Are we extremist and fanatical?

[RogueFemale]

We, as in gender critical/sex realist women.

I saw an old schoolfriend today, to exchange Christmas gifts over tea and biscuits. She's highly educated and intelligent, v. firmly feminist (in the sense of anti-patriarchy, and wanting women to use Ms not Miss or Mrs). Has travelled widely, knows a lot about other cultures etc.

Politics came up and I mentioned Phillipson blocking the ECHR guidance, and how I wasn't happy about it.

Turns out she thinks my gender critical views are extremist and fanatical. Actual words. I knew already she was inclined to the 'be kind' end of the spectrum, and that we disagreed, but this was new - that I'm an extremist.

That I was being unkind and TiM had a right to exist (I said of course they do, but...). That I should keep my views to myself, if I didn't want to be regarded as a nasty person, essentially.

I said, 'you don't understand'. She was having none of it, said she understands very well, and how there's been gender fluidity since time began. (And these poor TiM have nowhere to pee if they can't go in the ladies, as they'll get abused if they go in the mens).

But she really doesn't understand what is happening now.

I tried to tell her about autogynophilia, about how TiM have been attacking women who protest, the pattern these men have of abuse convictions, same as all men, etc. I said I could send her stuff to prove my points, she said, please don't.

Just a bit depressed to be told by an old friend that I'm a fanatical extremist weirdo, really.

Certainly she doesn't understand that she's not the arbiter, but to be fair, she is not a woman who toes the line around men, is often in a battle with them both professionally and in the home arena (the misogynistic residents association, for example).

It is going to take me a while to catch up on the hundreds of posts, but huge thanks for your support.

Your friend doesn't think TIM are 'real men'. If she's an intelligent woman who's done her research, I'd doubt deep down she believes they are women like herself and you. But the likelihood is she believes them to be a special category of 'non men'. Safer and softer than other men and victimised by men because of it. Therefore having more in common with women than men, and a natural ally to women in the fight against oppression by 'real men'.
This is how most feminists who include TIM in their feminism square the circle ime.

Yes, she argued that the TiM had to toilet somewhere and so it had to be the ladies', because if the poor TiM had to go in the mens' they'd be abused, boohoo. No logic relating to why women should be the ones who have to put up with the TiMs.

@Ccaatt Welcome to the FWR sex and gender board.

Have you just joined or did you name change to drop by and give us all a good scolding?

If you want one from this thread, then the complete overreaction to my comment is a good one. This whole spiral started, rather ironically, from my response to someone else's tone policing! I've now had umpteen lectures about womens rights, tone policing, about the actions of TRAs, what could possibly be a thinly veiled comment that I'm a man, Be Kind, etc, etc.

But yes, definitely not an echo chamber... It might happen to be one that I tend to agree with, but still.

What is the proportionate response to someone calling you a 'braying mob'?

And, what makes a response/comment a lecture?

Some might say you're the one lecturing others.

No. Posters disagreed with you and
asked you to back up accusations of us being a 'braying mob'.

Can you pinpoint precisely what you have an issue with people saying on this thread? Beyond them disagreeing with you?

And if you think it's an echo chamber, precisely what elements being discussed on here do you disagree with?

What makes you think that the comment was directed at you? Very defensive!

It seems like anything I saw will be willfully twisted to suit whatever impression you have already made of me. Oh well. I made a comment on the way some things come across and that it can make for unpleasant reading. I've never reported it, nor would I, because I believe in free speech. Some people seem to have taken this as some sort of personal attack, maybe that says more about them than they wish to admit to, I don't know.

Oh give over parroting 'echo chamber', that's all it is. Just a well known hackneyed 'say bullshit long enough and some twit might believe it' thing.

You are here, voicing your views, undeleted, unbanned. An echo chamber is something like Reddit, where anyone dissenting is vanished. Not disagreed with.

I didn't read that post as assuming your comment was about them so I'm not sure why you did. I read it as someone asking you what kind of response you would have considered acceptable without it triggering accusations from you?

I think that's a reasonable question. I'm wondering the same.

Fwiw, I am only dipping in and out of the thread and your posts are coming across as sharp as anybody else's.

Shoogly

Women are pointing out the hypocrisy in dehumanising women by using the term ‘braying’ which is also a word that shames people for sounding like donkeys mindlessly making noise. Frenzy is somewhat dehumanising too,You have made these accusations and then are complaining that people are responding to that accusation pointing out the issues with the language used.

Do you not see that hypocrisy here?

Particularly since it could be said you joined in with other posters to accuse and shame the board generally, which in my experience with some other posters very quick to declare they have been piled on, could be likened to a ‘pile on’ to FWR posters.

Perhaps you don’t see it, but others have and have been pointing it out.

What makes you think I think the comment was directed at me?

And this not-very-well-veiled dig at the end, is that you demonstrating how pleasant you are in comparison to how 'unpleasant' others are?

This is a pot/kettle situation, I'm afraid.

Thanks @ArabellaSaurus , yes that is a pertinent qualifier. It is legal to discriminate in a more personal capacity (eg to discriminate when choosing a sexual partner)

What word would be acceptable?

Huh, generally shame the board? What? I pointed out MY feelings when reading certain things, but have always said people are fine to post however they want. I'm not trying to stop people posting whatever they want. I did say, and will continue to think, that some of the more hardline approaches are likely to push people away. Hell, I'm close to walking away.

I don't think calling someone "thick" is robust discussion. Is that tone policing? I don't think so. Maybe we have different understandings of what that is. I clearly have a different interpretation of what an echo chamber is.

In the context of the OP's question, then yes, this board is clearly on one side of the discussion, and it's NOT representative of the general public. Does that matter? Not really. Is it worth thinking about, maybe.

I think of gender ideology as a religious belief. I don't see sex realism as a religious belief - I see it as factual/scientific

Lack of religious belief is also a protected characteristic. But I wouldn't say sex realism is equivalent to lack of belief in gender ideology. I may have to abandon this analogy if it's breaking down 🤔😂

Imagine having a slur for people who 'believe' in gravity, and being taken seriously for it.

I see your point. Better expressed than I put it.

There's some interesting discussion of exactly that point on the Robin Ince thread. Atheism+ has very rapidly turned into a fullblown religion. Us Old Unbelievers look on aghast.

For those curious to see this rickroll 'frenzy', here it is:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5458443-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-following-employment-tribunal-judgment-thread-58?page=30

I warn you, it's a disappointingly tame 4 posts - at least 2 of which are of ambiguous seriousness - and a handful more that are either obvious jokes or pointing out that the originals were.

Is that it?? Hardly a frenzy is it!

What word would be more acceptable than the dehumanisation of calling a group a braying mob? How about just leaving it as ‘I am sometimes uncomfortable reading threads’, with no judgemental comparison attached to it?

Is the link that Binturong posted what you referred to as an example of a ‘frenzy’? Because if that is an example then I think the characterisation is disproportionate.

When you consider the act of posting an accusation of posters going too far when using a comparative descriptor such as ‘braying mob’ and ‘frenzy’, emotive terms that are likely to get challenged, isn’t that an example of jumping on the ‘rage-wagon’?

Surely it can be said that your posts have been an example of what you accused others of?

What I have taken away from your posts is that you wish to use whatever language you want to while then complaining that others have gone too far in their language and their point of view. You agree that if the post stays within the accepted talk guidelines of the forum then everyone is entitled to speak as they wish, however keeping in mind that others will judge them for how they say something and what they say, while offering an insightful demonstration of just that.

I pointed out upthread that we get many posters who come along and post with undermining language and expressions who then complain that the board is not welcoming. An example of that would be posting as a new poster saying ‘I think that is so much hate on this board, but can you please explain x’ or the old ‘I don’t have a problem with sharing toilets with my friend who is a transwoman, why are you all so obsessed with this topic? ‘. Another example is often found on the AIBU board where a poster jumps onto a thread and complains that this is yet another transphobic thread in AIBU and how that poster is annoyed that it is there, when the reality is that the poster lacks the ability to scroll past a thread they are not interested in or maybe wants to berate and shame posters for interacting with the thread.

To me, that is a baiting style. It is a version of negative feedback farming where someone posts something using language that is inflammatory (intentional or not) and then claiming to be ‘just posting a question’, or just expressing an alternative opinion. When that is not ‘all’ that the poster has done. They have also expressed negative judgement and people are responding.

I have too often seen a pattern of those undermining posters then claiming to be victims of a pile on and victims of attack when people respond to the judgement delivered in the post.

Thank you for posting that link. I read on a few pages to check and I think that puts a few things into perspective.