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.

I don't understand the relevance.

From my experience Tandora posts something provocative that can't be backed up by evidence or logic, and people get sucked in.

I always assume that the goal is just to get people to engage, but I don't think they are particularly aggressive compared to e.g. AIBU. Perhaps people shouldn't waste their time on them, but then there are plenty of threads on MN that have no purpose.

Most of Tandora’s threads went badly, didn’t they? They were popular and filled up quickly too, and why would that be? People really loved attacking her, that’s why. Try reading through a thread.

People didn't love "attacking her", people wanted a straight answer out of her, which she didn't give.

I wasn't going to bother coming back, but a point of clarification. The difference between what has happened in this thread and what happens with others (such as those involving Tandora or Howse) is that no one is trying to convey a TRA standpoint. Despite the efforts of some here to twist comments and make it appear that way.

It's like you are fighting imaginary demons, tbh. So quick to lash out at any sort of perceived criticism that you end up attacking the wrong people.

And no, there isn't a deli system, and individual posts are, in the main, fine, although it is rather frustrating when words are twisted and there are some significant logic leaps made to make it seem like you are saying something you aren't. The cumulative effect of a number of posters rounding on another and sticking the boot in after they have stopped engaging, does, in my opinion, amount to a level of bullying. You won't agree, because bullies never do, but it makes for some very uncomfortable reading. This thread has been a good demonstration of it.

People really loved attacking her, that’s why.

Threads that fill up (and don't relate to an ongoing situation like a tribunal) tend to be fuelled by somebody posting rage bait.

Perhaps people shouldn't respond (and there are often pleas to ignore trolls), but if you come on a feminist forum and tell women that e.g. they have pink brains, you can't be surprised if some people respond.

You might as well go on the 'Doghouse' forum and suggest that dogs should be on leads at all times.

People have been posting rage bait on the FWR forum for decades.

I think in fairness, some people on the board are TRA and MRA, and if so, it can be helpful to have that out in the open from the offset. They are as entitled to post as anyone else, but should have courage of conviction and own their position. Unfortunately some behave quite disingenuously, asking questions they believe are 'gotchas', spreading false information, and derailing the thread, hence a climate of suspicion of intent has resulted.
I actually am a 'leftist' and have said things that people have clearly considered 'stupid'. However I own those views, disagree they make me 'stupid' so it's water off a ducks back.
Ad homs should be reported.

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

That's a load of crap, for starters.
I've seen people tag others in who haven't even been on threads before, sending out batshit signals of their own that way.
Or creating a thread to discuss other threads (which in any other context or part of MN isn't allowed and is against talk guidelines, but somehow allowed on here) and then people coming on to shout "oy oy cucomelon" and going on about gaming and Weetabix to try and change the topic 😂 (laugh emoji as it really was as ridiculous as it sounds 😁) happens all the time.
It's just kind of funny now, it's so ridiculous.

If you are going to call people bullies, you really need to give an example of what you are talking about. Otherwise it's just vicious slander. So please do. You have all of FWR to use as a source.

The cumulative effect of a number of posters rounding on another and sticking the boot in after they have stopped engaging, does, in my opinion, amount to a level of bullying.

But isn't that a function of the way this website works? I remember making a comment about au pairs (years ago under a different user name) on a thread where everyone clearly had an au pair, and nobody agreed with me. I didn't like it, but it's just a website and it wasn't personal, because nobody knew who on earth I was.

It's also difficult to believe in good intent when somebody has said something like 'sex is bi-modal', and it's been explained why that doesn't make sense, and then they wheel out the same argument on another thread.

Yup
Maybe black and brown people should let it go if a white person insists they're black or brown, maybe in a group discussing slavery or the Empire and said they were disadvantaged and prejudiced against.
Maybe disabled people should turn the other cheek if abled people claim their benefits and use the disabled loo.
Maybe 8 year olds and their parents should just shut up if 38 year olds want to join the kids in the playground or soft play centre.

Hundreds of threads on here each week continue after people who disagree with each other stop posting.

If people want threads stopped after a certain amount of time after each individual stops posting, then this ceases to be a forum.

Maybe those individuals need their own substack instead?

It matters EVERYWHERE. Even in knitting groups, or book clubs, or other places where we are vanishingly unlikely to be assaulted or lose in a competition. If it's women-only, that's that. We are women, they are not.

Howse? Oh, dear.

The regular TRA posters know exactly what responses they will recieve. They come here because they are passionate about their beliefs and tireless in their attempts to influence others. It appears to me that there is almost a relationship between these posters and the GC posters, where both sides know exactly what to expect.
I think they are not at all the same as a new poster coming here and being 'set upon' for expressing a 'moderate' view. So don't serve as examples to support that this happens.

Well, I have no idea who any of you fuckers all are, but my main complaint is the moaning.

Even the campest gay man is still male; and if you have been around gay club culture you will know just how heavy is the scent of testosterone to be found there. Having feminine mannerisms or tastes does not make someone less male, and it certainly doesn't turn a man into a woman.

All of my best male gay friends have still had a very masculine approach to sex. Males are wired differently.

Yes, I know this. I was talking about the views of women I've encountered who believe in a 'moderate' approach.
I'm not sure they conflate TIM with gay men (though some women feel it's acceptable to afford gay men 'liberties' if you will, that they wouldn't allow heterosexual men) its more that they think TIM are a different type of person altogether. A man who is not really a man, because he's taking hormones or he's had his penis inverted, or his brain is wired differently etc.
This isn't my personal view, but I encounter it a lot and its a difficult one to challenge, because many people have become convinced of this.

Well, yes.....people who are unable to think things through methodically and in a critical way. That's just about everyone who supports the idea of men being given access to female only facilities and categories are the basis that they wear and dress and make-up; or because they have fragile mental health and/or use 'she' pronouns.

I think most people only think about the few trans identified men they have personally encountered and not about the issue more generally.

Except they have.

In the same way that women are being asked to modify their behaviour if they don't want/like/can't share space with a man who would like to use them and the women's space to meet his own needs.

For someone “highly educated” she’s as thick as shit really! If we are all extremists then so are the UK Supreme Court, which seems unlikely.

Except it is that straightforward isn’t it. Me, you and everyone not only on this thread but on this planet has been brought into existence by the fertilisation of a female sex cell (egg) by a male sex cell (sperm).

So in what way is sex not binary?

I agree.

If someone wishes to control how others interact with their posts, they need to start a platform just for them (easy to do these days), or join a heavily moderated group.

It is remarkable to think that someone really doesn’t their posts interacted with yet posts on a discussion forum. And to declare that people should stop interacting with a post because that poster has left the thread doesn’t reflect how these discussion forums work at all.

I am now really thinking there are people who can’t understand how their own interaction parameters amount to control of a group. Or don’t want to understand.

If you don’t want your posts interacted with by people you cannot control, then there are other options available on the internet.

"Sex isn't binary" means either

"I don't understand what I am saying"

or

"I'm using sex to mean something that has nothing to do with reproduction, so we are disagreeing about linguistics, not science, and frankly I'm doing this because I couldn't care less about women's rights, and find discussion of them distasteful"