J. K. Rowling is cancelled because she is a T.E.R.F [ADMIN WARNING IN POST #1]

LLMMLL

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I have to think it must be purely an oversight on your part rather than putting it down to anything malicious, but that’s just nonsense. You’re suggesting that these women who were married to men have been radicalised after they discover that their husbands have always harboured a deep desire to emulate womanhood, and that’s what turns them towards “anti-trans” ideology, and you imagine they’ll do an about face once they’ve had time to process the idea that their husband has always harboured a deep desire to emulate womanhood?

I can understand why you are of that belief that appears to have formed in an echo chamber which perpetuates certain narratives to justify behaviour which you try to make sense of, but I would suggest that because the underlying contention is fundamentally flawed (the idea that “trans women are women”), it’s natural that the conclusion would also be fundamentally flawed.

One of the most recent examples (and there are many) that contradicts your “cart before the horse” thinking was a case in the UK -


Transgender woman ends bid to see her ultra-Orthodox Jewish children

Yes that's exactly what I'm saying. They go on mumsnet to speak to other "trans widows" and are offered a framework that allows them to direct their grief towards curbing trans rights. Counselling would be a far healthier solution.

That case you linked doesn't relate at all to what I said. No idea why you posted it.

karlitob

Libski wrote: »

That's not a very understanding opinion. I believe that there are people who truly feel that they don't "fit" the body that they have. We used to call it "dysphoria" and now we generally call it "transexual" but the name only indicates our culture around it - not the reality that some people are born feeling "different".

I think that it's important to be respectful of someone's feelings regardless of your opinion of them.

And that's when we meet a line in the sand - is stating your opnion that biological men are men and biological women are women disrespectful, or factual?

I think that respect and tolerance is needed on both sides. People who believe that sex is biological need to appreciate that not everyone feels like they fit their body, and people who feel like they don't fit their body need to respect the fact that most people do and that's why most people believe that a biological male/female is a biological male/female.

But respect is key. Empathy is important. It's important to acknowledge how others feel and respect that.

To be fair - you’ve gone on leaps and bounds from what I said. Always nice to identify the person who thinks they are some sort of wise sole who focussed so much on respect as if you’re the only one.

It is quite the understanding position if you bothered to reference the rest of the conversation that it related to. I clearly state that how am I supposed to know how a person with gender dysphoria feels when given a diagnosis of cancer which is typical to the gender they don’t wish to be.

But you jump on a phrase to go off on a soapbox. It’s not an intolerant or disrespectful position to use such language.

Gender dysphoria is a perfectly acceptable phrase to describe the conflict that people feel between their biological sex and the gender they believe they are.

https://www.hse.ie/eng/health/az/g/gender-dysphoria/causes-of-gender-dysphoria.html

https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/gender-dysphoria/what-is-gender-dysphoria


Just because a person with gender dysphoria doesn’t like the phrase that doesn’t mean they speak for all people with it, or that their experience - or feelings - have some sort of veto over the use of medical phrases and terms. There are plenty of slur words used to hurt. This is not of them as the intent clearly isn’t there.

It is possible to acknowledge someone’s feelings, respect those feelings - yet still have an opinion that is different from another person. They are not mutually exclusive.

So I’m not sure who you’re invoking with the royal ‘we’. But I don’t need you to police my use, or non use of language.

Finally, and in a nice loop to my post that you quote - how can I be empathetic to what a person with gender dysphoria who gets a cancer that is typical of the gender that they do not wish to be goes through as I am and cannot be any of those things or go through any of those things. (I’ve already answered the point about their feelings in the above paragraph - before you jump on that).

karlitob

Libski wrote: »

And that's when we meet a line in the sand - is stating your opnion that biological men are men and biological women are women disrespectful, or factual?.

You’re loving the royal ‘we’

There’s more to that question - is denying fact disrespectful and hurtful to those who state it.

While the topic here is transgender, this question can apply to any topic.

A persons feelings on a topic - however close to their heart and however it affects them more - does not give them a right to deny facts. And they denial of facts is disrespectful and can be hurtful.

karlitob

Wibbs wrote: »

Different to what though? I'm male, I don't know what it is to be a man, or feel like a man, I know what it is to feel like me, but that's it. Some of it is obviously reinforced by society and upbringing, but all I know how to be is me. I certainly can't explain what it is to be male, so how could I feel female, because that's just as subjective. ".

That’s interesting. I see your point but would you say that you share the same feelings/outlook/approach to other men - so much so that there is some commonality on what it’s like to ‘be’ a man.

Get ready to go out quickly
But what you need in a shop quickly
Enjoying fixing things
Drinking beer
Feelings of being a protector and provider
Parking

(I jest - a bit)

Or am I just talking about stereotypes?

One eyed Jack

LLMMLL wrote: »

Yes that's exactly what I'm saying. They go on mumsnet to speak to other "trans widows" and are offered a framework that allows them to direct their grief towards curbing trans rights. Counselling would be a far healthier solution.

That case you linked doesn't relate at all to what I said. No idea why you posted it.

The story in the link relates exactly to what you’re suggesting - this idea that women are somehow “radicalised” by groups where they have something in common with the women in that group and that’s what turns them towards curbing trans rights.

The problem with your theory is that you have to ignore the fact that if a woman had wanted to marry a man who thought he was a woman in the first place, they would have done, and the reason their marriage breaks down is because his wife has no interest in being married to a man who has a deep rooted desire to emulate womanhood. If they had, they would seek support in groups where there are other women married to men who have a deep rooted desire to emulate womanhood.

Isn’t that what men who have a deep rooted desire to emulate womanhood do? They seek out acceptance in groups, but you don’t suggest that they are radicalised or that they might need counselling when they suggest that anyone who doesn’t share their opinions should suck on their ladydick.

You don’t imagine that for most wives the idea of discovering their husband has a deep rooted desire to emulate womanhood would be a radical idea that would never have occurred to them before? The case I linked to is an example of the reality of these women’s circumstances, for them and for their children, when their father expresses their desire to emulate womanhood. Your prediction as though they’ll get over it in a year and come round to your way of thinking, is the stuff of fanciful nonsense. They never imagined themselves being put in that position in the first place. They don’t need counselling to be told “trans women are women”, as though they’re the person who’s thinking is disordered.

Gruffalux

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Yes, the latest "right" is that a man be entitled to "simulate" a pregnancy for 9 months which will culminate in a fake labour which will end whenever they cant take the self inflicted pain and result in a stillbirth (for which they will need support obv). This person will then stimulate lactation with drugs and hopes to use a real baby to nurse to make their fantasy more realistic. Women on a Facebook breast feeding group who have actually experienced the trauma of a stillbirth and who object to this have been removed from the group for transphobia and their actual wife and children are yucky transphobes too of course for not going along with it. Can anyone explain what this has to do with rights for trans people and why women are being castigated for finding it offensive?

I remembered you mentioning this today and I just saw this thread refering the story. There is an animation linked on the thread hosted on the New York Times youtube page. Nicely made animation and the transwoman speaks in a moderate calm tone. What they are saying is more to be pitied than condemned as it seems like a plaintive lament for the impossible. At that point 2 years ago the person was getting along with his wife. And then if you look at the recent screenshots they have gone all the way to acting out in a completely bizarre manner and now are abusive about the wife. The acting out is being applauded by people. I have seen and read a lot of things on this subject and only a few things shock me, like the 17 year old sweet boy video journalling his vaginoplasty journey, but this person acting out this imaginary pregnancy is right up there with maximum oddness.

https://twitter.com/godblesstoto/status/1311050509072113664?s=19

Gervais08

Gruffalux wrote: »

I remembered you mentioning this today and I just saw this thread refering the story. There is an animation linked on the thread hosted on the New York Times youtube page. Nicely made animation and the transwoman speaks in a moderate calm tone. What they are saying is more to be pitied than condemned as it seems like a plaintive lament for the impossible. At that point 2 years ago the person was getting along with his wife. And then if you look at the recent screenshots they have gone all the way to acting out in a completely bizarre manner and now are abusive about the wife. The acting out is being applauded by people. I have seen and read a lot of things on this subject and only a few things shock me, like the 17 year old sweet boy video journalling his vaginoplasty journey, but this person acting out this imaginary pregnancy is right up there with maximum oddness.

https://twitter.com/godblesstoto/status/1311050509072113664?s=19

That sums it up there “I was planning to go maybe four hours (labour, sic)...”

Yeah mate actual women don’t get a say in that - the sainted mother was in labour for 37 hours with me.

Quit playing at what you *think* being a woman is and just embrace the fact that there is nothing wrong with expanding whet it means to be a man - just leave biology alone. Or at least count up how many periods you’ve missed and have someone kick you in the lower abdomen on and off for five days at a time for each one.

LLMMLL

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The story in the link relates exactly to what you’re suggesting - this idea that women are somehow “radicalised” by groups where they have something in common with the women in that group and that’s what turns them towards curbing trans rights.

The problem with your theory is that you have to ignore the fact that if a woman had wanted to marry a man who thought he was a woman in the first place, they would have done, and the reason their marriage breaks down is because his wife has no interest in being married to a man who has a deep rooted desire to emulate womanhood. If they had, they would seek support in groups where there are other women married to men who have a deep rooted desire to emulate womanhood.

Isn’t that what men who have a deep rooted desire to emulate womanhood do? They seek out acceptance in groups, but you don’t suggest that they are radicalised or that they might need counselling when they suggest that anyone who doesn’t share their opinions should suck on their ladydick.

You don’t imagine that for most wives the idea of discovering their husband has a deep rooted desire to emulate womanhood would be a radical idea that would never have occurred to them before? The case I linked to is an example of the reality of these women’s circumstances, for them and for their children, when their father expresses their desire to emulate womanhood. Your prediction as though they’ll get over it in a year and come round to your way of thinking, is the stuff of fanciful nonsense. They never imagined themselves being put in that position in the first place. They don’t need counselling to be told “trans women are women”, as though they’re the person who’s thinking is disordered.

Eh you're arguing over a whole host of things I never said and don't think.

Never said it was a guaranteed causal relationship. Many people take different paths when their marriage dissolves. These particular women have been radicalised by the experience and hopefully someday will get the help they need to process the end of their marriage.

So your link is completely irrelevant.

Errashareesh

Today's feminism really has eaten itself hasn't it?

Been thinking it for a few years now. Its refusal to condemn abuse of women in "sacred cow" communities/societies began the sowing of seeds of doubt. And just its general vitriolic nature - willingness to throw fellow women under a bus if not fully compliant.

Very man hating - when the men in question are easy targets of course - and easily offended too (remember that scientist's shirt?)

Old skool feminists like Steinem were far more concerned with supporting women in difficult situations (which there were more of for women - sexism was a big problem) than hating men for being men (radicals like Dworkin and Solanas aside obviously).

Acceptance of cervical smear literature not mentioning "woman" anywhere - eyes need to be opened urgently.

One eyed Jack

LLMMLL wrote: »

Eh you're arguing over a whole host of things I never said and don't think.

Never said it was a guaranteed causal relationship. Many people take different paths when their marriage dissolves. These particular women have been radicalised by the experience and hopefully someday will get the help they need to process the end of their marriage.

So your link is completely irrelevant.

What exactly do you mean radicalised by their experience? They haven’t been radicalised, they’re sharing their experiences in common with other women who have been through the same experiences as they have.

Your point seems to be predicated on assuming they were on-board with the “trans women are women” nonsense before they discovered their husbands desire to emulate womanhood, and this discovery has pushed them towards what you call radical “anti-trans” women.

You’re being disingenuous with your “hope they get counselling to process the end of their marriage” and “many people take different paths when their marriage dissolves”, trying to brush the reason for their not wishing to remain married to their husbands under the carpet.

It was because women have no desire to be married to a man who wishes to emulate womanhood. That’s not a radical position.

mohawk

Gervais08 wrote: »

That sums it up there “I was planning to go maybe four hours (labour, sic)...”

Yeah mate actual women don’t get a say in that - the sainted mother was in labour for 37 hours with me.

Quit playing at what you *think* being a woman is and just embrace the fact that there is nothing wrong with expanding whet it means to be a man - just leave biology alone. Or at least count up how many periods you’ve missed and have someone kick you in the lower abdomen on and off for five days at a time for each one.

4 hours LOL is average about 12 on your first??

Contractions weren’t even the worst bit. Does the four hour labour have an episiotomy with tearing too? Maybe a prescription for painkillers because it’s too sore to sit down afterwards.

To be polite they have a very skewed vision of pregnancy and giving birth.

I responded to LLMMLL earlier after they posted this:

Quote: LLMMLL
Encouraging them to be radicalised into a TERF group is hardly going to help them. It might briefly give them an area to focus their grief on but does not allow them to deal with their actual issues. I fear there will be long term negative mental health consequences for these women but TERF groups don't care as long as they get some likes on mumsnet.

---

And I posted this:

"Encouraging them to be radicalised into a TRA group is hardly going to help them. It might briefly give them an area to focus their grief on but does not allow them to deal with their actual issues. I fear there will be long term negative mental health consequences for these men but TRA groups don't care as long as they get some likes on twitter"


Transphobic?

If so, your post is misogyny.

There isn't a middle ground here.

---

No response

Posts from LLMMLL about what they believe the place of a MTF's wife to be are misogynistic garbage tbh

They'd be up in arms were anyone in this thread to be so nakedly contemptuous of the feelings of a trans person

Quantum Erasure

Gervais08 wrote: »

That sums it up there “I was planning to go maybe four hours (labour, sic)...”

Yeah mate actual women don’t get a say in that - the sainted mother was in labour for 37 hours with me.
.

"...figure out how to operate the device while also concentrating on my own breathing. A warrior task...."

Gervais08

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

"...figure out how to operate the device while also concentrating on my own breathing. A warrior task...."

Stunning and brave there. 🙄

Gruffalux

Errashareesh wrote: »

Today's feminism really has eaten itself hasn't it?

Been thinking it for a few years now. Its refusal to condemn abuse of women in "sacred cow" communities/societies began the sowing of seeds of doubt. And just its general vitriolic nature - willingness to throw fellow women under a bus if not fully compliant.

Very man hating - when the men in question are easy targets of course - and easily offended too (remember that scientist's shirt?)

Old skool feminists like Steinem were far more concerned with supporting women in difficult situations (which there were more of for women - sexism was a big problem) than hating men for being men (radicals like Dworkin and Solanas aside obviously).

It has eaten itself.

There are lots of complex reasons. Huge issue. It would take a thousand threads

When I was young I was a really staunch vocal feminist. Not the man hating type but the we will overcome type. It was like this big idea of how women were just as good as men in my head and how no one should do you down just because you were a girl. Did not read any books about it but just was determined to do what I wanted study wise, travel wise, etc.

Then I had a baby young. And the reaction from many of my feminist friends was so mean and unsupportive that I thought fcuk this for a game of cowboys. They asked why I had not had an abortion. Why I had given up a very good career to mind a baby..the word baby being said as if it was dreadful. Why did I stay home. Why did I not put myself first. All this stuff that was surely my choice to make if feminism was about was freedom and equality. Anyways. I became a believer in egalitarianism. It all got worse over the next 3 decades to the point where wearing knitted genitals on ones head was considered some kind of revolutionary act...
So yep. Thats why I say I am not a feminist. Though I do believe in the free nobility of woman. And I hope men believe the same for men.

Rothko

Errashareesh wrote: »

Today's feminism really has eaten itself hasn't it?

Been thinking it for a few years now. Its refusal to condemn abuse of women in "sacred cow" communities/societies began the sowing of seeds of doubt. And just its general vitriolic nature - willingness to throw fellow women under a bus if not fully compliant.

Very man hating - when the men in question are easy targets of course - and easily offended too (remember that scientist's shirt?)
.

You can see a lot of that on here. There are a few male posters on this site that seem to think that hating men makes them a feminist (not realising, or caring, that they're actually doing more harm than good). Funnily enough, they seem to be practically silent on this thread.

Justin Credible Darts

not sure how many "real " men are on the thread...yes "real" man...biologically.

I prefer real women, and pretty sure all straight women like real men....as that is their sexual preference.
If some bloke who now identifies as a woman thinks they should be accepted as a "real " woman, they are in for a rude awakening.

If this means according to the likes of LLMMLL I must be a transphobe in his warped mind , so be it, knock yourself out....you tell yourself it is true, hell, you might even convince yourself at some point, whilst every child and upwards who has the most minimum grasp of biology can snigger at the absurdness of it all

Errashareesh

Ah god that's awful Gruffalux. Wtf is wrong with people who are such slaves to an ideology that it turns them into absolutely horrible human beings.

The one danger (imho) with rejecting the term "feminism" outright though is that it could have the effect of somewhat erasing the work of the original feminists (up to about the early 80s). I know of course you don't mean that G but things like that Milo character saying "feminism is cancer" makes me bristle - such an undercurrent of misogyny to it.

Feminism has been damaged for sure but I think a lot of you sensible women and men are helping take it back. I call myself a particular type of feminist (i.e. not one of today's) in that I hold views that you don't have to be a feminist to hold but they still align with feminism. I would just be hesitant to reject the term outright - for, as I said, historical reasons. And not to allow the current crop to discredit it completely.

LLMMLL

One eyed Jack wrote: »

What exactly do you mean radicalised by their experience? They haven’t been radicalised, they’re sharing their experiences in common with other women who have been through the same experiences as they have.

Your point seems to be predicated on assuming they were on-board with the “trans women are women” nonsense before they discovered their husbands desire to emulate womanhood, and this discovery has pushed them towards what you call radical “anti-trans” women.

You’re being disingenuous with your “hope they get counselling to process the end of their marriage” and “many people take different paths when their marriage dissolves”, trying to brush the reason for their not wishing to remain married to their husbands under the carpet.

It was because women have no desire to be married to a man who wishes to emulate womanhood. That’s not a radical position.

As I said I don't think it is the experience which has radicalized them. I believe they found mumsnet to genuinely seek to process their experience. They are radicalized by the insane brand of "feminism" (if you could even call it that) that mumsnet espouses.

Spanish Eyes

People are terrified of saying the wrong thing now. Where did that come from + the power to frighten people into silence about this Trans issue.

Personally I know NO trans person do you?

Errashareesh

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

not sure how many "real " men are on the thread...yes "real" man...biologically.

I prefer real women, and pretty sure all straight women like real men....as that is their sexual preference.
If some bloke who now identifies as a woman thinks they should be accepted as a "real " woman, they are in for a rude awakening.

If this means according to the likes of LLMMLL I must be a transphobe in his warped mind , so be it, knock yourself out....you tell yourself it is true, hell, you might even convince yourself at some point, whilst every child and upwards who has the most minimum grasp of biology can snigger at the absurdness of it all

I actually didn't know much about the "cotton ceiling" until this evening. Thought it was exaggeration/myth tbh. Nope, there is actually the school of thought that if you are a lesbian who doesn't want to have sex with a trans woman it is down to nothing other than transphobia.

I just... I just can't...

TheBlackPill

Gruffalux wrote: »

I remembered you mentioning this today and I just saw this thread refering the story. There is an animation linked on the thread hosted on the New York Times youtube page. Nicely made animation and the transwoman speaks in a moderate calm tone. What they are saying is more to be pitied than condemned as it seems like a plaintive lament for the impossible. At that point 2 years ago the person was getting along with his wife. And then if you look at the recent screenshots they have gone all the way to acting out in a completely bizarre manner and now are abusive about the wife. The acting out is being applauded by people. I have seen and read a lot of things on this subject and only a few things shock me, like the 17 year old sweet boy video journalling his vaginoplasty journey, but this person acting out this imaginary pregnancy is right up there with maximum oddness.

https://twitter.com/godblesstoto/status/1311050509072113664?s=19

That is just pure insanity! Poor person

Justin Credible Darts

I dont know what it means, nor do i care,
did not know what Terf meant, nor do i care.

All I know that people all deserve respect, but when one group has the audacity to try tell me biology is wrong, or that if a straight man turns down a trans woman he is a transphobe or some other absolutely retarded notion, you realize the levels of not just stupidity, but ignorance we are dealing with.

The fact these people have no comprehension of sexual preference
no idea of biology
and seems like no respect for "real" women either.

Gervais08

Errashareesh wrote: »

I actually didn't know much about the "cotton ceiling" until this evening. Thought it was exaggeration/myth tbh. Nope, there is actually the school of thought that if you are a lesbian who doesn't want to have sex with a trans woman it is down to nothing other than transphobia.

I just... I just can't...

I’ve mentioned it before - how people can Square this coercion in the “Me Too” era is beyond me.

No means no guys.

LLMMLL

Errashareesh wrote: »

Wtf is wrong with people who are such slaves to an ideology that it turns them into absolutely horrible human beings.

Well said. It amazes me how the TERF ideology can twist the minds of otherwise decent people. Thankfully it hasn’t happened to anyone I know.

randomchild

Gervais08 wrote: »

I’ve mentioned it before - how people can Square this coercion in the “Me Too” era is beyond me.

No means no guys.

Wokeness works on the concept of a hierarchy of rights, rather than universality. Trans people trump women on the scale, thus their right to validation and accomodation trump's a woman's right to sexual boundaries.

TheBlackPill

LLMMLL wrote: »

Well said. It amazes me how the TERF ideology can twist the minds of otherwise decent people. Thankfully it hasn’t happened to anyone I know.

There is no TERF idealogy. Its just a label of abuse invented by extremists like yourself to shout down people who have genuine concerns.
AS an insult it is becoming highly devalued due to inappropriate overuse

Gatling

LLMMLL wrote: »

As I said I don't think it is the experience which has radicalized them. I believe they found mumsnet to genuinely seek to process their experience. They are radicalized by the insane brand of "feminism" (if you could even call it that) that mumsnet espouses.

So what exactly are they being radicalised for ,
To believe women are women and not men who claim to women,
Or to believe men are men even if they put make up and a dress .

What's the endgame for these women ?

LLMMLL

TheBlackPill wrote: »

There is no TERF idealogy. Its just a label of abuse invented by extremists to shout down people who have genuine concerns

Shouted down? You may not have noticed but this thread is pretty much 20 vs 1.

TheBlackPill

LLMMLL wrote: »

Shouted down? You may not have noticed but this thread is pretty much 20 vs 1.

so you propose bringing in posting quotes?, kind of like gender quota's for baords?