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.

You that, unlike some places on teh interwebz, we don't send up a batshit signal to hasten over somewhere and post like mad?

We are all individuals in our separate places answering posts.

If one poster makes a claim, and the next 20 posts refute that, perhaps the claim doesn't stand up to scrutiny?

It’s a metaphor. I suppose you don’t understand it because you haven’t been on the other side.

And no, not double standards at all. It’s called ‘robustness’. Or ‘standing up for oneself.’ I wasn’t rude to any singular person; I didn’t swear; I didn’t misgender anyone; no abuse of any kind. I was discussing how the deluge of abuse of others made me feel.

Again, you know the difference.

Too right I'm proud this board is 'robust'!

We are not here to soothe and placate.

We are here to look at evidence, logic, patterns. Discuss, debate, question, and critique.

I find it useful to note the difference between emotive shaded words and neutral descriptors.

People debating on a discussion board very rarely phrase things 'neutrally' as if you're moved to argue a point, you're not going to be neutral about that point. Opinions are not neutral things, they are the top public layer of deep underlying values, so people are going to express themselves strongly at times.
That said, I believe that people should restrict their responses to the words on the page rather than the character of the writer (as per MN guidelines) and lines can be crossed when people believe 'only a stupid person could have written that' and say as much, which is not great to be on the receiving end of, and obviously even worse if it turns out that several posters are of the same opinion.
This boards 'reputation' needs to be seen in the context that there is a great deal of investment in dismissing the views of people on this board as based in 'bad character', mob behaviour, bullying for the pleasure of it etc, because it ties in neatly with the anti GC propaganda that GC people are out to hurt trans people because they're nasty oppressors. Once this 'reputation' takes hold it facilitates dismissing anything the 'nasty women' say as spite.
In truth I find this board to have a mix of personalities, in as far as we can judge from words on a page, just like any other. There are some incredibly polite and patient people and a sprinkling of others I'd not fancy having a drink with.
However, I've also 'served my time' on threads about other contentious subjects, immigration, benefits, Gaza, right v left, and I've seen far worse behaviour than I've seen on this board.

What 'deluge of abuse of others' are you talking about?

If someone posts something very interesting or controversial on a popular board, several/many posters are likely to be quickly inspired to tap a response.

Some of these responses will be short & quickly pop up. Others will be lengthy and/or laboriously previewed and spell-checked. So only appear in staggered steps, and the same points may appear again and again. Because while people compose, other responses will appear that they've not yet read.

This isn't coordinated bullying. It can still feel like a pile-on. But, as we all know feelings don't always reflect the truth/reality.

We aren't a monolith. I dislike phrases like 'give your head a wobble' and any criticisms seeming to centre a poster's personality/assumed aims rather than the quality of their arguments. And I'd happily suggest that any post too long to fit on my phone without scrolling probably needs editing. But others may find these the perfect length, useful, amusing and/or very necessary. And they may very well be right.

Opposing the sex based rights of women and LGB people is extremist and fanatical.

Supporting unevidenced medical interventions that sterilize, destroy sexual function, cause massive side effects and can involve genital mutilation is extremist and fanatical.

Demanding others use speech that goes against their beliefs, including their beliefs in the rights of women and LGB people is extremist and fanatical.

Failing to prioritize object reality and objective truth is INCREDIBLY extremist and fanatical.

I suppose the whole premise of this thread is 'are GC women fanatical and extreme'. (Mad or bad people whose views we should discount)

Its irrelevant really.

Just another ad hom.

What matters are the facts, but many people are focussed on character assessments rather than the actual arguments.

That includes:

• Bad faith attacks and attempts to monster women who deviate from orthodox opinion

• People who are influenced/swayed by tribal views

I mean most people are sometimes swayed by the latter, its human.

But the people in the first group using ad homs are taking advantage of the second.

Oh but why can't you just think as you're toooooooold....

All this is rooted in a belief that it's wrong women are permitted to talk about this (their abuse, the violence, the appalling behaviour of these men, their feelings, their experiences, their actual personhood) at all, but if they absolutely must then they should do so very quietly and respectfully and submissively. And if one of their betters drops by to tell them how they are sinning, they should listen and show deference.

Look, fuck that.

If you can't handle the idea of mummy having sex or indeed any life beyond baby then this really isn't somewhere you're going to have much fun. Not until you've done a hell of a lot of growing up.

And part of the current batshit philosophy of the establishment in all its forms, who are not just in bed with activists but have lost any kind of boundaries at all with them and need a quick Freedom course, is just to repeat the bullshit phrases. Over and over and over. Market. Flood the market with it. Brand it your way. Say it until they're brainwashed and so bloody exhausted and sick to death of you that they stop fighting, and then (you hope, somewhat forlornly) that you have controlled reality and now everything is going your way. We're wise to it here because we have toddlers and teenagers, and many of us have been fucked about by dysfunctional and abusive men, we know all the scripts, all the behaviours.

Bang, and the dirt is gone.
Echo chamber

Makes about as much sense, used in much the same way, and holds about as much meaning.

As I said, that is how many people process other people’s posts to learn and educate.

If you need a different approach, then you need to think about where you post. Not one person should be expected to post to suit your personal preferences on this board.

You're quite tedious you know.

Have you ever seen an actual pile on? Go to, say,trans reddit and write something very mildly critical of gender ideology.

Then report back, eh?

It’s a metaphor. I suppose you don’t understand it because you haven’t been on the other side.

Is actually report worthy. Just by the way. (Also: hilarious assumption, given several people here have been piled on IRL)

This is well expressed regarding posts popping up while other posters are composing their own (possibly similar) reply.

This isn't a deli with a numbered ticket for everyone to take a turn to post.

This isn't a deli with a numbered ticket for everyone to take a turn to post.

This is a funny image, it made me smile. Sums it up though. People on here want to have their say. It's a discussion board. I imagine it can sometimes feel like a so-called pile-on if lots of posters are saying a similar thing. But why shouldn't lots of posters say a similar thing? We're not all sat in the same office. We're spread far and wide. Many of us have the same opinions and want to express them. And yes, robustly.

Thank you. I wonder if eventually one of us will compose just the right words for the message to sink in.

A post that makes a sweeping criticism of 'the board in general' is likely to prompt responses from 'the board in general'. I.e. several posters.

Several people disagreeing is not a 'pile on'.

Several people disagreeing is not a 'pile on'.

It's not. But having experienced what looks like similar circumstances to the above (re comments on "tone policing" etc), IME it can feel like one.

The way that the "deli counter" post above expressed why it isn't, and also how it could be perceived as one, was great.

Edited for clarity

Well, okay.

But I don't see why we are expected to accept being called 'a braying mob' or 'frenzied' or 'extremist' or 'fanatical' in silence.

I get the image of us numbering off and fuck anyone who was late. And it doesn’t matter how pertinent their post was, they missed out on the draw.

Oh. And if you swear, you are restricted from any further interaction or you post counts for two posts so the entire thread is penalised to fuck for someone’s swears and not keeping everyone in line. That way all posters are tightly controlled and posting within someone’s personal parameters.

I went on a night out for our works Christmas party on sat
The toilets weren't names but were labelled
3x urinal, 5x cubical on one door and 8x cubical on the other door.

On every occasion I went into what is clearly meant to be the ladies there were men in there. On the first two occasions some poor bloke had got confused and wondered through the wrong door and was apologetic to the upset women and on the final time there was a man and woman having a shag in the stall next to me

Had to be Brighton.

Was the shagging cubicle labelled 'genderfluid'?

🤢

Agreed. To paraphrase the advice I received (and mentioned above), sometimes you get your arse handed to you because people are disagreeing with your point.

On balance, this is a great, and yes occasionally uncomfortable, place to be precisely because it's a mix of robust challenge and everything in between. All from lots of different viewpoints.