Late night surprise about reputation of FWR

[IwantToRetire]

I was on Site Stuff to report back on ongoing freezing and noticed another thread about whether Mumsnet should apologise about deleting threads about ongoing conflict in the Middle East.

And there were some comments about there being a border line between legitimate criticism of Israel's policies and anti semitism. And it is this last that get these threads deleted.

So was surprised to see some comment on this thread saying it was as bad as some threads on FWR, and those particularly at fault are thos with a GC view point.

(Funnily enough AI suggested a title for this thread along the lines of "Are FWR debates judged differently ..... " but now it has hidden its suggestion, just when I was going to use it.)

Oh its come back

"Are sex and gender debates on FWR judged by different standards?"

It was me. I’ll report for corrective kindness training now

There is a special room at the bluestocking for such corrective measures, just go in the back door with head down, will let Maude know.

Disagreement isn't 'attack', no matter how many times you try to claim it is.

I like posts started by @IwantToRetire. And what is wrong with provocation? Are people not robust enough to cope with words on a thread? Dear me!

Don’t forget the derailers. Although I think they are all one and the same.

I'd say posters have been civil (if firm) in disagreeing with you. Nobody has been 'aggressive'.

It's definitely gone a bit 'Bananarama' round here.

What I mean by “I don’t care” is not “I don’t care about the issue” it’s (as I’ve explained more than once “I don’t believe you can change biological sex but I don’t care if other people do think that”. Any more than I don’t believe in religion, but I don’t care if others do.

I can certainly agree in as far that I don’t care if others believe in a religion that I don’t believe in and I also don’t care if other people do think that they can change biological sex. We are in agreement there.

It isn’t the thinking in someone’s head that we’re discussing but the practices on the ground that arise from the thinking. Perhaps that’s where the discussion is coming unstuck. You can opt to not care about what is in someone’s head, fine.

Edited to add that I’m trying to understand the parameters of these differing views.

However, @MyLuckyHelper does your not caring about others thinking they can change biological sex extend to not caring about whether such thinking means they get to go into single sex spaces? That is, are you equally fine with a man who (truly) thinks he’s a woman entering spaces meant for women?

@MyLuckyHelper
What I mean by “I don’t care” is not “I don’t care about the issue” it’s (as I’ve explained more than once “I don’t believe you can change biological sex but I don’t care if other people do think that”. Any more than I don’t believe in religion, but I don’t care if others do.
But if the people who believed very firmly in a given religion suddenly were able to enforce rules about no shops being open on Sundays, no public transport or sports on Sundays, purity police prowling about in search of unmarried couples having sex, would you care then?

As PP have pointed out, people who do (so they say) believe that they can change sex have been enforcing their beliefs on us for some years now. Women have lost their jobs because they have refused to follow meekly along like good girls.

There is a certain section of men who label women as aggressive if the women say 'er actually I'm a sentinent human capable of thought and deciding things without men deciding what's best for me'.

There was a 16 year old kid on the BBCs Manosphere documentary who turned around and said that women don't really want to be lawyers and have careers.

Most of these TRA male posters sound exactly the same...

What is the correct way to answer posters who say something like 'I think the GC position is extreme, the real problem is men not TW'?

Are we supposed agree, ignore it, or say why we cannot treat men as if they are women?

It's bonkers to post on a board where you know something has been discussed at length over many years, with a very simplistic view and expect to be treated as if the comment was profound. Then be all hurt when people say you dont know what you are talking about. Back your argument not claim to be a victim.

Why not read the board first? Get an idea of the real GC view. Argue the real points not one you imagine.

As I’ve explicitly stated on more than one occasion now, my intention here was simply to note that, from my own experience, I’ve seen hostility and aggression on more than one side of the discussion, in response to a specific point that was raised by a PP. That’s all I was trying to contribute and tbh I don’t feel that’s been disproven by the replies.

I respect everyone else’s right to their opinion & understand many of the points raised but I’m not interested in debating trans issues with anyone. I understand people feel very strongly about it and you’re all entitled to your views, including any criticisms you have of mine. However the “debate” tends to go in circles and becomes unproductive unless Im willing to agree with everything said, as there’s no room for alternative view points.

However the “debate” tends to go in circles and becomes unproductive unless Im willing to agree with everything said, as there’s no room for alternative view points.

You stated your position, you made your case, you failed to change anyone's mind, that's not hostility or aggression that called losing an argument.

As I’ve explicitly stated on more than one occasion now, my intention here was simply to note that, from my own experience, I’ve seen hostility and aggression on more than one side of the discussion, in response to a specific point that was raised by a PP. That’s all I was trying to contribute and tbh I don’t feel that’s been disproven by the replies.

Could you please point out the aggression and hostility? As opposed to reasoned, fact-based, arguments?

I regularly get dèjà vu when I read posts on here: there's more than a couple of posters with a very distinctive and familiar posting style, with a similar 'view'

@Wearenotborg get thee to the rear of the bluey, pronto 😉

You can say whatever you like, but it will go around in circles if you don't offer anything more than 'it's my opinion'.

It's not 'unproductive' because you don't agree. It's unproductive because you're not offering up a good argument for your position. If you have good arguments for an alternate view, put them forward. Let's discuss it.

If you have a good point with evidence or at the very least good logic, then I'd be more than happy to look into it and maybe alter my position.

But, as you say, you're not interested in a debate.

As far as I can tell @MyLuckyHelper position on this seems to boil down to 'it doesn't affect me'.

When reminded that 'it doesn't affect her' because other people have fought for her right to her rights to single sex spaces and her rights call men, men ... nothing.

When reminded that it does affect other people (like the poor child assaulted by Katie Dolatowski) ... nothing.

So forgive us all if this is not a view we have huge respect for.

Watch it @TheKeatingFive . Your hostility and aggression is showing. 😉

I’ve seen hostility and aggression on more than one side of the discussion, in response to a specific point that was raised by a PP. That’s all I was trying to contribute and tbh I don’t feel that’s been disproven by the replies.

I don't understand how anyone could ever argue against or disprove this? Of course, in a heated debate involving millions like this one, there will be "hostility and aggression on more than one side". Which is why the statement above can only really be taken to mean the sides are comparable in this respect. Which is why posters are responding with comments examining degree and type of aggression, which definitely is an interesting debate, with scope to (if not prove things definitively) present a pretty damn strong argument.

Agreed. I have yet to see a woman threatening to 'rape' a man to further the argument that men need to stay out of women's spaces. Actually, not under any circumstances, come to think about it.

I mean, there's the general 'fuck you' but that's hardly in the same bracket as 'terfs should be.....(Add your own perverted rape scenario here).

Baseball bats, barbed wire, girl dick, bleed, cunt, etc etc etc.

But it's all very 'two sides' eh?

Are you really shocked when others respond to your post on a discussion board?

Is that another one for the back of the Bluey? 😂😂😂

Actually, I don’t think the poster has stated their position or made their case. I can’t even see that there was an argument to lose. There has been no debate because there’s nothing this poster has said that is debatable ie no alternative viewpoint was proffered.

The only takeaway is that they don’t believe that people can change sex but they don’t care if others do. That might well be the same view as 90% of posters here. The difference being that the implications of ‘others believing’ are debated on these threads, while this poster (and many other drive by scolders) avoids taking part in that debate and instead just stands by and repeats over and over again that everyone here is aggressive and hostile.

Yes, this is exactly the pattern with these type of posters.