots of people popped up to give speculative answers that seemed objectively wrong like 'they are all men typing one handed' or 'they post because they have nothing but contempt for mums and then see how smart we are and how dumb they are and run away' and it felt worth challenging a bit.

You can't be referring to this discussion, can you? Lots of people popped up to give a variety of answers, including myself, which are not at all 'they are all men typing one handed' or 'they have nothing but contempt for mums' or 'see how smart we are'.

It's odd that you seem to have filtered out the reasoned, thoughtful, balanced posts, and picked out a few you didn't approve of. Not to mention the Monty Python argument ones

The 'prevailing narrative' on the Feminism: Sex and gender discussions board is a based on the scientific fact that human sex is binary and immutable, and men can't become women and vice versa, and that women as a group have rights

Do you think that any discussion that does NOT contain at least one declaration that human sex is not binary and is not immutable, and transwomen are women and are entitled to women's rights as well as their own human rights is an 'echo chamber'?

I don't see sharing a common belief and analysis as being an 'echo chamber', but if you think that, then there's no possible escape from your designation of this as an echo chamber.

We believe what we believe, we believe we have good reason to believe it, we are happy to share resources that explain why we believe it, and if that makes us a giant with long arms aka a windmill to tilt at... that's just the way it is.