Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Are we a cult?

788 replies

CyclingSam · 11/08/2026 11:01

I keep reading that sex realists, of which I am one, are a cult. Perhaps a genderist could be so kind as to explain what a cult is, and why we qualify. Sometimes one of us calls them a cult too. Who has a better case, hmmm?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
18
Stonehenger · Today 13:29

CohensDiamondTeeth · Today 13:14

No thanks!

Why should I give up a perfectly serviceable word that is commonly used to accurately describe me, and other women who are also adults, and instead take a new sub-set name which is inaccurate and imposed on me by men, so men can have use of the word "woman"?

Why does that benefit me, or any woman, the adult human female kind, or anyone who previously understood the common meaning of "woman" (such as those with English as a second language in a health care notification for example)?

Again I ask you, don't you think that's pretty sexist of you?

You would require women to "budge up" in service to men at a detriment to themselves. How is that feminism again?

Well I’d also distinguish between cis men and trans men! You don’t have to use the terminology; I’m just saying it does exist, and it solves the problem someone raised.

BackToLurk · Today 13:31

nicepotoftea · Today 12:59

And admitting that would in no way undermine your gender critical beliefs

You think Rowling's behaviour was inappropriate while most posters on this board don't, presumably because they interpret her behaviour differently and are more offended by the behaviour that motivated it.

However, if it were found out tomorrow that Rowling is in the habit of drowning kittens and puppies, humans would still not be able to change sex and women would still depend on sex based rights that men don't need. There is no purity test for being able to observe material reality.

I wonder whether they think there is ever an occasion where a photograph can be used to illustrate a man behaving creepily. Or should women just not mention it.

Stonehenger · Today 13:31

I genuinely don’t think describing myself as a cis woman is much different from describing myself as heterosexual.

I wouldn’t say ‘BUT IM JUST NORMAL?? Why should I have a word??’ Because that would be wildly homophobic.

It’s HELPFUL to be able to describe specific experiences.

NotAtMyAge · Today 13:32

Stonehenger · Yesterday 23:58

I don’t think so. I’d never send anyone a death threat AND I’d never use a photo of someone’s body with the intention to humiliate them. I haven’t said anywhere that J K Rowling actions make her opinions invalid (although I do disagree with them), but I do think actions have consequences, and one of the consequence here is that people think it’s misogynist behaviour.

And I’m not asking women to be perfect…. But I do draw the line at harassment based on what someone’s body looks like, or using the ‘look what she was wearing, she asked for it’ defence!

How can it be misogynistic behaviour when the person you're defending is a man? Fred Wallace is a man. No criticism of him can remotely be described as misogynistic.

nicepotoftea · Today 13:32

BackToLurk · Today 13:27

‘Non binary man’ and ‘non binary woman’?

But a non binary woman who is actually a woman or a non binary woman who is a man?

if everyone is defined according to whether or not they identify with a binary gender, where does that leave people who don't?

I'm not sure where I would be categorised according to this system.

Seems much more simple and inclusive to assume that in a medical context 'man' and 'woman' are neutral terms that refer to sex.

CassOle · Today 13:33

I'm putting this link here.
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5566007-have-people-heard-of-andrew-balcer-here

This is where the stupid idiocy of people putting men (who say they are women) in women's prisons leads.

Women and men (who say they are women) are not the same thing at all, and I won't pretend that they are. I am not going to include both sets of people in my use of the word 'woman', whatever some person on the internet thinks.

Boiledbeetle · Today 13:33

Stonehenger · Today 13:29

Well I’d also distinguish between cis men and trans men! You don’t have to use the terminology; I’m just saying it does exist, and it solves the problem someone raised.

But why do you need to distinguish between a man and a man who wants to be a woman? Both are still men.

Stonehenger · Today 13:33

NotAtMyAge · Today 13:32

How can it be misogynistic behaviour when the person you're defending is a man? Fred Wallace is a man. No criticism of him can remotely be described as misogynistic.

Have you missed all the posts on this thread about the concept of trans misogyny? It describes how misogyny and transphobia intersect in the treatment of trans women specifically.

DeeperShadeofRed · Today 13:34

Stonehenger · Today 13:00

A non sexist response would be something like ‘you’re being foolish’ then, or even ‘you’re an idiot’, or something much ruder!

As a women, I immediately recognise the type of dismissal in the use of ‘don’t get your knickers in a twist’ as gendered. It was sexist (and if @Boiledbeetle is a woman, suggests some kind of internalized misogyny).

I think most of you absolutely know it. You don’t have to ALL agree on everything!

Pure pearl clutching at this point.

SeaAndSangria · Today 13:34

AimsAndObjectives · Today 13:24

Yes of course the power dynamics can change when a man directs certain phrases at a woman. Duh!

If you read my post again, you'll see I actually said when it's aimed at a "man" (read that usually means anyone who "must be a bloke because they're not in complete agreement with what I'm saying, even though they're actually not a man at all)
Duh!

Stonehenger · Today 13:35

Boiledbeetle · Today 13:33

But why do you need to distinguish between a man and a man who wants to be a woman? Both are still men.

You don’t think trans women and cis men are having a different experience or being treated differently by society at all? And that it might be useful to have language to talk about that? Ok.

CassOle · Today 13:36

nicepotoftea · Today 13:13

Seems quite confusing.

Definitely leaves people who don't identify with a binary gender out in the cold.

It is confusing on purpose (I know you understand this nicepotoftea, I'm just laying it out plainly for the lurkers).

The whole point is to blur the boundaries between the sexes, which leads to the Balcer situation I linked to upthread.

DeeperShadeofRed · Today 13:37

Stonehenger · Today 13:31

I genuinely don’t think describing myself as a cis woman is much different from describing myself as heterosexual.

I wouldn’t say ‘BUT IM JUST NORMAL?? Why should I have a word??’ Because that would be wildly homophobic.

It’s HELPFUL to be able to describe specific experiences.

Last post was tongue in cheek...but I genuinely want to know why you need to describe yourself as anything (beyond form filling).

I will never understand this obsession with labels.

Boiledbeetle · Today 13:37

Stonehenger · Today 13:31

I genuinely don’t think describing myself as a cis woman is much different from describing myself as heterosexual.

I wouldn’t say ‘BUT IM JUST NORMAL?? Why should I have a word??’ Because that would be wildly homophobic.

It’s HELPFUL to be able to describe specific experiences.

See, I generally don't need to describe myself as an 'anything' woman. I'm just a woman. I also don't tend to go round describing myself as heterosexual. In day to day life it's irrelevant whether I'm heterosexual or homosexual. When necessary the objects of my desire have had no problem working out I'm attracted to them.

CohensDiamondTeeth · Today 13:38

Stonehenger · Today 13:29

Well I’d also distinguish between cis men and trans men! You don’t have to use the terminology; I’m just saying it does exist, and it solves the problem someone raised.

It "solves the problem" by not solving any problems at all, disadvantaging women, and by being a sexist premise in the first place. It doesn't make it any less sexist for men to appropriate the word women, if you also take away the word men and give it to a tiny percentage of women either.

Are you familiar with the phrase "Two wrongs don't make a right"?

So it doesn't really solve the problem at all does it? In fact it adds in a whole new set of problems and the disadvantages all fall on women of the adult human female kind.

I'm going to ask you again, and just saying "well you could do this" is not a proper answer. Really try and think about it, if you are a woman, I think it's important for you to challenge these sexist beliefs which make you place more importance on male wants over female needs.

Why should women give up a perfectly serviceable word that is commonly used to accurately describe those of us who are adults, and instead take a new sub-set name which is inaccurate and imposed on us by men, so men can have use of the word "woman"?

Why does that benefit any woman of the adult human female kind, or anyone who previously understood the common meaning of "woman" (such as those with English as a second language in a health care notification for example)?

Why don't you think that's just straight up sexist?

You would require women to "budge up" in service to men at a detriment to themselves. How is that feminism again?

AimsAndObjectives · Today 13:38

SeaAndSangria · Today 13:34

If you read my post again, you'll see I actually said when it's aimed at a "man" (read that usually means anyone who "must be a bloke because they're not in complete agreement with what I'm saying, even though they're actually not a man at all)
Duh!

This is what you said. Don't see an 'aimed' in there. In fact, it doesn't actually make much sense however it's read. Do you want to have another go?

It's so interesting how "the rules" changes depending on who it is saying it is on here.
"GC" says "don't get your knickers in a twist", it's not misogynistic or sexist.
You can bet though that if a "TRA" or "a man" read anyone who doesn't toe the usual line on here, usually women who get called a man for their opinions it certainly is seen as such.

BackToLurk · Today 13:42

Stonehenger · Today 13:33

Have you missed all the posts on this thread about the concept of trans misogyny? It describes how misogyny and transphobia intersect in the treatment of trans women specifically.

Is there ever an occasion where a photograph can be used to illustrate a male person behaving creepily. Or should women just not mention it.

CohensDiamondTeeth · Today 13:42

Stonehenger · Today 13:31

I genuinely don’t think describing myself as a cis woman is much different from describing myself as heterosexual.

I wouldn’t say ‘BUT IM JUST NORMAL?? Why should I have a word??’ Because that would be wildly homophobic.

It’s HELPFUL to be able to describe specific experiences.

"It’s HELPFUL to be able to describe specific experiences."

It's not a game of Uno, you can't just pull the reverse card.

A poster made this exact argument yesterday that women need the words we have always used to describe ourselves as a sex class.

Timewise, the turnaround of "steal a GC argument, twist it and turn it to try and use it against them" is fairly impressive, but it lacks originality of thought.

1/10

GladLemonCritic · Today 13:43

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Boiledbeetle · Today 13:44

Stonehenger · Today 13:35

You don’t think trans women and cis men are having a different experience or being treated differently by society at all? And that it might be useful to have language to talk about that? Ok.

Every person on the planet has a different experience to every other person on the planet. That is life.

I don't treat men who want to be women any differently than men who accept they are men. The men who want to be women can have a language to enable them to talk about it if they want. What they don't get though is to try and make actual women describe themselves as cis women in order to make the men who want to be women feel better.

GreyskySexRealistsky · Today 13:44

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Outstanding reasoning and argumentation, well done

BackToLurk · Today 13:45

Stonehenger · Today 13:35

You don’t think trans women and cis men are having a different experience or being treated differently by society at all? And that it might be useful to have language to talk about that? Ok.

Why not trans-identifying man?

GladLemonCritic · Today 13:46

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

GreyskySexRealistsky · Today 13:47

This reply has been deleted

This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines.

Which part do you disagree with?

AimsAndObjectives · Today 13:48

BackToLurk · Today 13:45

Why not trans-identifying man?

They could have gone for 'trans man' if the TRAs hadn't been so keen to muddy the waters by attaching that label to trans-identifying females.

Swipe left for the next trending thread