First GC thread on MN: Women are being censored because they wish to discuss the politics of gender

[GallantKumquat]

According to @NancyBlackettt, this is the first GC thread on MN. It's such a fascinating look at the state of GC in 2013 that I thought it worth while creating a separate thread to discuss it given the one year anniversary of FWS.

Moore, Bindle, 'cis', TRA unhingedness, organisation capture, the endless comparisons on transphobia to racism, homophobia, misogyny, disability, etc. and inability to formulate why men should have access to women spaces as an argument in itself. It's all here. A remarkable read.

Women-are-being-censored-because-they-wish-to-discuss-the-politics-of-gender-I-say-NO-Who-wants-to-join-me

13 years later and TRAs are still hiding their beliefs of what they consider men or women to be! Still the dishonest and circular "anyone who says they are / feels they are a woman"!

Why won't they simply be open? What differentiates a man from a wonan when it's not the sex of their body?

If we're going through old threads (thanks OP!) perhaps the ones about how to engage with those deserving of our engagement could be brought back

As soon as someone lies or threatens on a thread it's clear they're just there to derail, so don't let them.

Let's not forget:

Calling a man a 'man' = violence and threats

Saying you will 'fuck them with a splintery rolling pin' = just banter.

I see the usual splintery-rolling-pin-adjacent suspect has rolled up to derail

Anyway, that thread is a very interesting read. It's all there even back then: references to toddler tantrums/narcissistic rage; nascent handmaidery, the cotton ceiling made an early appearance (who knew that has been around as long as it has?) together with debate on lesbians' rights not to include men in the definition of who they're attracted to; and lots of references to threats and insults that were already being dished out.

There's also compassion to the trans person who had clearly written on the thread (but whose posts were later deleted).

Best comment on the thread was in relation to genitals being 'identified' as something else: "I mean, I call my husband's penis Captain, but it doesn't draw a salary from the navy"

The most interesting post on the thread, though, references a Swedish study which shows poor outcomes for those undergoing reassignment surgery: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/1664221-Women-are-being-censored-because-they-wish-to-discuss-the-politics-of-gender-I-say-NO-Who-wants-to-join-me?reply=36898920&utm_campaign=reply&utm_medium=share

Very much like the Finnish study that's just been published but THIRTEEN YEARS AGO.

Where's the "Don't engage with the Interupteron" unicorn when we need him?

If it hasn't already been posted I would always post the screenshot of his violent bsky post on any thread he comments on. I think people need to see that he is posting totally in bad faith and is the worst kind of violent man.

In the absence of the original:

Or using a brick to bash information into our heads.

No you males are not getting harassed. The fact you had a 'counter' protest to protest womens rights where you femphobes and misogynists harassed us shows who the true harassers are. Your violent male sex class. And proof of Male Pattern Thought Process and Male Pattern Violence is in this screenshot:

"Wild how you think that trans people do not get harassed, threatened and so on. It's actually kind of legal now to publicly abuse and harass us on the streets thanks to the gov.
And here we are, protesting, rallying and living loud and proud while outnumbering those "silent majority" transphobes at every single step."

This is misinformation.

It is not any kind of legal to abuse and harass trans people on the streets.

This is DARVO being again used to justify violent threats against female people who disagree that any male person should be included in female single sex provisions. Including silencing female people who wish to meet to discuss the ramifications of those inclusion demands.

13 years ago, the silencing was more behind the scenes. Today it continues out in the open.

It is not any kind of legal to abuse and harass trans people on the streets.

Absolutely, trans people are protected from harassment arising from being trans under the Equality Act. In that respect, they have the same rights as everyone else, as everyone falls under at least one of the nine protected characteristics.

What they don't have is the special privileges they have demanded - because no-one gets those - and/or the right to trample over other people's protected characteristics (sex-based rights and the right to hold gender-critical views), because the protected characteristics are not hierarchical (i.e. one characteristic is not more important than another).

They also don't have the right to remove others' right to freedom of speech. A wise man once said "No-one has the right not to be offended".

Can anybody magic up a unicorn with a rolling pin? Meanwhile, here's a heavily armed genderbread gingerbread person.

So interesting, thank you

GenderTrender, an early GC wordpress blog that TRAs apparently eventually pressured WordPress to shut it down, figures prominately. Archives of it can be found here:

https://archive.ph/98KiL

Or, the internet archive, here:

web.archive.org/web/20130310030747/gendertrender.wordpress.com/

And gerbils make their (first?) appearance:

Beachcomber · 24/01/2013 08:16

I suspect you might right that the starting point for trans exclusive feminists is the belief that trans women can never be women, no matter what. Then "evidence" to support this belief is retro-fitted, a bit like Christians drawing on pseudo science in an effort to make their belief in creationism seem logical.*

You what?

Come again?

What does this actually mean KRITIQ?

Are you saying that sex is a belief system? Does that mean that if I don't believe I can have all the PIV I want and I won't get pregnant? Does that mean if I don't believe I won't ever suffer from a prolapse as a result of childbirth or get cervical cancer or need an abortion? Does that mean that if I am raped and I try really really hard not to be taken in by 'pseudo science' then I won't get pregnant?

And LOL at "evidence".

The mental contortions required to cognate the dissonance of transgender theory are quite something.

So let me get this right.

A female reproductive system is 'pseudo-scientific evidence' that a person is female. Pregnancy is 'pseudo-scientific evidence' that a person is female.

I don't think I'm up to that level of double-think.

One of my gerbils has recently given birth and is feeding babies - I wonder if it is the female one or the male one?

Gerbils have always been here...

I should have worded it more as a question (then I did above), because I'm genuinely curious. There were numerous positive replies to the above post, so it did indeed seem to be an already running theme. Of course it might be just b/c everyone loves gerbils. Naturally!

But I wasn't able to find (via google) any earlier posts where gerbils were referred to as MN or FWR mascot. So, I'm genuinely curious how the gerbil mascot came about and if there's an origin story (or thread).

Um a user that was banned a while back was commenting on the Aston scraping fiasco. And referenced Barry Walls 'gender addled grievance gerbils' by upgrading to 'Foucault addled grievance gerbils' being that they were in a university setting.

Soon after another user used the AI to create a set of images, and a third user opened a shop to sell products from the fiasco. Many users contributed in comments, sarcasm and AI generated gubbins.

The aftermath is all captured in the humongous museum and art gallery cafe pub called 'The Bluestocking' which is now in its umpteenth premises and I believe still creates havoc for scrapers as they are just scraping nonsense.

Ah. Essentially a happy coincidence. Thanks for the info!

'I think women's rights politics are reaching a pivotal moment - a moment in which we must stand up for our right to discuss our status as second class citizens as a result of the biological fact that we are female. If we can't discuss it, we don't have much hope of fighting it.'

Beachcomber, 2013.

Its been a long bloody day.

And wow women have stood up again and again and again despite being pushed back down, sometimes violently.

Thank you for sharing those other threads @GallantKumquat I had another look and spotted an even earlier one that I had not noticed, from 2012:

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/1452492-New-Trans-thread-as-requested-by-HQs

Some of the posts refer to earlier threads, some with 1000 posts, but I can’t find them and it sounds like lots were deleted.

From one of the other 2012 threads linked upthread
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/1516197-Would-I-be-unreasonable-to-do-either-of-these-things-To-tell-a-Sikh-man

"Would I be unreasonable to do either of these things? To tell a Sikh man
139 replies
Wheezo · 12/07/2012 12:27
... that if he wants to avoid being racially attacked he should remove his turban because to wear something so obviously advertising his 'difference' is to invite racial abuse of some kind which he could do more to avoid (same goes for anyone wearing clothes with religious/cultural/non-western/non-white associations that draws attention to their 'difference')"

How awful that in the last 14 years we've got to a point where Jewish adults and schoolchildren are indeed being advised not to wear Star of David necklaces to avoid being attacked.

Fascinating to see how things have changed, and not changed.
Makes you wonder how long it will take to unpick the ideology.