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 is rather odd to me to show up on a thread and really have no point to make other than i don't agree with you but am not saying why.

Then how dare you question my lack of logic, lack of point, missing data

you are really howid to me (i will scream and scream and scream until i am sick and i can you know)

me me me

on reflection they are mostly pretending , and are TRA derailers IMHO.

They are here and all over other threads like a plague of locusts because our collective efforts in reality is bringing their house down brick by heavy slow brick.

Slowly but surely.

I’m not suggesting there aren’t knowledgeable women on this forum - I think the majority are quite intelligent and know their subject, actually. That isn’t in doubt. But do posters here feel the same about irregular posters? Or are you thinking that we’re all ignorant leftist TRAs, probably male? Because if your reactions proceed from that position, it does explain quite a bit about the kind of conflicts we see here on a daily basis.

This is what I mean.

I am my own person. I am not a TRA. I don’t appreciate being likened to a locust.

I have been here for many years (upwards of 15) under several names. I haven’t changed my views a single bit, so you haven’t brought my house down.

I’m here for feminist theoretical debate. I’ve seen less and less of that as the years have gone by, and that is just how some spaces evolve.

There is no pretence here.

The same reason any debate goes on constantly, whether it be about womens rights such as abortion or about war.

I’m here for feminist theoretical debate.

What aspect of feminism did you want to debate?

But do posters here feel the same about irregular posters? Or are you thinking that we’re all ignorant leftist TRAs, probably male?

First of all, what are those views that you’ve not changed one bit in 15 years?

Second, it’s hard to evaluate irregular posters views if a clear position isn’t made and/or if the claim doesn’t extend beyond an initial position.

For example, myluckyhelper says they don’t believe people can change sex, but also doesn’t care if others do. I asked if that view extended to not caring if the believers (men who believe they’re women) wanted to enter all female single sex spaces but heard nothing back. So no response apart from a repeated accusation of being nasty.

To me, a ‘live and let live’ argument is limited and without discussing the wider implications, certainly serves TRAs.

I thought it was Feminism/Womens Rights?

Your intention is to centre yourself and not listen to anyone else. Your intention is to scold everyone else for not agreeing with you.

Then wonder why they don't and call disagreement 'aggressive'.

Yep we understand fully.

Nevermind

Yet I notice you refused to discuss or refute any of Theeyeballsinthesky's points about how women defending our rights are being abused.

Why is that? Why is it that you cannot address the actual issues brought up, if you are here in good faith?

I’m not interested in debating trans issues with anyone.

It’s a mystery why this poster is bothering posting on FWR.

The TRA side, has transwomen on here like AidaP who say us feminists and women like JK Rowling should be raped 'with a splintered rolling pin'. You can't take the Male Pattern Thought Process or Male Aggression out of transwomen it seems. The TRA side has gives rape threats and death threats, tells us we should die in a grease fire, be raped til our insides bleed, be skinned alive, be decapitated (along with signs at pro-trans/anti-women rallies that have a picture of a guillotine, and a woman being hanged).
The GC side simply says that rape survivors like me deserve our hard won female only single sex spaces, that our foremother feminists fought for.

So please don't 'two sides' this. Being asked to respond in good faith in a discussion is not vitriolic. Get back to me when us women and girls, us feminists give men rape threats and death threats like these (and I don't expect you to respond because I notice you refuse to actually discuss any points raised to you, you just want to scold and lecture and talk at, not talk with):

They literally admit to the bad faith.

The argument that usually gets trotted out is that they want to genuinely debate trans issues. Here we have an example of admitting they are here to shitstir and scold whilst wondering sincerely why they are given short shrift.

They are here merely to frame us as monsters and bigots because we refuse to defer to their 'greater knowledge and wisdom'.

And make out that we are too stupid to get this.

How is that even remotely nasty? It would only be nasty if someone said something like "lets hope your child is attacked" .

which was that there’s absolutely nastiness on both sides

Again, no, it absolutely is not 'both sides'. That's an absolute lie.

Not when by males 'living their life' means women and girls are impacted. Their rights end when our rights begin.

It's strange how none of you ever advocate for females to live our lives. It's only males that statement is ever used for. Funny that.

How is someone saying they hope your child is NOT harmed = hoping they are harmed? Are you serious?

Yet you have not been able to give one example of a GC person being 'aggressive'.

I imagine becuase a TRA might be less threatened by view of “live and let live”, than a GC person.

I actually truly laughed out loud at that. That is rich! It is the TRAs who won't allow women and girls to live and let live in our spaces, who won't allow us to meet up without them smashing up buildings and bringing loudhailers to drown out women. GC are live and let live, TRAs are the EXACT OPPOSITE of that. They will not let women just exist. They will not ever leave us alone or let us ever have anything, anything at all to ourselves. Ever notice GCs never counter-protest any trans events?

Now which one is it that won't live and let live?

Sorry but I cannot believe you typed that with a straight face. It's complete DARVO personified.

Except you refuse to even tell us what your beliefs are.

@ThatBlackCat the fact that I’ve had five tags from you alone in the space of 9 minutes, first thing on a Sunday morning, is aggressive to me.

The relentless hounding of someone who doesn’t share your views, is quite frankly, aggressive.

I’m not suggesting you’re going to send me a letter bomb, you don’t have to be violent to be aggressive.

You’re welcome to keep hysterically tagging me in your thoughts in rapid succession, but it won’t change the response I’ve given several times in that I’m not going to debate trans issues with you, or anyone else. And I’m as entitled to do that, as you are to spend your time trying to batter people into your way of thinking by mocking them.

Enjoy your Sunday if that’s how you wish to spend it 😂

Generally, they’re a thread where someone is being attacked by a group of posters.

There's the lies and misrepresentations again. A discussion is not 'attacking'. If you feel having a discussion, even if someone robust in nature, is 'attacking', perhaps you're not cut out for discussion forums?

1. You have not even expressed any of your opinions on here. We don't even know what your opinions are because you won't tell us what they are. How can we 'attack' you or be 'aggressive' to you when we don't even know what your opinions even are, in the first place?
2. You have not provided one, not even one, example of 'both sides' being aggressive. You have not provided one single example of any GC attack on here or elsewhere. You are lying here. Having a discussion in good faith is only 'attacking' as an easy out if you know you can't/won't enter the discussion in good faith. No one dragged you here, you chose to enter the thread. If you refuse to discuss anything and then turn around and lie and smear about 'attacks' and 'aggression', it's obvious you are not here in good faith and have an agenda to attack and smear and gaslight GC posters.

@MyLuckyHelper
I’m not going to debate trans issues with you, or anyone else.
So you're only here to tell us that we're 'aggressive' and 'vitriolic' for disagreeing with you, without having any interest in finding out why we might be a bit tetchy (but not, IMHO, aggressive and certainly not vitriolic) about this topic.

I note you haven't responded to my comments upthread about how you might feel if religion (which you don't believe in, but don't care if others follow) suddenly made demands of you or restricted your freedoms. Because failing to respect and obey rules about transwomen has lost women their jobs. Women are forced to subjugate themselves to what is a belief system to remain employed. Doesn't that bother you at all?
At least, I think it was you who made that comment.
Edited to be more polite.

i also haven’t expressed an opinion on self ID.

But's that's the thing, you haven't expressed any opinions on anything at all. So exactly why are you here?

We are. We're certainly being lied about and smeared by some posters that seemingly have no interest in adding anything to this discussion and are not here in good faith.

Sorry Dr Blackbird, I’d hate for you to think im
ignorning you. I did respond, so you didn’t ‘hear nothing back’

As I explained directly to you and multiple times to others, I didn’t come
here to debate trans issues, just to add my personal experience that I’ve seen aggression (not threat of violence which some posters seem to think I meant) on
both sides, in direct response to someone who said it doesn’t happen on both sides. I mistakenly thought I was allowed to have a view on that. Clearly misjudged it.

My view on transwomen entering single sex bathrooms is irrelevant, if I say I agree - I’ll be jumped on, if I say I don’t - I’ll be jumped on.

What will it add to your life to know my view on it? I can’t shape or influence policy around it, so my views are totally irrelevant to you. And I suspect unless all our views align perfectly - the conversation will be never ending and that’s not a sensible use of time
for anyone is it.

and actually your last point tha my attitude serves TRA, is exactly the point I made about why my views might’ve attracted less hostility from TRAs, but @ThatBlackCat laughed out loud at that and said it was utter nonsense. So seems I can’t win!

OR it's Sunday afternoon/evening in Aus, and a poster is catching up with the threads and responding to comments made whilst they were a sleep. Not aggressive just geography.