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?

Oops far too late to the argument sketch discussion (note to self - refresh the screen after a break 😁)

I am lesbian. Every individual has the right to discount sexual partners for whatever reason they choose.

And males, however they identify themselves are by dint of not being the same sex as females are automatically discounted from being potential sexual partners for lesbians. Do you need to brush up on the legal definition of homosexuality?

I'm not saying that's ok, and I don't know the context of what was said.

There is a difference between accepting that trans lesbians into lesbian dating spaces and saying that therefore anyone should date them or that they are somehow weirdly entitled to a date.

None of us are entitled to date any other individual; I am a (natal) lesbian in lesbian spaces, I am not entitled to dates with anyone who doesn't want to date me!

And, whether you like it or not, there are natal female lesbians who happily date trans lesbians.

I know that horrifies the authoritarian-minded out there who can not fathom the breaching of these imaginary discrete boxes in their heads. Most of us are different though and take a bit more of a live and let live approach.

It's been depressing to see so many men claiming to be lesbians along with their deliberate trashing of all lesbian spaces. That's why the SC judgment is so important. And of course why said men are gaslighting everyone all over the internet along with pissing on our streets in a desperate attempt to divert attention from the clarity of the judgment.

Because there are no gendered pronouns in Japan apparently! Good strong argument there!

And, whether you like it or not, there are natal female lesbians who happily date trans lesbians.

Obvioisly I've no problem with anyone's sexual attraction. However these people are not same sex attracted, now are they? They are not lesbian, they are bi.

It certainly isn't to "scold" anyone 😆

some posters are only here to scold, that may well not be you but it absolutely happens

Conversely, the aggression with which posters pile onto any post expressing support for trans people proves many of you to be hypocrites on this point

bollocks

I know that horrifies the authoritarian-minded out there who can not fathom the breaching of these imaginary discrete boxes in their heads. Most of us are different though and take a bit more of a live and let live approach.

i actually think this is the crux of the disconnect right there.

the GI side sees the GC sides insistence on some instances of correct categorisation by biological sex as a kind of old fashioned authoritarianism, and that we are trying to enforce this. Whereas the GC view is more generally… sometimes failing to categorise by biological sex has bad consequences. We actually DGAF what ppl wear or how they see themselves, but we sometimes need to categorise. Failing to do so creates harm.

Has @suggestionsplease1 answered this yet? Forgive me if I missed it.

As you are so keen to define others on their behalf - whatever you say ..we quite happily welcome bi women as well

And, whether you like it or not, there are natal female lesbians who happily date trans lesbians.

Natal female lesbians who date males are not by any definition lesbians. Good old reality based facts again. The category of lesbians as female homosexuals is a defined and protected category, it does not include males nor does it include females who date males. Gender Ideologists cannot just subvert categories to suit themselves.

Now someone mentioned scolding somewhere didn't they 🤔

Words have meanings. This is how we have meaningful conversations, protect people's rights, keep everyone on the same page.

I made a simple statement of fact. 🤷‍♀️

You see it as "authoritarian" while I see it as wise women well versed in spotting male techniques of coercive control, gaslighting and grooming women and girls.
You see the dynamics played out on the Relationships board daily - and on here by some of the "scolders" determined that men will be centred, including by lesbians in our relationships.
There's a reason this male dominated movement started with #nodebate. Now the coercive nature of that's been exposed, proponents are frantically trying to find different ways to bully women.
But in the UK (I believe you're not a UK poster?), the SC has clarified the law and everyone will just have to find the self control and respect for the rights of others to follow it.

You know, there was a time (I imagine you were also alive during it) that all lesbian (natal F-F) relationships were characterised as grooming and instances of coercive control as well. Thankfully times have moved on. Yes, UK based.

About 7 or 8 years ago I was accused of being a scolder but I genuinely wanted information and to hear points of view. I had been a regular on the other sections but new to feminism.

I had been fed the TWAW line and it had always felt a bit off. I had a few questions that lib fems couldn't or wouldn't answer. I also knew a couple of TW who were fairly shy and unassuming people who genuinely just wanted to get on with "living as a woman" but also couldn't really explain what that meant. I didn't mind sharing space with them, but I felt it may have been because I knew them rather than because they were women. I also knew a TM who I had realised I had a lot more in common with than I did the TW.

I had no idea about what was happening to children but some of the things I was reading on American sites like Jezabel made me really uncomfortable. It was also about the time that the "IT'S MA'AM" video was doing the rounds and I couldn't understand why so many people seemed to be supporting the actions of what to me seemed to be a very angry and abusive man.

I came here to ask questions, I thought it was like other boards where I could ask questions and people who felt like it could answer. I was quite upset at the responses because my post was from a place of genuine curiosity. However at the time I didn't realise just how much flack the regulars get.

The kind posters who answered really helped me and started me on my GC journey.

There are lots of other places that lesbians who are happy to date men-identifying-as-lesbians can meet them.

The argument that you're making seems to be that men-identifying-as-lesbians have a human right to beauty-parade in front of women seeking female partners, hoping to be picked.

I don't recognize that right.

This is it for me.

Certainly no finger wagging or scolding or hating mums nonsense.

Thank you for thinking about it logically and not just coming out with some variation of "They're all obviously terrible people who hate women".

That's not my recollection. Lesbian relationships were then seen as morally wrong with lesbians losing custody of their children, having to remain "in the closet" with fear of consequences at work and in families if outed.

There is a stark similarity to today in that just as male "transbians" have been allowed to colonise lesbian spaces, framing women as bigots if they object to them, back in the day lesbians were regularly threatened by men that what they needed was a "good seeing to" from a heterosexual man. The common theme being the readiness of men to sexually threaten and intimidate women.

It was a frightening time then and it's been so distressing to see young lesbians have lesbian only spaces removed from them in the last decade. Hopefully following the clarity of the SC judgement this harassment of lesbians by men will come to an end.

Apologies OP for the derail.

There is a disconnect arising from, I think, incorrect assumptions and misuse of language.
Laws cannot work without words having definitions. They also cant work on a case by case basis (law and evidence are different: of course within one law, there can be different case results due to differing evidence; but that is not the same thing)
There are laws in place to protect females. I am still not clear about the basis of the argument that a transwoman - ie a male - can use those protections (thereby rendering them unisex, and so meaningless).
As a liberal, I dont mind someone saying that the basis is: 'because females shouldn't have extra rights' - albeit I dont agree - because it makes logical sense. However, I struggle to see how any of the arguments - about other 'progressive' nations, KJK, some women exaggerating their personal need for protection, some people being homophobic, transwomen often being nice etc - have any relevance at all to the basic question of why males need to be granted access to the sex-based rights given to females specifically to allow those females (as a sex class) full and equal participation in society.

I am a lesbian and I won’t date transwomen because I think they are biologically men who have a delusion (albeit distressing to them) that by adopting female stereotypes they are magically transformed into women. And I won’t pander to that delusion.

So do we cancel each other out?

That transwomen are transgender is fine by me but they cannot coopt the term lesbian and ascribe it to themselves. I think there is a distinction between dimorphic sex and the term philosophical lense of gender which is based on stereotypes and see no benefit to women’s rights by conflating the two together.

This is true.

It is also because they only see it in a polarised framing. That unless you are fully supportive, you are obviously don't want them to exist.

It is a false polarisation but it is designed to enforce all their demands.

^This.

The young ones are just ill-informed and used to a low standard of rather teenage debate and ideas from Tumblr, etc. They have badly misunderstood the knowledge and intellect of posters here, and think it’s like arguing with their mum or an elderly relative, and that we are going to say “all right, dear, I agree”, and they are going to emerge triumphant having vanquished the bigoted and dim mummies with the power of Yoof.

A few are regular sea lions who enjoy needling other posters just for fun.

But you are aware other countries (countries with the best record for women's wellbeing and equality with men) have navigated potential areas of harm whilst retaining gender self ID, right?

https://www.context.news/socioeconomic-inclusion/denmarks-decade-of-self-id-cools-debate-on-trans-rights

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5338797-5338797-we-need-to-examine-why-so-many-women-including-some-prominent-feminists-pushed-the-trans-movement?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=app_share

relevant recent thread that people here might like to read.